Rolandt

by Jonathan Blaustein

I’ve been doing this a long time, as the column will be 5 years in September. In that time, I’ve seen books from every continent on Earth, two times over. (Yes, there were two books from Antarctica.)

The experience has increased my understanding of the world immeasurably. I am definitely a smarter, more empathetic person than I was when Rob first suggested I review books here at APE.

But until today, I’ve never cried before, when flipping through the pages.

Not even once.

Today, however, I wept.

I was looking at “Sharon,” a new book by Leon Borensztein, recently published by Keher Verlag in Germany. This is as personal a book as I’ve seen, though others have risen to this level of honesty.

So why this book? Why now?

Well, “Sharon” is a photographic and diaristic account, by Leon Borensztein, of the 1984 birth, and subsequent life, of his daughter Sharon. Though her eyes are closed on the cover, and the text is scribbly, I had no idea what was in store, when I took the book out of its packaging. (This one was sent in a couple of months ago, and landed in the submission pile.)

Within the first few pictures, we realize something is wrong. Baby Sharon has electrodes on her head, and that can’t possibly be good, right? (It isn’t.)

The pacing, and the balance between imagery and text, always feel right. The pictures are universally square, well-made, and shot in black and white, but they’re not GENIUS. Thankfully, they don’t have to be.

It turns out that Sharon has physical, developmental, and mental health issues, including being mostly blind. It is clearly every parent’s nightmare, and one I fretted about through the entirety of my wife’s two pregnancies.

What happens if you have a baby, so many of us fear, and it all goes wrong?

29 years of Sharon’s life are documented here, and the diary text openly shares how difficult it is. How draining. How depressing.

To make matters worse, (as is often the case in relationships enmeshed in trauma,) Leon splits with his wife, and ends up becoming Sharon’s sole caretaker. His ex-wife is eventually busted for meth, suggesting she was unfit as a mother.

Wow, is this a heavy book. But it is also beautiful, because as Pixar teaches us in “Inside Out,” sadness is a valid part of life. Sometimes, it’s the only sane reaction to life’s unfairness.

In the end, Leon decides to place Sharon in a facility, after spending years trying to find the right one. He is well-aware, and presents to us, the statistics facing disabled women, with sexual abuse rates that are heart-breaking.

According to the last text in the book, it was a good move for father and daughter, as both were able to move on with life, while remaining extremely close. It’s just… So. Fucking. Poignant.

In life, I’ve found, sometimes the small coincidences keep piling up to the point where it makes sense to listen. I thought I was done with my little San Francisco series, but it turns out that some of the people about whom I’ve written in the last month were big supporters of this project.

Who knew?

And just this morning, I was engaged in a Twitter conversation with people about the over-saturation of the photo-book market. (Precipitated by a Tweet from NYT critic Wesley Morris, who lamented the closing of Powerhouse Books.)

I told a couple of Twitter strangers that with so many books on the market now, as near-every photographer makes a book for each project, it was of course impossible for them all to sell well. The supply has increased exponentially; not so the demand.

The responses to my Tweet were ironic, accusing me of quashing dreams. Not so, I replied.

Make a book.
Have at it.
Go nuts.

Just this morning, mere hours before I picked up “Sharon,” I told people there were other reasons to make a book, beyond financial remuneration.

Books are tangible. They provide closure. Deadlines push people to finish, to grapple, to face the work they’ve made, and then perhaps let go.

It wouldn’t surprise me if this book sold well. It’s an excellent publication. But somethings tells me it’s already a massive success for the artist, because it’s shined some serious light on the dark recesses of his life.

Life is beautiful, according to Roberto Benigni, but it is also rather tragic. Capturing both realities in one book is an achievement. If it can make me cry, for goodness sake, you might want to check this one out.

Bottom Line: Powerful, diaristic account of raising a disabled child

------------------------

Visit our sponsor Photo Folio, providing websites to professional photographers for over 9 years. Featuring the only customizable template in the world.

------------------------

I have had a love-hate relationship with OnePlus. Even before the company announced their original flagship killer, the OnePlus One, the very prospect of a company launching a phone running CyanogenMod out of the box got me excited. Continue reading →

I just told you how Surface 3 became my travel companion. It's silent, it doubles as tablet with pen and notebook. I have the 4/128 configuration, which means 4 GB RAM and 128 GB storage. That's the top of the line for Surface 3. Incidentally, it is also the entry level for Surface Pro 4. And the most interesting feature of that configuration is the fan-less design around a Skylake Core m3-6Y30 processor. That's already quite a bit faster than the Atom x7-Z8700, but does not draw as much power as the Core i CPUs in the faster Surface Pro 4 models. Performance is not a problem for my workload, so the entry level suits me just fine.

