Sean's Blog

Controlling Google

One thing that is seemingly being lost in this whole Google vs China debate is the essence of what the Chinese were trying to breach.  it has been widely known now for sometime that Google is a massive information hoarder - in fact, I don't think any government body anywhere in the world really knows just how much information Google is keeping about its citizens.  We now have a situation where the Chinese have tried to infiltrate the honeypot and have seemingly had some success.

Google immediately went on the offensive and threatened to pull out of China, but now most accounts are saying that they are looking to just pull their underperforming search page, while maintaining their profitable international sales and technology groups in China.  So effectively they're now looking at closing their loser search portal, but keeping their profitable business - way to be tough Google!  I hope the Chinese revoke your right to trade there and give you the full on punt.

Much of the "social medial" tripped over itself to applaud Google for having the courage to take on China and while they did allow themselves to be censored, it was never too late to do the right thing, seemed to be the sentiment.  In amongst all of the fawning, I haven't read one single piece where someone has questioned whether or not Google should be allowed to hoard all of that data.  They created a massive target of private information about us users, they refuse to tell us exactly what it is they collect and the descriptions of how it is used is vague at best and insulting at worst - "We use it to provide our customers with a better experience".

I say that the US and European governments should now step in and demand to understand EXACTLY what it is Google tracks, what it does or doesn't do with it and an elected group somewhere needs to put some rules in place to protect people from Google.  They have been breached by a foreign government and people's private information has been stolen.  If this kind of widescale espionage had happened to the US or UK governments there would be considerable gnashing of teeth and public inquiries.  The media would be all over them, demanding resignations.  Now it is a company who aren't elected by anyone, have almost no transparency when it comes to this issue and the "social media" at the very least are rallying behind the company for being such freedom advocates.

There has been ALOT of barbs from people like Jeff Jarvis towards the traditional media about how they've lost their edge and are dying.  Well when do one of these new, Online Media Moguls step up and call Google out about this issue.

What would Google do if they were breached by a foreign government and private citizen information of users was stolen?  We now have the answer - make statements filled with bluster and rhetoric to distract from the real issue and then when the dust settles look for a compromise solution that keeps the ad revenue flowing in, allows them to save face by taking down their search page and run for the moral high ground before anyone realises they've been duped.

Chaos in the Air

I travel to the US a couple times a year and I really like the work the US Government has done with Immigration and Customs.  It is speedy, friendly and thorough.  They've done a massive technology upgrade at the airports to give them the ability to collect more info, faster - top notch management at play!

On the other hand, the TSA presence has been less pleasant.  Going through LAX can be eye opening.  The number of times that I've had TSA officers bark orders at me or heard them berating other passengers for not understanding the myriad of changing rules and regulations is astounding.  

One time I was coming from Orlando and my flight was behind schedule.  I had to grab my bags at LAX, change terminals and go through security again to re-check my bag on the way to Sydney.  When I arrived at the terminal, the security line was ridiculous and so I asked the TSA officer standing by if there was a business/first class line.  I copped a gruff, "No. You wait in line like everybody else."  Obviously my first thought was that I paid three times more than "everybody else" so the idea of preferred service shouldn't be so abhorrent.  I then explained to the TSA officer that my connecting flight was late and I might miss my next flight because of the line, her response was, "That's your problem, you should have taken an earlier flight, now get in line."  I made my Qantas flight anyway, but no thanks to the TSA.

Now fast forward to the present day.  The TSA is still in a state of disarray.  You have the "Pants Bomber" incident to highlight the mess.  Immediately the TSA starts issuing odd directives forcing passengers to stay in their seats for at least the last hour of a flight, you can't use the inFlight entertainment and you can have nothing in your lap.  Presumably the theory goes that if someone were going to try again, not letting them go to the loo might result in them putting out any fire themselves.

The dysfunction is systemic.  The "Pants Bomber's" own father called the US Government and told them his son was a danger.  He went on a list.  You'd think that the Intelligence area of the TSA might have taken note of that - oh wait, the head of Intelligence, K Kauffman, is Acting Chief of the TSA so he's a bit busy.  The reason he's not got his eyes on his own job is because the Republican party won't allow a vote in Congress to ratify the new appointee for the role.  To make matters worse, 75 Republicans voted against even funding the TSA this year!

