Philip Greenspun’s Weblog

In the great tradition of pundits, I will put forth a definite prediction for the 2008 Presidential election here.  If the prediction proves true, I will publish a gloating posting in November 2008.  If the prediction proves false, I will never refer to it again 🙂

The Republicans will lose the 2008 election.  People are tired of war.  Churchill was victorious in World War II and nonetheless his party was voted out of power in 1945 because, presumably, Churchill reminded the British of their sufferings against the Germans.  The Administration and the media have characterized what we are doing in Iraq as a war and the press coverage has communicated that we are losing that war.  Thus the Republicans remind Americans not only of war but of losing a war.

That leaves the Democrats.  Listening to Hillary Clinton, people feel that our problems are persistent, serious, and will require vastly higher taxes to address.  Listening to Barack Obama, people feel that our problems are temporary, slight, and can be fixed without raising taxes.  Barack Obama will win the nomination and therefore the election.

How close will the election be?  Both parties have sophisticated methods of making their candidates appeal to voters.  In the absence of spin doctors, Obama would win by a landslide, but the days of landslide victories are probably past.  Obama’s basic message, that the federal government can guarantee everything to everybody without a round of tax increases that would cripple the economy, violates basic laws of economics and common sense.  He will therefore be vulnerable to negative advertising, which will reduce his lead to 5 percentage points over whoever is unfortunate enough to win the Republican nomination.

What will be the net result of this change in government?  In December 2009 we will suffer a massive nationwide psychological depression.  People assume that all of their problems can be blamed on George W. Bush personally.  When the hated King Bush II has been back to Texas for a year and the beloved Obama has been in office for a year, people will look around for a quick status check.  They will still be stuck in horrific traffic.  They will still be paying insane prices for crummy housing in bleak, lonely communities.  Their children will be getting a terrible education at the local public school, perhaps developing to about 15 percent of their potential.  If in a hip urban area, criminals will still be smashing their car windows and taking their GPS.  They will realize that virtually none of the things that are unpleasant about their life have anything to do with the federal government, except for the war in Iraq, which a quick check of the headlines will reveal that we are still losing.

Full post, including comments

My friend Arnold called me up today inviting me to fly up to Nashua, New Hampshire (KASH) for lunch in his Piper Meridian.  Taking a jet-powered airplane 20 nautical miles for lunch doesn’t sound like the world’s most efficient plan, but Jet-A fuel is so much cheaper at ASH compared to BED that it makes excellent financial sense.  The flight was a good chance to compare a modern turboprop to the turbojets that I had been flying.

Starting the PT-6 is easy, but nowhere near as easy as starting the FADEC (computer-controlled) engines in the Cessna Citations.  The turboprop has “beta” and “reverse”, which are useful for slowing down on the ground but perhaps no better than the powerful antiskid brakes on the Mustang.  The downside of beta and reverse is that, as Arnold pointed out in flight, “If you pull the throttle back into beta, you’ll kill us both”.  You have to pull the throttle over a detent to get it into beta, but it is not idiot-proof.  Adjusting the power for takeoff requires great care.  The throttle is a stiff mechanical linkage to a fuel controller.  If you push a little too hard you’ll overtorque the engine by 200 ft-lbs.  Otherwise take off was pretty quick, helped by the fact that the wind was blowing 20 gusting 30 knots down the runway.

New England seems to present perennially miserable flying conditions and today was no exception.  Even in an aircraft with a gross weight of 4800 lbs., the bumps were significant.  The Malibu/Mirage/Meridian cabin is not famous for having extra space.  I’m exactly 6′ tall, the seat was all the way down, and my headset was almost brushing the ceiling.  Each bump would whack my head against the hard plastic ceiling, painfully dislodging the headset.  Interior noise was loud, but bearable with noise-canceling headsets.  Another challenge was the fact that the airplane has three airspeed indicators, all indicating different airspeeds.  This is a feature of the Meggitt Magic glass panel that I’ve seen before.  The airspeed tape in front of me was reading about 10 knots slower than the other two, which was unnerving because I always thought that I was flying too slowly.

The Meridian offers much better short-field utility than the Mustang, but otherwise it is hard not to get spoiled by flying a turbojet.  [The Mustang could be operated easily from short fields except that the owner’s manual demands using runways long enough to accelerate to rotation speed, lose one engine, hit the brakes, and stop before the end of the runway.  This does give a comfortable safety margin, but if you were satisfied with the safety of taking off from a short runway in a Piper Malibu you’d be a lot safer depending on both engines in the Mustang continuing to run.]

