February 09, 2010Second Coming of Wyden-Bennett?Republicans, preparing for Obama's Healthcare Summit, clearly want to avoid looking as foolish as they did when hosting Obama at their House issues summit. "Start over," seems to be the new mantra. How To Be Serious To avoid being laughed out of the room again, Republicans need to actually offer a starting point at which to "start over." Something that has been scored by the CBO. Something that has a believable chance of getting 60 votes. I think their best hope is to point out how Obama rejected the bipartisan Wyden-Bennett bill during his effort to pull together union support to get all 60 Democratic votes. Wyden-Bennett has been scored by the CBO and it is serious. It is a it is a shorter and simpler bill. It deals with underlying costs and structural inefficiencies in the tax code. It extends universal care. Wyden-Bennett has enough real support on both sides of the aisle - and enough Democratic opposition - that if the Republicans were to re-propose it seriously and in earnest, they might not be laughed out of the room at the Obama Summit. Instead, they might actually throw the whole process into disarray. How To Avoid Disarray Democrats should be ready for the second coming of Wyden-Bennet. Their best counterpunch would be to be prepared to throw out all the hard work they have done over the last six months and prepare enough votes to pass Wyden-Bennett unanimously among Democratic Senators. That move would be a surprise and would force Republicans to reveal that they are actually obstructionist after all. Or pass it. Which would be a good thing. Posted by David at 06:56 AM
| Comments (0)
February 01, 2010Reading JQuery SourcesJQuery has become the stdlib of Javascript. After reading the jQuery docs, the next level of understanding comes from reading the code. Here is an excellent new tool for reading the jQuery source, thanks to James Padolsey. Food for Thought: International jQuery Use On going back and looking at the top regions in which 'jquery' is a topic of Google searches, I find it interesting - and maybe worrying for U.S. internet innovators - that none of the top 6 jQuery cities of the world are in the U.S... Continue reading "Reading JQuery Sources"Posted by David at 07:23 AM
| Comments (0)
January 30, 2010Random Seeds, Coded Hints, and QuintillionsHere is a seedable random number generator in Javascript that you can set up to produce a determinstic sequence of pseudorandom numbers. Browsers do not provide a built-in way to seed Math.random(), so this solution is handy both when you need a repeatable pseudorandom sequence that is completely predictable, and when you need a robust seed that is much more unpredictable than your browser's built-in random number generator. Many games that use weak random number generators have been cracked by exploiting their lack of randomness, and recently it has even been shown that it is possible to guess your 'random' Social Security Number given information about the time and location of your birth. To resist this type of attack, you want do better than a linear congruential PRNG seeded with the current time. Explanations below. A Math.seedrandom Function
Math.seedrandom('any string you like');
Next time you call Math.random(), you will get a deterministic sequence of results that can be reproduced at any time on any browser by calling seedrandom with the same string (with the example seed above, you will always get 0.4514661562021821, 0.06749172707294096, 0.8683962295094814, etc). The code uses RC4 as the pseudorandom number generator, so the randomness is a bit better than what you get from most browsers' built-in Math.random. But since it does all the computation in javascript, it is also is 3-10x slower. A minified version of seedrandom.js (using the Google Closure Compiler) is less than 1K. The code also supports automatic seeding... Continue reading "Random Seeds, Coded Hints, and Quintillions"Posted by David at 08:06 PM
| Comments (0)
January 24, 2010Xinhua: We Report, You DecideDoes reading the Chinese press remind you of watching Fox News? There is a whole world outside China and outside Fox News that is starkly different and a bit closer to reality. But when you realize that Fox is actually the most trusted news brand in the U.S. today, you can get an appreciation for the success that a censored Chinese media can have inside the world's largest society. The effects of squashing dissent in the name of nationalism are not "very limited"... Posted by David at 09:49 AM
| Comments (1)
January 19, 2010My God, What Have We Done?Fellow Massachusetts voters! What was the point in electing Brown? Continue reading "My God, What Have We Done?"Posted by David at 09:57 PM
| Comments (3)
January 18, 2010Campaign CallsWe've gotten three calls from the Scott Brown campaign in the last 24 hours, two of them late at night. The GOP smells blood in the water. But everybody around here is a Democrat! Posted by David at 12:10 PM
| Comments (1)
January 17, 2010VoteMy wife was originally not going to bother voting in Tuesday's special election for Senate, since we live in deepest of the deep blue states. But it's turning out to be a nailbiter, so she's going to vote after all. Go vote. Posted by David at 07:38 AM
| Comments (0)
January 16, 2010Ballmer Favors Torture for LawyersAfter a series of Chinese lawyers have been imprisoned and tortured and "gone missing" for speaking up for their clients in China, our friend Steve Ballmer still "doesn't understand" why Google is upset about break-ins into Chinese lawyers email accounts. "I don’t think there was anything unusual," he says. Perhaps torture of lawyers is routine at Microsoft; it is a bit unusual at Google. Posted by David at 12:18 PM
