Just Because We Can ...

Matt says,

danah boyd writes a typically thought-provoking post on the prospect of exposing users' "Social Graphs," a meme that's been heating up recently. Quick backstory in case you didn't know: Google and a bunch of techy types want to make it so you can easily port your identity and contacts to any application on the Web. The advantages include easier sign-ups for different Web applications, no longer having to maintain the same information in a bunch of different places, quickly finding any contacts who are using an application you just signed up for, etc. Those of us with MySpace/Facebook/Friendster/LinkedIn/Flickr/vita.mn/etc. accounts are planning to be, for the most part, happy.

But danah makes the good point that those stumping for this move are all tech-savvy people who mostly have no idea of what the repercussions will be for some of the most vulnerable heavy users of the Web -- teens. A typical argument in favor of more open data refers to what Tim O'Reilly calls "security by obscurity" -- i.e. we have the illusion we're secure just because all our data is usually tucked out of the way, but this is patently false, as any reporter could tell you. Exposing public data more commonly means fewer people will harbor this false sense of security, ostensibly making them more directly conscious of how they manage their personal data. But as danah points out, it could be an awfully risky way to make a point.

A Good Hour

Robin says,

So I've mentioned Larry Lessig's new ten-year project on corruption before. Now I just finished watching his inaugural "alpha" lecture on the topic and it was terrific. An hour long, but well worth it, both for a glimpse of Lessig's cool, patchwork presentation style -- I'd heard it was great but never actually seen Lessig-slides in action -- and also for the framework he provides. He is an A+ presenter and an A++ thinker, and this is an A+++ subject.

The Second Constitutional Convention

Robin says,

Larry Sabato on DailyKos:

To begin with, by what sort of mechanism would all of this constitutional change be achieved? Our present Constitution outlines two ways to bring about amendments. The method used for all amendments up until now has been a proposed amendment passing both houses of Congress by a two-thirds majority in each house, then getting ratified by three-quarters of the states. For interlocking reforms of the scope and scale that I am proposing, however, such a piecemeal process wouldn't work.

Instead, we need to turn to the second process, one never before used in the history of the United States: a Constitutional Convention. Thirty-four states would petition Congress for a Convention, and the Congress would be obligated to call it -- while designing a "Call to Convention" document that would list the subjects to be considered by the delegates.

What an electrifying idea. Sabato's going to be writing about it -- it's the subject of his new book -- and responding to questions for the next few weeks on Daily Kos.

American Stakeholders, Part II

Matt says,

Remember this spring, when I was gushing about the American Stakeholder Act ($6,000 given to every child at birth for capital investments)? Apparently, no less bright a light than Hillary Clinton is all over the idea. Awesome. I wonder if the New America Foundation is working some kind of Manchurian Candidate-fu?

China and Taiwan

Robin says,

Tim Johnson has notes on some new developments involving a proposed referendum in Taiwan.

He links to a speech by Thomas Christensen, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asia. I actually found it a fascinating read: pure diplomacy, totally scrubbed clean, and yet with a surprising amount of frank realpolitik. (Frankpolitik?)

We Can Imagine a Better Democracy

Robin says,

Sure, they're just words, but even so: Nice words. From UK prime minister Gordon Brown, via the civic-minded Peter Levine:

At this point, Brown begins to outline practical ideas for increasing citizen voice in policy. "We have already taken the step of publishing the legislative programme in draft, inviting comments and views, and for the last six months I have been discussing and working through how to do in a more consultative way that involves people in debating the issues that matter -- drugs, crime, antisocial behaviour, housing development or even foreign policy issues like Iraq where there are public discussions."

The first step will be to "hold Citizens Juries round the country. The members of these juries will be chosen independently. Participants will be given facts and figures that are independently verified, they can look at real issues and solutions, just as a jury examines a case. And where these citizens juries are held the intention is to bring people together to explore where common ground exists."

Brown explains that "Citizens Juries are not a substitute for representative democracy, they are an enrichment of it. The challenge of reviving local democracy can only be met if we build new forms of citizen involvement to encourage them in our local services and in new ways of holding people who run our services to account. So we will expand opportunities for deliberation, we will extend democratic participation in our local communities."

The Citizen Juries sound similar to deliberative polling, an idea I've always liked. Honestly though, we don't even need anything as formal and involved as all that to get better at democracy. A little more openness would go a long way, along with a corps of legislators more interested in communicating than... whatever it is they're interested in now.

It's totally possible, especially if the internet keeps sort of reformatting social assumptions at the same rate it has been, but it is a project on the scale of a generation. Things won't magically get better in 2008. (Well: No, actually they will. But that's only because things are so bad right now. There will still be lots of work to do. Insert analogy about a house with leaky plumbing and bad insulation, but also, the roof's on fire, etc.)

Measuring Development (Maybe Defining It First)

Robin says,

Apropos of a few email threads lately, here's a passage from Charles Mann (who wrote the book "1491") quoted by Matt Yglesias (emphasis mine):

David Aviles, Ian Ebert and Lauren Tombari all ask (to quote Mr Aviles), "If [Indians] had such a large population, why hadn't they developed as much as other countries?" The answer to this very important question is complicated, but part of it surely is that evaluating relative levels of technological development is not so easy, and that it isn't at all clear that native peoples were less developed in this area than Europeans or Asians. As the historian Alfred Crosby has repeatedly observed, societies tend to measure "progress" in terms of things that they are good at. Europeans were good at making metal tools and devices, so we tend to look for them -- Indians didn't have steel axes and geared machines, so they must be inferior. But many Indian societies were extremely deft about agriculture. Looking at a Europe afflicted by recurrent famine, one can imagine them viewing these societies as so undeveloped that they were unable to feed themselves. It's hard to say which view is correct.

