links

Search for copies of your page on the Web.

http://copyscape.com/


Search EDGAR

http://www.secinfo.com

Stock Market

From Mr. McMillan

The U.S. stock market is giving traders a lot of feints. Overall, it has failed to break out of the trading range that it's been in for quite some time. This range, as defined by the 1200-1245 area on $SPX, has contained both rallies and declines for several weeks. Thursday's rally was a strong one, and one wonders whether it was mainly due to quarter- end window dressing (which often reaches its zenith of activity on the day before the quarter ends) or due to a new-found strength in the underlying tone of the market itself. Unfortunately for the bulls, we're taking a 'show me' attitude here -- not being convinced of the impending upside potential unless the market can actually break out above the 1245 area (and clear the double tops there and also clear them in the other major indices as well; in fact, it's amazing how much the recent charts of $OEX, $DJX, and QQQQ resemble that of $SPX).

This current rally is the second one off of the 1200-1205 bottom (basis $SPX). Both times, the market rallied without actually getting very oversold, although this time there was an oversold condition in the breadth indicators. Currently, both breadth indicators have finally moved to buy signals -- but the NYSE breadth didn't confirm until Thursday (rather late). Hence, breadth got oversold at the bottom which is bullish -- but didn't improve much on the rally until now.

Equity-only put-call ratios have remained bullish for the entirety of this move. They turned to buy signals in early September and have remained there with little difficulty. What this is actually saying is that traders have been buying calls (forcing the ratio lower) all during this time. As long as the ratio moves lower, that's bullish. Only when 'too many' calls are being bought and the ratios begin to turn upward, would this be negative -- and that hasn't occurred yet. Volatility ($VIX) hasn't been very predictive. It has more or less followed the market, not led it, over the last few weeks. Therefore, it is also in a trading range -- as $SPX is. That range is bounded by 14 on the upside (which $VIX reached each time that $SPX was down near 1200) and has a vague lower bound in the 11.00 - 11.50 area. $VIX is sort of in the middle of that range now, so we'd just rate it as 'neutral.'

So where does all of this leave us? We have two bullish indicators breadth and put-call ratios. We have two indicators in a relatively neutral status (within trading ranges): $VIX and the charts of the major indices. To us, it adds up to further trading range activity in the US markets -- especially considering that this most recent, strong rally day was likely the result of the calendar (quarter end) rather than a true shift in investor bullishness. I expect to see sellers emerge at the 1240-1245 area on $SPX because sales there were profitable the last two times that the average got that high. Eventually, if $SPX can break on through 1245, that would change things because those sellers would turn to buyers and other investors would be drawn in on the buy side as well. Unless that happens, we remain skeptical of the rally.

Writer Groups Not Backing Down In Fight With Google

At this point it's looking likely that at least one author's organization will go to court to try to stop Google's book-copying project.

By Antone Gonsalves, TechWeb News
Aug. 31, 2005
URL:

Google Inc. on Wednesday appeared more likely to face a legal challenge over its book-copying project, as a writers' group said it was "pessimistic" over the chances of avoiding the courts.

The Text and Academic Authors Association is the latest group to publicly join others representing authors and publishers in denouncing Google's plans to resume in November scanning and storing in its database copyrighted books from libraries. Despite opposition, the search engine giant has given no indication it will change its plans, which Google argues is legal.

"It's a matter of interpretation that ultimately will have to be resolved by the courts, if Google insists that it does not have to go to the copyright holder of each book," Richard T. Hull, executive director of the TAA, said in an interview Wednesday.

Asked whether a lawsuit can be avoided, Hull said. "I'm pessimistic."

The TAA, which represents text and academic authors, recently issued a statement saying Google was "backwards" in its logic of copying books, unless the copyright holder tells it not to. Groups representing publishers and writers argue that Google should approach them, and negotiate a fee.

In addition, the TAA said, Google's position was "in conflict with both the spirit and the law of copyright."

In an interview with TechWeb this month, Adam Smith, product manager for Google Print, said the Mountain View, Calif., company believes its actions are "allowed under fair use and is consistent with all the principles underlying copyright law itself." Book publishers, however, argue that fair use under the law only applies to using portions of books for educational or non-commercial activities.

Unless it has permission to display more, Google says it shows only a small portion of copyrighted material in search results. Hull, however, said that wasn't always true, pointing out that searching for a commonly used term in a book will deliver many pages of copyrighted material.

Indeed, a search for the philosopher Martin Heidegger, in the book "Martin Heidegger On The Way," edited by Hull, delivered many pages, one at a time.

"Anybody who's clever enough can download the entire book," Hull said.

Not true, said Jim Gerber, director of content partnerships for Google. "Martin Heidegger On The Way," for example, was submitted to Google by the publisher. Under those circumstances, people would only be allowed to see a maximum of 20 percent of the book, and a percentage of random pages are blocked completely.

In the case of copyrighted library books that are copied without permission from the copyright holder, Google only displays basic information so the viewer knows the book exists and where is can be found, such as a library or retailer, Gerber said. Google makes no money off the links to a retailer, or if the book is bought through the merchant. The search engine also doesn't sell advertising for the book pages.

"We do not collect a dime from the retailer," Gerber said. "We don't collect any money, when the user buys these books."

In opposing Google, TAA joins the the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, the Association of American University Presses and the Association of American Publishers.

Google announced its library project in December, starting with collections in Harvard, Stanford, the University of Michigan, the University of Oxford and The New York Public Library. Besides expanding its network of search advertising, the project could someday put Google into direct competition with giant Internet retailer Amazon.com, experts say.

Book publishers are not the only ones rankled over Google's handling of copyrighted material. Adult magazine publisher Perfect 10 Inc. is asking a federal court in Los Angeles to prevent Google from displaying pictures and links to the company's copyrighted photos.

The Beverly Hills, Calif., magazine publisher, which sued Google in November 2004, has asked the court to hear its request for a preliminary injunction Nov. 7.

Copyright © 2005 CMP Media LLC

From Marylaine Block:

Government Reorganization and Program Performance Improvement Act of 2005

You might want to pay some attention to this. The goal is to give every government agency a ten-year life span. If Congress does not specifically reauthorize each agency, it dies.


Loomia Podcast and Videocast Search Engine
http://loomia.com/
Not only a search engine but one intended "to help you discover, share, and manage things of interest to you. We make use of the likes and dislikes of an ever-increasing community to filter through thousands of channels to help you find good stuff." There's a surprising amount of library-sponsored or library-related content available already.



Replacing Your Vital Documents

While this is designed particularly for the benefit of victims of Katrina, we all could find it useful if we one day find ourselves in need of missing documents to prove we are ourselves.

Crossword Puzzle Makers

one

two

three

McMillan

Stock Market

The 'post-Katrina' rally was a strong one, taking $SPX about 40 points higher. However, it was not based on a sound technical footing, and has run into some trouble. Nearly all of the major indices have formed a double top on their chart (Figure 1). This is going to present a problem for the bulls, although if the averages should now punch their way through those double tops, it would be a strongly bullish sign.

On Monday, the final leg of the rally took place, bringing the major indices to levels very near their August tops. Some aggressive sellers decided, on Tuesday, that they would take a chance and sell at those levels. It was a fortuitous decision (for them), as the market crumpled from there -- declining for the better part of three days. The resulting double top formation will invite more selling, should the indices climb to those levels gain. In fact, the more times it works for the sellers, the more sellers there will be each time those levels are approached. If the market eventually does trade above there, though, that will turn sellers to buyers and will make support out of that level. Specifically, we are talking about the 1242-1245 level on $SPX. That also represents a 4- year high. None of the other major big-cap indices has performed as well as $SPX, so the double tops on $OEX, $DJX (the Dow), and QQQQ merely represent August highs.

Equity-only put-call ratios were slow to confirm the rally. They finally rolled over to buy signals late last week. Moreover, they began to 'hook' back up during this week's decline (Figures 2 and 3). These are usually reliable intermediate-term indicators, and their reluctance to get behind the bullish case is cause for concern.

Breadth hasn't been exactly eye-popping either. The "post- Katrina" rally was not accompanied by the expansive breadth that one usually sees when a new bullish phase begins. In fact, the breadth oscillators only got modestly overbought, and then fell back as breadth was poor this week. This action actually resulted in confirmed sell signals by both breadth oscillators on Tuesday of this week. That is certainly a problem for the bulls as well.

Finally, volatility ($VIX) has been a little more helpful to the bulls. $VIX has established a downtrend now (Figure 4), which is what one would expect during a market rally. While there was some momentary concern on Wednesday of this week as $VIX probed back above 13, it didn't stay there and is now declining again.

