Another political post today, and I thought I would start with Flash.  Lately there has been a lot of back and forth between Flash and Apple, each attacking the other over the future of Flash.  And today, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer group essentially said that while Flash is used now, there are issues, which is why their HTML5 support in IE 9 will support the H.264 codec.  Not a happy day for Flash, and quite a few people in support of Flash made some attacks to both Microsoft and Apple on this post. 

So, I suppose with the last bastion of browsers moving to HTML 5 and H.264, what would be the future of Flash?  I think it’s pretty obvious, Adobe will probably work in support for H.264, so current Flash developers will be able to use the same skills they have now to publish to the Web for all platforms.  Additionally, they will probably use Flash to develop apps for platforms other than the iPhone/iPad, meaning for WebOS (if HP keeps it), Android, and Windows Phone 7.  So Flash isn’t going away, even in the long term, though it’s use as the only video codec is rapidly becoming highly competitive.  So the politics of technology marches on, and without the help of the Democratic or Republican parties.  Go figure. 

For those of you who do develop for Flash, how are your projects working on mobile platforms?  Let me know, I’d love to get a survey and see where mobile app development is moving for Flash!

And the Chicago Sun-Times reports that President Obama will not have to testify in defense of former Governor Blagojevich.  I’m almost sad about that, because I wanted to see how the Administration and the Judicial would take such a request.  I love constitutional issues like that, it makes for good reading.  There is still a chance for it to come up in court of course, assuming it get’s appealed to the Supreme Court.  Something to look forward to in a couple of years, I suppose.

This week has been really interesting, and really busy.  For that reason, I’m doing another week in review (and it’s only Thursday!). 

First, Apple Training.  I taught the Mac OS X 10.6 Server Essentials course this week, and had two students.  Both were sharp, but one, Aaron Hix, works with Apple.  It was fun to talk with him, learn some things from his experiences, and talk about people we know.  I also got to see him at work (three laptops, an iPad, and an iPhone all running).  It was great fun, and we got a lot accomplished, and quickly!  It was the first time the Server Essentials class finished in 3 days instead of 4 (though we did skip exercises that both students were not anxious to go through). 

Second, I ordered an iPad from the Campus bookstore.  They had a sale where sales tax was not included in the price of all Apple merchandise, so I thought I would go for it.  Unfortunately, they didn’t have any iPads in stock (none!  Not even the 32GB which is supposed to be the unpopular one).  So, I placed the order and paid for it anyway, and I’m still waiting for it to show up (it could be in as late as next week).  In the mean time, I’m getting my apps ready, my pictures put together, and other fun things that come with getting a new device. 

Third, I became a Master Trainer for Apple IT classes, which means that we at the University of Utah can offer T3 courses.  It’s pretty exciting, and I’m looking forward to some being scheduled.  I also found out that we are unique among Apple Authorized Training Centers because we are able to run classes with just two students.  Other AATC’s usually need to have 5 to 8 to run a class.  We are hoping this means we get more students coming to our site, knowing we won’t cancel on them. 

Now for the Politics.  Apparently former Illinois Governor Blagojavich wants to have President Obama testify in his corruption trial, as part of the defense.  It will be interesting to see if a federal judge will try to subpoena the President in this matter.  My guess is he will not find reason to do so, though it’s always possible.  Even if it doesn’t happen here in Federal Court, it may be taken to the Supreme Court where the President will be asked again to testify.  And if asked, will the President make a personal appearance, or will he participate in some other way?  I’m keeping my eye on this one, just because it’s an interesting situation for the Judicial and the Executive branches. 

Apple vs. Adobe:  An interesting game of attacks, primarily from Adobe.  All over Flash..  Sure, Flash is a big part of the web (advertising, at least for my part), and it’s quite popular.  But Apple doesn’t want it on their iPhone or iPad.  So, Adobe tried to work around it by using Flash to develop apps for the iPhone and iPad, which Apple killed with the 4.0 user agreement (which also killed Titanium from Appcelerator).  Rumors were flying about Adobe suing Apple, but today they attacked Apple by saying they would rather work with Open platforms with their proprietary platform than with Apple’s closed ecosystem that supports open standards.  Apple fired back, the first time the Company has said anything publicly, while Adobe as a company and as individuals have been spewing forth hatred and ire at Apple. 