This is a really good point, and I am guilty as charged re: judging development in terms of the things we're good at.

But seriously, I am really guilty, and I can't even think of kinds of technology other than ours (computers, hybrid cars, plasma TVs, DNA sequencers, etc.) worth having or developing in the world today. The best I can muster is something about the ingenuity of the billion-or-so slum dwellers the world over -- e.g. they can make water purification systems out of rusty buckets and plastic tarps! -- but I don't really believe it deeply. Or rather, that stuff is cool, but I think they ought to (and do) ultimately aspire to computers and DNA sequencers too!

So whatcha got for me, Snarkmatrix?

The Sheltered Star

Robin says,

Historian Daniel Aaron on America:

To a nation hitherto self-contained and confident, the new responsibilities do not come easily. We have never bothered to understand alien ideas ('isms' were something to fear or deride), and 'selling America' had simply meant dispensing American largesse. We now see the extent of our involvement and the vulnerability of our talismans: natural resources and 'know-how.' We see that world problems are not merely American problems writ large, that it will take more than a little common sense and a few 'man to man' talks with the Russians to solve them. Finally, we can appreciate the degree to which our strengths and weaknesses as a people have been conditioned by the American past, how we have been blessed and victimized by our history. Because of our wealth and isolation and our vast inland empire, because of the advantages we have enjoyed as a result of European rivalries, we did not develop some of the qualities and abilities we now so desperately need.

Written in 1952.

It's just one salient bit from the latest edition of David Warsh's Economic Principals -- definitely worth a read. The last two grafs in particular are pretty tremendous.

Decision Making in Slow Motion

Robin says,

I've been hearing about the Petraeus Report for months:

Administration officials said Mr. Bush wanted to hold face-to-face talks with General Petraeus and with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and other top Iraqi leaders before completing a review of his Iraq strategy later this month and before General Petraeus and Mr. Crocker return to Washington next week to deliver their long-awaited assessment of conditions in Iraq.

And honestly I don't get it. It seems like such a '50s approach to information. Why isn't the Petraeus Report a live website with streams of statistics provided in near-real-time and weekly assessments from Petraeus? Why isn't the surge strategy being evaluated and updated every other Tuesday?

Of course, I understand why such a website isn't public (though I think it ought to be). What I want to know is why isn't on the administration intranet?

The Arc of the World

Robin says,

Dan just emailed me a link to this video of Hans Rosling from TED. I'd seen his Gapminder data visualizer before, of course -- but his actual talk is really really good, and made me want to go play with it again. Which I just did.

Dark, Ethereal, Floating Heavenward

Robin says,

A major challenge in economic policy is figuring out how to make people "see" externalities -- the costs of their decisions that they don't directly pay for, but instead pass on to society as a whole.

Well, what if every externality was a black balloon?

A New, Green Bretton Woods?

Robin says,

Interesting and subtle enviro-economic thoughts from Reihan Salam at The American Scene. Also, he transcribed part of a magazine by hand, a feat of bloggy strength I admire.

Contingency and Counterfactual

Robin says,

Dani Rodrik, in the closing of a post on historical determinism and development:

This may seem discouraging if you are interested not only in understanding the world, but also in changing it. On closer look, though, [Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson]'s historical determinism leaves plenty of room for human agency and policy choices to make a difference, as I have argued here. Statistically, plenty is left unexplained by historical factors.

Ha. Neat. I sort of like that: We get to be the error term.

Related: My train reading these days is Virtual History, a collection of counterfactuals edited by Niall Ferguson. Fun discovery: To spin an even mildly convincing counterfactual, you have to make sure the fundamental facts leading up to your branch-point are really solid. So oddly it's in the fake-history book that I'm learning about all these real events (a lot of World War II stuff, etc.) in more detail than I ever have before. I think Ferguson and other fans of counterfactual would say yes, that's the point.

Just discovered: Philip Tetlock, the terrific Berkeley researcher I saw give a Long Now talk on experts and forecasting earlier this year, also has a book of counterfactuals! Why was I not told of this earlier??

Psst: Any favorite what-if scenarios?

On the Ground

Robin says,

Seven U.S. infantrymen and non-commissioned officers finishing up a 15-month tour in Iraq have written an op-ed describing the situation there as they see it. It's a must-read.

The Prison-Industrial Complex

Robin says,

Brad Plumer on the American prison state. Eye-popping statistics abound; in short, it's horrifying. And yet, a malevolent spirit granted unlimited power to shape American minds and laws could hardly have crafted a problem more difficult to discuss in the mainstream-ish public sphere. See: "My opponent is soft on crime," etc. Gahhh.

Matt Yglesias Is My Tom Friedman

Robin says,

Few people beat Matt Yglesias for unapologetic mix of pop culture and geopolitics, and it's pure genius.

