Blog

  • Spotify integrated into X10’s Mediascape and Timescape

    Sony Ericsson (via the Sony Ericsson Product Blog) announced today that the Spotify  service will now be integrated deep into the Timescape and Mediascape shell on the SE Xperia X10. The integration allows Spotify to show as an online media service in Mediascape, and your recently played songs will appear in the Timescape timeline.  Check out the video — it’s pretty sweet. 

    The drawback for some of us (OK, a lot of us) is that Spotify isn’t available in the U.S., but then again, neither is the X10.  This is an idea I would like to see catch on, and other manufacturers with custom Android UI’s weaving Slacker or Pandora into the OS would be welcomed here. [via Unwired view]

  • Chinese Android AigoPad In The Works

    Found under: Aigo, AigoPad, Android, Google, iPad, Tablet, MID, China, Apple,

    The Chinese are gearing up for an Android invasion come next May 2010 the Chinese manufacture Aigo has two sleek looking Android MIDs and these things are rumored to be on the cheap. So you may be wondering what these two MIDs will be called well unfortunately the chosen name is AigoPad I mean seriously Couldnt they come up with something better why does devices like these have to suffer the name of the Pad I think the iPad is enough.The report entails that the Aigo boys are dev

    Read More

    Read more in mobile format

  • Video: Princess Leia. Car wash. No, we’re not kidding

    Filed under: , ,

    Star Wars Charity Car Wash – Click above to watch the videos after the break

    It could very well be the ultimate car-obsessed/Star Wars fanboy fantasy. What is this latest object of our geekery? How about a car wash carried out by a gaggle of Princess Leias? And not just any Princess Leia, mind you, but slave Leia. We told you already: Ultimate car-obsessed Star Wars fanboy fantasy.

    Not surprisingly, the fertile minds over at G4TV’s Attack of the Show were behind the stunt, and proceeds from the Star Wars Charity Car Wash went to the Make A Wish Foundation. And if you’re worried it was all just a horrible example of male chauvinism (yeah, it probably was), Han Solo, Darth Vader, Obi Wan, a slew of Storm Troopers and even a Tusken Raider and pair of Jawas were also present and accounted for. What, no Olivia Munn?

    Video? Of course, four of them in total. See it all go down after the break.

    [Source: Attack of the Show]

    Continue reading Video: Princess Leia. Car wash. No, we’re not kidding

    Video: Princess Leia. Car wash. No, we’re not kidding originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:58:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Ricky Gervais to return as Golden Globes host

    I am delighted to find out the funny and insightful comedian Ricky Gervais is to return as Golden Globes host in 2011. Very looking forward to meeting Ricky at the 2010 Banff World Television Festival (bwtvf) in June.

    Banff World Television Festival

    Filed under: bwtvf, bwtvf-nextMEDIA, bwtvf2010, Canada, Movies, Television

  • Deja-Vu: Why The Fed’s Latest Copy & Paste-Job Means It’s Back Into Early 2000s Bubble-Blowing Mode

    Today the FOMC announced that rates would stay unchanged, though more significantly was the fact that there wasn’t even a slight change in language.

    It was, as several folks noted, a copy & paste job.

    But even if you think it’s too early to take the training wheels off the economy (and several folks think that, including Jan Hatzius at Goldman) there’s reason to be concerned about the Fed’s consistency.

    Notes Mike O’Rourke at BTIG:

    Despite the recent round of rampant dovishness out of the Fed, we believed the FOMC should have taken “baby steps” towards tightening language and restored the 100 basis point spread between the Discount Rate and the Fed Funds rate.  Needless to say, the FOMC did not see the situation as we do.  The Fed decided to remain with the status quo. 

    Not that he expects an imminent tightening, but…

    We have always asserted that the earliest potential timing for a real tightening move is the end of  2010, but it would be more likely that rates do not rise until 2011.  Nonetheless, when it comes to the use of words and jawboning, the FOMC cannot be permitted to fall into the same pattern as 2002-2005.  During that time period, for 29 consecutive FOMC meetings, the statement used the word “accommodative” to reference monetary policy

    The problem:

    It is widely believed among the investment community (ourselves included) that such predictability of interest rate policy over the course of years fueled the housing bubble, credit bubble, SIV’s and reckless carry trades.  The Fed Chairman does not share this view, he still blames the “global savings glut,” but we remain convinced it was the leverage.  The “exceptionally and extended” language in its current form has been in the statement for just over a year, or 9 meetings.  But remember, the current level of monetary policy is “accommodative” on steroids. 

    O’Rourke goes on to voice support with the Fed’s one dissenter, KC President Thomas Hoenig who, if you recall, recently leveld a blistering attack on ZIRP.

    Hoenig’s basic view is simple and important. Seeing bubbles ahead of time is nigh impossible. But that doesn’t mean we can’t be smart enough to know the policies that lead to them, and free money is one such policy.

    Join the conversation about this story »

    See Also:

  • Apple buys chipmaker Intrinsity for a steal, readies for speed war?

    Apple sure seems to be in a spending mood these days. The company spent as much as $100 to 200 million to buy Siri, a virtual assistant applications developer. Now the New York Times confirms that it bought Intrinsity, a processor chipset maker based in Austin, TX, for an estimated $121 million. (These are bargains, considering the $278 million it previously plunked down for another chip maker, PA Semi.)

    The news started coming out after some trade pubs noticed that various Intrinsity staffers’ LinkedIn pages started showing Apple as the employer. And now a NYT article confirms the acquisition. Intrinsity is believed to be responsible — along with Samsung — for the A4 processor that’s inside the iPad. (This is what has many pundits thinking the tablet’s processor is actually the Hummingbird chip the two companies were jointly working on).

    Though far from a “must-have” gadget in the eyes of many tech fanatics, the Apple tablet managed to garner big sales, with as many as 1 million+ devices sold thus far. Part of that success is credited to the device’s fast 1GHz speed and battery life, estimated at up to 10 hours. And those features have everything to do with the chipset inside.

    Some could take this as an indication that Apple will bring the A4 to the next iPhone as well. And if that’s true, then could it be that the smartphone war has moved on from platform debates, touchscreen technology, UIs and app selection, to its next major battleground: speed and battery life?