Now, I really like Apple.  I teach about their technologies, and I’m developing for the iPhone using their tools (mostly because I can’t use Titanium for my class I’m developing).  I like Adobe.  Photoshop is great, as are many of their other products.  But, much like fanbois for any technology that attack others for their choices, Adobe as a company has been very, well, surprisingly unprofessional.  So has Steve Jobs in his remarks, though they were never made publicly (I don’t consider a company meeting public, as it’s within the private company). 

I come away from this liking the experience I have with Apple’s tools, not having stupid Flash ads pop up over websites I’m trying to read, and enjoying the idea of having open standards grow faster on the Internet.  I also come away from this with a bad taste in my mouth for Adobe.  Perhaps I should start to look at the GIMP a bit more.  Also, I come away with having less respect for Steve Jobs as a person, though he seems to be doing very well as a CEO. 

Anyway, that’s the week in review.  Hopefully there will be some new news on the iPad soon, as in tomorrow.  But if not, I’ll be talking about it when I finally get my hands on it.

Tomorrow is Armistice Day, Veterans Day, Remembrance Day, or what ever the day is referred to in your country, and commemorates the start of the armistice that ended World War I in 1918 on the 11th month, the 11th day, at the 11th hour.  Since it was delcared by President Woodrow Wilson in 1919, it has since become a day to remember all our veterans of any war, at least here in the United States. 

On this day, I thought it would be fitting to mention the veterans in my own family that I am aware of. 

My great uncle Buck was a veteran of World War II.  I don’t ever remember meeting him, but we visited his grave every Memorial Day. 

My wife’s grandfather who served in the Navy in World War II.

My uncle Bob was a veteran who served in the Army in France, though after the war.

My uncle George served in Vietnam in the Army. 

My father missed Vietnam by 3 weeks, and the Gulf War by 3 weeks.  He has served in the Army, National Guard, and the Army Reserves for years. 

My Father-in-law who served in the Navy during the Vietnam War and the Gulf War.

My big younger brother is currently serving his Nation in Afganistan, and his tour of duty is due to be up in April, if I remember right.  He gets some time on the computer and can post on Facebook, letting us know he is still alive and doing well. 

I have cousins in the Air Force, Army, and Marines.  While I have not sought a career in the Military myself, the plight and concern for our veterans has been of interest to me for years.  My wife as well, as she grew up on a Naval Base in San Diego. 

As the 11th of November comes around, and you go about your daily routine because schools and businesses do not close anymore in honor of out veterans, I want you to think about why we have the holiday.  Take a minute and think on those friends and family that have served and are currently serving in the military, and what they are fighting for.  This isn’t a day for political posturing, incriminations, accusations, or attacks on the Military, but rather a day to reflect on the freedoms we have and the freedoms others do not, and who made those freedoms available to you. 

These are the veterans that I am aware of that are close, as of the beginning of World War II. 

Lately I have taken to reading Theodor Mommsen’s History of Rome under the Emperors, and I have to say I am absolutely enthralled.  I love Roman History, but in particular I like to look at how complex governing systems worked.  Rome was a very complex system from it’s Republic to even under the Emperor, and continues to surprise me with every new look.

Lately I have been reading the history under Vespasian to Caraculla, which is the Second Semester in the book.  Here Mommsen talks about the Imperial income, and how the government made money. Now I realize that I will be talking in generalities, so please forgive my lack of specifics.  This was just an idea I had from a night reading over a couple of nights.  I do not have exact numbers, and so I remain vague.  If you would like to provide specifics, feel free to do so in the comments.

Now, current governments make money through taxation.  For the American people, this means taxation at the Federal, State, and even municipal level through income taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, and sales tax.  Income is then generated, and distributed for the good of those governed.  That’s the theory, at any rate.  Whether or not it’s to the benefit of those governed is a completely different discussion that I want to avoid for this post. 

What’s interesting in Antiquity is the method of income:  It’s not taxation, though taxes did exist, but rather through government monopolies and land usage fees (rents).  The State controlled all mines, and the wares sold were 100% profit for the State.  Lands were, once a region was made a Province, automatically owned by the State, and any that wished to "buy" it back could do so through annual payments, and even pay it off completely within a short amount of time.  Those wishing only to use land for pasture, planting, etc, could then pay a usage fee based on the type of usage.

Because of these sources of income, the Roman State had roughly a 4% tax it levied on it’s citizens, and even less on provincials.  I found this almost incredulous, but yet it was enough to build massive roads and works all across the Empire, not the least of which were in Rome itself. 