E.g., riffing on Ultimates 2 from Marvel, he says the comic book...

...illustrates key liberal views about international relations, namely about the importance of doing nuclear non-proliferation policy through legitimate international institutions rather than coalitions of the willing and/or random superhero teams.

Awe. some.

Update: Ah... a correspondent has noted that my headline can be misconstrued as a slam. In fact I mean that, whereas some people turn to Tom Friedman for cues on foreign policy, I turn to Matt Yglesias.

The Challenge of Authoritarian Capitalism

Robin says,

Argh! Must read this Foreign Affairs article! But it is available only to paying subscribers! Oh well -- the blockquote's pretty good on its own:

Today's global liberal democratic order faces two challenges. The first is radical Islam -- and it is the lesser of the two challenges. Although the proponents of radical Islam find liberal democracy repugnant, and the movement is often described as the new fascist threat, the societies from which it arises are generally poor and stagnant. They represent no viable alternative to modernity and pose no significant military threat to the developed world. It is mainly the potential use of weapons of mass destruction -- particularly by nonstate actors -- that makes militant Islam a menace.

The second, and more significant, challenge emanates from the rise of nondemocratic great powers: the West's old Cold War rivals China and Russia, now operating under authoritarian capitalist, rather than communist, regimes. Authoritarian capitalist great powers played a leading role in the international system up until 1945. They have been absent since then. But today, they seem poised for a comeback.

Authoritarian capitalist states, today exemplified by China and Russia, may represent a viable alternative path to modernity, which in turn suggests that there is nothing inevitable about liberal democracy's ultimate victory -- or future dominance.

The EU is also a noteworthy model. It's of course not authoritarian by any stretch, but it's not exactly democratic, either.

The question will soon be posed: Do we favor democracy simply because it is effective? Or do we favor it because it is, in some deeper sense, right? And are we willing to defend the latter proposition even if the first is subverted -- that is, even if nondemocratic systems demonstrate equal or greater effectiveness?

Not well-worded, but perhaps you get the idea.

My answer to the latter question, for the record, is yes. And you?

Law ~ Code

Robin says,

This is blowing my mind: Here's what it looks like when you apply the same visualization scheme to Project Gutenberg, the Windows kernel, and the U.S. Code.

Guess which two look the same?

Terrific conversation in the comments, too.

Failures of Clandestine Imagination

Robin says,

Good NYT review of a book I've been eying -- Legacy of Ashes, a damning history of the C.I.A. by Tim Weiner. The book is apparently a depressing chronicle of one disaster after another, but somehow the reviewer, Evan Thomas, ends like this:

After following along Weiner's march of folly, readers may wonder: Is an open democracy capable of building and sustaining an effective secret intelligence service? Maybe not. But with Islamic terrorists vowing to set off a nuclear device in an American city, there isn't much choice but to keep on trying.

Er... okay? We couldn't invent some new ways of gathering and synthesizing information? Seriously?

P.S. Besides, the real action at any intelligence agency these days is all in the internet teams that scour terrorist recruitment forums on the web... and sometimes even pose as members! It's totally cloak and dagger -- and it actually works.

The Google Grid, Broadcasting at 700MHz

Robin says,

Google has committed to bid for wireless spectrum -- as much to influence the direction of the market as to, you know, own spectrum (or so it seems).

And, good news: The direction they want to push it is towards openness.

These days, I find myself less worried about Google's techno-titanic mastery of all data and more excited about its potential as a force for change in public policy and markets. I'm actually really glad they're getting into that game.

Subscribe to Dani Rodrik

Robin says,

It is stretching my undergrad econ to its limits to understand this post on African economic growth from Dani Rodrik -- and I am using that as an excuse to remind you that he is now writing a blog. His is really a terrifically smart, sane voice to have available unfiltered.

Infographica

Robin says,

From a tipster: Peripheral Landscapes, an exposition -- in hot motion graphics format -- of Mexico City's recent history and informal economics. Starts out better than it ends, but pretty rad all the same.

Compare/contrast: the Pulp Fiction typography video.

The Carbon Tax

Robin says,

For the record, I am all in favor of a carbon tax. So is Anne Applebaum. So is Al Gore (who favors swapping it for payroll taxes). It's simple... it's fair... it's Pigovian!

Because, you know, everyone has been emailing me asking what I think about a carbon tax. Um.

2400 Percent

Robin says,

China: Holy shmoley.

I'm no Bill Kristol and a fax machine but honestly I'm kinda weirded out by the vision of a world where America is not le hyperpuissance. Not because I think it's bad... just because I think it's weird.

Update: James Fallows has some good China notes. Favorite part:

A few months ago in his annual press conference for foreign journalists, Premier Wen Jiabao indeed said that democracy was the inevitable future for his country. He just said it might take a century or so to arrive.

...And the Last Man

Robin says,

The Apologist beat me to the Fukuyama wrap-up. And then he posted a follow-up! With a one-two punch of post-neocon coverage like that, I think I better just leave it to him. Check it:

Quote of the night: (Fukuyama, exasperatedly) "The Project for a New American Century was basically Bill Kristol and a fax machine!"

