Technology

3D up your life - again?

So far, the 21st century has seen 3D image mania. First Hollywood went 3D for its new animation tales and even live action features on the big screen. Then Sony and other manufacturers released wide screen 3D TVs requiring brand specific glasses.

Now, Toshiba has released a 20 inch 3D TV that does not require any glasses and Fuji offers a 3D camera -- so you to can create 3D stills of your vacations, family birthdays or just your dog sleeping on the couch.

3D is so hot that sports TV broadcasts are not only jumping aboard, but redesigning how they shoot events. Traditional high angle camera work does not translate well to 3D which requires the camera to be at eye level alongside the playing field or ice surface.

So, is all this impressive explosion of technology a boon or a minor blip from the consumer’s perspective?

Firstly, realize that 3D motion is not reality or normal 3D. It is a gimmick that allows some objects to jump off the screen directly at you or float in front of the rest of the background.
It is a form of hologram effect.

This is not what happens in real life but gives the viewer a brief jolt like riding a roller coaster down a hill or in a sharp curve.

Do you want such a pit-in-the-stomach experience non- stop? Maybe gamers do in their virtual worlds that are already so non-real that an extra 3D boost would not be disruptive.

But to watch for hours on end the news, a talk show or some ‘reality TV’ would be difficult on the eyes and the brain. Even sports events would suffer except for hockey body checks into the boards (as if the players are flying at you) and shots on net or goal from the goal’s point of view as the ball approaches.

Personally, I suspect that for most film and TV viewing, 3D will prove a limited gimmick and a huge waste of money for the special camera and TVs.

TECHNOLOGY

America gives up on Star Trek!

The last launch and trip by a US space shuttle is scheduled by NASA for February 3, 2011 -- after which the entire fleet will be mothballed or disassembled. No new astronaut launches are scheduled for the next 3 years and beyond ( see www.nasa.gov/missions/calendar/index.html) And there is no sign of the 'replacement' ship' debated since 2004. Supposedly, money and the high cost of the shuttle-like missions is to blame.

The US will, for the foreseeable future, rely on Soviet rocket missions to the International Space Station -- for supplies, crew replacement and equipment delivery. NASA, instead, has been given orders to focus on one way only missions to outer space -- other planets, asteroids or moons --using cheap miniature spacecraft, land rovers and robots.


Meanwhile, China has accellerated its own space program. Since 2003, 6 Chinese austronauts have gone safely into space, and in 2008 Chinese austronauts worked outside of their spacecraft for the first time. According to western reports in 2006 and, official Chinese government statements again this year, a moon landing is the next goal!

With Russia weakened by the collapse of the USSR and relying on old technology, and with the abandonment of human spaceship program by the USA, look for China to soon be our planet's 'face to the universe'!

I am sure President Kennedy -- if he were still alive -- would be apoplectic.

The next flag on the moon and beyond will have stars on it -- but only 5 on a red background!

And say goodbye to any hope of a USS Star Ship Enterprise!

Peace and War

The Iraq blues

Now that the United States is withdrawing its last military forces from Iraq – as have the British and other allies – America is going through the same introspection and malaise as it did after Vietnam.

Columnist Joel Stein in Time magazine, August 5, 2010 issue, regrets his earlier, mild support for the 7 ½ year war and now says the cost in US military lives, civilian deaths and ongoing civil strife in Iraq mean that the US should never take military action ever again unless under attack or under imminent attack. (3rd last sentence.)

Such heartfelt guilt and dismay at a war without ‘real victory’ is a reemergence of the old Vietnam syndrome three and a half decades later.

Yes, the ‘war’ and American troop withdrawal did not come after a resounding victory and ensured stability in Iraq (or Vietnam) and thousands of American troops did die, and countless more Iraqis.

But to follow Stein’s closing advice is suicidal.


We no longer live in a world were enemies send formal declarations of war or ultimatums before the fighting begins. We no longer live in a world were nuclear weapons or deadly biological and chemical substances are under the control of a few states who realize (or care) that the ensuing WW3 will be the end of mankind.

Allowing unstable, megalomaniacal state leaders – whether motivated by religious or other ideology, or past history – to possess nuclear or biological and chemical weapons cannot be ignored.

Allowing terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda to obtain such weapons is even more unthinkable as the mind of the suicide bomber does not fear Armageddon and sees it as the doorway to some Messianic Age. As these groups rely on money and a secret supply of weapons from ‘mentor states’ and ‘backers’ – some of whom have long been in the process of developing or already have such instruments of mass death (think Saddam’s Iraq, Gaddafi’s Libya, today’s Iran, possibly Pakistan) the danger factor multiplies.

So, should we just hold back and watch and wait until an attack is ‘imminent’ or ‘begun’ as Stein suggests?

I think not.

Constant world wide vigilance and improved spying is key, but there is never 100% proof in advance any more.