So why isn’t this same method of State income still in use today?  A lot has to do with the history between Rome and now.  Let’s look at property first.  The Feudal period in Europe caused a huge backlash against the idea of a central government taking ownership of land.  Partly because of small feudal families wanting to keep their lands, partly because of the concerns of religious land ownership, it all came down to the right to own property that is protected by the US constitution.

With State-run monopolies, they were generally discouraged (with a few exceptions) with various experiments in various other countries failing.  That, and the fear of Communism becoming the new world economic model starting in the early 1900′s. 

Still, it’s interesting to see how different Governments have chosen to make their capital, and what they choose to do with it. 

In the United States, the Healthcare debate is bordering saturation, as everyone seems to have an opinion on any one of the 2,000 plus Healthcare bills currently submitted to both Houses by both political parties.  As such, it’s very difficult to get a non-partisan view of what Congress is currently trying to get passed, and what the Law will say.  Everyone has their opinions, with wild accusations from both sides being fired at will.

Because of this, it’s difficult for anyone to have a balanced view of the debate, as the facts seem to be difficult to come by.  So I thought I would take what I deem the responsible approach:  read the healthcare bills myself.  Unfortunately, there are literally over 2,000 submitted, and I don’t have the free time available to read them all.  Instead, I thought I would read the legislation the President has been touting as "The Bill" or "The Bills" on Congress, or the legislation he is supporting.  Unfortunately, I couldn’t find a single reference to a bill by the President or member’s of Congress.  Perhaps I was looking in the wrong places (I found I was in the end), but I just couldn’t find them. 

So, I thought I would get the information directly from the source:  The President.  Three weeks ago, I emailed the President’s office, addressing an Aide, because I don’t have any misconceptions that the President would have the time to read my email personally, and asked three questions:

• Which bill does the President support, so I could read it myself?
• If the bill is not crafted, can I get a draft version?
• Why has the President not kept his campaign promise made on Aug. 21, 2008, at a town hall in Chester, VA, to hold televised negotiations for Healthcare?

I had figured, as the President seemed intent on clarifying the wording of his Healthcare Reform initiative as represented by Congress and clearing up any misunderstandings, he and his office would be willing to at least point Americans to read the legislation.  It made sense to me, at least. 

I didn’t get a response right away, but that is to be expected, as I’m sure his aides and interns have a lot of email to go through.  So a week later I emailed Senator Orrin Hatch and Representative Jason Chaffetz, my representatives, and asked them the same questions. 

It has now been three weeks from the date of emailing the President, and two from emailing my representatives.  To this date, I received two responses:  one from the Office of the President, and one from Senator Orrin Hatch.  I have yet to receive a response from my congressman. 

The Office of the President, instead of sending my any answers, replied with a mass email asking me to post videos for Vice President Biden supporting healthcare reform.  As my questions were related to getting information to decide on whether or not I supported the healthcare reform as currently proposed, I was a little shocked and concerned, but not surprised.  The exact same thing happened to me when I emailed then Candidate Obama with a question:  I instead received invitations to join rallies to support the candidate, when I was as yet undecided. 

As some of you out there know, I am very particular in how my representatives listen to their constituents.  I have voted against local and State officials that have refused to answer emails and letters, while heartily supporting those that do.  Candidate and now President Obama’s organization has failed twice now to answer what I consider critical questions.  Others may disagree, but they have yet to earn the support they so erroneously assume I give when asking a question because they fail to answer those questions. 

The next response I received was from Senator Orrin Hatch.  In the past, I have sent emails and always gotten a response, which is why I support Orrin Hatch.  His staff treats me like a valued person, taking the time to respond to my questions.  This time was not different, as he provided an answer to the first question, the only one I would have expected he could give:  the legislation.  I knew he couldn’t answer for the President on the third, and as there was drafted legislation, the second didn’t need to to be addressed.

But what surprised me was the way it was answered.  I didn’t get any partisan statements, mentioning his willingness to fight for what is right, defying the Democrats and their evil ways, Parting the Red Sea, and other such political mumbo-jumbo that seems to be too prevalent in this debate.  Instead, he told me where I could find the legislation, explained about the THOMAS Congressional Record posted by the Library of Congress, which has links on it’s main website to HR 3200 (the house bill), and now to the Senate Finance Committee’s bill.  It was amazing, it was astounding, a politician that was more concerned with my question than with partisan rhetoric. 

Mr. Chaffetz, I am still waiting for a reply from your office. 