There is however a huge difference between the machines, at least for a writer. Surface Pro 4 has a much better keyboard than Surface 3. Since Surface Pro 4 is larger than Surface 3 (12.3" vs 10.8") the keyboard itself is also larger, it has spacing between the keys and the keys themselves have better tactile feedback. Also, this keyboard cover has a very decent trackpad, compared to the barely functional one in Surface 3. In summary, it is a much better laptop.

There is one other change that makes it less desirable, but only for me. Surface Pro does not charge over MicroUSB. Instead it has a reversible universal connector, which is able to deliver more power. That means that it recharges way more quickly than Surface 3. But it does require its own power brick. As I said, that only concerns me, since I like to travel with a single multi-port power supply which delivers 5V at 2.4A on each port. Good enough for Surface 3 but not Surface Pro 4. The connector is actually the same on Surface Book, on the Surface Book Clipboard as well as Surface Dock and it connects all relevant ports between those devices. Surface 3 is the odd one out.

My choice of the entry level Surface Pro 4 is also odd for many people. Most strive for faster processors and more storage. But I like the machine silent and "right sized". I travel light. Compared to the other configurations "my" Surface Pro 4 is relatively cheap. Compared to the Surface 3 it is expensive, while basically doing the same job.

A slightly larger screen, more performance, a bit heavier, these all even out. The keyboard would make the biggest difference. And there is a luxury version:

Nintendo, Jul 12, 2016

---

The  newly released Pokemon Go is an instant hit, though the  technology has been growing for a while. What's interesting about it is that it creates virtual entities that inhabit the real world. More, you can interact with them by capturing them,  training them, and pitting them in combat against each other. It's funny that Google ran this as an  April Fools prank a couple of years ago. The  Wikipedia article is a good overview. There will no doubt now be a slew of articles from the usual suspects about the impact of Pokemon Go in the classroom, the dangers of interacting with strangers, and the problem of people being too involved in playing the Pokemon game.

[Link] [Comment]

These are the Microsoft Store recommendations for me. The irony is that I don't play computer games. Ever. I learned many years ago that they are a total waste of time. Next time you ask me why I have so much time, here is one of your reasons.

How does Microsoft deem these apps worth my time? Because I have Minesweeper and Solitaire installed. Why do I have them installed? Because Microsoft adds this crapware to my installation every time they update Windows. And somebody who does analytics for the Microsoft Store can't figure this out.

I like to think of Microsoft as a company with smart people. But when they pollute my Windows installation with stuff I clearly do not want and adding insult to injury finally base their recommendations on their own wrongdoing, I have serious doubts.

Daniel C. Dennett, Tufts University, Jul 12, 2016

---

Useful paper from Daniel Dennett summarizing some of his major arguments about consciousness. What he says about the origin of consciousness seems right to me: "the rich and complex interplay between neurons, hundreds of neuromodulators, and hormones." Crucially, there isn't some sort of internal 'viewing screen', there isn't some 'viewer', and these basic elements of perception ('qualia') are not used as 'raw materials' by some other sort of cognition, but are cognition itself. Everything we thing cognition does is actually happening in the interplay between neurons, hundreds of neuromodulators, and hormones. Because as Dennett says, where else would it be happening? The later stages of the paper are more challenging and less well supported by evidence, in my view, but constitute essentially the view that this interplay is moderated not only by our experiences of the world, but also of others' experiences of us. Consciousness is, in other words, a community phenomenon, and not merely an individual phenomenon. It becomes something like a lingua franca that enables us to interact effectively.

[Link] [Comment]

Watch me whip, watch me pokésplain https://t.co/uObm76DuwX — Kevin Nguyen (@knguyen) July 8, 2016 Tweeted by @knguyen

mkalus shared this story .

---

This week, my nephew and I went to the Broken Islands on a kayak trip, somewhere I've wanted to go for a few years.

To get there we took the Frances Barkley from Port Alberni which drops you off right near the Broken Islands.

