I know with the world on the brink of all out revolution, you are probably thinking: What is this fool doing talking about "philosophy." I'll first make several points: 1. I've always wanted to talk about this 2. I'd love to get some feedback on it because even i get confused 3. I've dedicated plenty and will put up more about everything going on in the world.
My philosophical question today stems from something we do all the time: Thank people. If a waitress gets you your food, you say (or should say) "Thank you." If someone opens the door for you, you show them the same kind of thankfulness. when a teacher gives a student a test, many say "Thank you." But why? That's what I'm looking to discover today.
What is the purpose of a "Thank you?" Is it to show thanks someone who has gone out of their way to do good? Or is it to thank someone for doing the expected of them, rather than not doing their job at all? Depending on what purpose you find for the phrase you will come to different conclusions. If you think it is only for people who go out of their way, then a "thank you" to someone who keeps the door open for you is warranted, however, giving one to a waitress who gives you your food on time isn't; she is just doing her job. If you have concluded that you should thank someone simply for doing their expected job, then you would thank the waitress. The question lies, would you apply the same thanks to the waitress who did her job to the man who went out of his way to help you with the door? Is there a better way to thank someone so the two aren't equal?
This leads to an important question: Are there inherently good jobs? Jobs, where simply by completing them, you are doing a good thing. Some could argue that a firefighter deserves a thank you even though he is doing his job as well as a policeman. Are their jobs "inherently" good? What about a lawyer or engineer? They defend our constitutional rights and build our countries, don't they deserve a "thank you?" Are their jobs inherently "good" or not? How do we define these jobs? The contribution to society by a waitress is far less than that of an engineer (to be blunt), does one deserve more thanks than another?
Also, is there an benchmark that must be met in order for it to deserve a thank you? If someone keeps a door open for you using their pinky, does that warrant a thanks? If someone helps pick up your fallen scarf with their foot, should you thank them for their act? What if they intended to help you but made things worse?
While trying to lift up your scarf, the man splashes mud on it (idk how it happened it just did). His intention was to help, but he made things worse. This asks, is a thank you, a reaction to someone's intent to help, or only after the act is helpfulness is complete? What if their intent was bad but the result turned out great for you? Do you thank them then?
Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I'd rather over think things than not stimulate my brain by smokin' reefer!
Think about that the next time you thank someone for doing their job, or thank someone for actively helping you by going out of their way. Food for thought.
Please Share on your network, email, comment or subscribe!
Well, given my timing and some issues that came up, I wasn’t actually able to get to the protests on time and missed the whole thing. I was really looking forward to getting some pictures and videos and sharing it with you guys but that isn’t possible; Maybe another time. It is important to know thatthese protests are not isolated. There have been global protests to show support for the protesters in Egypt. Before that, there were protests to support the Tunisians. If you want to get involved there are countless Facebook pages to organize in your area.
There have been protests in the U.S., France, UK, and many more. If you aren’t one to spend time to protest, then at least passing the word on about these movements wouldn’t hurt anyone!!
For a brief video on how Mubarak came to power see the video below. However protests in other countries are much safer than those on the battlegrounds: Egypt where the police have said that they have detained more than 800 protesters and are taking aggressive action against all protesters.
As you can see here, Egypt is not short on international solidarity support. The revolution has garnered support from protesters outside the Egyptian Embassy in London; protesters in Geneva chanted slogans in English, Arabic and French; in Montreal, in front of the Egyptian Consulate, hundreds protested against Egypt's government (There were also protests in downtown Montreal, Canada).
These protests were held across the United States, Europe and throughout the Arab world. Of course, these protests only serve two purposes: First, they are a symbolic gesture of the Egyptians to show they have international support, and second (more importantly) it is a sign to the governments of the different countries that they can not tolerate the Egyptian rule of Hosni Mubarak. It has been clearly shown that President Barack Obama has told Mubarak that he should listen to the demands of his people, however, has left the notion of replacing the Egyptian dictator unaddressed. At no point did the U.S. urge Mubarak to leave, or resign from office despite the fact that, that message, is the largest message sent by the protesters.
Tunisia may have been the catalyst of all these uprisings, and it's own Jasmine Revolution was/is certainly important, however, Egypt will be the true measure of whether such economically driven revolutions that soon demand government change can be successfuldespite no influence and assistance from foreign powers, and being powered by nothing but the will of the people.
If any Americans will remember from their U.S. history course, the U.S. Revolution also started because of economic conditions, primarily (but among other things) new taxes placed on the people. These protests against conditions that made livelihood more difficult eventually lead to an all out revolution where armies collided. On one side, a bunch of poor peasants soon organized to determine their own livelihood, and on the other side a powerful government with a strong military. Yes, the specifics are a bit different, however the basic conditions are similar. A comparison could also be drawn to the French Revolution.
You see, ALL revolutions have extreme similarities but they could be extremely different at the same time. The matter of the fact is, that all dictatorships, as smart as they may think they are, are short-sighted. Economic opportunity, choice of livelihood, and freedom of expression much be granted to their people. Serious restrictions on those rights will, at some point, stress the population enough to cause an uprising. Yes, the first few uprisings will be squashed, but it is only a delay of the inevitable. IF governments decide to give the people economic opportunity, choice of livelihood, and freedom of expression, the full implementations of those ideas means a free and democratic government without anyone person in power; in other words, it is a lose-lose situation for all dictators at some point.
Here are just a few powerful pictures taken by the New York Times of the protests in Egypt:
Protesters pray together during the afternoon prayer times
Egyptian soldiers watch protests and have spent more time protecting and joining the protesters than controlling them
Many have been injured by riot police using tear gas, water canons, rubber bullets and more. An estimated 800 are captured in prison from the protests.