In summary, these indicators remain mixed. Perhaps we would do best to watch the index price chart as our best indicator: if it exceeds the double tops, all is bullish. If not, then the best the bulls can hope for is that a decline towards support (first 1220, then 1200, basis $SPX), might be enough to get some buy signals from our recalcitrant technical indicators. Until then, we are not recommending positions in broad market index options. What about the bear case, you might ask? It doesn't have technical backing right now, with equity-only put-call ratios still on buy signals and $VIX in a downtrend, but should those things change, then the bears may come growling out again.


Note: if you are viewing a text version of this report,
click on the link to see the charts"

Ban on marrying mother-in-law to end

here

By Sarah Womack, Social Affairs Correspondent
(Filed: 14/09/2005)


A ban in England and Wales on marriages between parents-in-law and their children-in-law is in breach of human rights, the European Court said yesterday.


The judgment will force an overhaul of legislation governing family law which will see men being able to marry their mothers-in-law for the first time - as long as they do not have a blood link.

The decision by the court in Strasbourg related to a case brought by a couple from Warrington who were refused the right to marry because the man, aged nearly 60, is the father-in-law of the woman, more than 20 years his junior.

Identified in court as B and L, the woman and man had claimed that the marriage ban breached the Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to marry and have a family, and outlaws discrimination.

The judges were told that B's original marriage to C ended in divorce, after a son, W, was born.

A relationship between the man and his daughter-in-law developed after the man's son, left the marital home.

A marriage between B and L, therefore, would mean the husband would be grandfather to his own wife's son.

The boy already calls his grandfather "dad".

The couple went to the Human Rights Court after being refused permission to marry by the Superintendent Registrar at Warrington Register Office.

The Strasbourg judges said that the British bar on in-law marriages, although pursuing a legitimate aim of protecting "the integrity of the family", did not prevent such relationships occurring. They added: "Since no incest or other criminal law provisions prevented extra-marital relationships between parents-in-law and children-in-law, it could not be said that the ban on the marriage (between B and L) prevented W from being exposed to any alleged confusion or emotional security."

The Human Rights Convention states: "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right." B and L were awarded nearly £12,000 in costs and expenses.

A spokesman for the Department for Constitutional Affairs said: "We are considering the judgment.'' Earlier this year Scotland became the first part of the UK to allow men to marry their mothers-in-law. Any man can marry his mother-in-law or daughter-in-law and women can marry their fathers-in-law or sons-in-law. The only proviso is that they must have been separated first through divorce or death from their original partner. They must not be blood relations. A spokesman for the Catholic Church said it had no ethical objections to the marriage of in-laws who were not blood related.

In England, step-children are allowed to marry their step-parents but only when they are grown up and only if they have never lived together.
Chamber judgement, B & L v United Kingdom [13 Sep '05] - European Court of Human Rights


© Copyright of Telegraph Group

The bells of Freedom ring clear.

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts; but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
- Sir Francis Bacon

Two nations divided by a common language

Telegraph

(Filed: 08/09/2005)


Americans aren't offhand, they just want to get down to business. Try not to get offended, says Widget Finn

Oscar Wilde claimed that "the Americans and the British are identical in all respects except, of course, their language" while around the same time Henry Sweet predicted that within 100 years American and British English would be mutually unintelligible.


A sense of urgency "is deep in the American psyche"

Which is worrying when you consider that currently around 4.5m US business people work in European companies and about the same number of Europeans are employed by American companies. How on earth do they communicate with their colleagues?

Often with great difficulty, claims Allyson Stewart-Allen, an American marketing consultant who was sent over to London by PA Consultancy Group two decades ago, learnt the language and has stayed on ever since. When she arrived she admits she had problems.

"I didn't know whether being pear-shaped was good or bad, what a damp squib was or if being knackered was faintly improper. But being an outsider meant that I could ask questions which nobody else dared raise. In a first meeting over here it's considered totally inappropriate to mention money, but I could act the naïve American and ask about the budget. It was met with nervous laughter but I usually got an answer."

There are numerous pitfalls for the unsuspecting Brit who thinks English is universally understood wherever it is spoken.

In the US you can grow a beard or a tomato but not a company, and slating a meeting means that you schedule, not disparage it. Thus a headline ''Third Harry Potter film slated'' can mean good on one side of the Atlantic and bad on the other.

If you're asked whether you want hot milk in your coffee, "I don't care" in New York is the same as "I don't mind" in London, but reverse the response and you'll get a reputation for surliness or indecision. This chasm of misunderstanding reflects the different cultures and history that affects business between the two countries.

For Americans, time is money and the transaction comes first, while building relationships are a long way behind. Go into a meeting and the British want to spend some time settling in, asking about your journey and offering coffee. Americans ignore the pleasantries and throw themselves into the business.

Allyson Stewart-Allen claims this sense of urgency is deep in the American psyche, going back to the early settlers.

In the 1800s publicity for the Manifest Destiny trains urged ordinary Americans to "Claim as much land as you can, as fast as you can".

She explains: "When our ancestors travelled across the country in their covered wagons they knew that they must stake their claims quickly before the people following behind grabbed the land. This means even now there's an antipathy to wasting time."

So it follows that punctuality is essential. If there's any doubt, arrive five minutes early and wait, in contrast to French custom where it's best to arrive five minutes late. This influences response times. You need it when? Yesterday? OK, no problem.

Americans want everything - information, deliveries - instantly says Ms Stewart-Allen. "The general rule for replying to phone messages and e-mail is no more than 24 hours, possibly 48 if you're travelling.

Waiting any longer than two days for a response implies that the person is not interested, slow, unprofessional.

In Europe a week may be a satisfactory time but not in America.

" This obsession with speed has a strong influence on marketing. "In the States we accept that we can go to market with a product or service which isn't 100 per cent ready. We're happy with 80 per cent so we can get in and get ahead.

''Here, being more risk-averse, you want to be absolutely certain it's right before launching a product but it means that by being second you seem a copycat and have to sell the idea that you're late but better."

It's the subtleties of culture and class that can cause most confusion. Ms Stewart-Allen first encountered it at PA where there was a certain member of her team with an illustrious ancestry.

"My colleagues laughed harder at his jokes, were deferential and, although he was just average, he got better assignments. Americans respect someone for achievements, not their DNA."

Understanding the gamut of linguistic and cultural differences can make the course of business run more smoothly but even if we learn each other's language there is still a natural barrier that keeps our two nations apart. As Eddie Izzard wisely observed: "America and Britain are divided by the Atlantic Ocean."

Top tips for working with Americans

The clock is king
Be on time for meetings. Deadlines are serious. Meet completion times or risk losing business.

Business before pleasure
Be willing to do business ?rst, build the relationship second. If Americans don't take time to get to know you no insult is intended, they're just keeping to a schedule.

Family, equal and ethical
Everyone, regardless of rank or age, should be treated as equals. Don't be insulted if addressed by your ?rst name - it's the American way.

Let's do lunch
Don't take offence when your American colleague suggests getting together but doesn't get it together. He's sincere, but too rushed to follow up so simply appreciate the interest.

Do it now!
Americans still make decisions on impulse. In their rush to 'get things done' they decide quickly and worry about the consequences later.

Source: Working with Americans

13 July 2005[News]: Strewth! Americanisms flush Aussie lingo down the dunny


© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005.

Police Begin Seizing Guns of Civilians

NYTimes

September 9, 2005

By ALEX BERENSON and JOHN M. BRODER
NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 8 - Local police officers began confiscating weapons from civilians in preparation for a forced evacuation of the last holdouts still living here, as President Bush steeled the nation for the grisly scenes of recovering the dead that will unfold in coming days.

Police officers and federal law enforcement agents scoured the city carrying assault rifles seeking residents who have holed up to avoid forcible eviction, as well as those who are still considering evacuating voluntarily to escape the city's putrid waters.

"Individuals are at risk of dying," said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of the New Orleans police. "There's nothing more important than the preservation of human . . .

Mr. Compass, the police superintendent, said that after a week of near anarchy in the city, no civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns, or other firearms of any kind. "Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons," he said.

That order apparently does not apply to the hundreds of security guards whom businesses and some wealthy individuals have hired to protect their property. The guards, who are civilians working for private security firms like Blackwater, are openly carrying M-16s and other assault rifles.

Mr. Compass said that he was aware of the private guards but that the police had no plans to make them give up their weapons.

New Orleans has turned into an armed camp, patrolled by thousands of local, state, and federal law enforcement officers, as well as National Guard troops and active-duty soldiers. While armed looters roamed unchecked last week, the city is now calm. . . .