    The NYT didn’t exactly address that. What it did say struck me as weird though, particularly the following passage:

    The speed of mobile device chips are typically measured in megahertz, and one of the more popular chips on the market usually runs at about 650 megahertz. Intrinsity’s engineers found a way to crank that speed up to 1000 megahertz…

    By acquiring Intrinsity, Apple would be able to keep that 350 megahertz edge to itself.

    Do you spot what’s missing? It’s 10 little letters, namely Snapdragon.

     

    Who’s the fastest?

    It’s a little weird that the A8 ARM Cortex processor developed by Qualcomm wasn’t even included. But the article does mention the company itself, whose 1GHz Snapdragon chips are often integrated in Android and Windows Mobile phones, as well as other makers like Nvidia (Tegra 2) and Marvell (Armada 618). They’re all spending a ton of money to develop their own ARM processors.

    I’m no chipset expert, but I do know there’s more to a device’s speed than how fast the processor clocks, including memory and other aspects. But Anandtech is, and he did a comparison a few weeks ago pitting the iPad, the iPhone 3GS and the Nexus One for browser load times.

    The Nexus One, with Snapdragon processor, beat the iPhone 3GS in all of Anandtech’s tests. And the iPad, with A4 chip, topped both in every instance but one (when the N1 loaded CNN’s mobile site 0.4 seconds faster than the iPad). These tests should be taken with a grain of salt, since there are variables (like the tablet’s bigger battery, for one) that don’t exactly make this an even fight. And even if the A4 chip could maintain that speed and power management in a smaller form factor, there’s no confirmation that Apple will even put it in the new iPhone.

    Still, the possibility is intriguing, and not just because it’s self-serving — as an iPhone user, I have to admit I would love this — but because of its potential impact on the industry as a whole.

    Apple didn’t lead the way in processing power, as Snapdragon has been on the scene for a while now (meanwhile, the current 3GS handset has been plodding along with 600MHz). If both make major waves in the smartphone scene, could it accelerate the rush toward faster, more energy-efficient chips across the board?

    I contend that competition is good, and if this sets off an all-out speed war, users of all platforms might feasibly benefit from it.

     

    Need for speed

    Given that most of the major smartphone brands already deliver touchscreens, contacts/calendar management, built-in and third-party apps, full HTML web browsers — and soon, multitasking — faster chips and longer life could wind up being the biggest differentiators to the masses.

    No matter what the handset, waiting for a webpage to crunch through loading is never fun. And there’s hardly anyone who doesn’t have a story about how the device conked out at an inconvenient time. (Kind of reminds me of those horror movie plot devices.) 

    So if faster processing without the power drain becomes the standard and not the exception industrywide, those scenarios could become a thing of the past.

    Tell us what you think. Are you happy with your smartphone’s speed and battery life? Or could those two factors sway you from one handset to another? (Or even one OS to another?) Share your thoughts below.

    Via: NYT


  • Ben Heck shows his shiny new PS3 Slim laptop v2

    Our favorite console modder, Ben Heckendorn, is back to show off his latest shiny creation, a brand new PS3 Slim laptop with even more features and a stylish black look.
     

  • Obama in Quincy, Ill. on Wall Street reform. Giannoulias shout out. Transcript

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary
    _________________________________________________________________________________________________
    For Immediate Release April 28, 2010

    REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
    Wall Street Reform

    Oakley Lindsay Civic Center
    Quincy, Illinois

    3:44 P.M. CDT

    THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody! (Applause.) It’s good to be home. (Applause.) It is good to be back in Quincy! Thank you, everybody. Thank you. It is good to be back in Quincy! (Applause.)

    We’ve got some special guests here I want to acknowledge: the outstanding governor of the great state of Illinois, Patrick Quinn, is here. (Applause.) Your fine mayor, John Spring — give him a big round of applause. (Applause.) Attorney General Lisa Madigan. (Applause.) Treasurer and soon to be senator, Alexi Giannoulias. (Applause.) Secretary of State and tumbler supreme, Jesse White. (Applause.)

    So I missed you guys. (Applause.) You know, now, being President is nice. (Laughter.) You live above the store, so it’s a really short commute. (Laughter.) There’s a nice plane. But one of the toughest things about being President is I don’t get a chance to come home as much I’d like and visit with all of you like I used to. (Applause.) I see a lot of familiar faces in the crowd here.

    Now, part of the problem is, is that when I travel now it kind of causes a ruckus. (Laughter.) I do remember, though, the last time I was here — I think it was in this building — that we were filling up sandbags, weren’t we? (Applause.) And I still remember that day because it was the picture of what America is about. You had people from all different walks of life, the whole community coming together; everybody was working hard; everybody knew that there was a challenge coming from the potential flooding; but everybody was in good spirits because they figured if we’re all working together then there’s no reason why we can’t handle this. We’ve handled things before. (Applause.) And that’s the American spirit on display and that’s the spirit of Quincy and the spirit of Illinois.

    So it’s just good to be reminded of that and to come back and spend some time with you all. We spent a couple of days in Iowa and Missouri and now back here — (applause.) Yea, Missouri! (Applause.) How about Iowa? Have we got some Iowans here? (Applause.) We got a few Iowans — but we are in Illinois. (Applause.)

    But over the last couple of days, we’ve talked to workers who are busy building wind blades for these big wind turbines, and a biofuel plant; families and small business owners trying to navigate through a tough economy; talking to farmers about what’s happening to family farms in the region. And because it’s folks like all of you and towns like Quincy that give America its heartbeat, that’s why it’s so important for me to be able to visit.

    It’s towns like this where working men and women built the American Dream with their bare hands. This is where our roots are. I just met a young man coming in — he says he’s my cousin. There he is, right there. (Laughter.) Seriously, it’s — what is it, fourth generation? Four generations back? I told him he was a little better looking than me. (Laughter.)

    But all of us trace back to this experience of parents, grandparents, great-grandparents building this American Dream — not having much to begin with. And that dream is shared by every Illinoisan and every American — the chance to make a good living, to raise a healthy and secure family, and most of all, to give our kids opportunities that we didn’t have ourselves.