A higher view of a protests forming in Cairo
Cars and trucks burn as protests turn violent to send a message to the Egyptian government
Protesters, alongside the military protest in the streets demanding change. In some instances, the military has paraded around with their tanks supporting the protesters.
When I first decided to start a blog, it took me some time to choose the platform (I absolutely hate Wordpress), the subject of the blog (I've decided kind of everything), and how I would design and present it. I wondered if it would be too time consuming to keep up with especially with all that goes in on a college student's life, but I have to say, that it is one of the most satisfying things I've ever done. Before I go into more detail, I would highly recommend you start your own and I can give you tips on how to get things off on a good start (we can even set up a blogging circle to help each other out!).
Important Note: Thanks to one of my readers, you can now reach my this blog by simply typing in dailyvoiceofreason.com rather than dailyvoiceofreason.blogspot.com This should make it slightly easier though you should already have me bookmarked!!!!
Now, I have to take a step back and admire the statistics!! So far, I've had some 650 views from the 10 following countries:
United States
South Korea
Singapore
Spain
United Kingdom
Lebanon
France
Sweden
Malaysia
Oman
Australia
Ukraine
Most of my viewers come from the U.S. but South Korea and Singapore have strong numbers to back them up, while others like the Spain, United Kingdom and Lebanon are middle range when it comes to viewership. All others are superficially small in followers but I see loyalty! So if you are from any of these countries (and I'm assuming you are since you are reading this) I'd just like to say hello!
You can't quite see the different shades for the different states, but clearly MA is the main source of my traffic!
U.S. centric stats show that I have readers in Massachusetts New York, Ohio (random!), Washington state, Virginia, California, and Georgia. When it comes to Massachusetts (the state I'm based in) I gain most of my views from cities in and around Boston, and a seemingly obsessive line of followers from Brockton! (Thanks! but also not to mention someone from Dartmouth *cough*)
This shows a high concentration of readers around Brockton and Boston.
Since I've started this blog, I've constantly changed the website to make it easier to get around as well as more aesthetically pleasing. I'm constantly changing the layout for easier use as well as the Labels so you can find information quicker if you want to access information quicker. I've also upgraded to a new commenting system to make it easier to comment and interact (by "thumbs up" something) with me. So feel free to comment away! Even if you have some experience that may give other readers an interesting insight, or you just have a strong opinion.
Tech related: 35% use Chrome (good job!), 29% use Internet Explorer (have I not convinced you to ditch it yet? search for browsers in the search bar to read my articles on them), Firefox 28% (also great choice!), and Safari taking 3%. The rest of it is either through search bar (I have no clue, don't ask), Opera (kinda good), NetFront and smaller software.
On Operating systems, 70% of you use Windows, 14% of you use Macs, and 13% use some other OS Unix system, while a small percentage follow from mobile systems. Most of you come from direct traffic (if you've bookmarked my site) Facebook, Twitter, other blogs or other sites like that have linked to my blog. Wherever you come from, for whatever reason, I hope you enjoyed your read since I put a lot of effort into these pieces!
Interestingly enough, here are my top 5 posts up until this date (with ties):
There is the update, to give you an idea of how quickly this site has grown in such a short amount of time, here's the graph I see over the past months:
Recently I reached the highest level of readers in one day. I've created a Facebook page for my blog that you can find here. as well as profiles in different blogging networks to spread the word! Feel free to share the site on any of your social networks if you enjoy the content!
Looks good to me! Send me any feedback you can about the blog by emailing me at moussahassoun@gmail.com or by commenting on here, or any of the stories on what you'd like to read, to voice an opinion about something or whatever else comes to mind!
The title, a phrase first coined during the late 1700s during the French Revolution. This phrase seems to outline what may be happening in the much of the Muslim world. I had written a piece on the Tunisian Revolution (officially called the Jasmin Revolution). Although I didn't expound much of it, I highlighted how some experts don't think it will translate to change in other countries; the most likely places being Algeria and Egypt.
With the President's State of the Union, much of the U.S. hasn't really concentrated with what has been going on (even myself). I'll help inform you. I won't recap what is happening in Tunisa, to read about it, see my Tunisia post here. To keep up with the story, here's a complete and constantly updated coverage of what is going on. Since then, an international arrest warrant has been placed for former dictator and ousted President Ben Ali while his loyalists are about to be removed from the government's cabinet. Meanwhile, the official ban on different political parties was removed and all political prisoners given amnesty and the police workforce has joined in the national protests. Here is a picture gallery of the Tunisian uprising as well as a time line for you to catch up!
Tunisia's story is truly inspirational because it is the epitome of what we take for granted as the "power of the people." No foreign influence, no party line opposition, simply, beautifully frustrated people living under horrible conditions. If anything, political parties and foreign influence were barriers to the Tunisian Revolution, barriers that were broken. Tunisians are fighting for freedom and opportunity, things we all take for granted, plus I can never get enough of REVOLUTIONS!
The success of these protests for complete government change is the reason why anything has changed and will change in the country. It has also sent a signal to their Arab brothers and sisters as well as Muslims that change is possible by the people. Arab countries are notorious for being oppressive, dictatorial, and U.S. backed (sorry! it's just fact!) because dictators are easier to work with than anti-American democratic governments.