But there's enough blame to go around!  President Obama is on holiday and apparently Hawaii is too far away for the President to return home from after a terrorist incident.  Or was it just an incident?  If it was just an incident and not a terrorist plot, then why on Earth did the TSA and Homeland Security department act like a bunch of porkchops and start making crazy rules on the fly?

Step on up Janet Napolitano, head of Homeland Security.  Could someone please ask this lady to explain what exactly is going on at the TSA?  New rules one day, lessening of the rules another day and finally complete abdication by leaving the enactment up to pilots and airlines.  This demonstrates a complete lack of leadership within the TSA and ultimately Homeland Security as the President asked for everything to be reviewed.  

The TSA's most recent declaration basically calls into question the entire need for it at all at the airports?  Why not just make it mandatory for all airports that have flights inbound to the US or outbound from the US have millimeter wave scanners implemented within twelve months.  Airports are either private enterprises or government owned, either way, the people responsible can afford it.  Why not get rid of the TSA from the airports and spend that money on enhanced technology.  If the TSA is just going to pass the buck on down to the airlines and heaven forbid the pilots, then who needs them?

Personally, I find the whole crazy act over the last week by the TSA difficult to swallow.  We're supposedly fighting a global war on terrorism to maintain our freedom and some bloke sets his groin on fire and the TSA revokes basic rights like using a toilet.  If the only way to protect our freedom is to take it away from us when it is under threat, then we've lost the war on terror already.

Canada Wins!

For the third year in a row, Canada has won the prestigious "Colossal Fossil" award!  On behalf of all Canadians, I graciously accept the award and would like to say the following:

"Thank you to the long haired jobless netizens who've mockingly granted Canada this award.  I know many of you live off the largesse of the Canadian government and other western governments who have a tolerant view towards your particular brand of crazy.  I'd like to pass on my appreciation to fellow 'fossils' Australia and Japan who've recently shared with Canada the illustrious 'Fossil of the Day' award.  I personally, and I'm sure most Canadians, take great pleasure seeing the Japanese government persisting with the Whale hunt (for scientific purposes) and the Australian government doing everything to be SEEN to be doing something about it, while really doing nothing - you're an inspiration to us.  I think it is very important that we continue not to commit to anything of any kind until the real polluters in this world - China and the US come to some kind of meaningful agreement that includes a plan for the up and coming polluters Brazil, India and Russia.  I commit, on behalf of my fellow Canadians, that should the day come when a meaningful deal is thrashed out, with teeth, we will not only meet those international targets, we will beat them!  Until then, we'll continue raping mother earth to provide free health care for all Canadians, having the most safe and secure banking system in the world and the best GDP to Debt ratio of any G7 country.  One last thing, was this award trophy made from recyclable materials?"

Ok, jokes aside - I'm not one of those evil "climate change deniers".  I'm more like one of those people who is sceptical of the science at the moment.  Every time something happens, "Oh, that's because of global warming".  Washington DC is buried in snow, more than most residents have ever seen - global warming.  We've had a pretty wet winter and so far a pretty crap summer here in Australia - global warming.  The Great Barrier Reef is dying - global warming.  Parts of the Reef are recovering faster than expected - global warming.  And on and on it goes.

I'm not a scientist - "Get out of here!" I hear you cry... Everything I've ever read suggests that the planet goes through these cooling and warming periods every so often.  I've read things that suggest we're headed into an ice age because one is due - I've even read things that suggest this sudden warm snap over the last century (if you even believe that to be true) is a natural precursor to the ice age.  That theory goes something along the lines of that crazy hollywood movie where the North Atlantic current is cooled by colder water from the melting ice caps and the oceans suddenly drop in temperature and BOOM, we're living in a winter wonderland.  