    Now, the truth is, is that sometimes it feels like that dream is slipping away. Times are tough in Quincy. Times are tough all across America. We’ve gone through the worst economy since the Great Depression. Even though our economy is growing again, even though our markets are climbing again and our businesses are finally beginning to create jobs again, there are a lot of folks who still aren’t feeling that recovery in their own lives.

    And I’ve heard their stories across the country. I’ve read it in the letters that I get each night. And a lot of them are worried about whether or not they’re going to be able to sustain their dream for a better life. Many felt that way even before this most recent crisis, even before the economic storm of the past two years. Folks were living up to their responsibilities as best they could, working hard, looking after their families, giving back to their communities, but they kept on finding themselves getting hurt in this economy in ways they didn’t expect. And part of it was because Washington and Wall Street weren’t living up to their responsibilities. (Applause.)

    That’s why I asked to be your President. That’s why so many of you joined the campaign. (Applause.) You joined me because you believed we had it within our power to change things.

    AUDIENCE: Yeah!

    THE PRESIDENT: You figured we could solve the problems that had been holding us back year after year after year, and focus on working Americans again. You believed we could keep the American Dream alive in our time, and for all time. And so that’s what I want to talk about today.

    When I took office, we were in the midst of this historic financial crisis brought on by reckless and irresponsible speculation on Wall Street. (Applause.) That in turn had led to a recession that hammered Main Street across America. And you saw lost jobs and lost homes and lost businesses, and downscaled dreams.

    The first thing we had to do then was mount an aggressive response — to make sure that this terrible recession didn’t turn into another Great Depression. And let’s face it, that required some tough steps to stabilize the financial sector. And some of those steps weren’t popular. I knew they weren’t popular. I’ve got pollsters. (Laughter.) They told me, boy, that’s really going to be unpopular. (Laughter.) But we made those decisions anyway, because the well-being of millions of Americans depended on them. Even if they didn’t poll well, they were the right thing to do. It was the only thing we could do to take those steps. (Applause.)

    So we took these steps to get America back on its feet. We aimed tax relief right at the middle class, the cornerstone of the American Dream. We made sure that we cut taxes for 95 percent of working families, put money in their pockets because they were experiencing hard times — fewer hours or somebody in the family being laid off, making sure that they could still buy groceries and pay the bills to keep the economy afloat.

    We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for students and parents paying for college. (Applause.) And all of this — not only did this help those individual families, but it increased purchasing power and spending power for businesses all across the country. And then we extended unemployment benefits and we made COBRA cheaper for folks who had lost their jobs. (Applause.) And then we helped give help to the states. And Pat Quinn will tell you, because of the federal assistance that was provided, we averted some massive layoffs of teachers and police officers and firefighters all across the country. (Applause.)

    So we did what it took to rescue our economy and spark its recovery. And that work goes on. And so I’m pleased to see that we were losing 700,000 jobs a month when I came into office — now we’re gaining jobs. (Applause.) The economy was contracting — now the economy is growing. (Applause.) The markets are back. We’re making progress. We’re moving in the right direction.

    But, keep in mind, I didn’t run for President just to get back to where we were when we started. I want us to do better than we were doing. (Applause.) I want folks to have more opportunity. I want people to have more and better jobs. And I want our young people to be getting better educations and more access to college. (Applause.)

    It’s time to rebuild our economy on a new foundation so that we’ve got real and sustained growth. It’s time to extend opportunity to every corner of Main Street, in every city and every town and every county in America, so that young people don’t feel like they’ve got to move someplace else to make their way. They can stay right here in Quincy. (Applause.) They can stay in Monroe. They can stay in Macon. (Applause.) They can stay in Fort Madison.

    It’s time to create conditions so that Americans who work hard can gain ground again, and they don’t have to take out a bunch of credit card debt. They don’t have to endanger their long-term financial future. And that’s what — that’s at the heart of all our efforts.

    It’s why we made the biggest investment in clean energy in our history, creating middle-class jobs in Middle America that harness the wind and the sun, and biofuels — that won’t be shipped away; jobs that will stay right here in the United States of America, and create energy independence so we don’t have to import as much oil. (Applause.)

    It’s why we took on the special interests and reformed the student loan system so that it works for students, not bankers. (Applause.)

    I don’t know if people paid attention to this. Because we were having such a big debate around health care, people may have missed this. The way the student loan system was working, the federal government was guaranteeing these loans but the banks were still taking billions of dollars of profits out of the student loan program. And my attitude is, well, if we’re guaranteeing them, then where’s the risk? So what are you getting paid for?

    So we said we’ll just lend the money directly to the students. (Applause.) That saved tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending that we’re now reinvesting in making college more affordable and upgrading America’s community colleges, so that every young person in America can get ahead in the 21st century. (Applause.)

    And, yes, Quincy, that’s why we finally passed health reform in America — (applause) — reform that will begin to end some of the worst practices in the insurance industry this year. (Applause.) So this year, they’re going to — they will have to stop dropping you when you get sick. This year, children with preexisting conditions, they’ve got to be able to buy insurance. This year, some of these lifetime limits that mean that you got insurance but you still end up being bankrupt — those practices are going to end. (Applause.)

    And in a few years, millions of families and small business owners are going to have more choice, more competition. You’re going to be able to purchase the same kind of high-quality, affordable care that members of Congress get. And you know that’s going to be pretty good. (Applause.) You know they’re going to give themselves good insurance. You’re going to be able to buy it, too. (Applause.)

    And by the way, this reform will reduce our deficit by more than $1 trillion. (Applause.) And, listen, don’t — this notion — I know the debate was contentious. But the truth of the matter is since I’ve been here, I’ve already met — I was in Mount Pleasant, Iowa, met a woman — (laughter) — met a woman at Jerry’s — you know Jerry’s, right? This is a restaurant there, and met a woman and she said — she came up and she said, “My husband is self-employed. I’m a homemaker. We both have preexisting conditions. We need help now.” And I told her this is exactly why we fought so hard for health care reform.