Now, as a result protesters have taken to the streets in Egypt to protest their living conditions in similar "bread protests" that started the Tunisian Revolution, there have even been several self immolation inspired by the one that inspired the uprising in Tunisia. I don't want to be a pessimist because the Tunisians accomplished it, however, a few more things need to happen before the protests in Egypt will accomplish much. My heart and prayers go with them and I hope they are successful in their goals, however, the events in Tunisia has taught the Dictator Mubarak (whose military is funded with U.S. dollars) that early crackdown is necessary in order for him to survive; and that is what has been happening. As tensions rise, protesters have burnt an Egypt police post; there were also several clashes in the capital, Cairo. In the meantime, the whereabouts of the President are unknown and although I don't indulge in rumors, word is spreading that his son has left the country and his wife to London. I'll wait for some facts on that.
Joining the movement is the Egyptian Nobel winner Mohamed ElBaradei who will bring considerable attention to the struggle. He has also offered to serve in Mubarak's place if the government is ousted (let's hope so!). Amidst all this, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has publicly stated that the Egyptian government is "stable" bringing much outrage in the country. In the last post, there are several very informative videos you will find if you scroll down to the article. I think we are still a bit far from a "revolution;" this isn't the first time President Mubarak has had to deal with protests, he's had almost 30 years cracking down on people. What gives me hope is the conditions that these newest protests arrive from: inspired by lack of economic opportunity, however, seemingly based on freedoms. Many other protests in the past were "bread protests" in their purity, and when things improved, or there was overwhelming government crackdown, the protests died away, and political prisoners were taken.
To keep the protests in perspective, watch this interview with a spokesperson of the Egyptian government. His view is clearly biased and a bit off point and inaccurate, but it is still worth watching.To stay up to date on what is happening in Egypt, here's full coverage in the region.
However, Egypt is not the only place with protests. There were large anti government protests in Yemen where the President has served for 32 years, and is working on changing the law to extend his rule for at least another decade. These protests were most opposition party led, however, were inspired by events in Tunisia. The President has already taken action by cutting income tax, increasing soldier pay, initiating price controls, and denying rumors he plans on appointing his son as president after him. There hasn't been police protester violence (that I know of) but what he is doing is essentially like Hosni Mubarak: acting swiftly to weaken opposition. Mubarak has chosen the police enforcement method, while this president is chosen to try making minor changes (while avoiding the major and necessary changes of government) to appease the people.
Amidst all this noise, there are other protests that aren't getting as much attention such as those in Algeria; a country with very similar conditions to Egypt and especially Tunisia. They are protesting (although in slightly lesser numbers) for the same things as those in Tunisia and Egypt. Their protests have garnered much government police force and has really restricted them. The clashes have left 300-400 estimated as injured from the police force!!
There are several reoccurring factors that tie all these protests together: All are based on limited economic opportunity, overly oppressive government, limited to no political participation. All have strong backing by the youth of their country who have never known a democratic or free society. All have used social networking (Facebook and twitter) in and out of their respective countries to organize and control their messages.
There is a reason why I still will refuse to call these protests anything close to a revolution. Yes, the people have learned from and been inspired by what is happening with Tunisia. Yes, they are living under similar circumstances and using similar tools and tactics, but the people are not the only ones to have learned the lesson of Tunisia; the governments also have.
The governments have learned several things: To stop a revolution you have two choices or a blend of the two. First, you can suppress any and all protests before they gain too much attention or control. This is what Egypt is doing and what Iran has successfully done with its election protests. The second option would be to address key issues of the protesters while maintaining control. This tactic is taken by the Yemeni government and is showing signs of working. By addressing key concerns of the people such as price controls, food supplies, working conditions and more, the government has helped weaken (not sure to what extent) the protests because less people see problems in their lives. Both options leave the fundamental question of the legitimacy of their governments and the anti-democratic forms they take unaddressed, and these protests will rise up again in the future, but unless their power and goals don't hinge as much on economic reform as political change, all I can call them are the birth of revolutions, and all revolutions can be quickly killed when first born. ***** Update!***** I've written this piece of several days and things are happening so fast that it can quickly be outdated. The massive protests in Egypt today (Friday Jan 28, 2011) have effectively become what I consider a much stronger movement because they have met my criteria. Although still demanding economic change, there is a stronger call for government change. The fact is, to gain economic changes, you need to change the government that makes it worse. With the violence come chants of "Freedom".
Also the headquarters of Hosni Mubarak's party was burned to the ground today by protesters. These protests have officially been named the "Lotus Revolution" and has had worldwide protests to show support. TO watch a live feed of protests in Egypt into even the night, click here. The broadcast is in Arabic so you won't be able to understand much, but it's about the pictures. You can also find live coverage going all through the night of the Egyptian protests in English here. I'm watching it live now, and there are still people out into the late night protesting. President Mubarak has also announced that he has asked his government to resign and he will appoint a new one in the coming days (by Saturday or Sunday). He has not mentioned if he will resign, but the fact that he will "appoint" a government is not a good sign.
As I said before, Egypt has the official label (at least to me) as a revolution, I don't think that is the case in Yemen or Algeria yet because similar circumstances have not happened. Let's hope they DO become revolutions. As this writer says,
In my previous post I had written about Obama's State of the Union, dubbed by myself as the "State of Our World" (as well as all State of the Unions since the 1950s till today). This is a continuation of that post for analysis of the criticism and support that has already built up. I also want to take a look at the Republican response and the "Tea Party" response. To read that post first, just scroll down to it or click here.
For further analysis of the President's speech, here are 5 political analysts that state their opinion in very short messages. Convenient if you aren't big on time right now, if you are, click below to read more!