The delicate issue is - what if all the moderates are right and something is going on?  We should do something to at least make a stab at reversing it or slowing it down.  To do that though, let's face it - without the US, China, India, Russia, Japan, Europe and Brazil signing on the dotted line it has no hope.  You are talking about 60% of the world's population right there and what, 90% of the total emissions?  Running around handing out mock awards to Canada for not "being a leader" is crazy.  You could add a full 1.0% of unemployment to the Canadian economy and lower GDP by 0.5% - massively more than anyone is calling for and you'd not even make a blip in the problem that is climate change if the people who are espousing the theory are to be believed!

I live in Australia, where the Prime Minister of the day was pushing for some pretty crazy environmental programmes to be pushed through without proper economic (or environmental modelling) so that he could go to Copenhagen and be an Eco-Hero.  Thankfully the opposition killed that because nobody really knew what the impact would be for Australia or the planet.  This was a politician looking for his Nobel Prize and the impact economically wouldn't come until after his next re-election so it didn't matter short term.  That's its own kind of sick and perverse if you ask me.

My feeling is that people need to stop turning up to these global events and protesting without a common cause and focus on small wins.  Baby steps - the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.  Look at CFCs - the world saw the science that these were bad for the Ozone layer and globally they were taken out of production - a win for the environment.  Instead of looking for these massive all encompassing treaties that enforce drastic targets on countries whether or not they can afford it is stupid especially in the democratic countries.  Anytime things get bad economically, some party will pop up and say that the environmental movement is killing jobs and bang the planet becomes the enemy of employment.  I don't know the answers, but maybe lower targets that are achievable, more money to developing nations for new technology so they don't become contributors to the problem or whatever - maybe start there, get that signed off and agreed.  The come back in three years and look for a little bit more.  If the science and evidence starts piling up that there is a major problem, then people will act faster.  

Anyway, thanks for the award on behalf of all Canadians - this won't impact a single vote in the next federal election, so good on you for wasting your time.  How many tonnes of CO2 were wasted on organising this prize?

Upside Down Land

I'm Canadian.  I've lived in Australia now for over twelve years and while I suppose part of me is becoming Aussie, I still have certain things about me that are very Canadian.  As mentioned in another post, I firmly believe in Universal Health Care - I don't know why, I have private health insurance here in Australia (the government taxes the crap out of me if I don't) and I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford it without thinking about it, but I still think the bare minimum the state can do for me is to provide me with medical coverage.  Anyhow, onto my reason for posting...

When you are a Canadian living abroad a number of things jump out at you after awhile.  One, sadly is that Canada's place on the world stage is diminishing.  Perhaps it is the rise of the BRIC nations causing a decline in the power of the G8 or maybe that Canadians have become a little more insular in their political outlook, I don't really have a reason, I just know that while Canada is perceived as a great place to visit, live and work, its not really being accused of hogging the limelight on the world stage.

Another thing you realise is that Americans, oddly enough aren't all bad.  I find I have a fair bit in common with most Americans I meet who live here in Australia and who are close to my age.  We grew up watching the same TV, we like the same sports, we know who Betty Ford is aside from being the namesake of the facility where celebs go to kick their drug habits and they no more understand the 80's Alf phenomenon than I do.  All up, they aren't half bad people once you get them outside of the US for awhile.

Finally, and maybe most controversially, as a Canadian living abroad, you come to understand just how unique we are as a country because of Quebec.  The fact that they are the second largest french speaking population in the world and we all sort of get along in one big happy dysfunctional country makes us somewhat special.  When people ask me if I speak french and I say no, they look at me like I have three heads - how do you grow up in a bilingual country where 20% of the people speak french and barely be able to order a meal in the language?  Blissful ignorance I tell them.  Part of the beauty of the place is we've sort of settled into this happy middle ground, we'll be english and you'll be french.  All of this crazy nonsense about special status and stuff is pointless when you're viewing the country externally.

One thing though that still fascinates me is how Quebec is still really upside down land.  I actually find it quite funny now.  I read a poll today on Canoe that talked about how Harper is still the preferred Prime Minister.  This whole minority government thing is really screwed up - most Canadians agree that having minority governments is bad.  Most Canadians think Harper is the guy for the job and the Conservatives are the party to lead the country.  Mr. Ignatieff is seen as being a bit "un-Canadian" because of his overseas education and work history.  Most importantly, the majority of Canadians across the whole country agree that the country is headed in the right direction...