| Comments (0)
January 15, 2010AnagramA puzzle! Rearrange the letters SEARCH ENGINE to make a phrase representing the displeasure of a nation. h/t Rachel Grey Posted by David at 11:38 AM
| Comments (6)
January 14, 2010Flawed SecurityAs awareness of the seriousness of the Chinese intrusion into Google expands, I would like to highlight what the Chinese "People's Daily" is saying about Google today: As the world's most famous search engine company, supposedly its defense capabilities should also be very strong. If the defense system is really flawed, it is necessary to strengthen preventive measures, while passive withdrawal only shows incompetence, but also contributes to the arrogance of hackers, which is very inconsistent with Google's prominent identity. Think about that for a moment. Google caught the electronic equivalent of a Chinese drone attack, using sophisticated weapons and circumnavigating layers of defenses. Imagine if the Chinese People's daily had issued a similar statement about the lack of antiaircraft missiles atop the World Trade Center or lax security of United Airlines. The Google attack was not merely a picked lock. As some details come out, it is clear that the attacker must have had access to many resources: the ability to make a custom virus on a previously unknown bug in IE; a familiarity with the architecture of Google's highly protected internal systems; and the knowledge of Chinese dissident private email addresses. An expert has called the attack on gmail "incredibly sophisticated, the kind only seen in the government and defense industrial sector." What seems increasingly flawed is the premise that it is possible to operate an honest business under the thumb of Chinese authorities. Posted by David at 09:15 AM
| Comments (0)
January 13, 2010Google and ChinaBravo, my employer has done the right thing in China and announced an end to the censored Chinese version of Google. A Few Thoughts and Lots of Links Commentators who interpret Google's policy change as a retreat in the face of stiff competition from Baidu miss the point. Despite serious obstacles, Google has steadily gained share after entering China in 2006, and there are a billion financial reasons to stay and compete. Continue reading "Google and China"Posted by David at 04:34 AM
| Comments (0)
November 10, 2009Pointless ArbitrageBanks are special: the Fed pumps them with money because they are supposed to be the smartest lenders. The decisions of the local bank loan officer drive the engine of capitalism. Unfortunately, the big money is no longer in writing the loans. The big money is in arbitrage. And that is why our economy is in trouble today. Reversi Arbitrage The pointlessness of arbitrage is obvious after you play a couple short games of Reversi. On the left, play as Black. On the right, play as White. Either game is challenging to win on its own. However, if you play both games at once, replaying Black's moves against White and vice-versa, then you are guaranteed to win one game with no effort and no skill. Even if you are a terrible player, you can rack up a 50% record with this strategy. And there is money to be made on a 50% record. You can offer to bet $100 for every game played, and you will never lose any money. If you put on a good suit and print some business cards, you could surely collect a few pennies of fees for each game and turn this two-faced game-playing technique into a profitable business. Or make a computer program that plays this way, plug it directly into the markets, and make a killing. The problem is this: you might be rich, but you would still be a terrible player. Arbitrage Is Not Banking And that is the problem with arbitrage. Banks are no longer playing the loan-officer game. They do not need to know how to recognize a bad loan. They just need to know how to package it up to be resold to a different investor. Maybe the investor is being dumb, or maybe the borrower is being dumb - the banks don't care because they just pass the game through to the other side. That is the norm in banking today. It is a blind, stupid business and it adds nothing to the economy. Banks have long argued that the derivatives they write increase the efficiency of the capital markets, but the more you really understand derivatives, the more you realize that they are simply a way for banks to duck out of their responsibility of actually playing the role of a bank. We need banks to get back to the business of making real decisions and taking on real risks. Banks Need To Take Risks Banks should not be allowed to securitize loans, write derivatives contracts, buy insurance against defaults, or transfer risk to other investors in any way. The role of banks should be to take risks and absorb risk. Banks are insured by the FDIC and have access to the Fed discount window. They should not be allowed to have these advantages while passing their risks on to others. Arbitrage and banking should be separated. Banks need to have skin in the game. Posted by David at 10:45 PM
| Comments (1)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Calendar
Search
Archives
All Articles
February 2010 January 2010 November 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 June 2008 May 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003
Recent Entries
Second Coming of Wyden-Bennett?
