Monday, May 2, 2011
Meanstwhile, within the trappings of human civility - my home, in the upper relm thereof, seated, hunched, hands held in the causual position of one that has pushed many keys over the years - another beginning.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Shifting the blame
To those who would blame Obama and rich countries in general, know this: it was China's representative who insisted that industrialised country targets, previously agreed as an 80% cut by 2050, be taken out of the deal. "Why can't we even mention our own targets?" demanded a furious Angela Merkel. Australia's prime minister, Kevin Rudd, was annoyed enough to bang his microphone. Brazil's representative too pointed out the illogicality of China's position. Why should rich countries not announce even this unilateral cut? The Chinese delegate said no, and I watched, aghast, as Merkel threw up her hands in despair and conceded the point. Now we know why – because China bet, correctly, that Obama would get the blame for the Copenhagen accord's lack of ambition.
Secretary Clinton made it perfectly clear that the US was ready and willing to support the global effort to control, and mitigate, the effects of human technological growth. It was widely reported that China's primary reason for eschewing any real commitment here was simply this - Transparency of process.
The US and Europe along with, albeit to a lesser degree, Japan and South Korea have proved over the last decades a willingness to take action on a national and regional scale. Why - because quite frankly there is enough openness in these societies that the common sense of 'the people' does exert pressure and over time form policies.
Why would China, the government of China, be so fearful of openness, of transparency to be willing to flout their nose to the people of the world? Why would India be so willing an accomplice?
Does anyone really wonder why the last great communist totalitarian government on our planet would fear openness? I doubt it. India? Well, guess they are just hedging their economics bets.
A lack of an international treaty does not release individual governments from their responsibilities to be good stewards of the ecology, of course. What this summit should do however is to be a clarion call to those in the developed world, interested in actually affecting a change, to focus on China and India as the true battle grounds.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Perhaps anyway - catching a wave, hanging ten or just being part of the 'boob tube' generation..this reminded me of the song..
although this guy really needs to pick up the pace..*smile*
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
cut the blarney, raw competition.
FOSS projects can build products that deliver value to the user on par with, or better then, closed commercial – old school – businesses!
First time I heard a remark with the above sentiment I was doubtful….and I went along my merry way in life.
At some point round or about five years ago, hearing it again (and not the second time) I took a bit more notice. Actually a good bit more notice.
The first because it installed and ran on my PC, easy.
The second because it installed and ran on my PC easy, twice :>)
hmmm – actually that isn’t exactly correct – Ubuntu installed easily and ran acceptably on a friends PC.
OpenOffice.org installed easily and ran acceptably on my PC under Windows and Ubuntu, allowing me to help my friend transition from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice.org in her daily computer usage needs.
She, was happy and I was happy that she was happy.
Well, it seems that a lot of folks are starting to feel the same – a recent estimate put 13% of Windows PC users as having OpenOffice.org, and even the, IMO, conservative OO.o PR Chief has claimed 10% of computer desktops overall.
Nothing however speaks to the successes of the FOSS projects, large and small, then the reactions of the predominant commercial player.
Whether in speeches to their resellers or this latest marketing campaign –
they say one thing….the US market is in play.