We've already gone over the content and tone of the Presidents' State of the Union, so let's look at the Republican response given by Rep. Paul Ryan from Wisconsin and the Chairman of the House Budget Committee. Here he is in his own words, in the 11 min response (click here for the full transcript):
Like anyone, the Representative spent the first minute on giving his hope and prayer on Rep. "Gabby" Giffords. I've never seen this guy before and my first impression was that he looked a bit like Data on Star Trek: The Next Generation (Star Trek fans?). The Rep. makes good points about his intent to work with the President to restrain federal government spending (this shows he is bipartisan). He also uses a smart speaking tactic of relating the spending to his children and by referring to himself as "a father." This helps him build a connection with any and all parents watching (a lot of people). He then calmly attacks the president of over spending and under-presenting (not enough bang for the bucks, or return on massive government investment).
He makes a smart remark by highlighting that no one is really happy with either party and so tells us the Republican beliefs on the role of government. However, I do see a lot of his speech on the size of government as just ideological talk and not anything really substantive. Yes government is huge and spending is out of control, but the vagueness of his words don't hold much ground with me. Give me a bit more details not broad visions (Obama did the same except he gave a bit more details). Understandably, he only has a 10 min window to talk while the President had 60 mins, so perhaps I shouldn't hold them to the same standard in which case, we will have to wait to see in the next few months where Republicans lead by turning those vague ideals to finer details.
In what is probably a sign of the times, or just a joke, Rep. Michele Bachmann delivered the Tea Party response. I already have heard the Representative talk, and stubbornly so, so I already had an idea of what's she'd say. Here it is in a short 7 min response (here's the transcript):
Interestingly, one of the first things she established was that the point of her response was not to challenge the official Republican response. This addresses the much hyped question of whether the Tea Party is part of the Republican fabric or a strand of its own; we see that the former is true. In her remarks, she's implying that the "spike" (it was a decline not spike) in economy recession in the past 2 years was the result of the spending and/or Obama, which of course isn't true. I also noticed that the camera angle was a bit annoying; she was reading of text in the back, but it doesn't really look like she is looking at the viewer (just an observation!).
To be honest, I barely got through the entire thing. She is so idealistic and unpractical. Her argument is that, we either have to repeal the health care law (since it apparently has no benefits) or we die. I was also surprised that she characterized us as the nation with the "finest" health care in the world!!!! Statistically, that isn't true. Yes we are in the top of the world, but we are far from the "finest." I'm actually questioning whether this woman is sane, or whether her speechwriter was puffing the magic dragon when they wrote this. The vagueness isn't what gets me, at one point, she compares the struggle against a totalitarian government in Europe to the fight they have today, and the only separative statement? "That's a little different." I pray for this country and the Republicans that doesn't become the leader of their party, or anything really.
The Representative may not have intended to overshadow the Republicans, but her response gained most of the media attention online and in the news. For better or worse, she was the face of the conservative movement.
Now I'm not one to usually post Bill O'Reilly, however I do follow him sometimes and I didn't find this Talking Points to be that bad. Yes I disagree with his conclusion of the role of government, or at least with his more extreme side, but this 3 min video is worth watching because it points out some important points and highlights the differences in vision.
Interesting point to remember: Today, on Jan 27th, the President will be having a live Youtube interview by answering questions sent by readers (questions are chosen based on the number of "thumbs up" they get. The top liked questions are then asked to the President). Speaking of interviews, on Sunday Feb. 6th, Obama will be having an interview with Bill O'Reilly! This should be interesting because the two obviously oppose each other politically but have never sat down for an interview! Put it on your calendars!
The reason why I decided to title this as the "State of Our World" is because the State of the Union doesn't just map out the Presidents' plan for the next year while reviewing past successes and failures, it maps out the Presidents' plans and intentions across the world. Since the U.S. has become a global superpower, anything the U.S. does, economically, financially, militarily, socially, and politically affects billions of people (for better or worse). Today the U.S. does all these together and is constantly reshaping the world regardless of whether you agree or disagree.
The Iraq War changed the dynamic of the Middle East, The Afghan War affected the geopolitics of Pakistan and Iran. The U.S. economic meltdown had massive repercussions to the rest of the world but especially our trade allies. Over the past 6 years (2 of which was under Obama) the U.S. has borrowed ridiculous amounts of money which has pulled in lenders from around the world. While social changes like the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell will create new challenges for the U.S. military on how to deal with gays and lesbians serving in countries where being a homosexual has the consequences of imprisonment and even death( if not murder by the people).
This isn't necessarily new, I believe that the "State of Our World" concept (that I came up with, thank you very much) has applied since even before the Cold War, but may have been strengthened in its importance by President Ronald Reagan.
This isn't to say that the world will just follow along. The President could outline a path for the future and have little support for it. However, any outline that the U.S. envisions for the future is something that is taken into consideration by all world leaders and how it affects them. Here is where the latest State of Our World comes in by President Barack Obama. Here is an interactive Youtube video of the speech to hear it for yourself in case you haven't already. Note: the first 5 mins are clapping, so skip over them and if you don't like the tiny screen, just click on the video and it should take you to the youtube video for a large screen.
If you don't want to watch, you can find the full transcript of the speech here.
As usual, the President struck a great tone by congratulating the new members of Congress and especially the new Speaker of the House John Boehner, not to mention his mentioning of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords who was shot recently by a mentally ill ma (as well as other victims). A very telling picture was seeing former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi sitting in the seats rather than next to Vice President Biden. His speech is as inspirational as you would expect of this gifted orator, but let's focus on the content.
He began by discussing what they've accomplished so far and among those accomplishments he listed:
Payroll Tax Benefit that added $1000 tax benefits to the average family
Small business tax cuts for employing more workers.