Reading JQuery Sources Random Seeds, Coded Hints, and Quintillions Xinhua: We Report, You Decide My God, What Have We Done? Campaign Calls Vote Ballmer Favors Torture for Lawyers Anagram Flawed Security Google and China Pointless Arbitrage Mandelbrot Bravo for Courier What's in the Box Coin Flips Are Biased Javascript Reversi Time To Build A Treehouse Free Market Healthcare Niagara Restaurants Law vs Power Weiner Goes to Washington Where I Learned Programming Disorderly Conduct Dear Losers McCain/Lieberman Easy Math Typesetting The Small Government Paradox The 3.6% Accident What is a Floppy Disk? Two Steps Behind Politics is Important Your Compiler Vanishes in A Puff of Logic Elastic Shortfalls Poetry and Prose Death and Taxes Geithner's China Triumph COP and the IMF Playbook How To Nationalize A Cultural Problem Obama to the World: Join Us What is a Stress Test? How Big Is It? Helicopters Arrive Under Cover Of AIG Testimony Clever Outrage Processing Congressional Team Building The Bossy R Bulls Enter China Shop American Majesty No Deceit Here Winning at Chess Transition in Cyberspace Elizabeth Warren Continued Fractions Rationals are Nonobvious Yellowstone Swarm RMB in the NYT In Spending We Trust Foreign Affairs on China Junichiro Obama Helicopters Take Off Amazing Transparency A Reflective Phobia Trade Deficit Arithmetic Perfect Numbers Taxman Game Mapping Out a Trade War Currency Disaster The Chinese Depression Sudoku Help Second Grade Spelling Waiting For Doc Twenty Eight Hours What Do You Call It? Rahm Emanuel A Fourth Republic Helicopters and Imports An Historic Day Chomp The 144 Game Klein on Obama I Blame Markowitz Time for Japan to Buy Republican Rebels Pictoral Subtraction McCain and Obama at Al Smith What After November 4? Where Is The Excess Capital? Quick, Get a Mortgage World's Toughest Job What's Scaring People The U.S. Needs a King Dear Nancy Pelosi A Sensible Proposal Do-Nothing Republicans Letterman's Best Non-Guest What's the Rush? Canon to Reshape Media An Era of Inflation Begins
Links
Bau family website
Joe
Gary
Eric
Gayle
Reza
Rod
Ulysses
Blossom
Howie
Nelson
Glenn
463
Pop
Wag
Physics
Nature
MG
LegoEd
Anita
Bernie
PCal
Cedric
Adam
Mark
Scott
Ted
StPeter
Joel
XMLBeans
Quick Search Bar
Battelle
Bricklin
Digg
Jake
Gilmour
Googlers
HotLinks
Mini
Raymond
RB
RMack
Sam
TM
Volkh
Wonkette
Waxy
Witt
Xooglers
Zawodny
EconView
UChicagoLaw
Older Writing
About
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright 2010 © David Bau. All Rights Reserved. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||