Checking for Plagiarism One Sentence at a Time

I/P Updates

LexisNexis has teamed-up with iParadigms to offer "LexisNexis CopyGuard" pattern-matching technology for identifying suspected plagiarism. The service assigns each document a "similarity index" indicating the total percentage of the document containing text originating elsewhere in the Lexis database. It also provides and "Originality Report" that underlines and color codes questionable sentences, with links to the original sources.

But should we be looking for plagiarism sentence by sentence simply because we can?

Musicians know that all great composers steal; documentarian's lament over dissappearing history; and artists are plagued by intellectual property issues. Even technological breakthroughs can be viewed as more of a societal building process than the singular obsessions of lonely geniuses.

According to Stuart P. Green, a professor of law at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, copyright law "protects a primarily economic interest . . .

Nine Offbeat Ways to Pay for College

look

By Lucy Lazarony
Bankrate.com

The news on college costs is mighty grim, but there are plenty of creative ways to keep your college dream on track.

Dwindling state and federal aid, lower endowments and drops in fund raising have forced many colleges and universities to raise tuition prices and cut back on financial aid programs.

What's a cash-strapped student to do?

Get real and then get creative.

First off, face facts -- These are trying times for anyone pursuing higher education.

It's time to pull out all the stops. Be flexible. Be determined. Be willing to give the unusual a try.

Here's a roundup of some offbeat and overlooked strategies for pursuing and paying for a college degree.

1. Accelerate your degree
Accelerated classes cram a semester's worth of material into six- or eight-week sessions . . .

Working with Statistics

Links from the SLA presentation
The revised handouts for Dr. Broch's presentation are now posted the DC-SLA Chapter Website:
here.pdf

and here.

Copyright claims -- the next gotcha?

Star Tribune

Dan McDonald
September 5, 2005 FORUM0905


One of your employees just read an article he likes, so he e-mails a copy to 10 colleagues. No problem, right?

Think again. If the company does not have permission to forward electronic copies of the article, its employees might have just committed copyright infringement. And don't assume it's not a "real" problem just because you haven't heard much about it.

Ask Legg Mason, the investment management firm, which was hit with a nearly $20 million judgment for repeatedly violating the copyright of a newsletter publisher. The company systematically forwarded electronic copies of the newsletter, without permission, to employees. While the fact that it went to trial and the size of the award make the . . .

ZIPmouse Aims to Uniquely Organize Web

Press Release

Tuesday September 6, 8:37 am ET
Company's Innovative Interface Offers Internet Users and Advertisers the Chance to See and Be Seen Like Never Before


CINCINNATI, Sept. 6 /PRNewswire/ -- ZIPmouse LLC, a leading interface design company, today announced the launch of its new website, http://www.zipmouse.com . The website, four years in the making, is designed to bring users, advertisers and information together in a seamless framework. That seamless framework is created by the unique ZIPmouse interface design.
"Any user at any level can effectively use ZIPmouse," said Keith Lawrence, President of ZIPmouse. "The experience we've created is so incredibly simple and efficient, users quickly feel empowered when using ZIPmouse."

The company stresses that ZIPmouse is not a search engine. The ZIPmouse taxonomy (orderly classification system) is organized into layers of logical categories that users can quickly navigate with just a few clicks of their mouse. The uncluttered and intuitive interface is maintained through every level of the ZIPmouse taxonomy structure - providing consistency and familiarity to users.

"That's the beauty of ZIPmouse; it utilizes one consistent interface and one consistent function," said Ed Estes, CTO of ZIPmouse. "Users master our system in a matter of seconds because the experience is the same no matter what you're looking for."

ZIPmouse is fundamentally different from existing online directories. Most directories have a flexible category system that adapts to the information indexed. Ultimately, this method of organization becomes disorganized as it succumbs to the individual demands of an enormous number of websites. The ZIPmouse taxonomy follows a rigid set of rules and organization methods that stay fixed, regardless of the amount of information it indexes. . . .

Britons return to tell of anarchy in Superdome

Telegraph

Britons return to tell of anarchy in Superdome
By Marco Giannangeli
(Filed: 05/09/2005)


Britons finally returning to safety from New Orleans yesterday told of the anarchy that developed in the city's Superdome, where thousands had been sent after Hurricane Katrina.

As they landed at Gatwick airport, bedraggled holidaymakers described the terror that followed attempted rapes, violence and squalor in the sports arena.


Jane Wheeldon is greeted by her mother at Gatwick Airport
Will Nelson had been touring the United States after summer work for Camp America.

"I'm just relieved it is all over and glad to be back and away from there," he said. "There were mothers with their children lying in corridors in filth and the toilets and water stopped working.

"The smell was disgusting and there were old people just sitting down in the road as well as the sick."

The 21-year-old had been staying in a hostel in the city just before the hurricane struck and was told that he and fellow travellers had to evacuate to the dome.

"The first few days there was a group of eight of us together but by Thursday night all the travellers were together - there were 40 or 50 of us," he said. "The lads were on the outside and the girls were on the inside and we just made sure that we didn't leave any of our bags."

He described how backpackers had been surprised by the intensity of the hurricane. "We were all cramped into sections and could hear lots of crashing but we didn't have an idea just how massive it was," he added. "The army gave out food and water at first to people, but then the situation got worse."

Charlotte Scott, 19, described how she and her sister Rebecca, 20, huddled together with other travellers in the dome. "Throughout the three days we just grouped together because none of us knew what we were in for. I saw a couple of people getting taken away by the army and others were getting angry . . .

Google Purge Announced

Google Announces Plan To Destroy All Information It Can't Index
August 31, 2005 | Issue 41•35


MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA—Executives at Google, the rapidly growing online-search company that promises to "organize the world's information," announced Monday the latest step in their expansion effort: a far-reaching plan to destroy all the information it is unable to index.


CEO Eric Schmidt speaks at Google's California headquarters (below).
"Our users want the world to be as simple, clean, and accessible as the Google home page itself," said Google CEO Eric Schmidt at a press conference held in their corporate offices. "Soon, it will be."

The new project, dubbed Google Purge, will join such popular services as Google Images, Google News, and Google Maps, which catalogs the entire surface of the Earth using high-resolution satellites.

As a part of Purge's first phase, executives will destroy all copyrighted materials that cannot be searched by Google.

"A year ago, Google offered to scan every book on the planet for its Google Print project. Now, they are promising to burn the rest," John Battelle wrote in his widely read "Searchblog." "Thanks to Google Purge, you'll never have to worry that your search has missed some obscure book, because that book will no longer exist. And the same goes for movies, art, and music."

"Book burning is just the beginning," said Google co-founder Larry Page. "This fall, we'll unveil Google Sound, which will record and index all the noise on Earth. Is your baby sleeping soundly? Does your high-school sweetheart still talk about you? Google will have the answers."

Enlarge Image
Page added: "And thanks to Google Purge, anything our global microphone network can't pick up will be silenced by noise-cancellation machines in low-Earth orbit."

As a part of Phase One operations, Google executives will permanently erase the hard drive of any computer that is not already indexed by the Google Desktop Search.

"We believe that Google Desktop Search is the best way to unlock the information hidden on your hard drive," Schmidt said. "If you haven't given it a try, now's the time. In one week, the deleting begins."

Although Google executives are keeping many details about Google Purge under wraps, some analysts speculate that the categories of information Google will eventually index or destroy include handwritten correspondence, buried fossils, and private thoughts and feelings.

The company's new directive may explain its recent acquisition of Celera Genomics, the company that mapped the human genome, and its buildup of a vast army of laser-equipped robots.

"Google finally has what it needs to catalog the DNA of every organism on Earth," said analyst Imran Kahn of J.P. Morgan Chase. "Of course, some people might not want their DNA indexed. Hence, the robot army. It's crazy, it's brilliant—typical Google."

Enlarge Image
Google executives oversee the first stage of Google Purge.
Google's robot army is rumored to include some 4 million cybernetic search-and-destroy units, each capable of capturing and scanning up to 100 humans per day. Said co-founder Sergey Brin: "The scanning will be relatively painless. Hey, it's Google. It'll be fun to be scanned by a Googlebot. But in the event people resist, the robots are programmed to liquify the brain."

Markets responded favorably to the announcement of Google Purge, with traders bidding up Google's share price by $1.24, to $285.92, in late trading after the announcement. But some critics of the company have found cause for complaint.

"This announcement is a red flag," said Daniel Brandt, founder of Google-Watch.org. "I certainly don't want to accuse of them having bad intentions. But this campaign of destruction and genocide raises some potential privacy concerns."

Brandt also expressed reservations about the company's new motto. Until yesterday's news conference, the company's unofficial slogan had been "Don't be evil." The slogan has now been expanded to "Don't be evil, unless it's necessary for the greater good."

