A Sarah Palin book signing.
H/t Melonhead at the Shortskoolbus BBS.
Year: 2009
Jon Stewart is a F%$#ing Genius, Republicans Giving Aid and Comfort to Terrorists Edition
It’s only 7¼ minutes, just watch it.
Goldman Sachs Shareholders: Show Me the Money*
Here’s a surprise: After a year of record profits for Goldman Sachs, the shareholders are demanding an increased slice of the profits:
Some of Goldman Sachs Group’s largest shareholders have asked the company to cut the size of its bonus pool and pass along more of its profits to investors, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the situation.
Although the shareholders are not pushing for a huge cut, they feel that Goldman should better reward shareholders for this year’s rebound, the paper said.
One of the oddities of Wall Street is that 30 years ago, the investment banks were not publicly held companies, they were limited liability partnerships, where all the profits, at least those not reinvested in the firm (and seriously, how much capital investment does a f$#@ing investment bank need) accrued to the partners.
So in the 1980s and 1990s, they all went public, generated huge cash outs for the partners, and enormous amounts of other people’s money with which to wager, but they continued to operate as if they were still partnerships, and that all the money accrued back to them.
Well now, the shareholders are thinking that maybe they should start acting like they own the firm, which, of course, they do.
Hopefully, this is a trend, though I doubt it.
*Full disclosure: I never saw the movie, Jerry McGuire.
This Has Epic Fail Written All Over It
It looks like Microsoft and Rupert Murdoch’s Newscorp are working together to attempt to create a walled garden around his so-called news:
Microsoft has had discussions with News Corp over a plan that would involve the media company’s being paid to “de-index” its news websites from Google, setting the scene for a search engine battle that could offer a ray of light to the newspaper industry.
The impetus for the discussions came from News Corp, owner of newspapers ranging from the Wall Street Journal of the US to The Sun of the UK, said a person familiar with the situation, who warned that talks were at an early stage.
However, the Financial Times has learnt that Microsoft has also approached other big online publishers to persuade them to remove their sites from Google’s search engine.
There are a number of assumptions here, on both sides, which I think will kill the deal:
- That NewsCorp®, and its shareholders will tolerate the implosion, at least in the short term, of online ad revenues, particularly given the current moribund revenues for print advertisement.
- That even if Microsoft® is successful, its unlikely to bring in much in the way of other search business their way.
- That if Microsoft® succeeds in dethroning Google® that they won’t be an aggressive monopolist and short change those content providers.
- That Craigslist® won’t continue to eat their lunches in the lucrative local classified markets.
- That the New York Times will team with the publisher of the Wall Street Journal and New York Post on this.
- That any of the foreign media will go in on this.
- That the EU antitrust authorities won’t be on their ass like white on rice.
This is one of those things that will get a lot of ink, because, of course, the newspapers want it to work, but it won’t get much beyond that.
The 800 pound gorilla in the room is, and continues to be, that the major news outlets are driven by the demands from Wall Street to hit their numbers, which, when juxtaposed with stupid debt deals on shiny new headquarters, they have consistently made their products less attractive.
The problem is that when you cut journalism out of newspapers, all you have left is advertisements, and like I said, Craigslist® is better as a pure advertising play.
H/t Atrios.
The Best Interviewer in Journalism
Jon Stewart interviewing Lou Dobbs:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Portrait of a Pandering or Courage?
Nice that he changed his position, but it smacks of opportunism.
I’m calling pandering.
Michael Bennet faces a very strong challenge from the Andrew Romanoff, who is coming at him from the left, so Bennet’s statement that he would vote for healthcare reform even if it meant him losing the election is an easy one to make. (see vid)
The reality is that he was saying he might not vote for HCR for a long time, and now that he has a strong primary challenger, and he would be dead in the primary if he voted against it, suddenly he’s willing to bet his career on it.
Another Challenger to the Lycoming/Continental GA Engines
Click top 2 for Large Pics
In this case, it’s the liquid cooled 120° V-6 Adept aviation engine Adept 320T avgas/mogas engine.
I’m dubious on market success, given that it has to use gasoline, though it is automotive fuel (mogas) compatible.
The cost, and relative unavailability of the fuel is what is driving people toward small turbine and diesel engines.
I came across their web site in a strange way, they were mentioned in an ad for Autodesk® CAD products on the back cover of the ASME magazine, Mechanical Engineering, and looked at their technology.
The basic features of the engine are:
- 320 hp out of 3.2 liter. I’m not sure of the RPM.
- Higher speed than legacy horizontally opposed twins, with a reduction gearbox.
- The engine, “has a fairly over-square bore/stroke ratio (98mm x 70mm),” which they claim keeps piston speed below that of the current engines.
- Liquid cooling.
- Operates on 94 Octane fuel, obviating the need for the increasingly scarce 100LL
- 2000 Hour TBO.
