Waterworld and Oil?

I was watching TV the other night when a CNN news story caught my attention. The bouncy anchor seamlessly took the audience to the North Pole where any number of countries are "claiming" territorial rights for either the fatherland or motherland. At the center of the controversy (and story) lies about 25-30 percent of the world's known remaining oil reserves. Yes that's right, directly under all those polar bears millions of barrels of bubbling crude.

If this is not fantastic enough, the side story - the one the anchor and most viewers probably missed- was the fact that the ice cap is melting. I was amazed, not that the US, Norway, Russia, Canada and others are trying to claim something they could have cared less for 20 years ago, but that the anchor just skipped by the part about the meltdown. Apparently the same people that first argued there was no global warming and then that we do not affect it - simply acknowledge it now as a variable for oil exploration.

The visuals for this news segment showed melting ice being navigated by ships representing explorers (or the symbolic representations of them) from various nations. According to the bubble headed anchor the ice will be sufficiently melted by 2015 for massive drilling to take place. If you do not see the bleak irony of this then perhaps you should turn CNN back on. "Never fear SUV drivers, soon the polar ice caps of Earth will be gone and Exxon can get you more gas!" My God, I just wonder at how many people thought what I was thinking (and my 12 year old son).

I guess the larger issue still is the apparent unconcern of Russia or any of these other countries for the environment or any other issue as being more paramount than seizing the last drop of a depleted and overused resource. I can't wait until we are totally on solar so we can watch these morons try to plant a national flag on the Sun! That is if we are not underwater or in boats by then.

Melting Ice Off Denmark

Photos Courtesy AP

Let's Talk Fast! Scramjets At Mach 10

Something I just realized is that this is my blog and I can write stuff I think my readers want to know about even if it is not Web 2.0! News today from Reuters in Australia ab out an experimental jet engine is quite fascinating if oy are a "go fast" techno geek. The fantastic "scramjet" engine is reportedly capable of 10 times the speed of sound. You read rigth "10" times, or 6,835 mph. The engine is being tested in the outback by defese scientists from the U.S. and Australia at the Woomerang test facility (what a cool name).

Scram
Scramjets require a rocket to propel the vehicle to high-speed where the engine takes over in the thin atmosphere. Scramjets, short for Supersonic Combustion Ramjets use supersonic combustion air for super-maiximized combustion have a theorietic speed capacity of up to Mach 24 without the addition of oxidizers for combustion. By comparison, the fastest conventional jets only approach Mach 3.5. So, scramjet equipped aircraft could porivide the ultimate adrenalin ride for some luck test pilot. The testing is likely being done in Australia because at that speed the test vehicle would be over Nebraska before it could be slowed down to land.

Welcome Aboard
Imagine taking off from New York and being in Paris in half an hour. I can just hear the pilot saying: "Welcome about Bomerang filght 123, fasten your seat belts, place your head between your knees and kiss your asses goodbye because we will be landing in 15 more minutes." I love Web 2.0, but nothing quite tintilates the senses like the thought of raw speed.

The tests were successful according to officials from the U. S. Defense Advacned Research Porjects Agency or DARPA. The results are being evaluated and scientists are exvcited about the potential for using scramject technology for high speed flight on long range missions and for a cheap method of lauching satellites.

Technology is so cool, isn't it? Now if we could just learn to apply it to more humane endeavors, there is no telling what could be accomplished. For now it is still nice to know that your rocket scientists can come up with faster and faster stuff. There is a certain securtiy in that after all.

Is Google on Self Destruct?

Holy cow! I did not crank up my little blog here with the intent to write ab out Google every day, but every time I log on there seems to be another story about some Google blunder or other. The "one" that caught me eye today was about eBay pulling all their ads from Google's Adwords.