The age of chivalry and lining up armies at a preset time and place is gone. And with weapons more deadly than in the past, the margin for error – for inaction – is close to nil.

So, a guessing game ensues. Which leaders, which groups can be merely watched and ‘contained’ and which constitute a deadly threat today -- or tomorrow.

And, maybe, Joel Stein should remember that soon after the overthrow of Saddam, Libyan Omar Gaddafi suddenly ended his quest for nuclear weapons and nuclear North Korea began to make overtures for peace.


_______________________


As for Iraq in particular, yes, Iraq has not gone as expected.

In the post 911 environment, in light of Saddam’s megalomaniac dreams of heading a new Persian empire (remember his decade long war with Iran in the 1980s) and Muslim world caliphate (invading Kuwait and vicinity – and possibly Saudi Arabia with its oil and holy Mecca in 1990 -- blocked by the West in the first Persian Gulf War), his ongoing support for anti-west terrorism, and with phone chatter intercepted by American, British, French, Russian and Israeli intelligence: between Saddam, his officials and scientists working secretly on completing nuclear weapons, etc.,** ongoing containment was no longer the option in the minds of at least the United States, Great Britain and their allies.

As for the ensuing war, it lasted less than 2 weeks in a resounding victory for western military strategy, superior equipment and well trained troops.


However, what was not expected was the subsequent fratricide, and ingratitude.

The Kurds, for the first time in over 3 decades, are living in peace in the north,
but Iraq’s two main groups, the majority Shiites and the previous dominant Sunnis have been unable to find a modus vivendi within a democratic framework.

Blood revenge for Saddam era atrocities was common at first, and then the battle for clan and warlord turf -- with its attacks and counter attacks – began. This is what has turned much of Iraq into a fratricidal bloodbath – usually misreported as religious strife of Sunni vs. Shiite.

With the exception of a small influx of anti-western Al Qaeda mujahidin terrorists, attacks on and battles with western troops have been part of these turf wars, as American and other troops ‘got in the way’.


Being ‘peacemakers’ is never easy; you become collateral damage.




** While weapons of mass destruction have not been found, Saddam did think he had such weapons at or near completion. The phone chatter convinced him and the world spy agencies. But the scientists and officials were lying to him – for fear they and their families would be killed.

Note: Even Canadian experts and news people were convinced. On the TVO show Diplomatic Immunity, just before the war started, all the experts from diverse backgrounds agreed Saddam did or would soon have such deadly, secretly developed weapons. They too trusted the intercepted phone chatter as well as the reports from Iraqi scientists who had fled to the West.

TECHNOLOGY

All Hail Google

Google is on an ever expanding, winning streak of innovation.

For years Google has been the most popular search engine on the Internet, leading the verb “to google” to be added to our most recent dictionaries.

With Google Chrome, Google has expanded to compete with Internet Explorer and numerous others as a web desktop browser -- and is currently the 3rd most used web browser in the world.

As for Android, Google’s smart phone software, it has been chosen by so many handset manufacturers that it is on more smart phones than any other system – far surpassing Apple’s iPhone numbers.

And with Google Earth the company has gone even further afield, into the realms normally left to geographers and real estate agents. Anyone can now look up his or her home for a bird’s eye – and more recently street side – view, or comb great cities, the oceans and mountains galore.

Then, just last week, to this expanding Google universe, was added the automobile!

Google released images and a brief PR story on how it has mastered creating a driverless car!!! The vehicle can drive to preset location automatically, staying on the road and making the needed turns – even in traffic – without collision or panic. To keep passengers more at ease – and this is still the test phase after all – a passive backup human sits in the driver’s seat – so if anything seems amiss, he/she can override the system.

So far, Google says, no glitches!

While German, Japanese and American automobile companies have been working on similar robotic cars – Lexus and Ford have production models that can parallel part on their own -- no auto manufacturer to my knowledge has created anything like the Google car yet.

Another Google first? It seems so.

What will this innovative and wide thinking company come up with next?

IBM, Sony and Microsoft are past being leading edge. And Apple seems to be reaching its Zenith as a 2½ note company – iPods, iPhones and the new, but far from unique iPad.

So all hail the new innovation superstar and future world leader (Yes, I am predicting this) – GOOGLE.

CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE

F-35 or no F-35 – That is the question



For the last 6 months the issue of the F-35 – the state of the art, new, stealth jet fighter – has been the subject of on-going debate in parliament and the media.
The Liberals have criticized the Tory government for (finally) putting in an order for 65 of the planes for delivery beginning in 3 to 4 years from now.
What are the complaints:
1. the contract is not open to bids from other manufacturers (TRUE)
2. and the planes are expensive at 65 million each. We are in the aftermath of a Great recession, running a deficit – so we cannot afford them. (TRUE)
While these arguments seem logical, they are distorted and the Liberals know it.
Point 1
Canada signed an agreement with 5 other countries – including Denmark - 5 years ago to design (and buy) a new state of the art stealth jet for NATO members; a jet specifically designed to meet the geographic needs of the consortium members and their NATO obligations.
As part of the deal, Canada was assured a fixed price for the planes while the USA agreed to cover overrun costs and other expenses – and there have been a lot.
The deal included guarantees that parts would be manufactured in Canada = Canadian jobs, and so too with service maintenance = more jobs.
Finally, unlike other partners in the deal, we have delayed putting in an order until the last minute, so this Tory government cannot be accused of being in haste.
Finally, as our current fleet of air fighters is 2 decades old and reaching their ‘end dates’ – i.e. think 20 year old cars and the problems they have being roadworthy and constantly in the shop for repairs and parts. We need replacements and ones up to any challenges that we will face for the foreseeable future.
The F-35 is the new West standard and in any new NATO or Canadian sovereignty issues, our planes need to be as good or better than any oppositions – and the Russian SU -35 --nearing the end of development and designed for export according to the Russian government – is the East’s equivalent of the F-35 in capabilities.


Point 2
At a guaranteed cost based on the original, 2005 deal, Canadians should be laughing all the way to the bank. Only the USA – which expects to buy over 300 F-35s, is paying for the usual delays and massive cost overruns.

In conclusion
To reopen bidding and start afresh will leave Canada another extra decade without effective air support, be sure to cost more due to extra development costs for a newer plane, and breach our NATO commitment – to have a common fighter which simplifies joint missions and joint mission communication – i.e. “Don’t shoot at me! Though I am 6 to 10 km away and you only see a radar blip, I not the enemy!!!”

PS: As of December 1, 2010, add Israel and Turkey to countries signing up for the F-35 delivery – because they don’t want to be left behind and become vulnerable.

YOUR MONEY -Money mania and the Canadian dollar

We are coming to the end game of a mistake made some 40 years ago with the abandonment of the gold standard for currencies.
In 1971, the major countries of the world were on a gold standard set at $35 an ounce. To back up their paper money they had to keep gold bullion in vaults to ensure the paper denominations ‘really meant something’. Soon thereafter, to save costs of bullion storage and because of the false belief that a country’s currency is really backed by its economic health and GDP – i.e., you can trust the country to pay out its money promises as its economy could generate enough ‘ wealth’ to honour any claims against the paper currency. In good times, this fantasy worked reasonably well, but as the world’s economies have begun to implode, even central bankers are starting to rethink the need for the universally accepted ‘hard asset of gold’ -- to ensure currencies can be ‘trusted’.
For some 40 years, governments have been allowed to print money at will, run huge deficits and allow speculators (i.e., invest banks, regular banks, oil rich national wealth funds and individual multi-billionaires) to play the currency exchange game at the cost to ordinary people and rational government behaviour.
Canada, for instance, is a stable democracy with a smoothly growing population and extensive and diverse resource base (coal, minerals, timber, oil/tar sands, and essential crops such as wheat), yet we have seen the Canadian dollar fluctuate irrationally against the American dollar and world currencies over the last 20 years.
At one point the Canadian dollar was worth $0.65 against the greenback and just a year ago the Canadian dollar zoomed to a high of $1.06 US! Today, it fluctuates almost at par but moves up and down a fraction to one cent almost hourly!!
Such roller coaster -- and even penny -- differentials have huge impacts on the Canadian economy and corporate decision making, creating uncertainty and undermining long term planning and growth.
Businesses that sell outside of Canada usually sign contacts in US dollars. So any change in the relative value of the Canadian currency to the US dollar – as set by the daily market swings -- affects their bottom line.
NHL teams in Canada, for example, when the Canadian dollar was at $0.65 US were bleeding to death as long term contracts for players signed when the currencies were close to par suddenly cost teams 35% more in Canadian funds – a huge penalty!!!
Even a fluctuation of 1 cent out of 100 cents (= $1.00 ) is significant as it is a 1% change and many companies often work on a net profit margin of 5 to 10%. So a drop in the Canadian dollar of 1 cent can affect profits immensely!
Profit and business viability is consequently and too often at the mercy of exchange rates, not in the sale of goods per se.
And those exchange rates are not controlled by governments any more really, but the speculative stock marketers.
So lets end the speculative currency roller coaster before this and related market insanity ** result in another World Depression!!!
The governments of the world and IMF need to get their acts together – or we will all pay a horrendous price as the currency fantasy comes to a crashing end!!!


** A barrel of oil from normal ground wells costs $10.00 or so to produce and even the most expensive oil source, the Alberta tar sands, are ‘profitable’ at $70.00 a barrel according to the OPEC minister from Saudi Arabia. So why is oil selling around $85.00 a barrel on the ‘open market’ and expected to go up?


Because MARKET SPECULATORS rule!!!