- They are not looking into helicopter applications, but they might at a later time.
There is a relatively uneventful video of an engine run at the bottom of this post.
$#&£¥%!!!!!
Washington lost to Dallas by 1 point.
Belgium, man, just Belgium!!!!!
Chicken Sh$#
Said piece of poultry excrement is William Jefferson Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States of America, who has backed out of making an appearance at free medical clinic in Arkansas, because Keith Olbermann supported and raised funds for them:
Bill Clinton told FDL’s Eve Gittelson that it would be problematic for him to attend a free medical clinic being held in Little Rock, Arkansas [held Saturday] because MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann had “politicized” the event.” He indicated that some were turning the event into a primary kickoff against Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln.
Eve ran into Clinton Thursday in the gift shop of the Clinton Library. She’s in Arkansas covering the Keith Olbermann’s free clinic event, organized by the National Association of Free Clinics. The former President is in town for the 5th anniversary of the Clinton Library.
Seriously, this is some major level of chicken sh#@, and it is typical of his time as a politician on the national scene.
Unfortunately, as indicated by retreats on torture prosecutions, the rule of law on terrorism cases, healthcare reform, financial reform, etc. it appears that Barack Obama has brought the Chicken sh$# brigade from Clinton’s terms, and put them in charge of policy.
Proof Positive that Geithner is Completely Wrong for the Job
David Brooks has endorsed Geithner’s choices and policies.
The only way that there could be a clear sign that Geithner was a disaster would be if William Kristol or Sarah Palin endorsed his policies.
Not Getting the Issue
Click for full size
Sub Quietness
Both the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), and Robert Farley at Information Dissemination make a very big deal about about the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) report that notes that current Chinese SSBNs are noisier than their Soviet equivalents from 30 years ago.
The ONI report notes that the submarines are easily detected, the sortie rate for patrol missions is low, and that the range of the missiles is low, and so the FAS concludes:
The ONI report concludes that the Jin SSBN with the JL-2 SLBM gives the PLA Navy its first credible second-strike nuclear capability. The authors must mean in principle, because in a war such noisy submarines would presumably be highly vulnerable to U.S. or Japanese anti-submarine warfare forces. (The noise level of China’s most modern diesel-electric submarines is another matter; ONI says some are comparable to Russian diesel-electric submarines).
That does raise an interesting question about the Chinese SSBN program: if Chinese leaders are so concerned about the vulnerability of their nuclear deterrent, why base a significant portion of it on a few noisy platforms and send them out to sea where they can be sunk by U.S. attack submarines in a war? And if Chinese planners know that the sea-based deterrent is much more vulnerable than its land-based deterrent, why do they waste money on the SSBN program?
The answer is probably a combination of national prestige and scenarios involving India or Russia that have less capable anti-submarine forces.
And Mr. Farley concurs.
I disagree. The purpose of building a credible SSBN force is to deter the United States.
Submarines, SSNs specifically, dominate the conflict at seas, as shown by the General Belgrano’s sinking by the HMS Conqueror, but they do not create prestige as such.
Unlike surface combatants like carriers, LPDs, or other vessels carrying naval artillery, they cannot control control coastal regions effectively. Even a relatively small gunboat can interdict a coastal road for an extended period of time.
What a Submarine can do is sink all those surface combatants with relative impunity, maintain a difficult to detect 2nd strike with nuclear weapons, or launch a surprise surgical strike (“cruise missile diplomacy”).
I think that the Chinese have always taken the longer view on these sorts of issues, going back to well before the creation of the PRC, and realize that in order to a more effective submarine force, they need to advance incrementally, and learn how to build, maintain, and crew better boats over time.
They are familiar with Soviet weapons, and they know the disasters that resulted from pushing the envelope.
Additionally, their horrific history regarding Mao’s Great Leap Forward is a relatively history, and so they are taking measured steps.
Simply put, the Chinese do not feel the level of paranoia that the Soviets did regarding an attack by western forces, and as such, they are taking their time, rather than rushing new systems into service when doing so would entail a large amount of risk.
Toto, I Don’t Think that We’re In Kansas Any More
Alan Grayson on Dylan Ratigan (2:24)
Crooks and Liars has a very illuminating clip on just what Alan Grayson expects to find in an audit of the Fed.
While I love Grayson’s line that, “Well we are in Emerald City right now. We’ve arrived in Emerald City. Toto has just run underneath the curtain…,” the important quote, and the important question is the more significant quote, “Well what I think is favoritism towards selected big banks that have failed and led us to the brink of national bankruptcy.”