He also said that "we need to take responsibility for our deficit" which is kind of hard to take seriously with so much spending that went on with his signature. That's not to say that I don't support a lot of what he's pushed in Congress, because I do, and that's not to say that there wasn't a lot of "pork" on the bills and backroom deals, but fact is, we spent a hell of a lot of money (for better or worse) and it has hit our long term debt and affected our annual deficit.
Next he proposed steps for leading the world to make peoples' lives better. The first thing he mentioned was inspiring innovation. I have no doubt that government research grants are completely worth it because every single major development in U.S. history has been either funded or invented by the government (mostly the military, i.e. internet, highway system, and more). My only issue is that you can't really spark innovation or force creativity; it will come on its own. All you can do is create a fund so that the creativity doesn't go unfunded. Our problem with energy won't be solved by "independent enterprise," it will be solved when the U.S. military finally discovers that a military running on oil is not an efficient military at all with a vulnerable point; in other words, the U.S. energy crisis is a matter of national security! Get the military on it! They have a strong history of advancing the country!
So I'm not necessarily against helping the private sector develop the technology, but the research and funding would be much stronger and faster coming from the military because profits aren't considered and there is just more manpower that can be applied. Don't spend the money for incentives, redirect it to military research on energy (when they finally "discover" the solution/s, it will be free for ALL private industries to use, benefiting the entire country). If we don't want more spending, we should just tight or cut aside certain spending in the military budget to increase research in the area. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that is more important than energy independence, it will determine who wins wars in the future (who is the least strapped to natural resources) and determine who gets involved with them in the first place.
After that he concentrates on a personal favorite: education! The President has already done some things for education by started the Race to the Top Funds (of which Massachusetts won) for it's government and high schools introducing innovative teaching systems and techniques to help increase student learning, participation, attendance, and scoring (My high school is getting some money for a specific program: New Bedford Leadership Academy). The "Race" has inspired 40 states to increase their teaching standards. I've also noticed the President has a smart focus sciences and technology since the world is relying more and more on those subjects. He follows these up by reasserting his belief in government grants and funding for students to attend college as "the right thing to do."
As a college student that receives overwhelming amounts of money from the federal government, I recognize (especially during my college application process) that I wouldn't decide where I went to college; the money would. Without the funds from the government I wouldn't be going to Bentley University. However, I also realize that because of government grants, schools tuition rates have increased faster than inflation since schools have little incentive to keep prices low when the government helps them fun so many possible students. I don't know how to solve this problem because I and others like me, are dependent on Federal and state aid to gain the opportunities we have in higher education, but colleges are taking advantage of the system by raising their tuition and costs to make higher profits. I will leave this one to the "experts".
And finally! We get to my favorite topic, and one that will saturate the news for the rest of the year: Illegal Immigration! A brief mention, but still a mention! Let's get it on! More, when the legislative push comes.
Following his stress on technology, the President outlines his concerns about the country's infrastructures as well as national internet networks.
On health care, he made an interesting cost, that "economists" predict that repealing the law would add a quarter a trillion dollars to our deficit. This puts deficit hawks weary about repealing it because it would make them look like they are adding to the deficit when their goal is to do the opposite; a subtle, but important comment.One final point he makes of domestic policy is simplifying the tax code, I really like the idea since it would help close tax loopholes and abuse and help even the playing fields in between classes.
Finally, the President turned to foreign policy by highlighting the removal of 100,000 soldiers from Iraq as it slowly stabilizes (though some argue it hasn't really addressed its main problems), minor improvements in Afghanistan (and plans for the future with troop removal beginning this July). Obama also mentioned his New Start Treaty with Russia on nuclear power while also addressing Iran's nuclear ambitions.
All together the President's State of the Union was what I expected, but nothing spectacular in my opinion. He concentrated on all the right points, but this speech is as political as it gets and it has been for decades. Inspirational yes, but it won't accurately depict the "battle" going on as the year goes on as everyone looks forward to the next election of Congress and the Presidency. More will concentrate on bashing each other, than doing what is right. More will be influenced by lobbyist than serve the general interest. Unfortunately, because of the massive influence of the U.S., these interests will mean more than just negatively affecting the U.S. and its people, all will suffer unless the fundamental problem of government isn't addressed: unnecessary influence by interest groups (whether domestic or foreign). This isn't just a "State of the Union" it will determine the "State of the World."
(I'll post up a follow up with further analysis soon on responses and more!)
The term "fifth Beatle" is an informal title given to an associate or perhaps more often written by a rock journalist to describe a person closely related to the fab four.George Martin who was the producer of many of the Beatles albums was often given that title,so as Brian Epstein-the fabs manager.
Now we all know that the term fifth Beatle do exist and some people not even directly related to the Beatles proclaim themselves as the fifth Beatle--like New York DJ Murray The K for instance.But is it possible for a sixth Beatle to exist? Well I did refer to the word "sixth" coz the term fifth Beatle has already been occupied by both George Martin and Brian Epstein respectively.George Martin on the other hand,was the band's producer and arranger and was responsible for the sound of different Beatles albums so I guess he deserves credit and Brian was the band's manager as well.
If the term sixth Beatle will ever be in existence I think the title deserves to be crowned to none other than ERIC CLAPTON--one of rock's guitar gods.
Eric Clapton has been closely related to the Beatles since the fabs and his first band the Yardbirds met at a local gig in England.Well,for you fact finders out there,Eric Clapton played on several Beatles records in the studio as a session musician particularly in the making of the Beatles 1968 self-titled album The Beatles which was widely dubbed by many as The White Album.Clapton played a beautiful guitar solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps", a song written by George Harrison.As a return favor,George Harrison played on the recording of Cream's last album Goodbye wearing the pseudonym L'Angelo Mysterioso.
