Obama, affirmative action, and my take on it

This past Sunday, in an interview on ABC TV, Barack Obama stated that he does not believe there is a need for race-based affirmative action in college admission. He believes that poor white kids are just as disadvantaged as poor black kids, and that rich black kids are just as advantaged as white rich kids. He goes on to suggest that race-based affirmative action should be replaced with some kind of financial-need-based affirmative action program.

... and now my take ...

I think we need to distinguish between two aspects of college attendance - admission and financing.

After admission, I have absolutely no problem with colleges offering need-based scholarships, so students from poor families can actually accept the offer and attend. (Of course, such scholarships should require the student to maintain a reasonable grade level - no assistance program should allow students to slack off on someone else's dollar.)

Until the point of admission, however, financial need shouldn't be considered. Admission should be based solely on test scores, grades in school, and extracurricular activity. Race, financial status, religion and other such factors should not be considered at all. As a matter of fact, I would say that the admission boards that make these decisions shouldn't even have this kind of information (including the candidate's name, since that can also prejudice a board.)

There is nothing inherent about poverty (or race, etc.) that makes someone less intelligent or less educated. In college, I made several friends who came from poor families. They were not admitted on the basis of lowered standards, but because they were able to get good SAT scores and get good grades in high school, despite their upbringing.

Sure, many poor kids come from families where education is considered unimportant, or from incompetent public schools, and that is unfortunate, but how will these kids be served by admitting them to a college where the coursework is too advanced for them? Either they will be unprepared for the difficult coursework or the college will have to dumb-down the coursework - neither of which is going to be good for the student in the long run.

With regard to a possible solution, if there is a problem with the students' families, there is nothing anybody else can do about it. If there is a problem with the public schools (and we all know there are problems with many of those schools), then the solution is to fix those schools, not dumb-down college admissions procedures.

Of course, until the public schools do improve (which we know may take a very long time), some kids will fall through the cracks. One possible remedy would be some kind of optional post-high-school program (perhaps run by colleges) that offers remedial courses to promising students from bad school districts, specifically to get a student up to the level where he can get admitted to a college on his own merits. Many colleges already have programs like this, so perhaps the real solution is to convince more colleges to start up similar programs of their own.

Unstoppable Global Warming - an interview

The above link is a transcript of a talk by Fred Singer and Dennis Avery, authors of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years, given at the Hudson Institute in November, 2006.

As a part of this presentation, the authors summarize their book and take questions from the audience. A lot of (politically inconvenient) facts are presented, making that case that the global warming trend we're currently experiencing is:

• Completely natural (not man-made)
• Cyclic (tied to an approximate 1500-year solar cycle)
• Not preventable, and
• Beneficial

The authors point out the junk science being published as fact, and the bias in supposedly respectable scientific journals. They also point out how much carbon reduction would actually be necessary to have an effect (for the US, 100% - meaning complete elimination of all fossil fuels from all sources.)

Read the paper. Then read the book. It's well worth doing.

WETA: Fourth Estate or Fifth Column? You decide.

"Islam vs. Islamists" is a documentary about the "silent majority" of Muslims that support democracy, freedom of religion, and separation of church and state. They oppose the radicals who are seeking to force Islam on the rest of the world by threat of terrorism. These people are usually unheard in Muslim nations, because the radical governments in charge don't let them speak.

Well, it appears that PBS (and WETA, in particular) has decided to agree with the radicals and silence them in yet another venue. The "America at Crossroads" series it was produced for will not be broadcasting it. They will, however, be broadcasting the segment that presents the radical's pro-terrorism point of view.

According to an interview with the producer (on the radio this afternoon,) "Islam vs. Islamists" will be shown to members of Congress in a private screening in Washington DC, but that may be the only time the film is shown. On top of all this, PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are blocking all attempts to get the film broadcast by a different TV network.

The media elite in the US hates George Bush so much that they have decided to join ranks with the radical Muslims that seek to murder us all. If the terrorists win, then George Bush loses, and there's all that matters. If this means broadcasting terrorist-propaganda films as documentaries while silencing the opposite opinion, that's just fine. And the fact that these members of the press would be the first murdered by a radical Muslim government, should one take over, doesn't matter either.

UPDATE

The original article's link at AZCentral.com has expired. But you can read about the current status of Islam Vs. Islamists at http://www.freethefilm.net/. You can also sign a petition to demand that PBS allow the producers to release this important film to the public.

Nukes? Ha! Who needs 'em?

Here's a fascinating article: MOPping Up: The USA's 30,000 Pound Bomb.

During World War II, the US developed some truly huge bombs. For example, the "Grand Slam" packs a 22,000lb blast (11 ton).