So, for those who are interested in reading the legislation yourself, it is available freely to all.  Perhaps, if we as Americans stop listening to the Partisan bickering and get involved constructively in the process, civility can return to politics.  But then I suppose it wouldn’t be politics anymore, would it? 

There has been so much going on this last week with the Healthcare Legislation debate, ups and downs with the Economy, and name-calling on both sides, you would think I would have something to say in the matter.  Well, I do, but I have to wait until at least one of the three politicians contact me with their replies.

I know Senator Hatch will, because he has been consistent in giving me replies to any question I send, all by snail mail.  I’ve never contacted Representative Chaffetz before, so this will be his first test (I tend to vote against politicians if they or their staff do not reply to my queries).  Lastly, I emailed the President’s office, requesting information from the aide that will read it (I’m under no misconception that I will get to the President himself).  So, things are on hold.

Beets

So what is this about beets?  This last Sunday we had my wife’s family over for a barbeque, and I cooked (again).  I knew a salad was coming, and some drinks, but no one ever brings veggies.  So, I thought I would try some things.

First, I made some hot carrots from the carrots in our front garden and the Santa Fe peppers we had in the back.  They were hot, and delicious.  I still have a big bottle left (not too many people wanted to risk it, I suppose).

Next, I pulled some beets.  Now, I’ve had boiled beets, raw beets, and pickled beets, but I’ve never grilled them.  I thought I’d give it a try, so I sliced them up.  I then sprinkled some olive oil over them, and threw them on a very hot grill.  You see, I grill with real wood coals, and so it takes time for the wood to burn down.  I threw the beets on when the wood was still burning, because I wanted to test the grill temperature.

The first thing I noticed was the seepage from the beets, which is normal.  Then, the carmel that formed.  You see, all beets have a high sugar content, and any beet can be used to make sugar.  By grilling them, the sugar browned, giving the beet a carmel flavor.  It was just like eating candy.  If I would have done anything differently, I would have added some salt to enhance the flavor.

So that’s it!  If you have never had a grilled beet, I would highly recommend it.  I didn’t peel the beet because I’m a firm believer in nutrients being in the skins, but they would be less bitter with a peeled beet than with a beet with the skin on.  Give it a try!

Last night I was watching a show with a mock pageant, one where the viewers participated in the outcome.  The viewers voted on the finalists, those selected by the judges to be of the best quality, thereby controling the outcome of the pageant to only those who were acceptable to the judges.  This is not unlike any reality show, where choices are already narrowed, making the decision easier.

Rewind about two thousand years.  Rome was a dominant power, having emerged from their Republic after a series of civil wars between powerful political and military men.  Now, at the end of the last pretexts, an imperial dictatorship was put in place, though Octavian, now Augustus, kept the pretext of choice and the Republic by having a Senate for which the people voted; a Senate with little power.  But the pretext, or the illusion of choice allowed the people to feel as though they still had a voice and could participate in politics.

Now fast forward to the 1780′s, when the United States of America was being formed. The Founding Fathers, finding problems with the Articles of Confederation in their effectiveness, met to draw up the Constitution.  This is when the three branches of Government were defined, their spheres of influence set.  Part of that definiton process outlined the methods of appointment.  Because of concerns regarding the common man’s understanding of the issues, an intermediary was created to vote on their behalf.  This intermediary, the Electoral College, can vote any way they want, though they generally (with one exception) vote with the results of the Popular vote.  So the people have only the illusion of Democracy, choosing instead intermediaries to worry about their political future.

I think that Scott Adams put it best:  Two Choices give the illusion of leadership.  As long as we are given a choice between two things, we are happy.  Republican or Democrat, Capitalism or Socialism, local vendors or corporate stores, etc.  Our society is built on these kinds of choices, these illusions of power and leadership.  Society doesn’t seem to want to worry about the details, just the choice.

But, you might ask, I have the freedom to choose, so that’s all I need, right?  Well, the thing is, those who want you to choose their way know we prefer simple choices, and as such try to frame our public opinions by trying to make their side seem like the side of reason.  They do this by distorting facts, telling half-truths, and providing “spin” on any and all positions.  This practice has been running in Politics since politics started.  As I’m sure the Ancient Greeks could attest to, it has had devastating results to nations and the lives of others.