    And then today, I met a woman who had breast cancer, and she was wondering how soon can we start moving on some of these programs inside the health care legislation.

    This isn’t some abstraction. Sometimes, the folks who were fighting us, they made it sound as if, oh, he just wants big government, this — no. I just want people to be able to not go bankrupt and lose their house when they get sick. (Applause.) I just want them not to have — see their premiums doubled. I don’t want them to be taken advantage of by insurance companies. (Applause.) I want you to get a fair deal and a fair shake. (Applause.) And that’s part of my job as President of the United States of America. (Applause.)

    AUDIENCE MEMBER: I love you!

    THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. (Applause.)

    Now, speaking of — speaking of you getting a fair shake, that’s why we need good old common-sense Wall Street reform. (Applause.) And we need it today. We don’t need it next year. We don’t need to do another study and examine it. We need it now. (Applause.)

    And in case you’re wondering, let me just take a minute to explain why it’s important to you. The crisis we went through, it wasn’t part of the normal economic cycle. What happened was you had some people — not all people — there’s some very decent people here who are in the financial sector — but you had some people on Wall Street who took these unbelievable risks with other people’s money.

    AUDIENCE MEMBER: Damn. (Laughter.)

    THE PRESIDENT: They made bets. They were making bets on what was going to happen in the housing market, and they would create these derivatives and all these instruments that nobody understood. But it was basically operating like a big casino. And it was producing big profits and big bonuses for them, but it was all built on shaky economics and some of these subprime loans that had been given out. And because we did not have common-sense rules in place, those irresponsible practices came awfully close to bringing down our entire economy and millions of dreams along with it.

    We had a system where some on Wall Street could take these risks without fear of failure, because they keep the profits when it was working, and as soon as it went south, they expected you to cover their losses. So it was one of those heads, they tail — tails, you lose.

    So they failed to consider that behind every dollar that they traded, all that leverage they were generating, acting like it was Monopoly money, there were real families out who were trying to finance a home, or pay for their child’s college, or open a business, or save for retirement. So what’s working fine for them wasn’t working for ordinary Americans. And we’ve learned that clearly. It doesn’t work out fine for the country. It’s got to change. (Applause.)

    Now, what we’re doing — I want to be clear, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money. (Laughter.) But part of the American way is you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or you’re providing a good service. We don’t want people to stop fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow the economy.

    I’ve said this before. I’ve said this on Wall Street just last week. I believe in the power of the free market. And I believe in a strong financial system. And when it’s working right, financial institutions, they help make possible families buying homes, and businesses growing, and new ideas taking flight. An entrepreneur may have a great idea, but he may need to borrow some money to make it happen. It would be hard for a lot of us to buy a house — our first house, at least, if we weren’t able to take out a mortgage.

    So there’s nothing wrong with a financial system that helps the economy expand. And there are a lot of good people in the financial industry who are doing things the right way. And it’s in our interest when those firms are strong and when they’re healthy.

    But some of these institutions that operated irresponsibly, they’re not just threatening themselves — they threaten the whole economy. And they threaten your dreams, your prospects, everything that you worked so hard to build.

    So we just want them to operate in a way that’s fair and honest and in the open, so that we don’t have to go through what we’ve already gone through. (Applause.) We want to make sure the financial system doesn’t just work for Wall Street, but it works for Main Street, too. It works for Quincy. It works for Mount Pleasant. It works for Macon and Fort Madison. (Applause.)

    Now, let me explain to you what this reform should look like, because one of the things you discover when you get to Washington is what’s black is white and what’s up is down and sometimes people will —

    AUDIENCE MEMBER: Lie.

    THE PRESIDENT: I didn’t say lie, but — (laughter) — they will tell stories about what’s going on. So let me just be very clear in terms of what we’re proposing on financial reform. First — and I know this is important to you because it’s important to me — we’re going to make sure the American taxpayer is never again on the hook when a Wall Street firm fails. Never again. (Applause.) We don’t want to see another bailout. That’s what this reform does.

    Now, you’ve got some — you had some who were saying, cynically, just claiming the opposite, that somehow this was a bill that institutionalized bailouts. What this bill did was it said, no, if you have a firm on Wall Street that fails, the financial industry is going to pay — not taxpayers. So a vote for reform is a vote to end taxpayer-funded bailouts once and for all. (Applause.) If a crisis like this again happens, financial firms are going to foot the bill. That’s point number one.

    Point number two — we’re going to close the loopholes that allowed derivatives and all these other large, risky deals that don’t make a lot of economic sense and that could threaten our entire economy — we want to bring those deals out into the — out of the dark alleys of our financial system into the light of day, so that everybody knows exactly what’s happening, what risks are being taken — investors, shareholders, everybody knows what’s going on. That’s the second thing.

    Number three — this reform is going to give you more power because we’re going to put in place the strongest consumer financial protections in history. (Applause.) Because — and the reason this is important — the reason this is important, this crisis wasn’t just the result of what happened on Wall Street. It also happened because there were a lot of decisions by folks out on Main Street who were taking out mortgages they didn’t understand, credit cards they didn’t understand, auto loans that weren’t a good deal. Some took on obligations they couldn’t afford. But millions of others were deceived or misled by shifting terms and confusing conditions and forests of fine print.

    And your attorney general, Lisa Madigan, has been fighting on behalf of consumers in this state and she knows how badly we need these protections. (Applause.) In fact, Lisa and a bunch of other attorney generals came to testify on behalf of the need for these consumer protection bills because they see this stuff in their offices every day. And it’s true all across the country.

    Now, some argue that giving consumers more information in clear, concise ways is somehow going to stifle competition. I believe the opposite. See, I think if you know what you’re buying, you can make a good decision. And that means that the companies, instead of competing to see who can offer the most confusing products, companies will have to compete the old-fashioned way: by offering the best product. (Applause.)

    But that’s not going to reduce innovation or competition. You just should be knowing what you’re buying. It’s like a lemon law, right? You don’t want to go into the used car lot and get something where they’ve changed the odometer and put a fresh coat of paint on some old beater and pretend like it’s a new car. Well, it’s the same thing with financial products. You should know what you’re getting.