In fact I don't actually have a lot to add. I was a bit disappointed by the lack of mea culpa in Fukuyama's talk. Not sure why I'm surprised: He still believes his thesis is basically true. And really "The End of History" does operate on a level much higher than that of mere decade-defining strategic disasters... It's explicitly a stab at a Universal History (when you see capital letters like that you know it's serious) with all the awesome/awful grandiosity that implies.

To Fukuyama's credit, he did spend a lot of time talking about how we'll know if he's wrong: If the EU never quite coalesces because nationalist/nativist forces overpower the urge for Leviathan Lite. If China never does democratize. If India goes nuts. If accessible WMDs turn out to be a big problem after all. If global warming wrecks the world.

Come to think of it, it was actually quite the parade of horrors. Good trick, Fukuyama... now we all hope you're right.

During the talk I texted this to myself, as is my habit: "The problem of the last man . . . We have a thin moral community . . . We want an identity that is distinct and not universal." Apparently I thought it was pretty important.

P.S. For the record, Snarkmarket is basically Matt Thompson and a fax machine.

Down With Values

Robin says,

Props to Ezra Klein for coming out swinging:

I have a confession to make: I am not a values voter. I do not want a foreign policy based upon "the idea that is America." I do not think we should be guided in all things by such glittering concepts as liberty, democracy, equality, justice, tolerance, humility, and faith.

In fact, I'm fed up with values. Entirely. They've failed this country. As a lodestar, there is none worse.

His column is keyed to a new foreign policy book by Anne-Marie Slaughter. It's all about the responsible application of American values to world affairs; but Klein says:

The problem with Slaughter's vision, which I generally found myself in enthusiastic agreement with, is that the only one I trust to carry it out is, well, Slaughter. And possibly me.

Nice.

What Klein wants is foreign policy proposals that focus on material outcomes -- not moral origins. We've had enough of the latter lately.

What timing! I'm going to see Francis Fukuyama speak tonight. He's going to revisit and re-appraise his argument from The End of History and the Last Man -- parts of which formed some of the deepest framework for the neocon misadventure. Expect a full report.

Greenwich Office vs. Palo Alto Garage

Robin says,

Interesting pair of posts here.

In response to a student's question about the social value of a Wall Street career, economist Greg Mankiw argues replies that yes, investors make a big contribution to society by making the economy more efficient.

The comment thread that follows is insanely good. Very long, and very detailed, but worth a look. I thought this was the gem:

The "invisible hand" works great when it is forcing productive firms to be more efficient.

However, some activities in our complex economy don't directly produce anything -- some portions of litigation, advertising, lobbying, and stock analysis simply shuffle existing production. In these cases, profit maximizing firms aren't automatically controlled by the invisible hand.

Prof Mankiw's student is correct in asking whether one more worker in those areas will really help grow the economic pie.

Economists can find positive externalities in any of these activities. Probably the first million hours of stock analysis (or litigation, or ...) provides an efficiency gain that justifies the deployment of those talented individuals. But that doesn't guarantee that the last million is a net positive.

The "deployment of talented individuals" angle is important. Over on his blog, Robert Reich also hits it (I feel like he must have read Mankiw's post, though he doesn't mention or link to it, so, uh, maybe not):

America is the greatest entrepreneurial nation in the world. But there are really two kinds of entrepreneurs here – product entrepreneurs and financial entrepreneurs –and only one of them truly builds the economy. Product entrepreneurs find new ways of satisfying customers. Financial entrepreneurs find new ways of ... well, making money off money.

Problem is, financial entrepreneurship is becoming more and more dominant in the economy. Thirty years ago, finance was the handmaiden of American industry. Now industry is run by finance. For every budding Steve Jobs or Bill Gates there are now thousands of aspiring private equity or hedge fund managers. That’s because this is where the big bucks are. Which means, it’s where some of our most talented young people are going.

The problem isn’t just the brain drain. It’s what the brains are being used for. Competition in the real economy generates better products. But competition in the financial economy is often a zero-sum contest.

"Now industry is run by finance" -- that's an interesting claim and takes the conversation into (I think) more useful territory.

Note that I have no smart ideas or opinions about this. Just starting to wonder about it.

P.S. The next post is about Muppets.

China Readings

Robin says,

1. Chinese Mirrors by Rick Perlstein in The Nation. Multi-book review (the best kind) with a special focus on James Mann's new book The China Fantasy. Mann's last book, The Rise of the Vulcans, about the original Bush/Cheney foreign policy team, was almost unbelievably good, so I am excited to read this one at some point.
   
   
2. China Makes, The World Takes by James Fallows in The Atlantic. I know it's lame to link to a subscriber-only article, but... I don't know... email me and I'll send you a copy or something. It's reporting in the truest sense: Rather than refer to GDP statistics, or talk to "experts," Fallows goes to Shenzhen and hangs out in Chinese factories. He describes characters and scenes I'd never have imagined. Any time somebody actually does this, it reminds you how, er, rarely it gets done. Worth noting that Fallows comes away from his investigation with a fairly positive view.
   
   (I have a special fondness for Fallows, as his pieces in The Atlantic were some of the first "Big Ideas journalism" I ever read, and pretty much cracked my head wide open circa 1998-99.)
   
   
3. My Time as a Hostage, and I'm a Business Reporter by David Barboza in the NYT. The lead:

   AS an American journalist based in China, I knew there was a good chance that at some point I'd be detained for pursuing a story. I just never thought I'd be held hostage by a toy factory.