Oh wait, I forgot upside down land.  The think Mr Ignatieff is "worldly" and therefore suited to lead.  They conveniently forget the kickbacks and scandals of his Liberal party only a few short years ago and they believe that the Liberals are fit to lead.  Of course they do, most of the kickbacks were going to Quebec - anyone need a golf course?  Most telling, 47% believe the country is headed in the WRONG direction?!?!?

How on earth does this happen?  How do one group of people feel so differently that EVERYONE else - literally the majority of people in every other part of the country think things are getting better, except Quebec.  You want to know the reason why?  Simple.  For the last 45 years, the people of Quebec have been voting badly!  The limitation of democracy is simply the common sense of the people casting the ballots.  They repeatedly voted for Separatist Governments throughout the 70's and 80's.  Mulroney made an effort to deal with Bourassa but ultimately couldn't.  At a Federal level they consistently give a disproportionate vote to the separatist Bloc Quebec and as a result, they further isolate themselves because none of the three major parties want to be seen as the ones doing a deal with the devil - they'll die in Ontario and the West if they do that - isn't that right Mr Layton?  Quebec did ok during the corrupt Chretien/Martin years because they had a provincial Liberal government and Chretien and Martin were backhanding money all over the place. 

Let me offer some voting advice to my friends back in Quebec.  Since the 60's the province has gone ass-backwards.  Ontario and Alberta have boomed, even most of the Maritimes have outgrown you.  Canada, as a whole, is a pretty unique place, and Quebec is a pretty massive reason for that.  So embrace the madness of being Canadian, vote for the good guys who are promising you the earth and reap the rewards!  Separatism is a stick - unfortunately you've left it out there so long the rest of the country has beaten you nearly to death with it.  Put it back in the closet for a generation or two and then the mere thought of you bringing it back out will make it powerful again.  With 15% - 20% of you voting for the Bloc, you're simply subjecting yourselves to the status of second class citizen - something the whole point of separatism was originally trying to avoid!

US Healthcare Debate

I'm a Canadian.  Yes, I live in Australia and more and more I'm considering myself Australian every day, but something at the very fibre of my being makes me Canadian - maybe it is my unwavering belief in Universal Healthcare.

I'm not one of those American hating Canadians either; after 13 or so years living abraod (virtually my entire adult life) I've come to the realisation that I have more in common culturally from my childhood with Americans than anyone else.  Only someone who grew up in North America in the 80's would get the "gay pirate" jokes when referring to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers old Jerseys.  Where's the Beef?  I'm not only the President, I'm also a client!  All of these things are similar cultural groundings that Canadians and Americans of my generation can relate to.

I'll also state a bias, shhhh, don't tell anyone, but I'm a "conservative" and especially on fiscal matters.  I was very tempted to say "physical" matters in homage to Steve Fielding, but we'll let that go. 

Even with that bias, I find the whole anti-Canada debate going on within the US regarding health care to be a sad state of affairs.  Canada beats the US in every OECD health care measurement except expenditure - the US spends considerably more but gets alot less.  Canadians live longer, have lower infant mortality rates, have 25% less asthma cases in children and because Canadians are more likely to go to a doctor when something is wrong, quality of life at later ages is higher.  I would have thought these are all good things!

However if you hear a Republican in the US they tell tales of soup kitchen like waiting lines for emergency procedures and hordes of Canadians flooding across the borders for elective surgery.  Sorry, this is all bollocks.  Shame on the Republicans for promulgating such a myth and trying to shroud the truth for political gain.  Yes, Canada has longer waiting times for "elective" surgery than the US and some of those folks do go across the border to get those procedures done.  Do I really care though that someone who has a deviated septum and snores has to wait six months?  No!  Americans DIE because they worry about not being able to afford NECESSARY LIFE SAVING procedures!  Who's really better off here?