Co-founders Page and Brin dismiss their critics.

"A lot of companies are so worried about short-term reactions that they ignore the long view," Page said. "Not us. Our team is focused on something more than just making money. At Google, we're using technology to make dreams come true."

"Soon," Brin added, "we'll make dreams clickable, or destroy them forever."

© Copyright 2005, Onion, Inc. All rights reserved.The Onion is not intended for readers under 18 years of age.

==================================
Lance Armstrong scandal

The Associated Press Friday, August 5, 2005; 11:00 PM PARIS, France --

Lance Armstrong's record setting seventh Tour de France victory, along with
his entire Tour de France legacy, may be tarnished by what could turn out to
be one of the greatest sports scandals of all time.

Armstrong is being quizzed by French police after three banned substances
were found in his South France hotel room while on vacation after winning
the 2005 Tour de France.

The three substances found were toothpaste, deodorant and soap, which have
been banned by French authorities for over 75 years.

Armstrong's girlfriend, American rocker Sheryl Crowe, is quoted as saying
"We use them every day in America, so we naturally thought they'd be ok
throughout Europe."

Along with these three banned substances, French authorities also physically
searched Armstrong and found several other interesting items that they had
never seen before, including a backbone and testicle.

Oxymoron or what?

"Ability to think and write clearly."

Internship Opportunity - People For the American Way Foundation

Contact:
Ginger Richards
Librarian
People For the American Way Foundation
2000 M Street, NW Ste 400
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-467-2342
Fax: 202-293-2672
www.pfaw.org


People For the American Way Foundation is a national organization with 700,000 members and supporters dedicated to defending constitutional and civil rights and promoting the democratic values of citizen participation, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and respect for diversity. It is home to the Andrew Heiskell Library, a collection of primary and secondary source materials on First Amendment issues, the right-wing movement, and other issues of concern to the organization.

Responsibilities:
• Help maintain book and serials collections of the Resource Center. This includes filing, making new files and creating reference tools to make the library easier for staff and visitors to use.

• Assist with maintaining online resources, such as book database, library web site, and intranet search (EDIT) tool.
• Help fact-check PFAWF and PFAW materials for accuracy.
• Assist staff members and visitors with reference requests.

Qualifications:
• Ability to think and write clearly.
• Concern for detail, organization, and accuracy.
• Knowledge of library services and functions.
• Ability to work both independently and with supervision.
• Familiarity with Internet-based research tools, databases, and other computer applications.
• Interest in and knowledge of current political issues and library sciences.
---

Couple flee abroad to fight against the 'Big Brother state' that took their baby

By Cassandra Jardine
(Filed: 30/08/2005)

A couple whose son was taken away by social workers over what they say were false claims of mistreatment have moved abroad, fearing that any more children they might have could also be seized.

Emma and Martin - not their real names, as a court ruling prevents them being identified - strenuously deny harming Peter and are attempting to challenge the court ruling that placed him for adoption.

But the couple claim that they can no longer live under the shadow of the 'Big Brother state' that broke up their family and feel they will be safer if they continue the fight to clear their names from outside Britain.

Their plight was highlighted in The Daily Telegraph last year when they revealed that they had last seen Peter just after . . ."

Will Google’s Keyword Searching Eliminate the Need for LC Cataloging and Classification?

Thomas Mann

"Google Print does not 'change everything' regarding the need for professional cataloging and classification of books; its limitations make cataloging and classification even more important to researchers. Google's keyword search mechanism, backed by the display of results in "relevance ranked" order, is expressly designed and optimized for quick information seeking rather than scholarship. Internet keyword searching does not provide scholars with the structured menus of research options, such as those in OPAC browse displays, that they need for overview perspectives on the book literature of their topics. Keyword searching fails to map the taxonomies that alert researchers to unanticipated aspects of their subjects. It fails to retrieve literature that uses keywords other than those the researcher can specify; it misses not only synonyms and variant phrases but also all relevant works in foreign languages. Searching by keywords is not the same as searching by conceptual categories. Google software fails especially to retrieve desired keywords in contexts segregated from the appearance of the same words in irrelevant contexts. As a consequence of the design limitations of the Google search interface, researchers cannot use Google to systematically recognize relevant books whose exact terminology they cannot specify in advance. Cataloging and classification, in contrast, do provide the recognition mechanisms that scholarship requires for systematic literature retrieval in book collections."

Over educated--Under utilized

Personal view: Why go to university? We need plumbers, not more media graduates

By Ruth Lea (Filed: 29/08/2005)


It is A-level time again and many young people are making their final decisions about university entrance.

Doubtless their motives for going to university vary but surely one of the most important reasons is to enhance career prospects and lifetime earnings. There is, however, increasing evidence that a degree does not necessarily improve employability and earnings. Indeed it may even harm it. Degrees - and universities - should come with health warnings.

In the very early 1960s the percentage of young people going to university was just over 5pc. By 1970 it had reached 15pc and stayed around this level throughout the 1970s and most of the 1980s. Participation rates then "took off" in the late 1980s and reached about a third in 1994, when the then Conservative government called a halt to further expansion.

Since then participation rates have soared again as the Labour Government has sought to achieve its 50pc target of all under-30s participating in higher education (HE) by 2010. Over the past three years the rate has, however, stuck at 43pc and there are currently few expectations that the 50pc target will be hit by 2010 or even 2015.

Putting aside whether the 50pc target made any sense in the first place (I believe not) and whether it will be reached, a third issue is of crucial importance to the young people who are embarking on a university course: does a degree make any economic sense?

Will the direct costs of studying at university, along with three to four years of forgone income, pay dividends or would it be better financially to leave school after A-levels and enter employment with professional and/or vocational training?

The DfES makes great play of its estimate that the graduate earnings premium, the average increase in total lifetime earnings enjoyed by a graduate compared with a non-graduate, is as high as £400,000. This handsome premium was, incidentally, used by the Government to justify the increase in tuition fees to £3,000 (which is due to start next year).

But the DfES calculation is fundamentally flawed. . . .

McMillan Market Commentary

Friday, August 26, 2005

Note: Please use the following link to view this week's charts:
To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here: http://www.optionstrategist.com/



Stock Market
The market continues its rather slow-motion decline, but the cumulative effect is beginning to take its toll. $SPX and other major averages broke significant support this week -- falling below 1220. The next stop should be the 1190-1205 support area. A downtrend -- even a downtrend channel -- has formed on the chart (page 11), and the 20-day moving average is now pointing downward as well.

The equity-only put-call ratios remain on sell signals. This category has been our most bearish, with sell signals initiated near the beginning of August. They have not wavered since. Not only that, but you can see that they have not crawled very far up their charts, so they are not oversold currently.

Market breadth has been less negative than prices or put-call ratios. This is mostly due to continued outperformance by the small-cap issues over the big-cap issues.

Finally, volatility ($VIX) continues its uptrend (see chart, page 11). It finally closed above 14, but that seems to be less important than the continuation of the uptrend that began a month ago. As long as that uptrend is in place, the market will have problems.

In summary, we don't see this decline abating until some true buy signals and oversold conditions arise. That has not happened yet -- a typical market condition after a long advance (such as we had from April to August). The bulls just can't let go, instead preferring to buy each "dip1," at ever-lower levels, until they finally disgorge everything at the eventual, true bottom -- where contrarians pick up the pieces.

Everyone's a superhero.
Everyone's a Captain Kirk.
With orders to identify.
To clarify and classify.
Scramble in the summer sky

Nena's lyrics

Harry Mount - Weblog - New York

Please tick box if you know how to make a bomb
(Filed: 18/08/2005)

Before Euan Blair took up his job this summer as an intern working for the House of Representatives in Washington, he had to fill out aDS-157 visa form from the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square.


Saddam Hussein: too old for the American anti-terrorist form

The DS-157 is a special extra anti-terrorist form that asks Euan to give honest answers to questions like "Do you have any specialised skills or training, including firearms, explosives, nuclear, biological or chemical experience?"

It's a pretty pointless form. If Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein were applying for a visa, they'd hardly tick the box marked "Yes - please explain."

But, in any case, they wouldn't have to.

The form is only for men aged 16-45 wanting an American visa. Saddam Hussein (b. 1937, Iraq) and Osama (b. 1957, Saudi Arabia) don't have to go through this extra level of American security. Euan Blair (b. 1984, England) and I (b. 1971, England) do.

This farcical situation - high levels of security for the law-abiding, with zero effect on the obvious suspects - is the norm in America now.

Critical as the American papers have been of Londonistan and the fact that our suicide bombers were home-grown, where America had to import theirs, the picture isn't too rosy over here either.