Full post, including comments

In 1998, I wrote a little article advocating that MIT abolish tuition, on the grounds that Harvard would eventually become so rich that they would have to abolish tuition or fight the IRS and explain why they weren’t simply an investment fund that ran a profit-making university on the side as a way to escape paying tax on investment returns.  The consequence of Harvard eliminating tuition would be that M.I.T. would only be able to attract those students who had been rejected by Harvard and the rest of the Ivies.  By eliminating tuition early, M.I.T. would capture the attention of super rich dot-commers and get enough donations to eliminate tuition.

What happened?  M.I.T. raised tuition, Harvard and the Ivies did too, and the rich techies gave their money to Africans.  Then Harvard began to eliminate fees for poor families.  Harvard’s new definition of poor extends up to $180,000/year in income.  A poor family won’t have to pay more than 10 percent of its income to send a proto-snob to Harvard.  Home equity won’t be counted toward family wealth anymore either.

Full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/education/11harvard.html

Full post, including comments

This week marks my first experience flying turbojet-powered aircraft.  I did the takeoff from BED and the climb to 28,000′ in the CJ3, whereupon we had to engage the autopilot under the RVSM rules (now that high-flying airplanes are separated by only 1,000′ instead of 2,000′, the FAA requires the use of autopilots).  As we descended towards ICT four hours later, I clicked off the autopilot to build a little experience on the controls before commencing the approach and landing.  Tony, the captain, piped up from the right seat, “You’re flying by hand now.  Do you want to declare an emergency?”  I did a reasonable hand-flown instrument approach, breaking out of the clouds about 800′ above the runway.  We picked up a trace of rime ice.

The next jet flight was in the new Cessna Mustang, supposedly a very light jet but it looks pretty much the same as the popular CJ-series.  Takeoff, the climb through the clouds, and some maneuvers at 10,000′ (steep turns, stalls) were uneventful.  The instrument landing system approach and touchdown on the slightly snowy/icy runway were reasonably good.

My final jet flight started off very rocky, with the airplane veering off to the right after I brought up the power.  We clipped a couple of runway lights before I got the Mustang back onto the centerline.  One engine failed as we were climbing out, but I was able to get it restarted eventually.  Then the other engine caught on fire.  I followed an emergency checklist to shut down the engine and extinguish the fire.  When nearly ready to land, the control tower said that there were deer on the runway, that the airport was unsafe, and demanded a go-around.  I climbed back up on one engine, retracting the gear for better climb.  I returned for another instrument landing system approach and a touchdown, bounce, touchdown again, veer to the right, and finally brought the plane to a stop on the centerline.

The FlightSafety instructor assured me that “everyone has trouble maintaining directional control with the rudders at lower speeds in the sim.”

A lot of firsts this week:  flying turbojets and flying a full motion flight simulator.

Full post, including comments

Wichita, Kansas, even in the depths of an ice storm, has been a reasonably pleasant place to hang out.  The folks at the airport Hilton are much friendlier than any of my friends in Boston.  The price of a room ($94/night) is probably less than what I spend keeping my apartment heated, cooled, Internetted, lighted, insured, taxed, and maintained.  The restaurants have been good.  There are no traffic jams.  We went to the local health club, Genesis, with a fantastic array of machines, an indoor running track, a spacious free weight area, racquetball courts, a 25 yard pool, a huge hot tub, a sauna, a steam room, a pool for water aerobics, and a Swim-Ex treadmill pool.  Unlike the $50 million, $900/year MIT gym, the Genesis club provides soap in the showers.  In fact, the club provides shampoo, shaving cream, deodorant, and a bunch of other items from dispensers.  The cost to enjoy this luxurious retreat?  $40 per month.

All is not rosy in Wichita, however.  One guy in the Cessna sales department told us that the nicest part of the city was just north of downtown.  “I’d like to live there, but no way would I be willing to pay the outrageous price of a house there.”  What does it cost to buy into Wichita’s most happening neighborhood?  “You could be looking at as much as $160,000 for a house there.”

Full post, including comments

We had a fun time today giving rides to nearly 50 Harvard students, faculty, and science post-docs (these folks with Ph.D.s reported a salary of $38,000 per year for 70+ hours/week, not exactly great arguments against my women in science article). The weather cooperated as much as you could expect in Massachusetts, with clear skies and winds at 16 knots gusting 22. We landed on some soccer fields behind the Harvard tennis center. The Boston Logan tower was cooperative as always and there were no massive sporting events in open-air stadiums nearby generating flight restrictions. Nobody threw up. The undergraduates at the Harvard Flying Club had everything organized down to the minute and even managed to run a bbq grill.