    All right, so that’s the third thing. Finally, we’re going to give the people who own these companies, these financial companies — mainly investors and pension holders and shareholders like many of you — we want you to have more say in the way they’re run. Because some of these firms, they’ve got these huge salaries, huge bonuses that create a perverse incentive to encourage people to take reckless risks. But if you own stock in these companies, you need to get some say in how they operate. (Applause.) You’ll get to decide how managers are paid and how those firms operate. And that means that we’ll actually increase the connection between Main Street and Wall Street. They’ll be more accountable to you.

    So that’s the reform we’ve put forward. (Applause.) These are the reforms that we’re putting forward: Accountability — which means no more bailouts. Closing loopholes — no more trading of things like derivatives in the shadows. Consumer protections — no more deceptive products. A say on pay — so that we give shareholders a more powerful voice. That’s what we’re trying to do.

    Now, I don’t think this should be a partisan issue. Everybody — Republicans, and Democrats, and independents — were hurt by this crisis. So everybody should want to fix it. So I’m very pleased that after a few days of delay, it appears an agreement may be at hand to allow this debate to move forward on the Senate floor on this critical issue. (Applause.) I’m very pleased by that.

    And I want to work with anyone — Republican or Democrat — who wants to pursue these reforms in good faith. And there can be some legitimate differences on certain issues, but the bottom line is consumers have to be protected. We have to end bailouts. We’ve got to make sure that these trading practices are out in the open. We’ve got to make sure that people have a say in terms of how these firms operate so they’re more accountable.

    So as long as we’re adhering to those clear principles, then I feel okay. What I don’t want is a deal made that is written by the financial industry lobbyists. We’ve had enough of that. (Applause.) We’ve had enough of that. I want to listen to what they have to say, but I don’t them writing the bill. I don’t want Democrats and Republicans agreeing to a bill written by them, for them. I want a bill that’s written for you, for the American people. (Applause.)

    So we’re going to see how this debate unfolds. We’re going to get this done. And we’re going to get it done because you demand it. It’s been two years since this crisis, born on Wall Street, slammed into Main Street with its full fury. And while things aren’t nearly back to normal out here, they’re getting back to normal pretty quick up there. Some in Washington think this debate is moving too fast. They think, well, this is kind of a political game; let’s see how this whole thing can play to our advantage in November.

    See, that’s not how I play. I’ve been calling for better rules on Wall Street since 2007, before this crisis happened. (Applause.) So I don’t think we’re moving too fast. I think we’ve been moving too slow. It’s time to get this done. And I don’t think you want to see us wait for another year or two years. I don’t think you think Washington is moving too fast. (Applause.) I think you want to get this done. (Applause.)

    You shouldn’t have to wait another day for the protections from some of the practices that got us into this mess. We can’t let the recovery that’s finally beginning to take hold fall prey to a whole new round of recklessness. If we don’t learn the lessons of this crisis, we doom ourselves to repeat it. And I refuse to let that happen. (Applause.) So the time for reform is now. (Applause.)

    Quincy, let me just say this. Through all the noise and the lobbyists and the partisanship — and I know sometimes you’re watching TV and saying, sheesh, everybody is yelling and hollering, and why are they so mad? But this debate comes down to a simple choice: Are we going to go down the same road, where irresponsibility of a few can put millions of families at risk and stick taxpayers with a tab?

    AUDIENCE: No!

    THE PRESIDENT: Or are we going to protect consumers, and strengthen our financial system, and put rules in place that keep this from happening ever again? (Applause.) Are we going to give in to the special interests, or are we going to score another victory for the American people? (Applause.) Are we going to stick with the status quo? Or are we going to bring about fundamental change that makes things work for ordinary Americans? (Applause.)

    We’ve got the power to do something about this. That’s all it comes down to — the will to act. I still believe we can come together, just like you all came together during those floods, filling those sandbags — everybody joining together, everybody breaking a little sweat, everybody helping out. That’s how America got built. (Applause.)

    We are not powerless in the face of our challenges. We don’t quit when things get tough. We’re not afraid. (Applause.) When something happens, we come together. We move forward. We act. We are Americans — our destiny is written by us, not for us. (Applause.) And if we remember that and summon that spirit once again, we’re going to strengthen our economy today and tomorrow, and restore security to the middle class. (Applause.)
    That’s what we’re fighting for — the American Dream right here in Quincy, right here in Illinois, all across the country. (Applause.)

    God bless you, and God bless the United States of America. Thank you. (Applause.)

    END 4:16 P.M. CDT

  • Vodafone Nexus One Sold Out

    Found under: Vodafone, Android, Google, Nexus One, Sold Out, Stock, Smartphones,

    Vodafone UK just began offering pre-orders for the Google Nexus One recently and already the handset all gone yes you read correctly the Nexus One on Vodafone is sold out. The release date is set at April 30th we hope for the sake of consumers who want a Nexus one Vodafone UK will do their best to re-stock on supplies before D-day.Fear not though you can still pre-order your Google Nexus One but here is the catch you wont be getting a hold of the handset come April 30th youll be

    Read More

    Read more in mobile format

  • Peter Gleick: Smart Water Meters, Dumb Meters, no Meters

    How is it possible that a place like California, with such a long and painful history of water problems, remains so far behind the curve of smart water management? How is it really possible that things considered basic, fundamental, taken-for-granted in other places are still missing here? And are water managers and users so insular that they really think they’re doing a good job with water?

    That’s a rhetorical question: California is not ahead of the curve in anything “water.” It is dealing with 21st century water problems with 20th century (or is it 19th century) water policy and politics. Some remarkable, innovative efforts are underway, but they remain the exception, not the rule.

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
    Peter Gleick
    Dr. Peter Gleick is president of the Pacific Institute, an internationally recognized water expert and a MacArthur Fellow.

    To what do I refer? Well, it could be the complete lack of comprehensive groundwater monitoring and management — a fact that stuns my colleagues overseas (and even in other states, and even a remarkably high-ranking official in state government here). It could be the inability to figure out how to put in place permanent, comprehensive water efficiency programs. It could be the archaic agricultural water policies. It could be the inability to properly develop desalination in a way the both provides safe, reliable water but also protects the public interest with environmental protection, transparency, and financial rationality.

