Data Breach at UCLA

The UCLA reports that there was a signicant data breach after hackers gained access to the its database containing records of up to 800,000 people. This blogger is not a data security expert but I still find some of the things that were overlooked puzzling. The information not only included the files of current and former students, staff and faculty, but the names and their social security numbers. While the UCLA spokesperson states that there is no evidence yet that the data has been misused, it is highly unlikely that such a sophisticated attack would be merely for fun. Some of that information will indeed be misused and there may be danger ahead. While sympathetic to the plight of the UCLA and the students, I wonder why institutions such keep such detailed information in the first instance. Shouldn't the lesson of the recent breaches be that minimalism is the way? Do not keep more data than is absolutely necessary. On the other hand, an institution that maintains records concerning 800,000 people ought to naturally find an encryption programme.

News Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/13/us/13hacker.html

How are States and Criminal Organizations Alike?

Without prejudice to the outcome of the investigations that will be conducted, I would be prepared to wager a substantial bet that Mr. Litvenenko was eliminated either by a certain state through its agents or by a nefarious criminal organization. It has now been confirmed that Mr. Litvenenko was poisoned by the extremely toxic Pollonium 210 isotope. It is highly unlikely that such a lethal and highly toxic element would be in the safe possession of any individual or group bereft of a high degree of organization and planning capability. Secondly, given the acceptance that the administration of this toxic agent required careful handling and storage, the individual who ultimately administered it must have been prepared to take great risks on behalf of the organization to ensure the elimination of the victim.

Bearing in mind that organized criminal groups do routinely eliminate victims through poisoning, I do not think that many of these would have the ability to procure, store, transport and place an agent to administer Pollonium 210 to the chosen victim. Certain nations and governments though have not only the capacity for all four, but are also known to have particular contempt for civil treatment of critics living outside the jurisdiction of those countries. States have behaved in a manner akin to organized criminal groups before but in the poisoning with Pollonium 210, one of them is the principal suspect.

Wonders of the World

Scholars and interested people may debate what truly deserves to be included in the list of human achievements considered as the Wonders of the World. Most of these however have to do with elaborate constructions that involved a high degree of engineering expertise in the medieval or middle ages. For all the achievements, how come the last century did not lead to a spectacular construction or achievement that led to a true debate about the displacement of the list of the Wonders of the World (WOWs).

Part of that answer must have something to do with two features that a good number of the Wonders of the World (WOWs) possessed. The first is that the these constructions were built in a world that was not unlike that of the twentieth century where ideas of freedom were very highly developed and expensively defended, with the result that indentured labour was largely unavailable. The second point is that the world assumed a more libertarian stance that would not allow for the construction of white elephants that most of the WOWS were. In essence, we are unlikely to see another construction matching the exquisite design and unabashed opulence of either the Taj Mahal or the Great pyramid of Giza because of the virtual abolition of indentured labour and the rise of representative democracy. This blogger will explore this hypothesis further by enumerating reasons for the claim.

Markets for Diamonds and bottled Tap Water

To my mind, one of the most fascinating ideas is why there are markets for some products and services in the first instance. Leaving aside the rhetorical bit of this question, I often wonder why markets exist for products that rational people perhaps would not buy at all or in the quantities and prices that are more common. For instance, many people purchase pure tap water that is bottled in plastic under the guise of mineral water at a premium. In many instances, the cost of the good is far above what the equivalent quantities of petroleum would be. Ornamental diamonds too are quite expensive, considering that it's all an isotope of carbon. It is to be granted that there are products that have real utility but are enhanced with specific branding and therefore carry a discernible premium derived from that brand.

However, why wouldn’t one take the time to find out exactly what real mineral water is in order to distinguish it from tap water sold in cheap plastic bottles? I assume that it is not elitist to state that this is the cost of failure to fully search for and base economic decisions on information. Sticking to the formation of markets that fail to pass my arbitrary test of rationality, the above items are some that I find completely puzzling and those that perhaps would cease to exist or seriously reduced if only the purchasers knew better. I will be adding to the list as I try to understand how these markets form.

