just thinking out loud 0 comments on Two days later – My processed thoughts on the Executive Order banning refugees

Two days later – My processed thoughts on the Executive Order banning refugees

Ok – I’ve processed a bit more, and read a bit more, and thought a bit more, and come to this conclusion:
 
This Executive Order isn’t anti-Muslim. It’s anti-Axis of Evil. Yup, we’re back to the Axis of Evil. It’s actually much worse in my opinion. My primary complaint with the Left across the world today is that it doesn’t provide solutions. It only points out the problems with the Right. So instead of just complaining, here’s my set of proposals for what I would do instead:
 
(1) We need to divest from Oil. We need to invest in American energy. We are less than one generation away from being able to run our electric grid nearly completely on renewable energy. This creates jobs in America that are impossible to export. The delta should be filled with American sources of energy. This allows us to invest in those communities as a matter of national security with the balance being that we would want to do so in both an ecologically and economically sustainable way.
 
(2) If we pull off (1), then we need to divest from the Saudis. The primary reason to stay involved with Middle Eastern affairs is to maintain open channels into the Saudis. This allows us to make sure that their influence on OPEC is balanced with our economic needs. We can then arm them against Iran (more to come on this below). And play puppet master . If we can reduce our attachment to OPEC, then we can also diminish the wealth and power that we give to Saudi Arabia today. This in turn diminishes the need for the US to be involved in the Middle East allowing the region to return to a status as a local one instead of a global one.
(2a) The Wahhabi School of Islam, as preached and protected by the leaders of Saudi Arabia, is the primary source of Islamic Terrorism. If what we’re really doing is fighting Islamic Terrorism, this is yet another reason to divest ourselves from the Saudis.
(3) The other primary source of Islamic Terrorism is the blind support of Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians. To solve this, we need to drop the two-state solution rhetoric, focus on a single Israel where Arabs, Palestinians, and Israelis can live side-by-side successfully, and the religious views of all are protected. This means that Israel has to change its constitution. It also means that Palestinians need to be willing to trade statehood for prosperity. I don’t know if it’s possible, but it’s a much better outcome than what’s on the cards today.
(4) America needs to get over its infatuation with Iran. Yes, there was a revolution in 1979. Yes, there was an embassy hostage situation. We need to move on. Just like Reagan’s economic policies drove the Soviet Union to the ground, so can an open door policy bring down the extremism inside of the Iranian government. It may not mean a return to democracy for Iran. But let’s not focus on democracy everywhere. Instead let’s just reduce the hostility against us in as many places as possible.
If we do the above, then here’s what we’ve done:
(1) Moved away from non-renewable resources in our energy supply chain
(2) Created jobs in the US that cannot be exported while preserving the economic and ecological solvency of the communities most impacted
(3) Disconnected from our perverse relationship with Saudi Arabia
(4) Solved a human rights controversy in Israel
(5) Dropped our unhealthy obsession with getting back at Iran
just thinking out loud 0 comments on The year of the autonomous car

The year of the autonomous car


The picture above is the Ford entry in the 2016 24h Le Mans race. Ford famously won the race in 1966 – if I’m not mistaken – on the back of work done by Mr Shelby whose fame comes from the car carrying his name. They came back at the 50th anniversary, and won it again. 

Outside of this car, however, this was the year of the future of automobiles – not the past. And the brands at the show would have had you believe that right around the corner, we’re all going to be in self-driving cars that we rent, and that parking, car accidents, and fuel consumption are things of the past. 

But, even as a technologist, the last thing I want is for this revolution to come too quickly. 

Autonomous cars represent for me the next major economic shift we’re going to take as a society. 

We won’t need – truck drivers, taxi drivers, or parking attendants. 
We will need – systems engineers, merchandise unloaders, and a whole new breed of mechanics. 

We won’t have trucks competing with daily commuters at peak hours to get places. 

We will have roadside motels shut down as their clientele becomes unemployed. 

We don’t know what insurance looks like in this new world, and we do know that taxes, licensing, regulations, and standards will all have to be reconsidered. 

And so while I want the technology to be built, and the regulations and licensing conversations to start, the bigger opportunity I want to challenge us to take is to build a framework in which we look for a win-win (Pareto Efficient) outcome for everyone who will be impacted by autonomous cars. 

We have a chance to have the conversations that we didn’t when we built the interstate system and exported our manufacturing infrastructure.

How can we ensure that there is protection for those who will lose paid for by the economic gains and efficiencies of those who win?

How can we look at the industries impacted by this revolution – trucking, parking, construction, gas stations- and make sure that in preserving themselves they don’t stifle innovation? 

And equally – that the technologists who will win in this new world don’t irrationally pull us into the future without being able to ensure our safety, our communities, and the new culture we will build on these capabilities?

After this election cycle, and this year’s CES, I’m realizing that policy is just as important of a deliverable for a disrupting business as the product that is doing the disrupting. 

My key takeaway – we all want to get to the future knowing our dignity will be intact when we get there. 

We should make sure we have the conversations to help as many of us achieve that goal as possible.