Please don’t take anything I say to be supportive of any political agenda.  I just started to notice this pattern, and thought it interesting that democracy as we know it is nothing more than an exercise in managed choices for those who are too busy with their own lives to be bothered with “the issues”.  The only way to avoid that is to become active with the issues, which can take time away from other activities.  That again, is a choice…  how managed it is depends on ourselves, I suppose.

Science Daily had an interesting article today regarding the impact Autism is having on mothers vs. mothers of children with developmental delays.  It seems that parents with Autistic children have a higher level of stress and psychological distress than those parents of children with developmental delays. 

It’s interesting also to note that high care-giving needs are not the cause of stress.  Even though some parents of children with developmental disorders need to focus more on care giving than parents of autistic children, autistic children still increased the stress of the mother and family. 

Why?  It all comes down to the behavior of the autistic child.  Autistic children have meltdowns more often than normal children with a lot of irritability, agitation, crying, inappropriate speech, and so on, and on top of that they have a hard time following rules.  For instance, let’s say in your house you have a rule that your child is not to go outside after a specific time of day.  Most children will obey that rule after one or two attempts and failures (meaning they are punished in some fashion).  The autistic child will not follow that rule, even if they are punished.  If they have it in their mind they want to go outside, they will. 

So what does this mean?  It means that family life becomes even more stressed than a "normal" family, and as such the parents have a greater strain on their relationship.  Many parents of autistic children tend to have higher rates of divorce than those without autistic children.  The stress of the child’s behavior needs to be relieved, and sometimes parents take it out on each other. 

What can we do about it?  Keep in mind the stress, and find ways to release it in a healthy way.  The best way is to develop a family adaptive functioning technique that allows you to adapt to the stress in a safe environment.  As a family, parents need to support each other, and feel support from other avenues.  Because if the parents feel like they are getting support, they are more able to support their children with early intervention and therapy. 

This is why it is so important for parents to have politicians that really get it, and know what the Autistic community needs.  It isn’t about who is right or wrong, it’s about understanding the need of parents and addressing that need for the sake of the entire family.

Today there have been a lot of articles in the news about the reaction, or lack thereof, from President Obama’s Administration regarding the protests and prelude to revolution in Iran.  Instead of whole-hearted praise and warm greetings to those protesting what appeared to be a rigged election, it has been a measured, cautious approach.  Some call this outrageous, others call it being too weak.  I, on the other hand, see it as exactly what the US should be doing, and here is why:

In 1989, when protesters in Berlin began to bring down the Berlin Wall, the world was elated.  Everyone wanted a piece of the wall (and I think you can still find some pieces on eBay, though I’m not sure if they are authentic), and everyone was talking about the success of the US policy against Russia.  The media was praising this, and looking to the President, then President George Bush (Sr.) for words of support and praise.  Instead, President Bush was reserved, much like President Obama is currently.  He was criticized for his apparent lack of concern or support for what almost every President since John F. Kennedy had called for:  the fall of the Berlin Wall.

But President Bush had a reason to be reserved:  Having worked for the CIA, he knew of a common technique used by the KGB where rumors of CIA and US support would come to those who revolt against Soviet rule.  The protests would then be made with the hope and understanding that the CIA would back the revolt, and the KGB would then sweep in and quickly wipe out all dissidents.  President Bush didn’t want the same technique used in Germany, and so merely said he was watching things closely and didn’t say anything regarding the fall of the Wall. 

As a result, the fall of East Germany under the rule of the Soviets was completely a German matter, and was not controlled or instigated by the US.  As such, the reunification has since been a German decision, and no one can claim that Germany is by any means under the control of the US Government.  Also, other countries were able to break free from the Soviet State, and become independent without US intervention, and therefore their governments became truly theirs, representative of the people. 

So now let’s look at Iran.  There is a lot going on there that is promising to those looking for freedom and a true democracy in that country, free from the influences of the US or any other nation.  These demonstrations are truly Iranian in nature, and President Obama is determined to keep it that way.  It’s worthy of President Bush, and I imagine he probably had counseled with the former President on this very issue.  There are no other sitting Presidents who have had this type of experience, and no other President that could have boasted such a successful outcome. 

So, to the people of the Media, before you criticize the President for taking such a cautious and reserved stance, keep in mind what is at stake here.  The minute the US is seen supporting any type of demonstration, the current regime can dismiss it as foreign intervention, and kill people without conscience.  But if it remains purely an Iranian event, the Iranians can decide for themselves if a regime change is necessary to bring true democracy to the country, or even if they really want a true democracy.