   Via Dani Rodrik's excellent blog.

A New Star to Follow

Robin says,

Larry Lessig has a post up where he announces a new direction for his research and activism. The substance is super-interesting -- he's going to focus on corruption of the political process, in a broad sense, rather than copyright policy -- but so is the format.

I love the idea of so consciously staking out a direction -- of so publicly announcing a new set of questions. His post has this almost odd specificity to it:

[...] I have decided to shift my academic work, and soon, my activism, away from the issues that have consumed me for the last 10 years, towards a new set of issues: Namely, these. "Corruption" as I've defined it elsewhere will be the focus of my work. For at least the next 10 years, it is the problem I will try to help solve.

He explains that he's been doing copyright policy for ten years; he feels he's learned all he's going to about that set of questions, and kicked off a powerful movement; and now it's time to start over.

As Lessig defines it in his post, corruption is the central problem in our political system today: Its inability (our inability?) to acknowledge broadly-agreed-upon facts and act appropriately. See: "An Inconvenient Truth, "The Assault on Reason." (Indeed, Lessig says Al Gore is one of the people who inspired this new direction.)

But I lost track of my original point: Even if his new focus was milkshake policy, I'd be impressed by the sharpness of his shift, by the stark statement of new goals. For those of us with a million thoughts and links buzzing around in their brains, all mostly just looping in on each other (clearly I am talking about Matt here), it's a good model to consider.

US Map of the World

Matt says,

This map displays US states renamed as foreign countries with similar GDP. California, for example, is re-christened France (whose GDP is $2.15 tril), Michigan becomes Argentina, and Texas becomes Canada. As the footnotes on the map indicate, it's not a straightforward comparison, because it doesn't include population. But it's a pretty darn interesting visualization nonetheless.

No, Not That Vista

Robin says,

Okay, see if you can guess what this refers to:

VistA stands as perhaps the greatest success story for government-developed information technology since the Internet itself.

Wow, right? The answer lies in Thomas Goetz's NYT op-ed.

(His blog Epidemix is subscription-worthy as well!)

The Spy in the Aisles

Robin says,

Oh good: Wal-Mart is hiring intelligence analysts. Via AFWW, who asks:

Here's a question for you: Does Wal-Mart have it's own security force? An actual division of the company? Or do they contract a Blackwater-type? Anybody know? I feel like that would be a solid next step. Then would be buying an island.

Except in Wal-Mart's case I feel like the island would be... Australia.

God, I'm So Glad I Live in the Year 2007

Robin says,

Robert Reich's first videoblog. It's actually interesting: He talks about the experience of being a guest on big-time TV vs. being a videoblogga.

What Matters in the Budget

Robin says,

What matters in the federal budget?

1. Social Security.
2. Medicare and Medicaid.
3. Interest payments on the national debt.
4. Defense.

Everything else -- from energy to foreign aid to the Justice Department to roads and bridges -- all together add up to about as much as one of those items.

The Yield Curve

Robin says,

Okay, this is cosmic: Ben Hyde explains the yield curve (in short: it's a map of interest rates for various points in the future, and is a rough measure of investors' optimism) and links to a super-cool animation that shows its fluctuations from 1977 'til now.

It takes a bit of reading to understand exactly what it is what you're looking at, but once you do, it's pretty amazing.

For instance, here's the yield curve for December 1979:

And for January 2004:

And based only on what you know about those two moments in time, you can probably begin to guess how to interpret the curve. So what do you think today's looks like?

There's Trouble in the Oceans

Robin says,

Headline from Science: By 2048 all current fish and seafood species are projected to collapse.

Specifically, "collapse" means we're catching at most 10% of what we used to. Already, a third of all fish and seafood species have collapsed.

Dohhh!

(Here's the NYT story if you want it, but frankly, I love those EurekAlerts!)

Insurance and Opportunity

Robin says,

If you are a reader of one or more policy blogs, Jacob Hacker's proposal for a new kind of social insurance will be old news. If you are not, then check it out. And subscribe to a policy blog why doncha!

This Democracy Thing, It Just Might Work Out

Robin says,

The Sunlight Foundation seems to be the hub of some of the coolest things bubbling up in citizen journalism these days. Over on the Sunlight Network blog, written by Zephyr Teachout, I love the subtext of this line:

We are experimental, irreverent, and especially (but not exclusively) interested in the ways that technology and the networked public sphere can nurture the already developing democratic movement in our country.

I actually don't think it's intentional, but even so, it casts democracy as this still rather fresh idea, still struggling. I like that vibe.

Sunlight just announced a round of grants to a bunch of interesting projects.

No Surprise This One's Online

Robin says,

At this point, blogging software should probably just include a button that says "link to latest Malcolm Gladwell article." Because, well, yeah. It's about pensions and is, of course, illuminating and eminently sensible. And, bonus! -- the article continues on Gladwell's blog.

Demands

Robin says,

Ezra Klein points to video of Stephen Lewis's speech at the close of the big AIDS conference in Toronto. He's right, it's great (control-F for 'lewis' on the page). Lewis is a Canadian diplomat and, it turns out, a bracing speaker.

There's Oil in the Water

Robin says,

Google's Chris Sacca posts a brilliant visual representation of the energy cost of shipping in bottled water from abroad. Ick.