Tribute to Milton Friedman

Speaking to the University of Chicago Magazine for November-December 2006 issue, Prof. Kevin Murphy states, “A really smart person will come up with what you would come up with,” Murphy answered, “only faster. A genius will come up with something that you would never come up with, no matter how long you worked on it.”

Without doubt, Milton Friedman is one in that category. Not only were his ideas very influential in the field of economics but his particular approach aided in giving it the respectability that it has as a scientific endeavor. Added to this is the fact that he was part of the intellectual establishment now recognized as the Department of Economics of the University of Chicago. That establishment has been assigned it own label and mark, known as Chicago approach to economics.

That he received the Nobel prize for economic sciences is not a surprise. Farewell Milton Friedman,but the discipline of economics lives.

Saddam is Convicted: So What?

"But there is no event so plain and clear that a determined human being can't find ambiguity in it". Lev Grossman (Time Magazine September 11 2006)

As the week began yesterday, the press was filled with news about the conviction of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. Judging from the limited access that this blogger saw of the press coverage of the trial, it would take a naive person to be surprised that the conviction came. Still, the very eloquent pronouncement of the death penalty jolted some and I am among them.

I am unsure of what its immediate and long term political consequnces will be in Iraq or elsewhere. However, the gleeful sentiments expressed by certain Iraqi leaders and joined by Presdent Bush suggest to me that there's been so much gloom about prospects for peace in Iraq that the pronouncement of the death penalty over a pitiable old man should be cause for celebration. The timing of the judgement was especially convenient in respect to the mid-term elections in the US but it could all be the result of very random and mutually exclusive events.

Madonna and the Baby

I make an exception below to comment on a purely social matter that is pertinent.

Over the last couple of weeks, the press in Africa, Europe and the US were filled with stories of the difficult legal process that baby David Banda has gone through in order to be formally and legally adopted by Madonna and her husband. This is one case in which there are unlikely to be winners because enduring questions that cannot be adequately answered. Madonna and her family are making a very brave step by opting to adopt a child from a separate continent, race and yes, that word culture. Typically uninformed objections and support for the process covered the press pages about whether all this was an exercise in vanity and therefore inimical to the best interests of little David. To their credit, Madonna and her family went about that process with dignity and minimum comment.

A story in the press today reports that she finally went on the offensive by attacking the bunch of those opposed to the adoption of baby Banda and that is where she completely lost the sympathy and respect on my side. Appearing on the Oprah Winfrey show aired on the 25th of October, she alleged that the press maelstrom was hurting all orphans in Africa. That is just pathetic. To my mind, it is akin to another argument recently heard that any adverse comment on the state of the war in Iraq would be "aiding the enemy". The attacks were not worth responding to especially when it is also reported that the father of the child may be having second thoughts about the adoption. Bad advice from whichever publicity firm she employs! While most of the attacks and support for her desire to adopt were really strident and sometimes personal, she has merely ensured that a more critical eye will be cast on her in terms of the parenting outcomes regarding David. She cannot win this and the sooner she stops parenting through the press the better. Fight no one now as your greatest obligation is to David for whom you now have elected to try your best as a parent. While at it, try and get David's biological father to rediscover some higher regard for you. A sanctimonious sermon on Oprah Winfrey show is not the way.

Can Spammers Really Spell Well?

I know that the sheer number of commercially driven spam mail is a reflection of the extremely low cost of sending them relative to the possibility that a substantial gain will ensue from a limited number. I have kept count over the last few days and think that I receive between 4 to 5 spam messages daily. I could therefore not help noting that there are defining characteristics of the spam that I receive. The first is that spam mail appears to be replete with grammatical errors and spelling mistakes. The other is that the application of the correct pronoun is often wrong. My main question then is that if one expects an average person to be taken in by the possibility of earning 25% of US$ 25 million, wouldn’t that recipient be particularly suspicious of the large number of errors in that single e-mail? Perhaps this is the wrong question because it appears that the indubitable negligence does not affect the overall success rate. If it did, then I guess that some spammers would take the time to run the messages through some person or computer facility that could detect and clean out the most obvious errors. Finally, it could just be that a person led to share a portion of US$ 25 million just has little time to conduct a spell check and write correct grammar.