According to a story via Yahoo! News Google has been lobbying eBay to accept their "Checkout" online payment system, which is a competitor to eBay's PayPal system. So, Google decides to throw a party at the same time eBay is holding a conference for its merchants. What a way to treat a zillion dollar client huh? EBay tried to down play the whole issue and had this to say initially: "This is part of an ongoing experiment to look at how we market across all media channels, " said eBay spokesman Hani Durzy.

Adwords = Google

For those of you who don't know Adwords is Google's primary source of ad revenue and Yahoo! sources revealed that the eBay pullout was in response to Google's inappropriate behavior toward them. Durzy finally responded to questions about the Google party saying essentially that eBay did not think this was a way to treat a valued partner. No kidding? Well , don't expect them to apologize eBay, Google is above all that as we are seeing in other news.

Seriously folks, I do not just look around for goofy Google stuff to write about. I do not even like Google and would much rather write about other companies. However, they are a huge Internet presence that should have their act together. I guess that is how I am amazed at the arrogance and stupidity that abounds from them.

Where Do They Get Off?

Privacy, insults, international goofs, copyright issues and enough lawsuits to choke Harvard Law school. One stupid thing after another and everyone seems to just get all googly eyed every time they add some gadget. I don't get it. I applaud eBay for snatching their ads, perhaps if some more companies would grow a pair Google would act civilized, maybe even say when they are wrong or something big like that.

Google Gives A Little, Very Little

Google and the great data gathering factory.
Google is apparently backing up again today announcing that they will cut back on how long the company keeps Web search histories of users from 2 years back to 18 months. Search information will become anonymous after the year and a half. I am not sure what how 6 months less time in the Google vaults could be anything to cheer about in regard to privacy issues but it is something. Google just seems to step on more and more toes in an almost effortless jaunt across the Web 2.0 landscape.

Why
In an article yesterday Paul Glazowski reflected on the Privacy International issue I reported on in this blog. Paul points out potently that Google users are not going to be exactly thrilled to find out their histories are saved for even ten minutes let alone 2 years. Here we have another situation where Google simply backs up after going too far. This is the same tactic being employed in then YouTube copyright cases.

In a letter to Google mentioned in Paul’s post Privacy International pretty much hammers Google with what appear to be legitimate issues in light of Google’s claims against the non-profit privacy organization. Essentially the letter from Simon Davies Director of Privacy International demands an apology from Google for trying to discredit the otherwise untarnished organization.

Who Do They Think They Are?
The latest news via the New York Times reveals Google’s intentions more clearly. Google says that it shares general information on search trends, but does not release this personal information outside the company. In my post yesterday I pointed out that THEY DON”T HAVE TO! Half of the advertising on the Web is filtered through Google one way or another. The same holds true for any manipulation or machinating where user preferences, trends or privacy might enter into the equation. Google went on thumbing their nose at the Web according to this NYT article.

“We believe we can still address our legitimate interests in security, innovation and antifraud efforts with this shorter period,” Peter Fleischer, Google’s global privacy counsel, wrote in the letter. He added that the company would “firmly reject” a retention period that was any shorter.

According to Google’s global privacy Czar Google could not look at other companies and find any clear privacy policies. This is tantamount to telling Google users that “no policy means we do what we want.” The absence of clear policies for the world’s most powerful Web entity should indicate the need to supply their users with one don’t you think? Google is open to dialogue according to Fleisher, but given the statement about shorter data holding, it sounds like doubletalk to me.

Conclusion
Google just announced today that they would be testing technology to recognize copyrighted video and audio in response (after months) to the Viacom and Premier League lawsuits. I just reported at Profy about the latest companies to jump on YouTube in the class action suit. This is all becoming so systematic and predictable and really sickening in my book. Google is stacking up like one of those bullies you have to stomp an apology out of when they go wrong. In fairness to them (why I do not know) the other big companies practice some of the same tactics and use people’s information. However, no other entity has nearly as much control over the data collected. Maybe 20 or 30 million users migrating somewhere else because they were not aware of Google’s practices would equate to a good “stomping”