Strategic Advice from Grand Moff Tarkin

Robin says,

Current U.S. foreign policy straight out of Star Wars, sez Yglesias. Truth-value of claim irrelevant as it is appealing mix of policy and pop culture.

An Inconvenient Truth

Robin says,

File under Dept. of Effusive Praise: Larry Lessig calls Davis Guggenheim's doc on global warming and Al Gore "the most extraordinary lecture I have ever seen anyone give about anything."

I saw the film with a bunch of Current folks and it was great. Go see it this weekend if you can.

Added bonus: There's actually some rise of the image fall of the word mojo happening with this movie; both it and the slide show it's based on use images, moving and still, to communicate complicated ideas in an extraordinarily efficient way.

It Was a Dark and Nerdy Night

Robin says,

New genre: wonk noir. Sample line: "She was Milton Friedman with the body of Scarlett Johansson."

Peacemakers for Hire

Robin says,

Whoah! Dystopian foreign policy idea of the week: Forget U.N. blue helmets in Darfur. Why not send in a private mercenary army to keep the peace?

Probably because it's hella Snow Crash, per Matt Yglesias. I mean come on: These are companies with names like "Blackwater"... "Aegis"... "Dyncorp" (!?)... and "Executive Outcomes" (!!?). Let's leave this plotline to the novelists.

But! -- it is probably worth thinking about new ways to protect people in screwed-up regions. Cool anecdote from The New Republic about an organization called the Genocide Intervention Network:

GI-Net quickly concluded that going with mercenaries was a bad idea. But, as their search dragged on, the group's members became increasingly frustrated that they were sitting on a pile of money when, seemingly every day, there was some new horror in Darfur. Finally, in January, GI-Net had a breakthrough. An African NGO was willing to take GI-Net's money and, in tandem with the AU, train a contingent of female escorts to protect Darfurian women when they leave their refugee camps to search for firewood. This week, Smith is in Addis Ababa putting the finishing touches on the deal.

ScaryFeed

Robin says,

Subscribe to this page to get all the latest news about Iran and nuclear technology. Hoo boy.

Welcome to My Bloglines Account, Foreign Policy

Robin says,

The excellent magazine Foreign Policy has a new blog called Passport. Subscribe without hesitation. (It's already been proven Snarkmarket is just a shill for FP but whateva.)

For the Record, I Am Totally Not a Libertarian

Robin says,

I've been enjoying the Cato Institute's blog. Well, I guess it's not actually a blog, as they do not link to op-eds and funny Flash movies. Rather, it's like a little e-zine with original contributions -- lots by libertarians, of course, but they do a good job mixing it up. The latest round of repartee (on the subject of inequality) features Peter Singer and Jacob Hacker, for instance: the founder of the animal rights movement and a smart thinker on welfare policy, respectively.

And what I like about it is that Cato's format approximates the back-and-forth ideal we all kinda wish the blogosphere would live up to more often. In this case, David Schmidtz lays out an argument, and then Singer and others reply. Now Schmidtz is back with ripostes. It's smart stuff. (Pretty abstract, though, so this is only for you if a title like "I'm Not a Utilitarian But I Play One on TV" sounds potentially amusing. Otherwise... yeah.)

Is the Information Economy About Chips... or Culture?

Robin says,

Well hey, speaking of European innovation and the European Dream: Umair Haque (a smart media and technology strategist) says Europe's got the only capital that's worth anything in the long term:

At heart, that's the source of Europe's genius: it is, fundamentally, the most creative place in the world.

The Garden State Argument for Health Care Reform

Robin says,

Best ever: Ezra Klein's talking about health care and the profile of Mark Warner in the NYT Mag when he drops the Garden State Argument. Like so:

At the end the movie, it's clear that Natalie Portman (Sam) and Zach Braff (Andrew) are screwed. As an actor, Andrew needs to live in Los Angeles. As an epileptic paralegal in a firm with an "amazing" health plan, Sam can't afford to lose her insurance. So she can't move to be with him and he'd have to give up his profession to be with her. And all because of the employer-based health care system. Not only is it an impediment to economic efficiency on both the worker and employer side, but it obstructs true love.

Were that Natalie Portman could somehow figure into illustrative examples for all policy debates...

Click back to Klein's blog to see how indie rock bands figure into the picture, too.

Axis of Looove

Robin says,

Whoah... didn't see this coming: Foreign Policy (previous love) has a special web-only Valentine's Day report. (It's actually a survey of countries' attitudes towards each other. Revealed: Poland wants to be our Valentine.)

I Mean the Global Police Force, Not the Band

Robin says,

You know what's cool? Interpol.

Google Goes to China

Robin says,

Much has been written on Google's China policy: In exchange for permission to operate google.cn from inside the People's Republic, they will censor some results on that site.

The WaPo's Sebastian Mallaby has the best take on the situation so far, if you ask me. One of his key arguments:

Google has negotiated the right to disclose, at the bottom of its Chinese search results, whether information has been withheld -- a disclosure that may prompt users to repeat their search using google.com instead of google.cn. Of course, the second search might be frustrated by Cisco's routers. But disclosing censorship is half the battle. If people know they are being brainwashed, then they are not being brainwashed.