Development of these pretty much stopped after nuclear bombs were invented. For comparison, "Little Boy" (dropped on Hiroshima) and "Fat Man" (dropped on Nagasaki) were 15T and 21T, respectively.

Today, however, it is unacceptable to use nukes. It is especially unacceptable to use them for taking out small targets (like underground bunkers). So the US has gone back to the drawing board and is developing new, terribly powerful, conventional bombs.

The first of these, the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), is a 30,000lb (15T) bomb. That is as powerful as Little Boy, but without any nukes. Which means it can be dropped on a battlefield without poisoning the landscape for centuries. Initial tests show that it can penetrate through 60' of concrete. My guess is that the goal here is to be able to take out Iran's underground nuclear development labs.

Apple - We'll put up, not shut up

You may recall Steve Jobs open letter, Thoughts On Music, where he called on the record labels to allow Apple to sell music without any digital rights management (DRM) restrictions.

Well, one record label took the bait, and Apple is following through with their end of the deal. In May, all iTunes Store songs published by EMI will be available without DRM. More specifically, these songs are 256K AAC (double the bitrate as before) and sell for $1.29 ($0.30 more expensive), and have no DRM.

The existing 128K AAC DRM-protected songs are still available for $0.99. Customers who have already purchased EMI songs may upgrade them to the new format (256K, no-DRM) and only pay the difference in price ($0.30).

Something just froze over

Jerusalem Post: Evangelicals to present Knesset with 'letter of repentance'

I'm under no illusions here - I don't think anything will change in the grand scheme of things. Christian missionaries worldwide are not about to give up their careers because of this one group of evangelical leaders.

Nevertheless, this is still big news. If the leadership of prominent ministries can come this far, then maybe in time, they'll walk the next few steps and decide that Jews (gasp) have the right to want to remain Jewish.

Naw. I'm just fooling myself now. No Christian missionary will ever come to this conclusion. They'd have to abandon or ignore large chunks of their bible in order to come to that decision.

The end of an era

Today, I must say goodbye to my good ol' Macintosh Quadra 840av. I bought this computer used in 1998, as a part of Visix Software's going-out-of-business fire sale. It was a few years old at that time. I upgraded it several times since then, adding more memory, replacing the hard drive when it died, upgrading the CD-ROM drive, putting it on the internet, and setting up a tape-backup system for it.

This computer was my main machine at home for several years, until I got my Power Macintosh G4 system, which I'm using today. Running Microsoft Office and Filemaker Pro, this computer held together my personal finances, and kept track of most of the important things in my life.

Today, the G4 fulfills these purposes, but I made a point of powering on the Quadra every few months, just to see if it still works, and to play a few games that don't play well under Mac OS X (like those that demand the old 1-bit color display modes.)

Until two weeks ago, that is. This most recent time, it wouldn't start. The monitor turned on, the hard drive started spinning, but the familiar "bong" sound didn't play. I checked the PRAM battery, and found that it still had plenty of voltage. I went on-line to do some research, and apparently, this is a common fate for Quadra 840av systems. The capacitors get old and start leaking, and the motherboard dies. Some people suggested washing the motherboard (in the dishwasher, no less!) to clean off the leaked electrolyte, and some suggested replacing all the capacitors on the motherboard, but I think there's really little point to attempting either of these procedures for a computer that, admittedly, hasn't served any useful purpose in the last five years. But it's still sad to see formerly-good equipment decide to finally fail.

Gizmag: Car runs on compressed air

The Tata MiniC.A.T is a small car, apparently aimed at the European commuter vehicle market. This isn't unusual (although, you may not have heard of Tata, it is, apparently, a very popular brand in India.) What is unusual is that this car runs on air.

That's right, it runs on air. Specifically, compressed air. It's tank holds 90 cubic meters (3178 cubic feet) of compressed air. This allows the car to drive at speeds up to 68MPH, for up to 10 hours or 200-300km (125-186mi). An electric air compressor can refill the tank in about 3-4 hours.

The manufacturer expects filling stations to eventually start offering air-refill services. These stations would have high-pressure compressors capable of filling a tank in a few minutes. They estimate that a refill will cost about €1.5 (about $2). (Of course, that doesn't count the inevitable taxes that governments will impose to offset losses from gas-tax revenues if people stop burning gasoline in their cars.)

In terms of scheduled maintenance, it needs an oil change (1l of vegetable oil) every 50,000km (or one quart every 31,000mi).

It's exhaust is just air. Interestingly enough, this exhaust is very cold air (below freezing temperatures), so the car can recirculate it as a part of the air conditioning system.