The Robinson R44 ran like a champ for 4.2 hours, smoothed out the bumpy air, and impressed the audience during shut-down periods.

Off to Kansas tomorrow in a CJ3 and then for a test flight in the Cessna Mustang.

Full post, including comments

I gave a talk at Harvard this evening (helicopter aerodynamics, to the flying club, in preparation for giving rides from the athletic fields tomorrow).  The venue was a renovated classroom in a building occupying about $20 million of real estate in Harvard Square.  The university’s $40 billion cash hoard was sufficient to pay for a blackboard, a box of chalk, a video projector, and a fancy A/V panel.  However, they couldn’t come up with another $300 for a permanently installed Dell PC that would be hardwired to the A/V panel and to the Internet.  So a 20-minute harlequinade ensued in which students attempted to hook up a laptop both to the Internet (wireless) and to the projector (wired).  They were never fully successful in getting a large PDF to load.

How many university classes are there in which someone wouldn’t want to project a diagram or something else from a Web server somewhere (see this older posting, for example)?  If the answer is “almost none”, why don’t the schools buy some cheap PCs and nail them down in the classrooms?

Full post, including comments

A new Amazon Kindle electronic reader arrived in today’s mail. It took about 15 minutes from the time that I opened the box until I was reading the first book that I purchased, Joshua Ferris’s Then We Came to the End. The $9.99 was seamlessly withdrawn from my credit card. Amazon might make you poor with this device, but they won’t make you miserable.

This would make a great Christmas present for anyone who loves to read and travels enough that light weight is important. The screen is not nearly as bright and attractive as a color LCD, but the battery life is about 100X longer than it would be with a standard LCD display. Books are downloaded over a cell phone network and download time is minimal. The device shows up at your house already configured to know who you are and how to charge you for stuff (keep that in mind if you buy this as a gift; it will truly be the gift that keeps on giving… $9.99 holes in your credit card statement).

This is the kind of thing that the phone companies would have done a long time ago if they had any imagination (consider that you still can’t use your mobile phone in the U.S. to book a hotel room, even though the phone company knows your approximate location, Expedia knows which hotels have rooms, and the hotels are accustomed to paying substantial commissions).

I’m hopping out to Phoenix next week (Citation CJ3 to Kansas and then Cirrus SR22 the rest of the way and back) and will take nothing to read other than the Kindle, then supply a full report.

[Update after reading one book (mostly on an airplane under the reading light): The main issue for me is that turning pages interrupts the flow.  I have to stop and concentrate on the last 5 or 6 words before pressing the Next button, then wait 1 second, then pick up the sentence again.  I am accustomed to reading one sentence at a time, not one word at a time.  It is easier to do that with a book where the pages can both be seen at one time and/or can be flipped very quickly.  The Kindle would be better if there were an option to overlap a line or two between pages.

I still give the Kindle an A+ for user experience and and A- for traveling.  I would give it only a C for replacing books at home or in the office.

I left the Kindle in a backpack with the screen saver on, came back a week or so later, and found the battery 100% dead.  I’m not 100 percent confident that I could travel with this without the charger.  (Wouldn’t it be nice if companies could agree on a way to get power to these little devices and standard hotel rooms had the right interface?)]

Full post, including comments

A New York Times reporter contacted me over the weekend, wanting a quote for a story on paying people to do illustrations for Wikipedia.  He asked me whether I thought that this was a radical departure for Wikipedia, which had never paid authors before. I said “it isn’t radical because illustrators aren’t authors.”  The illustrators with whom I’ve worked are not domain experts.  They’ve taken a pencil sketch from me and cleaned it up so that it doesn’t look like it was drawn by a developmentally disabled third grader.  To me, paying an illustrator is like paying a typesetter or someone else who assist in preparing a manuscript.  Of course there are medical illustrators and others who have substantial knowledge of anatomy and who probably be regarded as authors, but I wasn’t think of that when I suggested the following idea to Jimmy Wales: (1) author sketches in pencil, scans, and uploads to a queue, (2) illustrator somewhere in the world downloads the pencil sketch, reworks competently, and uploads to an approval queue (email notification to the author), (3) author reviews to make sure that the professionally drawn illustration is consistent with the pencil sketch, (4) illustrator gets paid and drawing goes live on Wikipedia, with hyperlink credit to a page where all of the illustrator’s contributions are shown and that has contact information for that illustration (I figured that prominent credit would cut down on the compensation demanded by illustrators).