Nobel Peace Prize 2006

The Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to Prof. Mohammed Yunus who is the founder of the Grameen Bank and the concept of Micro-lending and Micro-finance. The Nobel Committee never fails to surprise me because the odds for this individual were so low that they never featured in any of the discussions or commntaries on the most likly recipients.

My view is that this prize is richly deserved. Not only does the Grameen Bank represent a novel approach to helping the desperately poor, but more especially because the winner represents an institution with a replicable idea. Thus this is as much a prize for an idea whose originator proceeded to implement with significant success. Granted that the idea of micro-lending has its limits, it still represents sufficently original thinking about getting people to engage in profitable enterprise. No one can begrudge Prof. Yunus of this prize.

Nuclear NPT: In Search of New Paradigm

While the world was focused on the initiatives by the Islamic Republic of Iran to scale up uranium enrichment with the potential for the production of weapons grade material, North Korea conducts an underground nuclear test and reminds us all that we are juggling far too many balls. There have been predictable responses regarding the illegal move by North Korea but I wonder whether North Korea has not done it precisely because it is illegal. Being a rogue nation certainly ensures that one has international attention.

Two important questions come to this mind that is not thoroughly schooled in military affairs. The first one is whether North Korea really intends to maintain a set of military weapons with the intention to use them. Knowing Kim Jong Il, is it likely that he would be so daft as to try and attack while knowing that that such action would probably constitute the last executive action that he would take in North Korea? Judging from the actions that the leadership of North Korea is known for such as to overestimate the degree of control and influence that they may have on international affairs, the primary intent and timing of the test may be the result of different calculations and assumptions. Indeed, the North Korean establishment has communicated that it will abandon further development in return for reciprocation from the United States of America. At this point in time then, nuclear armaments or the threat of their attainment are a bargaining instrument.

The second question is informed by the fact that with the expectation of the Israeli bombardment of Osirak, there is no historical precedent of a nation that was successfully reversed once it took major steps towards being a nuclear power. As a matter of fact, the extremely brave tactical strike such as this one may not be entirely possible today. One may therefore ask, to what extent is the rest of the world determined to go to ensure that the North Korean Nuclear programme is permanently halted. More directly, the question asks what are the acceptable costs for maintaining the Non Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban in their current forms. My fear is that irrespective of the degree of danger posed by North Korea’s development of nuclear devices, the more appropriate approach demands the adoption of a different mind set altogether. I suspect that most nations, whether classified as rogue state or not, would ultimately cobble together a nuclear device of some kind or other notwithstanding the best endeavors of the international community.

Scary as the implications of this may be, I do not foresee the CBT and Non Proliferation Treaty maintaining their present character within the next two decades while still successfully holding constant the number of nuclear weapon capable states at the current number. Presently, the prestige and respect that nations gain from cheating their way into the circle makes even clumsy attempts at attaining nuclear power status irresistible for desperate dictatorships.

The condemnations aside, background thinking on developing unambiguous symbols to communicate the costs that would be attendant to either use or transfer of nuclear weapons material to non-state combatants is worthy of pursuit. The determination of North Korea and other non-democratic states to acquire nuclear devices suggests that browbeating them will not work for long. The real danger lies in the fact that there will certainly be a panic among its neighbors with the consequence that there will be a real arms race in the region.

A new paradigm for regulating entry into the nuclear weapons capable nations club is required. Otherwise, the international community or whatever is left of it will continue to juggle many balls with the increasing possibility that one may drop.

Quote of the Day

"Coming together is a beginning, Keeping together is progress. Working together is success." Henry Ford

Improving Richard Branson's Pledge

Sir Richard Branson today made the pledge to invest upto US$ 3 billion over the next decade into the search for alternative energy sources that would solve the problem of global warming.

I think that as reported, Sir Richard Branson requires a little advise to ensure that his pledge is used efficiently and that he could maximize its utility in the following ways.