What is clear is that for a long time, at least since Alan “Bubbles” Greenspan became Fed Chairman, was that the “Greenspan Put”, which Wiki calls:
The Fed’s pattern of providing ample liquidity resulted in the investor perception of put protection on asset prices. Investors increasingly believed that when things go bad, the Fed would step in and inject liquidity until the problem got better. Invariably, the Fed did so each time, and the perception became firmly embedded in asset pricing in the form of higher valuation, narrower credit spreads, and excess risk taking. It has been criticized as a form of privatizing profits and socializing losses, and as inflating a speculative bubble in the lead-up to the 2008 financial crisis.
(emphasis mine)
Has been a factor of life.
Basically, if you were big enough, and f$#@ed up badly enough, the United States Fedral Reserve System would bail you out.
I think that there are a number of reasons, the first being that in doing so, you can make yourself look good, and I also believe that in the Ayn Rand addled mind of Greenspan, speculators are Rand’s noble capitalists, and as such need to be coddled and protected.
The best example of this is probably the collapse of Long Term Capital Management (LTCM), where Greenspan set up a bailout that competed with a much more severe haircut for the investors, to see this, but it happened over, and over, and over, and over again.
The only reason that Greenspan could get away with this, and be called a genius for getting away with this, was because he concealed, and in some cases flat out lied, about what he was doing.
That needs to end.
It is corrosive to democracy, it is corrosive to society, and it is corrosive to finance.
Calls for Timmy to be Fired.
Click for full size
Congressman Peter DeFasio Calls for “Timmy” Geithner to be fired.
Also coming from right wing ‘Phant Kevin Brady
Representative Peter DeFasio (D-OR-4) has now explicitly called for Barack Obama to fire Timothy Geithner, though you will note in the video (top) that he calls him “Timmy” (at about 1:35), which I think is a very deliberate slight.
And, according to The Hill, that removing him, as well as Larry Summers, is now the consensus position for the Congressional Populist Caucus (CPC).
We are also seeing similar calls from the right wingers in the Republican Party too, note the calls made to Geithner’s face by Texas whack-doodle Kevin Brady (R-TX-8).
Of note, it appears that Brady’s accusation actually got under Geither’s skin (bottom video).
When Brady brought up his performance as President of the New York Bank of the Federal Reserve, and suggested that his performance there was sub-par, it’s clear that Geithner was irate at this suggestion.
Another Dumbass Move by Governor Paterson
Appointing Kristen Gillibrand to the US Senate, where she now trails Rudy Giuliani by a 54%-40% margin.
Paterson appointed Gillibrand because….Hell….No one knows, but my guess is that it was yet another case of him tacking right, as he did with taxes, until forces by the rest of the New York Democratic party.
Healthcare, The 1st Cloture Motion Passes, 60-39
FDL has the liveblog.
That and £3.00 will get you a Starbucks.
Some notes:
- It now requires 60 votes to accept an amendment to strip out the public option.
- This was just a vote to go to debate so there will be more cloture votes.
- The bill is pretty sucky.
Negotiate … Negotiate … Negotiate …
Today, Brussels, tomorrow, the world!Bwahahaha!!!!
Paul Krugman has discovered that EU foreign minister Catherine Ashton has a full size replica of a dalek in her sitting room. She received it as a present from her husband.
I’m not certain if I am amused or alarmed….
Supreme Court to Hearing Business Method Patent Case
This is big. Basically, the Supreme Court is reviewing a patent on a business method, specifically a way to hedge against inclement weather (I sh$# you not, someone patented betting on a cloudy day), and it could effect the future of much genetic and software algorithm patents, which, after all, are more discoveries than inventions.
I am with the anti-patent side, whose basic argument is here:
Eben Moglen, director of the Software Freedom Law Centre is emphatic that business process patents should never have been allowed in the first place. Patent law, he says, cannot award ownership of facts of nature, or mere mental activities, or algorithms because the Supreme Court has been unambiguous on that point for more than 150 years. However, for the last 20 years, the USPTO and its supervising appellate court have been liberal with patents for inventions consisting of software or business methods enabled by software.
But I would actually go further: While I understand the need to update patent law to apply to new technologies, I believe that the standard should be a clear showing that a lack of significant innovation is resulting from the lack of protection.
After all, the basic reason for IP, Patent and Copyright specifically is to encourage innovation by limiting the rights of other people to use that expression or invention*, as it says in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States:
The Congress shall have power to …..
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
(emphasis mine)
It’s about public benefit, not property rights: a temporary exclusive license is granted to an individual in order to help society as a whole.
While some solutions have been offered to deal with this problem, most notably crowd sourcing patent review, the real solution is to go back to where we were in 1985, when neither genes, species, nor software algorithms were patentable. We got innovations in those areas without those protections.
It should be noted that the Supreme Court only takes the cases that it wants to, and lately when it takes up patent cases, it does so to slap down the USPTO and/or the Federal Patent Court, both of whom tend to be like a man with only a hammer, and see everything like a nail.