I ask the question - if politicians didn't have fully covered health insurance, a fat bank balance behind them and ready access to John Hopkins University hospital, would their views be different?  If those Republicans were on $35k/yr, worried their plant might close and their health benefits go the way of the dodo with their job, would they have a different point of view then?  What if they were facing all that and discovered a melanoma?  This is the type of thing that the average American faces every day, maybe some of these spoiled, cocooned politicians should wake up and rejoin the real world.

I say this to any and all of my American friends out there, your health care system is broken and everyone knows it.  The Canadian system is something that ALL Canadians feel so passionate about that many of us want Universal Healthcare enshrined as a constitutional right.  You've put a man on the moon, you've split atoms and created some of the greatest technology the world has ever seen, yet people are dying because they aren't sure they can afford a heart stent - that's crazy!  I say give the Canadian system a crack, see how it goes - let your President do what he was elected to do!

Hypocrisy of Australian Telecommunications

I have been a firm believer for some time now that Telstra has needed to be broken up into wholesale and retail pieces.  I also think that a "government controlled" entity should own the basic infrastructure to provide backhaul and the last mile - so effectively the wholesale piece minus mobile.  I believe that telecommunications infrastructure is critical to the country and in Australia it is overly politicised and monopolised to no ones benefit.  I think the wholesale infrastructure should be open to any "carrier" at tiered pricing based on volume purchased.  Finally, I believe that government controlled entity should NOT return a profit to the government's coffers, but be mandated to spend its entire profit on upgrading the core networks and reducing the impediments to wider scale high speed communications technology to rural areas.

I do not believe in the NBN.  I think it is poorly thought out and yet another instance of the politicians becoming too involved in things they don't understand.  When people ask me why I don't like the NBN I usually give the glib answer, "If people in Wagga want faster access to porn, they should pay a higher price." 

In many respects, my two positions seem contradictory, but let me explain.  The problems in the Australian telecommunications industry are to do with issues such as: exchange access, last mile access and quality, pit access and regulated pricing.  None of these will be solved by the NBN, but they would be solved by breaking up Telstra.  I just think dropping some $40b on a new network to solve a regulatory issue seems like dropping a nuclear bomb to kill a mosquito.

In its current form, the NBN is misguided.  It will turn out to be a government spending orgy that results in NBN PoPs in every marginal federal Labour seat in the country.  Every school in a safe Labour area will have more fibre than they can shake a stick at while kids in Castle Hill in Sydney's northwest resort to tin-cans, string and carrier pigeons.  I'm not simply pissing on Labour, I'm sure the Coalition would do the same thing - politicians can't help themselves.  They are measured by re-election (a popularity contest) and sometimes, the important ones are considered in a historical context, but the next election is always closer.

I think the government should go through with breaking up Telstra and regulating access to the wholesale network.  I think the federal government should consider what to do with the national fibre networks of NextGen and Optus as part of the wholesale scheme.  If they really wanted to make telecommunications cheaper and better, they'd probably buy both, plus look at the undersea assets in and out of Australia.  Australians pay a fairly hefty price for internet access because of peering costs on undersea cables to the US, which is where the bulk of the content lives.  If you could eliminate the excessive gouging in that area, you'd be onto a winner.  Ultimately, let that piece of policy shake out and then see if we need to spend all this money.  We very well may need to and if the country needs and wants that, then great, spend away, but right now it seems that the market may sort this out itself.

My last thought is on hypocrisy.  The Howard Government were bitterly opposed by the now governing Labour party when they went through the process of selling Telstra.  The Howard Government made the Telstra debate part of their election platforms.  Labour has decided to break-up Telstra and have set a deadline effectively for doing so that would preclude the electorate from getting a say on a significant decision.  Labour obviously doesn't want to have done to it, what it encourage the labour unions to do to the Coalition during the last campaign on WorkChoices and that's run ads all over the place slamming Labour's decisions on telecommunications - the government is trying to keep Telstra's marketing machine on the sidelines. 

I suppose the part I find most hypocritical though is that Labour were opposed to selling Telstra, yet they inherited the Future Fund which was made up of the proceeds from that sale and now they are breaking up the goose that laid the golden egg so they can spend the proceeds that may not need to be spent to fulfill a poorly constructed election promise that has become bigger than Ben Hur.  It just doesn't pass the smell test with me.