We Need a Bomb That Makes Good Citizens

Robin says,

Embedded in Sebastian Mallaby's critique of Condi Rice there's an interesting note about the world in general:

The best formulation of this new debate comes from Francis Fukuyama, who famously proclaimed the universality of the democratic urge in his 1989 essay on history's end. Fukuyama certainly believes in spreading U.S. values, but he has emerged as a critic of the Iraq war because he believes its ambitions were unrealizable. The United States lacks the instruments to transform other societies, Fukuyama argues; to build nations you must first build institutions, and nobody knows how to do that.

That's pretty amazing. We are talking about the most fundamental fabric of societies here -- and we have a hazy understanding at best of what it's made of, and no understanding, really, of how to weave it anew.

How weird that we can, like, blow up the moon, but we can't change an institution, here or abroad -- not as part of a plan, anyway, and not on any schedule.

You know, I might as well just wire it up so Mallaby's columns get linked on Snarkmarket automatically as soon as they appear on washingtonpost.com...

USA vs. GOOG

Robin says,

Oh man, this is SUCH a cool case. You may recall that the Justice Department is trying to get Google to give up a large sample of its search records. Well, John Battelle reports:

Apparently, the subpoena originally asked for a lot more than just a million addresses, as reported Thursday. From the motion the DOJ filed to force Google to comply with the subpoena:

"The subpoena asks Google to produce an electronic file containing '[a]ll URL's that rea available to be located through a query on your company's search engine as of July 31 2005."

and

"all queries that have been entered on your company' search engine between June 1, 2005 and July 31, 2005."

Battelle concludes that Google is fighting this as much for business reasons as for idealistic ones -- but either way, wow. Makes that Yale conference seem somewhat prescient, doesn't it?

Demand for Education

Robin says,

WaPo global-issues rockstar Sebastian Mallaby goes to India and finds the market for private education -- K12 and college alike -- absolutely booming. For instance:

What's made this engineering takeoff possible is not an increase in the supply of universities financed by taxpayers or foreign donors; it's an increase in demand for education from fee-paying students -- a demand to which entrepreneurs naturally respond. More than four out of five Indian engineering students attend private colleges, whose potential growth seems limitless. In 2003 the Vellore Institute of Technology received 7,000 applications. In 2005 it received 44,000.

Mallaby's analysis: Conventional wisdom is that education leads to development, but it looks like the arrow points the other way, as well. Okay, maybe that's not so surprising, but still.

Also: Saheli's in India!

Global Stories You Missed

Robin says,

Foreign Policy rounds up ten big stories that fell through the cracks in 2005. Take a spin and get re-acquainted with what's actually happening in the world.

More on Chinese Unrest

Robin says,

Following up on the little flare-up in China, Anne-Marie Slaughter's source in China writes:

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has watched the "color revolutions" in Georgia (rose), the Ukraine (orange), Azerbaijan (rose/orange), and elsewhere with great trepidation. But if such an event were to happen here it is unlikely to come in the warm hues favored in the former Soviet bloc, and it would certainly not be red like the revolution of 50 years ago. No, the revolution the CCP is increasingly worried about is green.

More on China and the environment follows. It's interesting stuff.

P.S. In good ol' Civilization IV the ultimate economic system is... environmentalism. At first I thought that was odd, but upon reflection it might just be prescient.

WaPo's Congressional Votes Database

Robin says,

Hmm... perhaps Adrian Holovaty will simply craft Google.gov himself.

Check out some of the subtle, smart touches: You can view the votes with the narrowest and widest margins, for instance. Also: Leonard Boswell of Iowa, WTF? Votes database co-creator Derek Willis explains Boswell had surgery and missed votes while recovering. So who feels bad now? That would be me.

But can he create an online FOIA tool??

Mo' Laptops, Mo' Problems

Robin says,

Hey, they unveiled the prototype of those $100 laptops we've blogged about before.

In the Washington Post, Seymour Papert says: "It will change ... the way children everywhere think about themselves in relation to the world."

CNN's story quotes Nicholas Negroponte like this: "One laptop per child: Children are your most precious resource, and they can do a lot of self-learning and peer-to-peer teaching. Bingo. End of story."

But Ben Vershbow at if:book says:

Sorry to be so snide, but we were watching the live webcast from Tunis yesterday... it's hard not to laugh at the leaders of the free world bumbling over this day-glo gadget, this glorified Trapper Keeper cum jack-in-the-box (Annan ended up breaking the hand crank), with barely a word devoted to what educational content will actually go inside, or to how teachers plan to construct lessons around these new toys. In the end, it's going to come down to them. Good teachers, who know computers, may be able to put the laptops to good use. But somehow I'm getting visions of stacks of unused or busted laptops, cast aside like so many neon bricks.

There is a grain (maybe several grains) of cagey wisdom there, and some useful caution. All the same, I'm excited to see what happens with these things.

(if:book features some of the most thorough thinking around. I totally recommend the feed.)

Update: Great, detailed on-the-scene interview with the CTO of the $100 laptop project by Andy Carvin. I love the internet!

Trillions and Trillions

Robin says,

I have been playing Civilization IV lately and so am more interested than usual in the management of large nations and/or empires. So this USATODAY story on our various looming fiscal crises caught my eye -- and check out this great (bold!) lead:

WASHINGTON -- The comptroller general of the United States is explaining over eggs how the nation's finances are going to hell.