In arguments, the court, except for Clarence Thomas, who never talks, appeared to be somewhat disparaging of the arguments of the plaintiffs:
Huge legal expenses and 13 years later, the two men behind the case, Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, had their day in the U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 9. Most legal experts though, agreed that the duo had no chance of victory. “I don’t think anyone other than Bilski thinks that Bilski deserves a patent,” says Mark Lemley, a professor of law at Stanford University. (See the 50 best inventions of 2009.)
The bench seemed to reflect this view, and several Justices suggested somewhat humorously that if the Bilski argument were to proceed, a number of other ludicrous patents could be issued. Justice Antonin Scalia asked if under Bilski’s argument, methods of horse-training could be patented, while the court’s newest member, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, asked if a “method of speed-dating” was patentable.
The interesting thing here is that most of the business community, excluding patent trolls and their close relatives, realize that the current system is completely out of control, which is obvious when the Wall Street Journal has an OP/ED that describes the case as, “The Supreme Court v. Patent Absurdity“.
*Trademark protection is really about protecting the consumer by ensuring that what they buy is what they thought that they were buying.
The Death of Stealth
Click for full size
The shape of anti-stealth
The USAF is expanding a massively parallel supercomputer. It is made from 2,200 Sony PlayStation 3 game consoles, and its purpose is deriving more resolution from radar imagery:
The U.S. Air Force is looking to buy 2,200 Sony PlayStation 3 game consoles to built out a research supercomputer, according to an document posted on the federal government’s procurement Web site.
The PlayStation 3s will be used at the Air Force Research Laboratory’s information directorate in Rome, N.Y., where they will be added to an existing cluster of 336 PlayStation 3s being used to conduct supercomputing research.
The Air Force will use the system to “to determine the best fit for implementation of various applications,” including commercial and internally developed software specific to the PS3’s Cell Broadband Engine processor architecture. The research will help the Air Force decide where Cell Broadband Engine processor-derived hardware and software could be used in military systems.
The Air Force has used the cluster to test a method of processing multiple radar images into higher resolution composite images (known as synthetic aperture radar image formation), high-def video processing, and “neuromorphic computing,” or building computers with brain-like properties.
The thing to note is that the PS/3 costs about $250 online, so the cost of buying all these boxes is under ½ a million dollars.
That’s less than most missiles out there, and by fusing the data, you can get a much more accurate picture of position and heading, probably close enough for a targeting solution.
If you assume that each one of the data centers costs about $1 million, even a relatively poor nation could deploy dozens of centers around the country, and use them to detect stealthy attack.
Heck, with a size of 12.8″(W) x 3.8″(H) x 10.8″(L), 0.304 you could fit 2200 PS3s in a box 8¾ feet on a side, so, if you assume that putting them and a rack and cabling them together increases the required volume by a factor of 5, you can fit the system on about 4 flatracks (picture).
If you were just to buy the boxes, and extract the electronics, you might be able to fit this in one flatrack, though at that point, power and cooling get iffy.
Still, the technology for ganging the PS3’s cell processors into a massively parallel supercomputer is very much public knowledge, with most of the requisite software being GPLed open source.
Stupid
So, the crew of the HMS Scimitar decided to do target practice on a buoy, which should be no big deal, only before opening fire, they adorned their target the Spanish Flag, and the ambassador to Spain has been forced to apologize:
The Royal Navy was accused yesterday of using a Spanish flag as a machine-gun target.
Giles Paxman, the UK’s new ambassador in Madrid, was forced to apologise after sailors fired at a red-and-yellow flag affixed to a buoy while patrolling off Gibraltar.
He was summoned to the Spanish Foreign Ministry for a dressing down and officials said he had conceded there had been an ‘error of judgement’.
I’m not entirely sure why the crew did this, it was not for any historical purposes, as the anniversary of the battle of the Spanish Armada was August 8.
My guess is that this has something to do with the 300 year long dispute over Gibraltar, but even so, I think that one ship captain is facing early retirement in Her Majesty’s Navy.
Harry Reid Disses David Broder
So it appears that Harry Reid is telling the “Dean of the Washington Press Corps” to go Cheney Himself:
“In tomorrow’s Washington Post, David Broder, their distinguished senior columnist, certainly not a political conservative, expresses his reservation as a citizen about the steps that we could be about to take,” McConnell said.
Reid couldn’t have been less impressed. “To focus on a man who has been retired for many years and writes a column once in a while is not where we should be.”
(emphasis mine)
David Broder has been highly respected for his writing columns calling liberals DFHs* and giving a tongue bath to the conservative establishment since the 1960s.
Actually, it’s been the same article, written over and over again.
Nice to see that Harry Reid is calling him irrelevant. One wishes that this statement had been made decades ago by hundreds of more people.
Of course Broder is a conservative. He has been a spokesman for the status quo for over 40 years, though his real constituency is the Washington, DC cocktail party circuit.
*Dirty F$#@ing Hippies.