    But no. This time I mean water meters. Every single water user — residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural — should have an accurate water meter. And every single user should pay for each gallon of water use, preferably with the price rising with the volume. Again, the fact that this is not the case stuns my water colleagues from other places. And it should. It is an outrage in a place where water is scarce, contested, and still used so wastefully that water use should not be accurately measured and charged.

    But of course it isn’t. The people without meters, or people with old “dumb” meters unable to be read remotely or provide detailed information to users, would be at risk of paying more (some would pay less, but some would certainly pay more). People without meters can use, and waste, as much water as they want and no one takes them to task. It is the tragedy of the commons, writ large. And somehow, these self-interested people have been able to influence politicians against taking action to the detriment of the rest of the state, the environment, and all other water users.

    Water Numbers:
    To date, Sacramento still has meters in only 25 percent of its houses and has no intention to meter everyone in a reasonable time period. And they’ve made ridiculous arguments that it would cost too much to put meters in. The Sacramento City Council has authorized a first phase to put in 1,735 meters for $20 million. Explain, then, how come the City of Ottawa will spend $25 million to install 190,000 smart meters? In the arid San Joaquin Valley, south of Sacramento, more than half of all residents are not metered. Fresno, the region’s largest city, charges single-family households a flat rate, regardless of how much water they use. And what do you know? Fresno’s water rates are among the lowest, and their water use among the highest, of anyone’s in California. Average Fresno residential use is 290 gallons per person per day. The state average is 135. For the same amount of water (22,440 gallons, more than enough for a family of four for a month) City of Fresno customers pay, on average, a monthly water rate of only $28.33, compared with San Francisco’s $89.57 and San Diego’s $95.48 (see the figure below). At least Fresno is beginning to slowly add meters.

    In some cities, the problem is worst for multi-family homes or apartments, which often have a single meter serving many families. San Diego is beginning to tackle this problem by requiring developers of new multi-family homes to install water meters for each unit. The San Diego City Council has approved a cutting edge water sub-metering ordinance for all new apartment buildings and condos. Councilmember Marti Emerald wrote and promoted this ordinance. This is a big deal: multifamily homes account for 44 percent of the housing units in San Diego and over 1.2 million new residents are expected in San Diego by 2050, according to the SD Union-Tribune, 80% of them multifamily units. Studies show that renters will cut their water use by 15 percent to 39 percent if they pay explicitly for their water use, rather than having their utility costs folded into their overall monthly rent.

    Water Rates California Cities

    Water rates for selected California cities for 22,440 gallons per month.

    Even better, there is a whole new generation of “smart” water meters coming. These can be read remotely, saving millions in door-to-door readers. Smart meters permit more sophisticated pricing structures. And they can provide users real time and effective information on how to save water and money — identifying leaks and providing feedback on water-intensive activities. Toronto Hydro is installing smart water meters and expects to save $33 million on meter readers and collect as much as $24 million that it loses from inaccurate billing from the old “dumb” meters.

    It is long past time for a statewide requirement (hey, how about a nationwide requirement?) that all water users have meters installed, quickly, and that water use be charged by volume. In Sacramento, legislation introduced by Assemblyman Paul Fong may tackle part of this. Fong’s measure, AB 1975, would require multifamily complexes permitted after Jan. 1, 2012 to install meters for each unit as a condition of water service. Owners would be required to charge tenants based on the volume of water they use. This is an excellent start but more is needed.

    Peter Gleick


    Dr. Gleick’s blog posts are provided in cooperation with the SFGate. Previous posts can be found here.

  • Artist hired by Car and Driver swipes rendering from Jon Sibal?

    Filed under:


    Rendering swipes? Jon Sibal vs. Mark Neeper – click above for high-res image gallery

    In the May issue of Car and Driver, the pub peered through the looking glass to see what kind of product enthusiasts can look forward to in the next few years. The feature, entitled “25 Cars Worth Waiting For,” combines some astute speculation and a few foregone conclusions with a rendering of each vehicle. However, one particular depiction caught the eye of ace auto artist Jon Sibal.

    A rendering of the 2011 BMW M5 commissioned by C/D and created by artist Mark Neeper bore a striking resemblance to an image Sibal says he penned this past December. Considering both artists were working with existing information, the number of similarities – particularly the sculpted front bumper and side sills – could’ve been mere coincidence. But Sibal delved deeper and came across several disturbingly exact parallels.

    In Sibal’s own post, he breaks down each of the distinct items he included in his rendering, and while the first few examples could be taken as fluke coincidences, details like the precise lighting glare on the silver side mirrors, a swapped tow hook cover and the highlighting on the side sills were exact duplicates. More telling is Sibal’s admission that he made a slight mistake on one side of the intake (not blending it in properly) which mysteriously made it onto Neeper’s image. Additionally, Sibal added his own “watermark” – an odd, pinched line on the front bumper – which he claims, “was left in there purposely… to track and identify the parts of the car I’ve painstakingly designed and created.”

    To his credit, Sibal isn’t out for blood or even monetary compensation; he’s just looking for some attribution. And when we spoke with him earlier today, Sibal made it clear that he respects Neeper’s work.

    Neeper, who has yet to return our emails, is a well-respected artist who’s been creating drawings and renderings for various publications for the better part of two decades.

    Sibal says he has contacted C/D, but apparently has yet to receive a response. We’ve spoken with C/D and they’re just as flummoxed as Sibal and are taking the matter very seriously as they embark on an investigation.

    Check out the examples below for more proof, and get the full details on Sibal’s site.

    [Source: JonSibal.com]

    Artist hired by Car and Driver swipes rendering from Jon Sibal? originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:23:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Daily U-Turn: What you missed on 4.28.10

    Review: 2010 BMW 550i Gran Turismo is the Ultimate Passenger Machine

    In the wake of BMW’s new “Joy” ad campaign comes the 5 Series Gran Turismo, the first Ultimate Driving Machine that’s more interested in shuffling passengers in comfort than providing thrills behind the wheel.