First, the evidence that is available suggests that a number of research consortia and labs are already in the search for this alternative energy source. It is not necessary therefore to have to start again. Instead he ought to complement the ongoing research efforts by putting up his investment into a prize kitty that would be awarded to the researchers who provide the solution within the time frame.

Secondly, Sir Richard is best known for being a good investor in certain industries and making his companies grow. He does this while keeping overheads very low and leveraging on capital. He ought therefore to concentrate on making investments from which profits could be utilized to fill up the prize kitty and let all specialized research teams to compete for the prize. All he needs to do is define the technical parameters that the teams must meet in terms of energy costs and applications.

In this way, he would ensure that the appropriate division of tasks take place to provide the incentive towards provision of the the solution. Its about designing the appropriate incentives system.

Is The Battle of Ideas About Communication?

Animated discussion is one thing that yours truly does engage in not infrequently. I have recently come to wonder why very bad ideas of policy that are obviously couched in errors are not only often popular with academia and the laity but also dominate much of public approaches to issues such as trade, investment and immigration more especially.

One person who characterizes himself as a liberal posits that most of this has to do with the efficacy of communication. He proceeds to say that liberals in particular are very poor at resonating with people who are not as informed about a subject as they are. Granted that some very dangerous ideas are experessed in very simple terms, I am at a loss about how true this may be. Is it all about the efficacy in communication.

In other words, when it comes to public affairs, does style win hands down over substance? I will be back about this issue.

Trading off Perks for Parliamentary Immunity

Recent publications covering the application of economic thinking to everyday decision making and policy decisions appear to emphasize the fact that incentives are important for shaping behaviour. While I am largely in agreement, I retain the impression that this fact is oftentimes overstated. Leading publications here are probably Freakonomics by S. Levitt and S. Dubner on the one side and The Undercover Economist by Tim Harford.

However, nothing beats the real life application that the Prime Minister of Cambodia designed. It is argued that in the quest to undermine the opposition, a bill was brought before the legislature with the proposal substantially compromising the priviledge of immunity from prosecution for any speech while contributing to debates in the chamber. Contained within the same bill was a package consisting of pensions and other financial incentives. Legislators were then placed in the position where the rejection of one proposal meant that the whole bill would collapse.

The Economist Magazine dated 9th September 2006 reports on page 57 that the financial incentives, "..proved irresistible even to some in the opposition".

However, in respect of an adultery law, the PM had to resort to the majoritarian muscle of his party to pass a bill banning the practise. I wonder whether the same legislators would have opted to exchange the pensions and related privildges in order to prevent the imposition of criminal sanctions for adultery. Sometimes those who understand how incentives matter can get their way too easily. Apparently, Cambodian legsilators have led to the discovery of what legislative immunity is worth in financial terms.

Free, Clean and Constant Energy: Any Takers?

"We have developed a technology that produces free, clean and constant energy".

That is the claim made by a technology solutions firm based in Dublin. To my mind, the production of free, clean and constant energy is altogether impossible. While I remain skeptical principally because the claim remains irreconcilable with the conventional wisdom regarding matter and energy, I am impressed by the opennes by this firm in placing an advertisement in The Economist and its website challenging experts and researchers to apply as part of the jury to test the technology.

To the extent that I can tell, no bookies are taking odds on this and I will guess that the probability of the claim being verified is less than 5%. I will be keeping watch and please do so too at www.steorn.net

Whatever the outcome, this is science entering a new era. Do not blink!<

Quote of the Day

"For every complex problem, there is a simple solution- and its wrong". H. L. Mencken

Introduction

Hi Everyone,

This is without doubt a new experience for your blogger. I therefore start this posting with very modest expectations both of myself and whoever may favour this blog by reading or submitting comments.

Over the next couple of days, I will together with some friends put up the very limited set of rules that will guide any discussions here. We are minimalists.

Second, the interests and subjects will be very broad but there will be definite biases.

Finally, my hope is that we not only have interesting discussions but that whoever reads this will consider it worth their while.

Kwame.