The manufacturer expect a selling price of £5,500 (about $9,000).

Shouts & Murmurs: The Wisdom of Children: Humor: The New Yorker

The New Yorker runs an amusing commentary comparing futile student protests with the nonsense children think when hearing adults talk in the room next door.

An excerpt:

—Did you hear the news, Mr. President? The students at the University of Pittsfield are walking out of their classes, in protest over the war.

—(spits out coffee) Wha— What did you say?

—Apparently, students are standing up in the middle of lectures and walking right out of the building.

—But students love lectures. If they’re willing to give those up, they must really be serious about this peace thing! ...

Read the rest of the article while the link remains valid.

Steve Jobs: Apple would embrace DRM-free music downloads

In an unusual open letter, Steve Jobs (founder and CEO of Apple, Inc.) writes about the current state of legal music download services.

He starts off by explaining why music download services (including Apple's own iTunes Store) apply digital rights management (DRM) data to downloaded music. As you are probably aware, this isn't because Apple wants to be mean, but because the record companies (that hold the copyrights on the music) demand it. He says that Apple's contract requires strong DRM, and that if the DRM is broke, Apple must quickly fix it or the record labels can withdraw their entire catalog from the store.

This was news to me. I know the record labels require strong DRM, but it hadn't occurred to me that Apple's store can be completely shut down if a third party breaks the DRM in a way that Apple can't fix. I wonder if other music stores (like Microsoft's Zune store, or the numerous WMA-download stores) have similar terms on their licenses.

Jobs then proceeds to explain three possible futures for DRM content.

The first possible future, is to leave everything as it is. While many critics claim that this is a "lock-in", forcing iTunes Store customers to buy iPods, and forcing iPod customers to buy from the iTunes Store, Jobs points out several facts that contradict this:

• iPods can play several non-protected formats, including MP3 and AAC.
• The overwhelming majority of music on iPods is not purchased from the iTunes store. (Most is ripped from legally-purchased CDs.) It's hardly a lock-in if the majority of music on iPods is not restricted, and only a small percentage is restricted.

Jobs doesn't mention a third fact - that Apple's DRM allows customers to burn CDs with the purchased music. These CDs can be ripped into a non-DRM format, which can be played on any computer or portable player. So even iTunes purchases can be made portable, although with some degradation in quality.

The second possible future Jobs describes is an open-DRM standard. Specifically, he addresses those critics that want Apple's "FairPlay" DRM to become an open standard. So multiple stores can sell FairPlay tracks, and so non-Apple music players can play those tracks.

Jobs points out that Apple has a difficult time right now, meeting their contractual obligations to the record companies. FairPlay DRM has been broken a few times. Apple has repaired the damage by simultaneously updating the iTunes Store, the iTunes client software, and the iPod firmware. This coordinated effort is not easy to get right. It would be virtually impossible to coordinate this across dozens of music stores and dozens of music player manufacturers.

On top of all this, DRM systems all use secrets (encryption algorithms, encryption keys, etc.) When these secrets are shared among dozens of corporations, leaks to the outside world will be inevitable, undermining the entire concept.

Either of these scenarios (undermining DRM, or failure to quickly distribute updates) would result in the record labels shutting down music stores, which definitely would not be in the public interest. (Jobs also points out how even Microsoft is moving from an open DRM standard, "plays for sure" to a closed one on the Zune.)

Finally, Jobs proposes the third solution - eliminate DRM altogether. I am a proponent of this, and I know a lot of other people who are too. I was, however, shocked and awed that the CEO of Apple proposed it as a serious alternative.

He points out several facts that are well known, but seem to be ignored by the record labels that demand DRM from on-line services:

• 90% of music purchased is on CD, which has no DRM. Putting DRM on the 10% that is downloaded does nothing to prevent piracy, because the pirates can simply buy CDs.
• DRM is expensive and difficult to develop, implement, and maintain.
• DRM restricts consumer freedom
• DRM makes it hard for new players to enter the music-player and music-reseller markets.

Jobs then points out that most of the clamor for Apple to open up FairPlay is coming from Europe. Most of the record industry (the ones demanding DRM) are European (Universal/Vivendi is French, EMI is British, Sony/BMG is 50% German). Jobs suggests that European governments direct their pressure at the record labels, to eliminate DRM requirements altogether.

Finally, Jobs states that if the record companies will support DRM-free music downloads, "Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly." This still amazes me.

I don't know if the record companies will ever wise up and realize that DRM is a waste of time and money (the way the software industry briefly understood the same about copy protection), but if anybody can convince them, it is Steve Jobs. Let's hope he can pull it off.