Eric Clapton and George Harrison became the best of friends until the early seventies and everything went sour when Eric snatched George's wife,model Pattie Boyd.The two eventually made up and George even attended Pattie and Eric's wedding in 1974.
Eric Clapton also played alongside John Lennon,Keith Richards and Mitch Mitchell on a supergroup called The Dirty Mac,on the Rolling Stones Rock N' Roll Circus.He also played guitar on Lennon's post-Beatle outfit Plastic Ono Band and on several of John's solo albums.
I've been thinking quite a lot,did Eric closely associated with the Beatles because he has plans of taking George Harrison's wife away or did it just happened in coincidence? A 2005 statement made by Eric himself said that he felt so sorry for breaking George and Pattie's marriage and that he even became an alcoholic out of guilt of what happened.George just shrugged his shoulders and eventually married an American called Olivia Arias.
George Harrison was an awesome guitar player and a guitar god himself-the story circulated at the time that George invited his good friend Eric Clapton on the White Album sessions to lay down some beautiful guitar licks on his song on the purpose of keeping "the peace" between the Beatles.Back in 1968,the band was in total mess a year after the death of their manager Brian Epstein and most of them claim that without Brian they seemed to have lost direction, like a child without a father to guide him.The Beatles eventually broke up two years later in 1970.
Eric Clapton on the other hand,started off with the legendary Yardbirds and went on with his own rock group Cream with bassist Jack Bruce and drummer Ginger Baker.Cream invented the power trio format and has laid down the pattern for other heavy metal acts to come.Now every musician and every kid on earth who started to learn how to play guitar wanted to be Eric Clapton.A graffiti on a London wall during Cream's heyday spelled "CLAPTON IS GOD".
Rock music will never be the same without the great Eric Clapton.
Clapton for me is--the sixth Beatle,Im sure other Beatles fans feel the same way about him.
I've decided to take a look at the future, what we can reasonably expect within the next 10-20 years in relation to technology and how it changes our society.I know you are probably wondering why I'm not talking about the State of the Union, let it sink in, and I'll have something up soon after all the analysis craze going on with the media. Here we go!
Facebook: It's plainly obvious, that with Facebook's userbase growth, it has had to hire more and more people. As the company grows, so do the government's ability to regulate it. When Facebook hits a certain Stakeholders benchmark, the SEC will force it to release financial statements to the public (although it may remain private). When this happens (over the next 4-5 years), Facebook won't want to give up that information without the benefits of a public company and an IPO. They will go public then (most estimate 2012) or will wait it out a bit longer till the government officially forces it to go public.
Mark Zuckerberg is famous for his micro-managing and hands on approach to everything (which is why its success is always attributed to him, as well as its flops). So why is this important? When it goes public, Facebook will be directly accountable to its shareholders in different ways. There will be more stress on it to make larger revenues by its investors as it is traded in the public market which may make the site more obtrusive in what many consider to be too inconsiderate of users' privacy. This will create a conflict between Facebook's users and shareholders. At the same time, Mark Zuckerberg will not have the same control he typically has, and will be able to be kicked out of the company if a privacy flop goes seriously wrong (though I doubt that will actually happen, since he's dealt with them many times, that's like Apple firing Steve Jobs today, not going to happen, Mark is Facebook's image). I recently posted a long piece specific to Facebook, click here.
Smart phones: Although the overwhelming majority of U.S. and world cell phone users don't have smartphones, the amazing growth of these phones shows that they will soon overtake traditional phones for the majority of users in the 1st world, and even 2nd world countries. Yes they are more expensive, but when companies like AT&T slash prices of older smart phones (the iPhone 3GS) to 50 dollars a piece, it greatly expands the people who will be able to afford them. Yes, they will be getting and older version, but it will be their introduction into the smart phone market, a market that few ever leave back to feature phones. Expect Windows to keep making strides, Apple to continue to innovate, and Symbian and Androids to drown all other competitors world wide (Nokia and Google respectively). Some studies even show that traditionally computer based communications like email are making a leap over to mobile as more people send emails from phones and not computers.
Another important point, is that your phone is going to become your wallet. Mobile payments are going to be the "next frontier" in e-billing. You will be buying things on your phone, or buying them in the store, and scanning your phone to pay (like you swipe a credit/debit card). Doubt that's the future? Paypal is already getting into it. Starbucks just started accepting mobile payments in all stores nationwide. Although I said Smart phones will become the norm, I also think that this mobile payments will become so necessary in our lives that they will be available on limited feature phones. The fact is, if you forget your wallet, it sucks, but you can move on, however, for more people, if you forget your phone (especially your smart phone) your day and life are over. You MUST find it before continuing your day. With your phone on hand all the time, more so than a wallet or purse, mobile payments are only natural. Here's an article on why many think this is a winning strategy for Starbucks.
Gaming: (For all your gaming whores out there). As you will probably expect gaming is going active. First initiated by the Nintendo Wii, both Microsoft's Xbox Kinect and Sony's PlayStation Move have all brought to the market more active games. In these games you no longer just sit and click buttons, rather, you stand up, jump around, kick, punch and more while clicking buttons to play virtual sports, practice your fitness, or play through adventures. Yes, the hardcore gamer will always use the current technology to play shooter games and serious adventure games, however, since all the major companies have invested in it, they will work with game design companies to make more intense games that use their new controllers. There will be a point when these newer gaming systems with a combination of camera, stick controllers, and headsets that use brainwaves to control virtual objects, that will give us the ultimate gaming experience.