Since September 11, over $15 billion has been spent on homeland security. All that means is that $15 billion worth of bureaucracy has been piled onto day-to-day life, and America remains as open to terrorism as it ever was.

Every day, a banal new bit of heavy-handed security makes some everyday job unbearable.


Want to post a cuddly toy to your godson in Kent for his birthday? Two days later, back comes the cuddly toy with a picture of an aeroplane and a red cross across it, saying "Surface transportation only - Because of heightened security, the following types of mail may not be sent by air: all domestic mail weighing 16 ounces or more that bears stamps. Please take this mail, in person, to a retail clerk in a post office."

Suicide bombers in the Gaza Strip? Get all bus-drivers to ask anyone who looks at all bulky round the waist to get off the bus.

Want to see your accountant in his humdrum office off Times Square? Photo ID please.

And so it goes on and on.

The domestic war on terror is entirely unfocussed. It's a flabby, old, moth-eaten security blanket that clogs up the machinery of day-to-day life but does nothing to stop determined bad guys from sashaying through the holes.

And, precisely because the blanket brings such inconvenience to the innocent, the Homeland Security Department can comfort themselves that they've pulled off a real clampdown.

Each time another bomb goes off, the innocent cling to the blanket even more. Well, it seems churlish to complain about standing for an hour in queue in a post office to send a cuddly toy to your godson, when others have to go through much worse - like being torn to pieces on the Tube.

Issuing precise, catch-all prohibitions on the sort of post you're allowed to send, or precise age ranges for extra visas, just means that terrorists work out ways of getting round the restrictions. They develop 15-ounce letter bombs that you are allowed to send by plane. They train adolescents and geriatrics to become suicide bombers.


If security is tightened in one area, terrorists will target another

It's an extension of the Bolted Windows policy. That is, if you get extra bolts, alarms and shutters for your windows, you don't cut the amount of burglary nationwide; you cut the amount of burglary on your house. Burglars just start to look for the next-door neighbour who leaves his window open.

There'll always be an open window somewhere in a country as vast as America. If there's a security crackdown on the subway, someone will stick a bomb on a train. And when there's then a security crackdown on trains, they'll start bombing churches.

You don't stop burglars by bolting windows. You stop burglars by arresting them, or killing them.

If your burglars are terrorists, you catch them by going to war with them abroad, or by using intelligence to track them down in your own country. You do not catch them or kill them by restricting what they send through the post or what diplomatic forms they fill out.

When Osama bin Laden drew up the principles of al-Qa'eda in 1988, he envisaged it as "a pioneering vanguard, the spearhead of Islam".

And its targets have been spearpoints, aimed at targets with different and precise profiles - the World Trade Centre in 1993 and 2001, embassy buildings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, the USS Cole in 2000, a nightclub in Bali in 2002, the Madrid overland trains in 2004, the London underground in 2005.

And spears go through blankets rather easily.

Do you agree/disagree with any of Harry's comments? Let us know at blogfeedback@telegraph.co.uk
8 August 2005: Washington weblog: Alec Russell
26 June 2005: Euan Blair takes intern role with US Republicans
12 March 2004: Massacre in the rush-hour
14 October 2002: 182 dead in club bombing

Yale Studies Globalization

here

Mission of YaleGlobal

YaleGlobal Online is the flagship publication of the Yale Center for the Study of Globalization. The magazine explores the implications of the growing interconnectedness of the world by drawing on the rich intellectual resources of the Yale University community, scholars from other universities, and public- and private-sector experts from around the world.

Our aim is to analyze and promote debate on all aspects of globalization through publishing original articles and multi-media presentations. YaleGlobal also republishes, with a brief comment, important articles from other publications that illuminate the many sides of this complex phenomenon. To the extent permitted by copyright arrangements, YaleGlobal archives such articles and makes them available for search and retrieval.

We are also developing an archive of academic papers on globalization as well as book excerpts and reviews of books on the same subject. YaleGlobal also offers a selection of audio-visual presentations by speakers at Yale and elsewhere.

YaleGlobal is a free site open to the public at large. All articles and multimedia presentations on the site will remain archived and available for as long as technically and/or legally possible.

Your Bloglet Update from "excited utterances"

"excited utterances - http://excitedutterances.blogspot.com/

What are the guys at Thomson's Research & Development Department up to now? Thomson research scientists Jack G. Conrad and Dr. Khalid Al-Kofahi (along with University of Minnesota computer scientists, Ying Zhao and George Karypis) published their latest technical paper, Effective Document Clustering for Large Heterogeneous Law Firm Collections. Here is an excerpt from the paper's introduction: Many firms currently deploy systems that offer their practitioners both full-text search capabilities and the ability to browse through a general legal classification system such as KeySearch, which is based on common legal practice or research areas (e.g., bankruptcy, intellectual property, torts & personal injury). Useful as such a broad-ranging taxonomy is, however, there are numerous instances when it is rendered incomplete if not irrelevant. For example, some firms offer fewer legal practice areas, but among those provided, they offer them at substantial depth. A broad-based, but shallow taxonomy would thus be inadequate for such expertise. Other examples include those firms that are now practicing areas of law that may not be well covered by an existing taxonomy (e.g., elder law, law involving abortion, gay marriage law, or law involving anti-terrorism). Still other firms find such taxonomies only partially relevant to their portfolio of practice areas. At least in the context of automatic text categorization, the strength of these firms? KM applications will depend upon the relevance of their taxonomies and the availability of exemplar documents for each category. So clearly the incompatibilities outlined above are problematic. In the absence of a relevant taxonomy and corresponding training data, an effective and intelligent document clustering application could prove to be useful. For a list of other publications authored by the members of the R&D Department at Thomson Legal & Regulatory, click here. (8/8/2005 11:01:17 AM)
"

Google to WorldCat without username/password

Open WorldCat program [OCLC - WorldCat]

WorldCat update
WorldCat is the world’s most comprehensive bibliographic database. Updated at a rate of nearly one new record every 10 seconds, WorldCat contains more than 61 million bibliographic records and holdings information contributed by more than 8,600 libraries around the world. The Open WorldCat program makes the items in library collections—physical and digital, popular or special—discoverable by people searching the Internet.

[The Google toolbar can be configured to look up book information at Amazon, Alibris or WorldCat. Once you put your zip code in, it gives you the libraries in concentric order.]

KM Asia and the US - What Does the Future Hold?

Thread from the KM.gov listserv:

-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Hillman, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 9:29 AM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge Might I make a humble suggestion?


John:

Might I make a humble suggestion?

As you noted, this has, and continues to be an interesting discussion. However because its being done on a list serve, the knowledge that’s being shared is only available to those on the list server today; there is no real ‘capturing’ of it for future members.

I for one have unfortunately deleted most of the e-mails on the subject after reading them … now I wish I hadn’t.

However, had the exchange taken place in a discussion forum, it would have been:
1) captured for future use by members who don’t know we exist today; 2) not barraged members who are not interested in it with e-mails, and 3) and most importantly, might have served as a vehicle for the participant to work virtually on a common path forward on KM … and God only knows spurred a host of sideline discussions, all of which would have enriched the Federal KM community!!

That said, I suggest at next week’s planning meeting on the future of the KMWG we discuss adding a discussion forum, as well as collaborative tools to the KMWG web site … and in doing so, make it easer to capture the wealth of KM knowledge our members possess.

Your thoughts?

Mike Hillman


-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Nerida Hart
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 8:40 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


This has been a very interesting discussion and I would like to tell a
personal story about KM issues and outsourcing to India which I experienced
earlier this year.

At the Information Online conference 2005 (held in Sydney in February this
year) there was a guest speaker from India (I think he was from KPMG - but
don't quote me) talking about the benefits of outsourcing call centres to
India. He highlighted the benefits of lower costs, 24/7 service, higher
level of education from the workers etc.

However, when I pressed him about the cultural differences and knowledge
issues he admitted there were a fair number of problems in this arena.
What it came down to was that India was more than capable of undertaking
pure processing (not taking on complex issues which may involve societal
and cultural issues). I was particularly interested from the point of view
of the social welfare system in Australia which has very large call
centres. However, the types of questions from the clients would require a
strong undertanding of Australian culture.

I can see the benefits of outsourcing processes to India or China, but I do
think each country has particular cutural differences (even those that
exist between the USA and Australia would be highlighted in this area)
which cannot be satisfied by using foreignsources of labour.

I think it is up to those of us in the knowledge arena to highlight to
those we can influence in government that this is not just about the
tangible (money) issues and that some things (the intangibles) can bring
greater benefits if only we were taking notice of the long term impact
rather than just the costs.

regards

Nerida Hart (Deputy Convenor, actKM)
Director
Knowledge & Information Services
Dept of Family & Community Services
Box 7788
Canberra Mail Centre ACT 2610
(02) 6244 6430



-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Hsu, Francis X
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 5:20 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


John,

I am smiling because I wrote MM offline on just this issue.