    Infographic: One car stolen every 33 seconds… and other fun grand theft auto facts

    Car theft is no laughing matter, but a quick look at these stats will have you cracking a smile.

    Daily U-Turn: What you missed on 4.28.10 originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:20:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Pre-Alpha Version Of Firefox Mobile Out For Android

    Found under: Google, Android, Firefox, Mobile, Mozilla, Fennec, Browser,

    So heres what we got Firefox Mobile is now available for Google Android dont get all excited because Fennec on Android is in pre-alpha that means the browser is barely usable. One other thing you may also want to look at is Mozilla Weave Sync this Firefox add-on allows you to synchronize your browser bookmarks passwords history and tabs between the desktop and mobile versions of Firefox.To get a hold of Fennec your Android handset has got be running on Android 2.0 or above that

    Read More

    Read more in mobile format

  • Gizmodo Editor Chen Entitled to a Little First Amendment Respect

    In yesterday’s post, we asserted that the REACT high tech task force search of Gizmodo editor Jason Chen’s home and seizure of his computers and other property as part of their investigation of that blog’s reporting on the iPhone 4G prototype was almost certainly illegal. That claim caused some to question whether the California shield law and the federal Privacy Protection Act (PPA) apply if the reporter himself is suspected of criminal activity.

    Both statutory provisions likely apply here, and for good reason. The First Amendment does not excuse illegal activities, but it certainly provides safeguards to ensure that free speech interests are not trampled along the way.

    Regarding the PPA, as we said in our original post, “[t]he PPA includes an exception for searches targeting criminal suspects (which Chen may or may not be), but that exception does not apply ‘if the offense to which the materials relate consists of the receipt, possession, communication, or withholding of such materials or the information contained therein.’” If Chen’s property was seized under the theory that he or Gizmodo might be guilty of, say, receiving stolen property for taking possession of the iPhone about which the blog reported, even if he had reason to believe that it was stolen, then the seizure likely violated Chen’s PPA rights because the alleged crime would be one covered by the federal statute.

    The California law is more stark. Penal Code section 1524(g) says sets forth that “no warrants shall issue” for unpublished “notes, outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort” if that information was “obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public.” There is no statutory exception for cases in which the journalist is the one under investigation. If the California legislature intended such an exemption, it could easily have included one, as it did in another part of the same Penal Code section 1524, subdivision (c), which prohibits search warrants targeting physicians, psychotherapists, and members of the clergy, with an explicit exception if they are “reasonably suspected of engaging or having engaged in criminal activity related to the documentary evidence for which a warrant is requested.” (For a review of the respective histories of Penal Code subsections 1524(c) and (g), see PSC Geothermal Services Co. v. Superior Court, 25 Cal. App. 4th 1697, 1705 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994).)

    Notwithstanding the clear language of the statute, some observers have pointed to the case of Rosato v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.App.3d 190 (1975), arguing that it stands for the proposition that California’s state shield law “wouldn’t apply to subpoenas or searches for evidence of such criminal activity.” The Rosato decision, however, addresses whether a constitutional right (in that case the right to receive a fair trial) could trump the Evidence Code under certain circumstances. One problem with relying on Rosato is that the reporter’s privilege is now a constitutional and not merely a statutory right, having been overwhelmingly approved by voters in 1980 (after the Rosato decision). See, e.g., Liggett v. Superior Court (Gregerson), 260 Cal. Rptr. 161 (Cal. App. Ct. 1989) (“The purpose of adding the shield law to the Constitution was ostensibly to trump the reasoning of Rosato and Farr and to further insulate the shield law from judicial tampering.”) (vacated on other grounds). If the reporter’s privilege is to give way to a competing right, that right must be constitutional in nature, as the California Supreme Court noted in Miller v. Superior Court, 21 Cal. 4th 883, 898 (Cal. 1999):

    [T]here is nothing illogical in interpreting “the people[‘s] … right to due process” not to include the right to compel the press through the sanctions of contempt-incarceration and substantial fines-to supply unpublished information obtained in the newsgathering process. The fact that the assertion of this immunity might lead to the inability of the prosecution to gain access to all the evidence it desires does not mean that a prosecutor’s right to due process is violated, any more than the assertion of established evidentiary privileges against the prosecution would be a violation.

    A bigger problem is that Rosato had nothing to say about the warrant restrictions Penal Code section 1524(g) sets forth to ensure that police investigations involving reporters do not disturb the confidentiality of sources or other unpublished information.

    Protections for journalists implicate not only the journalist’s right to speak but also the public’s interest in obtaining information. That is why the First Amendment protects reporters who publish truthful information, even when it was illegally gathered. See, e.g., Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514, 527-28, 533-35 (2001) (First Amendment barred imposition of civil damages under wiretapping law for publishing contents of conversation relevant to matter of public concern); Smith v. Daily Mail Pub. Co., 443 U.S. 97 (1979) (First Amendment barred prosecution under state statute for publishing name of a juvenile defendant). These protections apply even when the reporter has arguably stolen commercial trade secrets or otherwise violated the law. See, e.g., Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Bankers Trust Co., 78 F.3d 219 (6th Cir. 1996) (overturning an injunction preventing Business Week from publishing information about a court case even though the District Court had found that the magazine had “knowingly violated the protective order” by obtaining the documents that necessarily reflected “trade secrets or other confidential research, development or commercial information….”); CBS Inc v. Davis, 510 U.S. 1315 (1994) (permitting broadcast of footage of a meat-packing operations obtained through “calculated misdeeds.”).

    To be sure, if Gizmodo or Chen did break the law, the First Amendment will likely not affect their potential civil or criminal liability. (The police have as of yet not identified what crime was allegedly committed, who allegedly committed that crime, and what evidence supports such an allegation.) But even in instances in which a reporter may have violated the law, and could be subject to criminal or civil liability for that violation, the First Amendment still applies, as do the procedural safeguards in California law and the federal PPA. Simply put, while a court may conclude that under particular facts and circumstances that a reporter must divulge sources or unpublished materials, or that he is liable for his misdeeds, police may not decide on their own to ignore free speech protections for journalists merely by claiming that the reporter may have committed a crime.

