Uncategorized


To those of you in the audience that support the Republicans, I ask why? If you are… 10

To those of you in the audience that support the Republicans, I ask why? If you are primarily a social conservative, that's a separate discussion, although frankly demanding a certain type of personal behavior from people is hardly what I'd call small government.  

On the other hand, if you are a fiscal conservative, I reiterate the question, why support the Republicans. Do you favor smaller government? Since 1980, the GOP has controlled the White House for 20 out of 32 years and congress for roughly half that period. Yet, there is no empirical evidence that despite campaign claims to the contrary, that they will ever shrink government. Under Republican presidents spending has gone up and deficits have grown (primarily for the military and with tax cuts for the wealthiest among us) while median real incomes have gone down and poverty has increased. 

So under Republicans, government just spends more in ways that do not benefit the vast majority of the people. How is that an improvement?

Discuss

Will the GOP actually shrink government?
Video on msnbc.com: Up host Chris Hayes and his guests debate whether the Republican party is truly fiscally conservative, enough to shrink the size and scope of government.

Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.


I listened to the latest edition of Triangulation yesterday where +Leo Laporte had… 2

I listened to the latest edition of Triangulation yesterday where +Leo Laporte had a great conversation with +Tim O'Reilly. As usual Tim had lots of interesting things to say.

However, I think the most important takeaway was the idea that you should always strive to create more value than you extract. Only when this happens does the economy as a whole grow and everyone benefits. 

Of course this is exactly the opposite of what the "geniuses" on Wall St do when they come with financial instruments like derivatives and CDOs. They find a way to make a lot of money for themselves without actually contributing any real value to the equation. 

For all of the derision I've heaped upon Apple (and rightly so I believe) over its policies of pursuing patents and patent litigation against competitors I still believe that on the whole the company has created far more value than it has extracted, at least so far by creating great products that people want and inspiring others to do so as well. If Apple starts collecting huge royalty payments from competitors that could shift the equation, but it remains to be seen what will happen. 

Ultimately for any company, the goal should be to first create outstanding products at a price point that customers can afford. When that happens, the profits will inevitably flow just as they have for Apple, +Ford Motor Company and others. They create products that consumers want, thus employing people that buy more stuff and supporting a supply base and other surrounding businesses. 

Triangulation 66 | TWiT.TV
Founder and CEO of O’Reilly Media, watcher of the alpha geeks, sharing their stories, helping the future unfold.

Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.


The worst part of Mitt Romney saying something as utterly ridiculous as "America…

The worst part of Mitt Romney saying something as utterly ridiculous as "America invented education" is not the fact that he said it. It's that millions of Americans will actually believe it!

Embedded Link

Romney: America Invented Education
If you think Romney left out the public part accidentially, you're fooling yourself.

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.


It was bad for consumers and technology when Microsoft was dominant and it will be…

It was bad for consumers and technology when Microsoft was dominant and it will be as bad or worse if we allow Apple, Google or any other company to dominate the future. Vote against technology monoculture with your dollars. Fragmentation is actually a good thing (more on this in the future as I work out my thoughts)

Reshared post from +Dan Gillmor

My Guardian piece on what the Apple-Samsung verdict may mean. Hint: It's very bad for competition. 

Apple crushes Samsung in quest for global tech domination
Dan Gillmor: A US jury has rubberstamped Apple’s exploitation of the patent system. But Samsung’s $1bn loss will cost consumers dear

Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.


As he so often does, +Mike Elgan sums up the whole Apple patent argument very nicely…. 3

As he so often does, +Mike Elgan sums up the whole Apple patent argument very nicely.  I hate the fact that Apple is using the patent law system to try to suppress competition in the market segments it competes in. But I do recognize that Apple, Oracle, Google, Motorola, Intellectual Ventures and countless other tech companies and patent trolls do this because the law as it is written today allows and encourages this behavior. 

I have long criticized the current intellectual property system (both patent and copyright) as outdated and unneeded for the modern world. I criticize the companies despite the fact that they are a symptom rather than the cause because I and other consumers don't have the power to influence the politicians that generally only listen to big corporate donors. 

By refusing to spend my dollars on Apple products (despite the fact that I use existing Apple products like the Macbook Pro I'm writing this on) and encouraging others to do the same, perhaps we can influence Apple and in turn they can influence politicians to change the system.

I know I'm tilting at windmills, but it's really all I can do.  After all we are often told that the only way to influence corporate policies is with our purchasing habits. So let's change our habits until the system changes for the better.
#boycottapple   #boycottthesystem  

Reshared post from +Mike Elgan

Why Apple Sues

Apple’s critics generously assign a variety of motives to Apple for filing lawsuits.

Apple sues because it wants to control the market, overcharge for its products, exclude competitors from the market or punish competitors for daring to not think different. It’s all part of Apple’s “quest for global tech domination.

But these aren’t actual motives. These are appeals to emotion. They’re legitimate perspectives, but expressed to negatively encapsulate spectacularly complex technical, legal and ethical issues into sound bites that make you want to agree with the author that Apple is bad and wrong. 

Apple has only one motive for patent lawsuits, and I’m going to tell you what that motive is: 

http://www.cultofmac.com/187014/why-apple-sues/

Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.