The gaming masses will choose this experience over the systems we have today. Today's "serious" gamer, will be tomorrow's grumbly niche lover. On the mobile side of gaming, Nintendo is going to introduce it's Nintendo 3DS, part of it's usually hand held gaming systems. This newer one got much attention because it showed 3D graphics for its games without any 3D glasses. Many have put off 3D as dead, but I still think it will need some adjustment before it is convenient for average users. Although the Nintendo is improving the handheld gaming system, I think in the long run, these systems will die off. Smartphones are are huge gaming platform, and as they get more advanced, will overtake the 3DS and others with popularity in games. As in other aspects of gaming systems, hand helds, will become a niche platform for hardcore gamers or just Pokemon fans (though that can change!)
Cars: The future to any reasonable being for cars is more fuel efficiency, or convergence with electricity. Nissan's Leaf has created a lot of attention and Toyota's Prius (hybrid) has already garnered a large base. Cars will also become much safer in different ways. Think about it, in the early 2000s, if a car had a 5 star crash test rating it was impressive, but today, if a car doesn't it won't do so well; nearly all cars do meet the 5 star standard. The future of car safety is not going to be able making the actual car safer (though that will be researched), rather, companies will start to invest in avoiding crashes altogether. Yes, cars that drive themselves.
I don't think we can expect cars that drive themselves well over the next 20 years, but the research will be critical in the coming years. Lexus already has a car (that it sells) that can parallel park by itself. Small tech firms are always researching with universities ways to make them more efficient in automated car races across all kinds of terrain. Furthermore, the military is doing some heavy investment in robots that drive themselves and larger cars and tanks to reduce the risk of human soldiers. Interestingly enough, Google is investing in automated car systems. Unusual? Yes. But that's what everyone said when they invested in Android, and today that OS makes them billions and sells more than Apple's iPhone. Although I don't think it is very likely to take hold, there is some research over a car system that would allow a larger truck to take control of users cars temporarily for them to do tasks like read, or drink/eat something. Check it out.
Aid: The fact is, technology makes our lives extremely easy, but it can also help uplift people. A women has come up with a new design and system to create a jacket that transforms into a sleeping bag for the homeless. Although starting in the U.S. it can be greatly applied to the poor around the world. An engineer once held a TED Talk about his product, and the company he started around it: A bottle water that instantly purifies water in less than a second. The Talk was very revealing and you have to see it for yourself. Here it is, it's just 10 mins long.
On top of those, recently the Indian government has gotten considerable attention for it's investment in an incredibly cheap (and small) car that would be affordable for hundreds of millions living under the poverty line. Now-a-days it has also gotten attention for a ridiculously cheap laptop that it will be introducing to give access to poor Indians to technology and computing basics to help integrate them into a high tech world.
I haven't posted in a couple of days since I've been moving back on campus (oh Bentely...) and things have been a bit chaotic, the only thing that's calmed me down is Andy Kim's "Rock me Gently". I've also been really interested in writing a piece on Facebook, so here we go:
Social networks have existed since the beginning of man (it could also be argued with animals). From the earliest cavemen to the villagers in early Europe, Africa and more, to what we see today as the "ultimate" social network. (see History of Social network for quick video) One that exists over the internet, destroying boundaries and connecting people that otherwise never would. This ultimate social network is Facebook, and all others that it inspires in the future. Click below, or the title to read more.
Chances are, if you are using the internet (since you are reading this blog), you know what Facebook is. It's the world's largest social network and even if you don't use it (because you live in a cave or are one of "those people" who refuse take advantage of it), chances are, a friend does. I'm not going to bother explaining what it is, because, if you know what a blog is, I KNOW you know what Facebook is (plus based on what I know of my readers you guys are pretty tech savvy). I did find some VERY nice photo essays about Facebook's main headquarters, as well as Facebook around the world.
So aside from constant discussion between friends and family about newest photos on the social network or teenagers bickering of what Mike's boyfriend said about Tina or Lashandra (yes, Lashandra) Facebook comes up in the news almost every single time when it changes anything on the site. I've been on Facebook for almost 5 years, back when it wasn't cool and Myspace was still the place to be. I was mocked, and asked if I suffered some kind of mental disorder for leaving Myspace for some "nothing" website called Facebook. After I joined.... the world followed (I'm not attributing Facebook's rise to me, but well.... c'mon... let's all admit it..). Before I go on a diatribe about how all my friends who previously made fun of my use of Facebook over Myspace, today, have left the site for some time now and can't live without Facebook, let's discuss where controversy lies.
Facebook is a platform. This platform allows us to put things up on it. These "things" are personal information covering everything from your favorite movie, your name, where you work, and photos or videos. Naturally, controversy comes up when there are concerns that the "private" information we put up online is sold to companies for marketing management and it just isn't safe anymore. However, the issue of privacy isn't the only thing that creates controversy. Any changes to the layout or functionality of the website always seems to create massive outrage (and unnecessarily so). Allow me to bash on the commoner for a second:
On the issue of layout and functionality changes. Too many people complain about the "new" changes Facebook makes to its product, so what are these changes based from? Statistics that Facebook collects from it's 500 million active users when they use Facebook. The company tracks ,en masse, how many people use the messaging system, how many people use the "like" button, how many photos are uploaded, etc. Then, based on this information, Facebook adjusts the website to compliment the userbase. In other words, Facebook makes changes to the website layout and functionality based on what people use the most, and how they use it. That's not to say that they haven't taken leaps before, however, every single time they have made a major change to the website (yes there was eruption) it has made Facebook a better product. I can't think of ONE thing that has made it worse.