  • RIAA Missing The Point About Record Store Day

    The RIAA’s blog is an endless source of fun, and its latest post is touting some figures showing the success of the recent “Record Store Day”. Record Store Day is a yearly event started by a group of indie record stores that’s grown over the last couple of years, and is marked with some festivities as well as the release of a lot of limited-edition records, CDs and other products available only in hard copy in certain participating shops. This year, there were 175 such products, and they helped boost the sales of indie shops. In particular, sales of vinyl albums were up 119 percent over the previous week, and vinyl single sales grew by 529 percent. But this isn’t proof that the “we must sell music” mantra is correct; the sales increased not because people were buying music, they increased because they were buying an attractive, scarce physical product, like special vinyl picture discs or limited-edition prints. Record Store Day is a great example of how the packaging of a product that happens to contain music can drive people to buy it. The value consumers were paying for was in that packaging, not necessarily the content within it. Whether they know it or not, the stores and bands have given customers a reason to buy.

    Permalink | Comments | Email This Story





  • Advanced Home Tab 2.2.1 Released

    Cookie Home Tab seems to have brought forward a whole new generation of Sense Mods into their imageWindows Phones world. The very popular mod seems to have created a whole new mod that requires it to run. This mod called Advanced Home Tab brings something that even HTC themselves did not think of. This mod brings a scrollable home screen, task, and more.

  • New: Full CHT 1.7.1 integration in appointment list (home layout editor support)
  • New: Use custom task application (ThumbCal is now supported)
  • New: Extended view support (view up to 7 tasks in CHT extended view)
  • New: Improved scrolling
  • New: Task counters – See numbers of tasks for each filter (all, today, overdue)
  • New: Filter buttons – Use the buttons on the upper right to switch between 3 different filters: All, Due today, Overdue
  • Swipe-to-left / Swipe-to-right gesture to switch between appointments and tasks
  • Scrollable task list (show nearly any number of task items)
  • Due date is colored red when the task is overdue
  • Complete your tasks using the checkboxes (with vibration feedback)
  • Ascending and descending sorting of tasks by Status, Priority, Subject, Start Date or Due Date
  • Filter completed tasks by age
  • Automatic refresh on switch / on edit
  • Configurable colors for due, today and overdue tasks
  • Removed: Weather & clock modifications (now done by CHT)
  • Removed: Filter gesture
  • Co0kie’s call history & voice mail fully supported (hidden, always, dynamic)
  • CHT Home layout editor support
  •  

    You can try this application on XDA


  • Report: Chrysler’s Sebring replacement to be named Nassau

    Filed under: ,

    Chrysler Nassau Concept – Click above for high-res image gallery

    Flash back to the 2007 Detroit Auto Show and sitting on the Chrysler stand was the Nassau concept. Nothing ever came of the angular five-door, but some of the elements that debuted on the show car eventually worked their way onto the Sebring. That connection stands to be revived with a report by the Detroit Free Press that the Sebring’s replacement will carry the Nassau name when the all-new midsize sedan goes on sale within the next two years.

    The concept’s sleek lines aren’t likely to inspire the Nassau, but considering Chrysler purchased the name, it’s fair game and will help to put Chrysler’s lackluster sedan out of the public consciousness.

    Chrysler hasn’t official confirmed the name yet, but when the Nassau goes on sale – likely in 2012 – it will be joined by the refreshed Dodge Avenger, with a thoroughly revised interior and a choice of either a 2.4-liter four-cylinder or Chrysler’s new Pentastar V6.

    [Source: Detroit Free Press]

    Report: Chrysler’s Sebring replacement to be named Nassau originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Salt Shakedown Faces Scrutiny

    A national poll released by Rasmussen Reports on Monday reveals that a majority of Americans oppose an FDA takeover of how much salt restaurants and food makers can put in food. As we put it to The Wall Street Journal this week, bureaucratic meddling in salt is “an illegitimate form of government intervention” parading as paternalism “run amok.” And as a front-page USA Today story notes yesterday, Americans’ tastes make it difficult to simply slash sodium from dishes. Salt also serves important culinary functions, integral in curing and preserving bacon, olives, and fish and is crucial for making bread, said one pharmacology professor at the University of Southern California.

    We elaborated on some of the less savory aspects of the salt assault at The Daily Caller, telling readers that not only is salt science far from crystallized, but mandating a population-wide sodium reduction could have unintended consequences for our health:

    [T]he health effects of a countrywide sodium reduction are far from crystallized. “It is unclear what effects a low sodium diet has on cardiovascular events and mortality,” concluded a 2002 review in the British Medical Journal… Because of the variance of how people deal with salt, then, there’s no one-size-fits-all amount that the government can mandate….

    And from the ever-reliable law of unintended consequences, New York Times science columnist John Tierney notes that a salt reduction could conceivably make Americans fatter. How? Because we’d eat larger amounts of low-sodium food to try to get back to the old levels of salt intake that our bodies are used to.

    As Tierney jokes: “Never bet against the expansion of Americans’ waistlines, especially not when public health experts get involved.”

    Read the whole piece here.

  • Hey Jon, Pass the Magic Mushrooms [Blockquote]


    Click here to read Hey Jon, Pass the Magic Mushrooms

    Jon, Jon… a merger? A merger? Maybe you should read our analysis on HP buying your company. [WSJ] More »







  • Cape Wind Project, The First Wind Farm on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf 2010

    800px-Gay_head_cliffs_MV

    2010April28: U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar approves the Cape Wind project, the first wind farm on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. The wind turbines are expected to produce enough power to meet 75% of the electricity demand for Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket Island (New York Times, 2010).

    Reference: New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/science/earth/29wind.html

    Read the Department of the Interior Press Release http://www.doi.gov/news/doinews/Secretary-Salazar-Announces-Approval-of-Cape-Wind-Energy-Project-on-Outer-Continental-Shelf-off-Massachusetts.cfm

    Image Description: Gay Head Cliffs in Martha’s Vineyard. Photo by JP06035. Image Location http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gay_head_cliffs_MV.JPG Image Permission: This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of the file under the conditions that you appropriately attribute it, and that you distribute it only under a license identical to this one.