To me, these discussions are at the heart of KM. They help us get ahead of the steep learning curve of KM. If this is so easy, why bother? Why think about it? What’s the purpose of having ‘virtual communities’ if not to exchange ideas?

What happened on 2001-09-11? We’ve since learned that many individuals, in the US Gov’t, tried warning us that something dire was going to happen. Did anyone listen and take action?

Now, we are suppose to invest billions and billions of taxpayers dollars in KM-IT without bothering to think through what this is? Or means? Vendors will sell you anything.

They don’t’ really care whether it’s effective or not. The Manhattan Project didn’t produce the A-bomb because they decided to stop thinking about what they were doing. They had plenty of discussions and arguments too. That’s what using one’s mind in a democratic society does.

KM is the Manhattan Project of the Information Age. Open discussions will help identify the good, the bad and ugly parts of KM. If anyone knows a better way to do this, PLEASE, let us all know.

Francis Hsu
Dept of State
IRM/OPS/SIO/API/Data Management
703-875-6089

This message is UN-CLASSIFIED per EO 12958.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************
-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of John Andre
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:34 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


Hey, folks.

While I've been interestedly watching this thread develop on the listserv, I have been receiving pointed messages questioning the direct relevance to KM. In fact, I've had about ten people drop off because of the impression of being overloaded with what appears to be an important but peripheral topic.

If you will forgive me, let me ask that those interested in continuing the discussion, or lurking as I have been, on the subject of U.S. IT competitiveness to communicate directly with Mr. Montgomery. I don't wish to be a traffic cop because this is more activity than I've seen in some months, and it's a topic of burgeoning interest to agency CIOs.

Nevertheless, I am forced into a position of doing so.

Very respectfully to all sides,
John

***************************
If you wish to unsubscribe from the KM listserv, please contact john.andre@gsa.gov.

***************************

-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Hsu, Francis X
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 12:40 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


Mark,

Your responses are so detailed, it’s difficult to formulate a reply.

I am researching for a book on information uses. So naturally this would overlap, sometimes a lot with some of your points.

1) Your ‘years of screaming’ underscores what we all already know: actions speak louder than information. Osama bin Laden declared war on America in 1996 (Words, information). It took 2001-09-11 as action, to get the attention of American government and more to the point, American people.

2) Intelligence information is highly overrated. Especially as it relates to business, finance and investments. Even when the info is related to national security issues, such terrorism, it gets noticed ‘after the fact.’ Note how these former officials, George Tenet (CIA), Richard Clarke (WH-CT) and John O’Neill (FBI) for years warned of Al Qaeda activities. You’ve heard of the FBI’s Phoenix memo. An agent of the FBI in Phoenix wrote a memo (prior to 9-11) to draw attention of his suspicion why so many Middle Eastern men seem to be taking flying lessons. HQ and the Intel Community did not follow up.

3) Your point on VC financing is very cogent. Until now, America has had this to ourselves. Now that both brain-power and financing is sloshing around the world, there is real competition of what and how.

4) Maybe someone could focus more on the transformation process of getting the inputs into outcomes.

Francis

-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Mark Montgomery
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:07 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


One person asked the expected question- "What relevancy does this have to
KM?" (U.S. competitiveness)

I answered privately, but the short answer is that what I have seen globally
in knowledge systems all around the world have been investments (reason for
being) due primarily to their country or entity becoming more competitive,
largely in response to the U.S. in the past. Of course one needs some kind
of knowledge system in place before one understands the need, but if any
country, including the U.S., is not competitive on the global stage- then
its ability to provide services will be greatly impaired. So competitiveness
is at the core of priorities for most countries and entities who are
investing in knowledge systems, and justifiably so. The fact that
globalization and competitiveness isn't a popular topic in the U.S. does not
change its importance- more of a symptom of a culture that has not
experienced competition, and a scary symptom at that.

Bob- your query highlights the reason why I continued with GWIN until I was
almost personally bankrupt. One of very few global networks, and from my
perch by far the most influential at the time given the membership- most
countries had senior membership as did almost all major companies and think
tanks- it would have been very easy at the time to choose one of the dozens
of communities, or via the social networking features, to hook you up with
the appropriate people- directly or indirectly. Today I would likely go
through my friends at T-Bird U who have a major campus in China or one of my
peers in Asia.

A global knowledge network that is well designed and free from conflicting
interests can be a powerful tool for all concerned, but one very difficult
to fund. We did it with our personal retirement funds.

Let me know off list if I can help. Best, Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: KMWG [mailto:KM-List@listserv.gsa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Turner
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 3:07 PM
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge


Have enjoy your insights Mark, especially about China and India. I think
my next read will be Kenichi Ohmae's "The Next Global Stage". Last year I
went to Beijing and enjoyed it so much I'm returning in October. I'm
thinking it could be interested to make a connection there with Chinese
regarding knowledge management, either in the government or private sector.
Wonder how I would do that? By the way, a recent Ohmae article is: here








Mark Montgomery
To KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Sent by: KMWG
cc
Subject Re: [KMWG] Study Says US Could lose High-Tech

08/15/2005 03:34 PM


We could probably go on for weeks and justifiably so just on China alone.
No disagreement here- my personal ethics have too high a bar for China, but
it's not only quickly becoming the largest market in the world, but more
importantly for decision makers- the majority of economic expansion is
expected to come from China, India, and to a lessor extent other emerging
markets- Brazil, Eastern Europe, etc. In most of industry leader circles
today, the belief is that if you do not find a way to engage in China and
India you will very likely lose your global leadership position in the near
future. Now consider that we have U.S. taxpayer supported programs for
investment in emerging markets, but not for our own states, some of which
are at a disadvantage economically. That's probably not one of the mistakes
China is making right now, although guessing.... Why shouldn't investors be
given the same option for dying towns in the Midwest with low costs and
vast emptiness?

We are having a very similar conversation about China today that Europe did
about the U.S. in the industrial revolution. The primary differences I see
is that China and much of Asia are already over populated rather than a
vast empty space that the U.S. was- so we won't see the mass migration that
we saw to the U.S. from Europe- the jobs won't go to the population in the
west, but some of the ROI will. That's a big difference.

And China's situation, culture, and systems are substantially different
than anything we've encountered before. It's a very complex situation, but
no question that currently China and India are perceived to be where the
future resides. I attended a global private equity conference a few months
ago - the emerging markets portion was amazing- the general partners in PE
firms were discussing and sharing experiences. Most that were invited to
speak are doing extremely well compared to the rest of the world due to
growth, but they are dealing with issues like oligarchs, corruption,
favoritism/nepotism, fraud, mobile and un-enforced laws, and enormous
language and cultural barriers.

However, they do have some ethical investors on the ground, the costs of
doing business well are ridiculously low in comparison to the west (anyone
who doesn't believe that costs matter are living in denial), their
technology is much better than most in the west are aware of- the majority
of large companies in the west now have R&D centers on the ground, and
their governments and local companies favor local companies when buying.
So in the world of competition, they are simply more competitive. Will they
have a down cycle? Of course, and the banking system will take a hit sooner
or later, but valuations are rising so fast across such a vast population
that it covers an enormous range of errors. It is in many ways like the
U.S. once was in terms of economics, but very different in other ways. It's
not a melting pot, nor a democracy- a hybrid of communism and capitalism.

One of my peers is a US national who moved over there a decade ago, who I
think is among the smartest in private equity over there, said that he
doesn't think that anyone can stop the beast now- not their own government,
not the U.S. - no one. Similar to the early wild west in the U.S. I
suppose- where everyone else's rules and requirements were ignored but
their own, and their customers. Another peer in DFJ I know well just made a
billion dollars on the search engine IPO in China.

As is always the case in capitalism- winners and losers alike are in good
company. But I don't agree with my friends in multinationals who suggest
that this trend is good for the U.S., unless of course the individual in
question owns equity in the winners. It simply is, so we all have to deal
with it whether we like it or not, and we all are feeling the affects,
whether we recognize the cause or not. I for one would just like an equal
playing field, but we don't have it in most of the states today. .02 - Mark

----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Pavlak
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge

Mark,

I was prompted to jump in by a comment you made about Venture Capitalism
in China. My visceral reaction was that the VCs would loose their shirt
because China does not have the legal infrastructure to support something
as sophisticated as venture investing. VC is safer in India than in China.
But on reflection China VC could be very interesting.

VCs need a China brand, a method of investing that relies less on law than
on personal contacts and family. China practices a primitive form of
capitalism, not quite robber baron but close. A VC who is sensitive to the
culture might do well.