So… please fill the comment section with your opinions.  Is this a radical departure?  Is the illustrator the author or the domain expert who did the pencil sketch?

Full post, including comments

In chatting with friends here in Cambridge, all of whom are, needless to say, angry Democrats who blame all of the world’s ills on George W. Bush, the conversation has turned to some cheerful holiday subjects…

• is the average working American better or worse off than in decades past?
• is it easier or more difficult for an American to achieve a reasonable standard of living?
• is all of the increased wealth of our society going to a handful of folks at the top enjoying a new gilded age?

For these diehard Democrats, the answer is clear: the average person is worse off; the rich are a lot richer. One statistic that seems to support this way of looking at the U.S. is a chart of real wages showing that the average weekly earnings, in 1982 dollars, grew to a peak of $332 in 1972 and has fallen to $278 today.

http://visualizingeconomics.com/2006/08/15/average-income-in-the-united-states/ and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

show that real household income is still growing, albeit at a slower pace than between WWII and the early 1970s. How to explain this difference? The fall in average wage might indicate an influx into the workforce of people who work only part time, e.g., mothers of young children. The rise in family income might indicate an influx into the workforce of people who hadn’t been working before, e.g., wives of guys with jobs (though the Wikipedia entry indicates that the number of married households with two working partners is decreasing as a percentage of the total, maybe an indication that divorce has become more common).

One thing that nobody seemed to consider was the effect of immigration. If a bunch of folks show up here with limited education and poor English skills we wouldn’t expect them to earn high wages. It might not be an indication of unfairness if real wages have stagnated. It might simply mean that immigrants are arriving in huge numbers. The natives are experiencing income growth but they are disappearing in the statistics under the tide of immigration.

http://encarta.msn.com/media_461544532/Immigration_to_the_United_States.html

shows that the modern stagnation in real wages coincides with a huge increase in the number of immigrants. Should we feel sorry for a guy from Guatemala who earns only $277/week? As long as his standard of living is higher than it was in Guatemala, we shouldn’t pity him on economic grounds. If his children are not as prosperous as the children of a Rockefeller, should we pity them or give the family a few more generations to build wealth?

Complaints about the plight of the average worker seem to be contradicted by everyday experience. Habitually drunken carpenters who seldom show up to work are driving around in $35,000 SUVs, living in brand-new sprawl housing, and buying $2,500 flat-screen TVs that nobody in the 1970s could have imagined a need for. Brazilian house cleaners with questionable immigration status are driving the 4-year-old SUV that was traded in on that new one. Whole Foods is packed with people willing to line up to pay $150 for a slice of cheese, plate of sushi, bowl of soup, and bunch of free-range carrots. It is tough to hire anyone competent. We see the oppressed masses in Michael Moore movies, but we don’t see them on the streets or in the stores agonizing over whether to buy bread or medicine.

My explanation for the apparent contradiction between what one sees at the car dealers and BestBuy and how folks in the Peoples’ Republic of Cambridge feel is immigration and population growth. I mentioned this to one interlocutor, 70 years old now, and pointed out that if the U.S. had remained a country of 150 million as it had been in her youth, the average wage might well be quite high because labor would be scarce. She was shocked and refused to believe that there had been such significant growth, but the Census Bureau backed me up. We asked her what she thought the best years to have been an American were and she said the 1950s, despite the fact that conservatism strangled her beatnik spirit. The population of the U.S. reached 160 million in 1953, compared to 303.5 million today.

What about the countries that we regard as workers’ paradises with 35-hour work weeks, national health care, and lavish pensions? Visit

http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/300million_popchart/flash.htm

and click on “International”. Then click “USA”, “France”, and “Germany.” Notice that the last two have flat population graphs since 1950. Click on France and Germany again to remove them. Then click Mexico. A session with Edward Tufte’s books would probably result in the graph being rescaled, but it is clear that we have more in common with Mexico than with France.

So… should we give thanks this holiday season that we have managed to introduce 150 million additional people to the joys of traffic jams, strip malls, materialism, borrowing money, printing money, and invading helpless Third World countries (i.e., all of the things that make America great)? Or should we be sad that we can’t have a country of 303 million where a fresh-off-the-boat immigrant earns as much as someone whose family walked off the Mayflower?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/technology/01online.html  says that income distribution hasn’t changed since Jesus Christ was in the Temple…

Full post, including comments