Broken Island group is as beautiful as advertised. The water is clear and warm, the islands are pristine and the nature is just stunning. This is a picture from Benson island, after three days of paddling. On the other side of the island (a short walk) the Pacific slams into the island (full version):

The weather varied, first day we had insane winds and had to navigate 4-5 foot high waves and winds that gusted at over 50kph (recorded at Tofino airport). By the third day we had wonderful sun all day and spent lots of time on beaches and hiking and enjoying the fabulous weather. The fourth day the rain hit and we got cold and wet once we'd got out of our kayaks. What the West Coast weather giveth, it also takes away.

And when the rain descends, you get something more like this:

And the winning campsite? Clarke Island which has a beach like this:

This was my first time using my Garmin GPS to navigate, something that I got on the assumption that there was no cell phone access. Which is now incorrect, there is full coverage throughout the islands. Took me a while to use it properly and I kept forgetting to stop it, so the data is a bit wonky:

Some notes so I remember for future trips: we used about 12 litres of water and one large primus propane tank.

Bird and Moon @RosemaryMosco
Yessss, nerds. Catch those Pokemon. One day you will catch them all, and birdwatching will be waiting for you. Mwahahahaha

David Weiner @daweiner
Too old for Pokemon, too young to die.

Steve @Stv
#PokemonGO proves the rule: launch first, fix later. There’s 1000s (1000000s?) of people using barely functional software & loving it!

Jonathan Zdziarski @JZdziarski
How my Twitter client feels about Icelandic pic.twitter.com/BRO3emHcMh

von trapp queen @metalouise
So, Pokemon Go is basically Ingress for people who wouldn't be seen dead standing faux-nonchalantly next to obscure landmarks?

Jim Pick @jimpick
Hey! It's @ddrucker! cbc.ca/news/canada/br…

mkalus shared this story from FAIL Blog.

---

pancakepusher added this as a favorite.

shan-is-a-fan:

badwoolf21:

Serena Williams - All 22 Grand Slam Titles

All Hail Queen Serena!

wearewcc:

Know what February is good for? Hibernating and learning. Join us! =)

themendozaline:

By David Mendoza - Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Recently, there has been increased attention paid to the resurgence of measles in the United States. But despite this uptick, it’s important to remember how effective the measles vaccine has been at reducing the prevalence of the disease. Since 1963, when John F. Enders helped develop the first vaccine against the measles, the number of cases of this respiratory disease has declined considerably. By the end the 1960s, according to Samuel L. Katz, Chairman Emeritus of Pediatrics at Duke University, “annual measles cases had been reduced by more than 90%.” Immediately before then, approximately 400 people died and more than 3 million people were infected by measles every year.

The chart at the top of the page displays the remarkable reduction in the measles incidence rate per 100,000 people in the United States. The incidence rate is defined by the CDC as the number of new cases of a disease over a given period that is then divided by the average population of a locality. So in this cases, the incidence rate measures the number of measles cases reported to the CDC adjusted for each state’s population. The chart is ordered from the states with the highest average incidence rate at the top and the states with the lowest rates at the bottom. I gathered the data for this visualization from Project Tycho, a database maintained by the University of Pittsburgh. The researchers at Project Tycho culled their data from weekly surveillance reports from the NNDSS. Specifically, I used Level 1 data, which has been standardized into a common format for easier analysis.

I provide more context below.

Keep reading

It looks like Canadians will have to wait a little longer before being able to officially get their hands on Pokémon Go.

According to a recent statement from Niantic, Pokémon Go’s global rollout has been paused until the developer is able to deal with the game’s current server issues.

Thank you for your patience. We have been working to fix the server issues. We will continue rolling out #PokemonGO to new countries soon.

— Pokémon GO (@PokemonGoApp) July 8, 2016

Niantic CEO John Hanke also recently stated in an interview with Business Insider that his studio plans to release Pokémon Go globally have been “paused until we’re comfortable.” It’s likely that Pokémon Go’s server’s issues are at least in part caused by players accessing the game from regions not officially included in the title’s initial launch.

While the experience of catching real-world augmented reality Pokémon is a dream come true for nostalgic fans of the franchise, Pokémon Go’s release has been mired with server issues, game crashes and rampant glitches.

Thank you for your patience. We have been working to fix the server issues. We will continue rolling out #PokemonGO to new countries soon.