To those that a newer to the website, you may not appreciate what it used to be like. Simple, yes, but horribly unorganized. There was outrage when Facebook instituted the "Wall," "Like" button, new messaging system (to come), New profile, News Feed, Live Feed, Top News, Facebook Places (mobile only), requirements for basic information, allowing third party applications etc. Yest they have all enhanced our experience on the social network. What would Facebook be without the "Wall" and now-a-days, all you see on the website (and 1 million other websites) are your friends "liking" everything from a photo album to a comment. What would we do without the News Feed where all the news of my friends is neatly organized! Will I have to MANUALLY look through my 300 plus friends to know what's going on in their lives... I'm glad that day is over.
This is a cool video about what happens every 60 seconds on Facebook.
Soon the company will be releasing (to everyone) the new messaging system as well as an automated system to make tagging friends in photos easier; both of which will cause more outrage. Before it happens, I might as well say, that through my experience from the time that Facebook was the new ,but rejected website by most people all the changes to the functionality have only made my experience better. I would DIE if I had to return to the "old" Facebook as it was 4-5 years ago..... *shoulders shiver*
On privacy, I think the issues raised are serious, but again, allow me to say this. You, as a Facebook user, put up (on your own) all your private information on a website that is made for sharing. You accept Facebook's Terms of Use Policy and Privacy Policy without question. (how many people have read that? .. surprisingly.. I have!) You know that Facebook uses basic information you put up to help manage its advertisement business... yet despite all this, you complain when you are afraid that your information isn't private? Yes, Facebook should make sure your private information isn't so easily accessed, but can you blame a company for using information given to it for FREE by the user to make money? I wouldn't. Facebook has, however, adjusted to privacy concerns by simplifying it's privacy settings and giving more specificity of protecting almost every aspect of your account ( I said almost). There are also major controls to allow users to filter out spam in their news feeds in case you don't like what you are seeing. All this put together, if you don't like what they do with the information, don't put it up. (Though some would argue that it no longer isn't a choice)
I will admit, that it looks that Facebook is going to take over the world (I can also make the case for Google). Facebook is rolling out its Facebook Deals for mobile users to earn free stuff and savings by "checking in" to a location such as... a GAP Store or Starbucks Cafe. Facebook has also partnered up with Microsoft's Bing, a Google rival, to personalize the Bing search engine with your Facebook account (this is happening with millions of websites that have the Facbook social plugin like CNN.com or simple like buttons like Mashable.com). Facebook Questions is working to create a massive database of useful information generated by users so you won't have to Google Search anything anymore (A higher quality Yahoo Answers and websites like that).
If you find yourself to be the person always rambling on about the evils of this company, check out this article by TIME about the 5 steps to Facebook Happiness. Also learning some Facebook Status tricks may also please you!
On my last TECH Update, I analyzed the Coporate side of many tech companies. One of those companies was Facebook, click here for that post.
Recently, Facebook has gotten attention after TIME magazine named Mark Zuckerberg as "Person of the Year" over what many assumed would be the winner, Julian Assange. They had an interesting interview with Mark Zuckerberg to understand what he sees about Facebook.
Initially, I , like the rest, was a almost outraged by the choice, but in reading the article written by TIME and all their coverage of him (much of it linked in this blog post), I have to agree that he deserves it. I would greatly recommend reading it, though it does deserve some time since it is 10 pages long).True Jualian Assange had a huge year (for better or worse) with everything he and his organization has done, but so has Facebook. I'll leave the smaller debate for others. I considered writing a piece defending the choice, but, well, as Clarke Gable said in the 1939 movie "Gone with the Wind" -- "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."
I do have some concern (and I don't think it has gotten enough attention) that there is another tech bubble building. With Goldman Sachs' investment into Facebook, the company is valued at 50 billion dollars. Since it isn't a company, no one outside the company and its investors know the expenses and exact revenue Facebook accumulates. It is estimated that the company will go public in or around 2012, but until then, I've seen a massive amount of investment firms greatly investing in smaller tech startups while hoping that theirs will have the "big breakthrough" and become a new Facebook, Google, etc. Because of this eagerness, these firms are willing to invest huge sums of money that are worth more than what the start up is hoping that with its success they will make a profit. This kind of eagerness and valuation as seen with high profile cases with Facebook and the thousands of small start ups points to the fact that unless this slows down, we may be heading to a tech bust similar to the 90s. Here's an article questioning Facebook's value.
Facebook is the ultimate social networking tool, and for better or worse, with such an engineering-style company, it doesn't look like it will die anytime soon (though we can never be certain). It has proven useful to many while being tiresome and scary to others. Although Facebook is the largest social network, some may have noticed that I haven't mentioned things like online abuse or illegal activities that utilize social networking to make our lives worse. Although worth mentioning, I don't think they are a Facebook-specific problem, rather a larger social networking problem that even Facebook is addressing by working with some agencies to filter out illegal activities and decrease online bullying. To Mark Zuckerberg, our lives wouldn't be the same without you, to the commoner who gets mad every time there is a small tweak to the site, you are about to get a whole lot more mad since the site is forever changing, get used to the constant changes.
This leads to an important question: Are there inherently good jobs? Jobs, where simply by completing them, you are doing a good thing. Some could argue that a firefighter deserves a thank you even though he is doing his job as well as a policeman. Are their jobs "inherently" good? What about a lawyer or engineer? They defend our constitutional rights and build our countries, don't they deserve a "thank you?" Are their jobs inherently "good" or not? How do we define these jobs? The contribution to society by a waitress is far less than that of an engineer (to be blunt), does one deserve more thanks than another? 