Alex

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Montgomery
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge

Hi Francis,

I hear you- we can only share published reports- most valuable information
on this topic is protected by confidentiality agreements. The best public
work I see on the topic is from the Milken Institute
www.milkeninstitute.org , but good global information is still spotty.
Milken has much less invested in a particular outcome, have sharp staff,
and their results more often jive with reality.

The primary message is that after years of screaming by many of us who do
see the results, the media is finally taking notice, which will eventually
presumably have some impact on voters, which will then eventually
hopefully have some impact on policy makers.

It's not accidental that often has been the case that a venture capitalist
is chosen as chair or co-chair of the presidential advisory council on
technology http://www.ostp.gov/. One of the past chairs is one of my
closest advisors and I have communicated often on this topic with many
past members. Currently Floyd Kvamme of Kleiner Perkins is co chair. Colin
Powell recently joined them as an advisor. Professors have an excellent
view on emerging research- VCs are the source for emerging companies and
where that research is being commercialized. I have no idea how good the
top secret intel is on this or what the President and Congress see, just
what we see.

I would agree that it's foolhardy to count the number of degrees, R&D
dollars, or any number of other measures commonly found in economic
development circles, of whom I am constantly spending time with in an
attempt to convince them that their learning on the topic is flawed and
needs to be replaced. The important issues are overcoming very specific
barriers and creating a culture conducive to building tech companies.
Everything else is noise.

The quality of a market can indeed be quantified, but the economic
development community methodology is usually flawed relating to
entrepreneurship, and even the foundations specializing in the area are
often culturally biased. I am involved in preparing a conference in AZ
currently on "AZ Competitiveness", but the sponsors all have conflicts
that prevent them politically from seeking/telling the truth -universities
want more funding regardless, economic developers and community planners
usually want more control and higher budgets, and trade associations of
course want to protect the interests of their members, which are often
multinationals, not start-ups.

So consequently the conferences themselves (generally speaking) get off in
the wrong direction, invite the wrong people, and poor information is
often delivered regarding the topic of entrepreneurship and
competitiveness. The bulk of the information from the government is simply
not credible on this topic (sorry folks but it's true- the SBA Office of
Advocacy is the only credible source I've found consistently over 20+
years now).

Sadly, in the past decade in large part due to this medium, much of the
world has listened to the real thought leaders in the trenches, while much
of the U.S. has not. It's not that the U.S. has done anything differently
in the past few years- we haven't, but that's the problem- we need reform
while much of the rest of the world is quickly improving their
infrastructure relating to building competitive technology based companies
that can compete globally- India certainly being perhaps the best example
in IT, but far from the only one. And the U.S. has really not done
anything differently at all, except a bit more funding using the same
distribution channels- namely in the NIH and DoD, and that will have some
positive impact, but the percentage of tech transfer in our research is
simply terrible.

For example, our SBIR program and SBIC (SBA venture capital program) are
not at all competitive in many very specific ways- they are relics. The
only reason they worked so well in the past is because so few in the world
were making any serious attempt at all. That is no longer the case. It's
not politically correct to take this view, but IMO it shouldn't be
politically correct to not tell the truth as one sees it.

We see much the same in SIGs within science. The institutionalization of
entrepreneurship in recent years, particularly the economic development
and political influence in the U.S., as well as the cultures within
institutions, have really changed the entrepreneurial environment in the
U.S. to the negative- again relative to the rest of the world. The valley
of the death in the U.S. (viability gap in building tech businesses), as
was recently shared with Congress by Floyd Kvamme ( here ) is very real, and in
my view is expanding in the U.S. while shrinking in much of the world.
That is viewed as a good thing by some for world peace, but is also very
difficult for anyone to influence, much less control, other than each
country themselves in reducing barriers.

I don't see Bangalore as a SV, but more an eastern branch of SV- a lot of
VC is pouring into India just within the past few months. China is
attempting not just to replicate and replace SV, but rather has eyes on
surpassing the entire U.S. economically- and most believe they will
succeed eventually. The EU has serious barriers like the U.S. on the cost
side, but Ireland is the best example in the world on what can be done in
a short period of time for a mature country. Recent perspective includes a
private conversation between myself and a SV VC firm who said that when
they expand, they will do so in China, not in SV.

There can be no debate about a couple of issues. Quality of human capital
is the key and the trend has been somewhat reversed in a short period of
time- expats are heading home in large numbers and/or assisting from the
U.S., and much fewer thought leaders are finding it necessary to come to
the U.S. And unlike just 5-10 years ago, it's no longer necessary to come
to the U.S. for venture capital, especially for the best in the world.

What we are seeing is the early stages of globalization of entrepreneurism
and venture capital in much the same way as we did with manufacturing in
the past. It is changing and will continue to change the world
dramatically IMO.

In AZ for example we have made tremendous progress in just four years,
particularly in life sciences- more so than in decades past combined.
However, it required a large long term (read not federal but regional)
sales tax revenue stream for applied R&D in our state universities, and
specific legislation removing many barriers, and significant investment
that created one of the world's leading genomic institutes (TGen), and we
still have no institutional venture capital worth discussing- and all of
our competitors do now around the world in comparable markets (except
sadly in some U.S. states).

All that said, critical mass is still very important as is face time, and
SV is still the center of the universe in venture capital in technology,
which is why we are planning to relocate. Virtually everyone I work with
functionally at our level are in SV and have been all along. For us all
things get easier - fund raising, recruiting of talent, competency level
of attorneys/consultants/accountants- collective human infrastructure,
scheduling meetings worldwide from inbound partners and entrepreneurs
(much the same as diplomacy in D.C. or public stocks on Wall Street). The
one exception is of course housing costs for everyone involved, which has
become a very serious issue for CA as it is now beyond the ability of
everyone they need to buy even a small entry house- scientists,
entrepreneurs, professors- it's even a major issue for VC firms and their
staff. But one we must deal with.

In that regard, a modest reduction of housing costs and costs in general
for the U.S., particularly in the key markets, will assist substantially
in the competitiveness of the U.S. relative to the world.

- MM


----- Original Message -----
From: Hsu, Francis X
To: Mark Montgomery ; KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 7:01 AM
Subject: RE: [KMWG] Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge

Mark,
These reports are essentially about ‘inputs’ to the process. As
important as they are, it is the ‘outputs’ or ‘results’ that matter. For
many years in the 1980s-90s, leaders trekked to Silicon Valley to learn
how to duplicate the valley in other parts of the world. After all this
time, it seems only Bangalore India has been able to do it. That’s not
to say others cannot, in time, make their mark.
Perhaps trying to understand how inputs can be ‘effectively transformed’
into outputs requires more scrutiny.


From: Mark Montgomery [mailto:markm@initiumcapital.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 11:54
To: KM-LIST@listserv.gsa.gov
Subject: [KMWG] Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge

From the www.NASVF.ORG newsletter. Some may not see it as relevant to KM,
but I certainly do. We see the same issue within the specific research
and practice of knowledge systems and related. If one's knowledge systems
are not state of the art, then neither will be the science or society. A
lot of countries "get it" and have funded it. The recent column by
Friedman in the NYT on Ireland was particularly valid and a must read for
anyone interested.

Study Says US Could Lose High-Tech Edge
China and India are educating so many scientists and engineers that it is
all but certain that the United States will lose some of its technological advantage and will suffer difficult economic adjustments, according to a recently published paper:
Boston Globe


When Guo-Liang Yu traveled to Shanghai to set up a research facility for
his Burlingame biotech company, he immediately realized that things would
be different in China. Mr. Yu says he was able to rent, design and
renovate a 20,000 square-foot facility two hours south of the city,
complete with clean rooms, in less than six weeks. "You could never do
that in United States," Mr. Yu says. Other benefits quickly surfaced as
well. He could hire top notch scientists for $7,000 a year and the
government gave him a business tax holiday for two years. Yu figures he
shaved 50 percent off his research costs by opening in China:
San Jose Business Journal





American-educated graduates from other countries, from Israel to Taiwan
to Ireland, also have launched companies in the United States. But the
Indian connection is unique because of the intense engineering focus
there. And returnees starting businesses in India, unlike those in
smaller and richer countries, can tap into a large and growing domestic
market, and into a pool of low-cost skilled workers:
Boston Globe





Mark Montgomery
Founder
Initium Venture Capital
http://www.initiumcapital.com

Florida

SBA to open satellite office in Fort Pierce
August 15, 2005, Miami Herald

SBA spokeswoman Althea Harris said plans to build Scripps Research Institute, a 100-acre bioscience park in Palm Beach County, will open the flood gates for new business opportunities in the area.