— Pokémon GO (@PokemonGoApp) July 8, 2016

The game is currently available in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand, but if you can’t wait to “catch ’em all” we have a guide explaining how to you can get the game right now for both iOS and Android.

Related reading: Pokémon Go is more fire than Charizard’s Blaze [Game of the Week]

Ethan Zuckerman, The Atlantic, Jul 13, 2016

---

"Many hard problems require you to step back and consider whether you’ re solving the right problem," writes Ethan Zuckermaan in this excellent article. "If your solution only mitigates the symptoms of a deeper problem, you may be calcifying that problem and making it harder to change." This is the characteristic result when technologists see a social problem as an engineering problem. "The problem with the solutionist critique, though, is that it tends to remove technological innovation from the problem-solver’ s toolkit." As I've long said, the best use for a technology is one people select for themselves, and  designing a solution to a problem is exactly the wrong way to design technology (none of my colleagues at NRC agree with this). Recommended via Gerald Ardito. Related: UNICEF principles for digital development.

[Link] [Comment]

Mashable published a profile of Jordyn Castor, a 22-year-old Apple engineer on its accessibility design and quality team. Castor, who has been blind since birth, joined Apple full-time last year after interning there in college. As she explains to Mashable:

"I realized then I could code on the computer to have it fulfill the tasks I wanted it to," says Castor, whose current work focuses on enhancing features like VoiceOver for blind Apple users. "I came to realize that with my knowledge of computers and technology, I could help change the world for people with disabilities.

In addition to speaking with Castor, Mashable interviewed Sarah Herrlinger, senior manager for global accessibility policy and initiatives, who explained Apple's approach to accessibility:

a notable part of the company's steps toward accessibility is its dedication to making inclusivity features standard, not specialized. This allows those features to be dually accessible — both for getting the tech to more users, as well as keeping down costs.

Mashable's piece is a must-read for Jordyn Castro's inspiring personal story and its insight into the unique way Apple approaches accessibility. Instead of treating accessibility as a special, add-on feature that is purchased separately, it's built into the operating system itself. That, combined with the work Apple has done to make accessibility features easy for developers to adopt, reveals a pragmatic approach designed to encourage broad-based adoption, making Apple's accessibility innovations available to as many people who need them as possible.

→ Source: mashable.com

When it comes to wide-scale malware attacks, China’s consumers are rarely out of the firing line.

Up to 10 million Android devices have been infected with a malware that amasses fake clicks for adverts, according to a report by security firm Check Point. Most of the devices are in China, with large numbers also detected in India, the Philippines and Indonesia.

The malware, dubbed ‘HummingBad’ by Check Point, originated from a group of Chinese cyber criminals that work alongside ad firm Yingmob. The security firm first discovered instances of the malware in February 2016. According to their data cases have spiked in the past month.

Check Point estimates that the group behind the malware are raking in up to $300,000 USD per month in fraudulent ad revenue. “[Proving] cyber criminals can easily become financially self-sufficient.”

HummingBad is a type of malware that can hide undetected within an operating system, allowing the creators to remotely control a device. The group has used the malware to install fake versions of apps, or click on ads to make them seem more popular.

Lookout, a separate security firm which first discovered the same malware in November and has labelled it “Shedun,” says the malware can masquerade as popular apps suck as Facebook and Twitter. In a blog post they attribute the recent 600% rise in cases to “the authors building new functionality or distributing the malware in new ways.”

They also note that a the malware is not removed with a factory reset, and can defeat uninstall attempts.

Neon Drive by Fraoula is a devilishly difficult 80s-themed driving game that immediately reminded me of the campy short film, Kung Fury. The unapologetic, over-the-top style of Neon Drive is a big part of its charm and adds to the fun of the game, which is available for OS X and iOS. The mechanics of Neon Drive are incredibly simple, but the mastering the game requires precise timing. Well-placed checkpoints provide just enough of a sense of progress though, to make Neon Drive more fun than frustrating.

Neon Drive is part endless runner, part rhythm game. The controls are about as basic as they could be – on iOS you steer your car across lanes by tapping the left side of the screen to move left and the right side to move right. On the Mac, you can accomplish the same thing with the left and right arrow keys or other preset key combinations. Each of Neon Drive’s levels is accompanied by an 80s synth soundtrack that adds to the game’s atmosphere as you dodge obstacles. The first time you hit an obstacle, your car is temporarily slowed down with the screeching sound effect of a needle scratching across a record that distorts the soundtrack. Hit a second obstacle and it’s game over. Fortunately, if you cross a checkpoint, you don't have to restart from the beginning.