"We face a demographic tsunami" that "will never recede," David Walker tells a group of reporters. He runs through a long list of fiscal challenges, led by the imminent retirement of the baby boomers, whose promised Medicare and Social Security benefits will swamp the federal budget in coming decades.

And apparently simply building a temple in our capital city and connecting to the 'gold' resource icon on the map is not quite going to cut it in this case either.

Let's Be a Multiple-Planet Species, Shall We?

Robin says,

I know some of us here on this blog aren't too keen on funding space science, but you gotta admit there's something compelling about the NASA chief's argument in this WaPo interview.

Or maybe he's wrong to be worried about 'mass extinctions.' Are we sufficiently advanced and resourceful that we could survive a cataclysm here on earth?

American Academies

Robin says,

This long synthesis of some recent writing on college in America deserves comment... but it is late and I am tired. Tomorrow perhaps.

This struck me as particularly provocative, though:

Murray Sperber, a professor of English at Indiana University and the author of several books on college sports, has proposed that universities spin off their research facilities, allowing them to become wholly independent entities, with their own managements, budgets, and new names. The Rand Corporation, the Brookings Institution, and SRI International all do competent research without direct academic connections. In fact, SRI began as a branch of Stanford University, but has been on its own since 1970. Sperber's view is that organizations like these can contract with businesses, the military, even clandestine agencies, on their clients' terms, without having to worry about any effects on academic values.

I also recommend this piece by Princeton prof Stanley Katz (who is cited in the article above) -- it's a somewhat harsh critique of the modern American research university, framed as a defense of Princeton's more traditionally collegiate character.

The Whole Nation a Hamsterdam

Robin says,

In the LA Times, a former Seattle police chief calls for the legalization of all drugs -- not just marijuana -- and lays out a (loose) plan to do it. Wow!

I wonder: If you asked them behind closed doors, would corporations be psyched about this? Certainly sounds like a potentially lucrative new suite of products for them to peddle...

Things Fall Apart

Robin says,

The images from the earthquake in Pakistan are horrific. Just looking at the ruined buildings you can tell how poorly constructed they were -- like big cinderblocks. And that's basically the model throughout South and East Asia. I fear more disasters like this in years to come.

Blogging the United Nations

Robin says,

There is something awesome about the way openDemocracy's Solana Larsen is blogging the big UN summit... I think it's that she's just doing it like any normal person would:

I am sitting in the General Assembly hall, where the UN has conveniently provided wireless internet. The president of Georgia is speaking and no one is listening (sorry Georgia).

There's some really excellent details in there -- go check it out.

American Privacy

Robin says,

A neat little two-pager on John Roberts and the right to privacy in the NYT's Week in Review. It really is interesting that we, as a society, take it so seriously, isn't it?

Mapotheosis

Robin says,

U.S. Census data on a Google Map, with a simple interface.

I think I might have just found my religion.

Logistics and Leadership

Robin says,

Saheli breaks it down in a post titled, aptly, "WTF":

And even if it isn't about race, why the hell is it about poverty? What the bloody hell is up with this? What is up with our system wherein if you are poor you get left behind? The message we're sending the world is that in America, if you are poor, if you don't have a car, if you can't all fit into your car, you will get left behind to die in sewage. As I wrote Tauscher and Boxer and Feinstein--I've never been so ashamed and so dissapointed with my government.

When's the Tikrit Tea Party?

Matt says,

Ha! Matthew Yglesias takes a look at the rough road to democracy:

The fact that Iraq will have a democratic constitution that honors women's rights, the rights of minorities, is going to be an important change in the broader Middle East. So says the President of the United States. But let's take this analogy seriously. Iraq is maybe going through something like its Articles of Confederation stage -- you've got your Whiskey Rebellion, your disorder, your confusion, etc.

But in a few years, they sort things out and the elite members of the nation's dominant ethno-sectarian group will work out an agreement establishing order throughout the country. The Sunnis, naturally, will be held as chattel slaves. Kurdish land and natural resources will be slowly expropriated via a series of genocidal military campaigns.

Some decades down the road, the conflicts papered-over in the initial constitutional compromise will break out into the open leading to a horribly destructive Civil War.

The Moral Hazard Myth

Robin says,

I'm on a tear! I found this New Yorker piece on the ideas behind health insurance by Malcolm Gladwell (he of "The Tipping Point" and "Blink") lucid and enlightening. This is my favorite kind of journalism.

Holding Colleges to a Higher Standard

Robin says,

I had kinda forgotten about The Washington Monthly and its spunky spirit -- their new college rankings are a reminder. Way cool.

United States of RSS

Robin says,

Ooh! The government publishes a ton of RSS feeds!

e-Qaeda

Robin says,

Absolute, absolute must-read: The Washington Post's special report on al-Qaeda's online organizing. The video features are interesting, but it's the text pieces by Steve Coll and Susan Glasser that are truly illuminating. Print these articles out and read them this week; it will seriously help you understand the world better.

N-ASS-A

Matt says,

An excellent indictment of NASA's manned spaceflight program, which y'all know I love. (Via Collision Detection, which also features a great post on babies learning with toys.)

Report on Iraq

Robin says,

Honestly, I have basically zoned ou