Telegraph | Money | Greece joins the flat rate tax bandwagon: "Greece joins the flat rate tax bandwagon
By George Trefgarne, Economics Editor (Filed: 15/08/2005)

Greece is set to become the next European nation to introduce a flat rate of income tax, according to speculation in Athens triggered by the finance minister, Giorgios Alogoskoufis.

The prime minister, Costas Karamanlis could announce the proposal at next month's Thessaloniki International Fair. A flat rate of income tax, which abolishes all bands and exemptions and replaces them with a single rate and a high personal allowance, is all the rage among free-market thinkers and the idea is sweeping across eastern Europe.

The Greek government's precarious finances were thrown into "

Google Sells Out Users to Publishers: Corante > Copyfight >: "August 12, 2005
Google Sells Out Users to Publishers


Posted by Aaron Swartz
As you undoubtedly recall, months ago Google launched their Google Print Library Project scanning thousands of books from the country's libraries for potential search, putting up whatever fair use or the publisher would allow.

Publishers, in typical copyright-holder paranoia fashion, worried that perhaps the two line snippets Google would be providing of their books would spell the end of the world for their entire industry. They wrote articles attacking Google for their cruelty and finally, today, Google announced it would back down.

That's right: Google won't even scan any book copyright holders ask them not to, even though doing so is perfectly legal. It's as if copyright holders got to dictate what books get placed in libraries. Their short-sighted selfishness will cost us all, depriving us of our heritage in our online Library of Alexandria.

Details at the Google Blog, under the Orwellian title Making books easier to find.

UPDATE: the EFF's Jason Schultz attacks publishers: 'This is a clear example of copyright failing the public in the digital age. Google isn't selling the books; they just need to scan them to help Internet users find what they're looking for. The fact that publishers are able to hold up this process works against consumers and the marketplace, not in their favor.' And copyfighter Siva Vaidhyanathan attacks me."

[Follow link for embedded live-linked version of this item.]

Google Print put on pause | The Register: "Google Print put on pause
By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
Published Friday 12th August 2005 23:22 GMT

The irresistible force of Google Inc. has bumped into the immovable object of copyright, with the result that Google is calling a brief truce.

Last night, the internet company said it would halt scanning in copyrighted book material as part of its Print project. Google has antagonized libraries and rights holders by opting them into its program. Concerns have also been expressed about libraries compromising their public interest mission by ceding control to Google, a private for-profit corporation.

Google intends to make full text searches of the books available to users for free, but won't share revenue with the rights holders. Meanwhile the Print project could become a lucrative venture for the Google corporation itself, allowing it to take a revenue cut from purchase links and contextual text advertisements.

So far, we've seen Google excercise the first, but not the second option. Google Print offers 'Buy This Book' links to books it has scanned; we've yet to see advertisements for say, insecticide around Kafka's Metamorphosis. The Association of American Publishers, the Association of American University Presses and the Libraries' Association have all voiced objections.

Earlier this year Google called a halt in Europe after vocifierous opposition from rights holders and the EU. Yesterday, Google said it would pause its scanners in the US, too.

'We won't scan any in-copyright books from now until this November,' wrote Google Print Product Manager Adam Smith. 'We're going to continue talking about Google Print with our partners and the publishing industry.'

It's not going to assuage the rights holders, however.

"Google's procedure shifts the responsibility for preventing infringement to the copyright owner rather than the user, turning every principle of copyright law on its ear," the AAP said in a statement.

"I think the libraries are getting played badly here and they are violating their own principles of openness and public service by letting Google take charge and set the terms of this service," wrote author and journalist Siva Vaidhyanathan of New York University.

"Google might be a very good corporation - one of the best ever, probably. But it's still not a library. Let's try to remember that," he added.

Hillary's coming fight

Hillary's coming fight - PittsburghLIVE.com: "

By Dick Morris

Sunday, August 14, 2005
Westchester, N.Y., DA Jeanine Pirro has formally announced her candidacy for U.S. Senate from New York, which will pit her against Hillary Clinton in a battle royale. This is just the kind of fight that Sen. Clinton hoped to avoid.

While Hillary would have no problem dispatching an opponent like Nixon son-in-law Edward Cox or Yonkers Mayor John Spencer (the two other possible GOP contenders), Pirro presents a real problem.
Jeanine Pirro is pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-affirmative action, pro-gay-civil unions and pro-immigration. And, of course, she's a woman.

In a sense, Hillary will have to end up running against someone who is quite like herself in her public positions.

Except, of course, Pirro is a good old-fashioned anti-tax, anti-crime, tough-on-terror Republican from the suburbs.

Hillary would love to cloak her Senate re-election as a necessity in the face of a determined GOP effort to overturn Roe v. Wade and to roll back the clock on gun control. But against Pirro, she will be disarmed of all her best issues. She will have to run on her own record, which is limited at best.

Pirro, on the other hand, can point out that Hillary refuses to say that she will serve out her term if elected -- since we all know that the day the returns are in she will start her campaign for president. (Hillary has her own twist on the famous line of Gen. Sherman: 'If elected, I refuse to serve.')

The Quinnipiac Poll recently found that Hillary beat Pirro by more than 30 percentage points -- but in the same poll, 60 p"

Google Desktop Search can search Gmail as well

: "Larry's Gmail Indexer 1.00
by Larry Gadea (trivex@trivex.net)
'Search your Gmail directly from Google Desktop Search.'

Regularly index your entire Gmail account contents into Google
Desktop Search. This is done using Gmail?s POP access feature.
See the following URL for information on how to enable POP access
on your Gmail account:
http://gmail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=13273&topic=194

To install, follow these instructions:
1. Verify that POP access is enabled on your Gmail account. If
you have used POP access with Gmail before, it's recommended
that you disable and enable it again so that you can receive
all of your old email using this plugin.
2. Run the 'LarrysGmailIndexer.exe' file in the zip.
3. Agree to the registration with Google Desktop Search.
4. Log in using your Gmail email address and also your regular
Gmail password.
5. Indexing will happen immediately. You can watch the emails
being indexed by using the Index Status link in GDS and looking
at the 'Emails' counter.

To uninstall, follow these instructions:

1. Go to your Start menu and select 'Control Panel'.
2. Select 'Add/Remove Programs'
3. Find 'Larry's Gmail Indexer' and click 'Remove'.
4. Thats it!

If you have any comments/concerns/questions/suggestions, whatever,
feel free to contact me at trivex@trivex.net. "

McMillan on the Market

To receive the complete commentary plus reccomendations visit here: http://www.optionstrategist.com

Stock Market
Nearly all of our indicators gave sell signals last week, but the market's rally this week has negated some of them. Still, we feel that a much more negative tone is apparent and a bearish stance can be adopted -- at
least for the short term.

The major averages broke down below first support levels last week, but more major support levels have not been tested (yet). For $SPX, this means that it fell below the 1228-1230 support level, bouncing at 1222, but did not test the major support at 1210. The subsequent rally this week failed near the highs once again, so there is now a double or triple top in the 1243-1245 area. A close above there would be bullish and would cancel all the sell signals, but as long as that resistance holds, it has negative implications.

The equity-only put-call ratios rolled over to sell signals. In this case, that means they turned up and began to rise (see Figures 2 & 3). At first -- or perhaps even today -- this rollover wasn't obvious to the naked eye, but we use computer projections to verify these signals, and those projections "saw" the rollover in its initial stages. You can see that the weighted ratio had dropped to nearly the bottom of the chart (about the same level as last December's sell signal), which means it was in overbought territory when this sell signal was given. While we don't use absolute levels as buy or sell points, it is useful to note whether the signals are coming from the extremes of the chart -- as this one is -- for those are usually the best signals.

Market breadth has bounced back and forth as the market first declined last week and then rallied this week. We'd rate breadth as "neutral" at this time.

Finally, volatility ($VIX) has been interesting as well. The increase in $VIX last week was the harbinger of the selling that took place. $VIX shot up above 13 and closed there -- ostensibly a sell signal. However, just as sharply, $VIX retreated this week, dropping all the way to 11.50 before rebounding back above 12 again. The net of this action is that $VIX is in a trading range now; if it closes above 13.40, that would be bearish, and if it closes below 11.50, that would be bullish. Otherwise, if it remains in between, $VIX would be neutral.

In summary, the most negative indicator is the equity-only put-call ratio, while the others are mostly neutral. But that's an important indicator which has -- at other times in the past -- been the primary indicator of a market move. As a result, we are taking a negative stance unless $SPX can break out to new highs, or unless buy signals are generated by some of these indicators (unlikely).

Note: if you are viewing a text version of this report, click on the following link to see the charts: click here