Neon Drive features seven very difficult levels. Getting past the first level felt like a major accomplishment even in normal mode. I'm not great at games that require perfect timing, so your mileage may vary, but despite the difficulty, I found Neon Drive fun and addicting in the same way a game like Canabalt is.

Neon Drive's look and soundtrack are a big part of its appeal.

I played Neon Drive on my iPhone 6s Plus, iPad Pro 12.9, and 2015 Retina MacBook Pro. The games are virtually identical on iOS and OS X, but I'd give the edge to the iOS version because there's something about tapping the screen directly that makes Neon Drive a little more immediate and fun. On OS X, Neon Drive got my laptop’s fans roaring almost immediately, which detracts the game some. My one wish for Neon Drive is for Fraoula to bring it to the Apple TV, where I think its simple mechanics would work well with or without a controller.

Despite being frustratingly difficult to master, Neon Drive is a blast to play and does a fantastic job of making you feel like you are playing a real 80s arcade game.

Neon Drive is available for $3.99 on the App Store and $9.99 on the Mac App Store.

---

Like MacStories? Become a Member.

Club MacStories offers exclusive access to extra MacStories content, delivered every week; it's also a way to support us directly.

Club MacStories will help you discover the best apps for your devices and get the most out of your iPhone, iPad, and Mac. Plus, it's made in Italy.

Join Now

The following is a set of questions and my responses to a Canadian government request for feedback the future of immigration in Canada (it would be nice if these surveys had a 'blog this' button; in the mean time they advise that the results will eventually be posted on Open.Canada.ca, which of course I support.

• How many newcomers should we welcome to Canada in 2017 and beyond?

I don't want to fix on a specific number that might be interpreted as a maximum, but I strongly encourage increased immigration into Canada
 

• How can we best support newcomers to ensure they become successful members of our communities?

This second question would require a book. I think we should be drawing on community support and community organizations more, because in the case of the Syrian refugees resources that were available were untapped. I think that we should encourage settlement in the Maritimes, if possible, as this region is insular and depopulated and would benefit from the infusion of new people; make it clear federal resources are flowing into these provinces (and hence helping the locals). The obvious support services are language training in the official language of their choice, housing and basic income, employment support and placement, other education, access to health care, etc.
 

• Do we have the balance right among the immigration programs or streams? If not, what priorities should form the foundation of Canada's immigration planning?

No we do not. We are currently favouring people who can buy their way into Canada. The points system is recognized internationally as a fair approach, however, we should understand that people who have not benefited from economic activity are equally viable immigrants. We should greatly increase our support for refugees. We should support students on student visas, focusing on people in developing nations who would not otherwise have access to further education.

• How can immigration play a role in supporting economic growth and innovation in Canada?

If you look at the enormous wealth in supposedly 'poor' nations generated simply by virtue of their human resources, this question would not be necessary. Adding more people supports additional development in Canada, and we can show that this development is possible without generating poverty and inequality as seen elsewhere. Immigration is basically an economic stimulus program; our resources are focused into the lowest income strata, where it is more likely to be spent (we should expend similar resources on the lowest income strata already resident in Canada, and especially First Nations). As we work to improve the strengths and abilities of newcomers, they will devise strategies for economic growth and innovation (we don't need to manage it for them, just create opportunities). Services developed for newcomers - such as innovation zones or business development hubs - can be made available to all Canadians. Our economy will grow best not by giving more money to companies that are already successful, but by helping new companies take root and flourish.
 

• Should there be more programs for businesses to permanently hire foreign workers if they can't find Canadians to fill the job?

I don't agree with programs designed to help business hire foreign workers. When they say they "can't find Canadians" what they often mean is they can't find people willing to work at the wage they are offering in the location (often remote) offered. These programss for business are effectively business subsidies, and I would rather see subsidies reach people directly, rather than support otherwise unviable business models.
 

• What is the right balance between attracting global talent for high-growth sectors, on the one hand, and ensuring affordable labour for businesses that have historically seen lower growth, on the other?

Again, the purpose of immigration is not "ensuring affordable labour". This is an approach to immigration that will fail, and will spark resentment among people whose wages will be depressed as a result. I'm not sure what business you mean that "have historically seen lower growth" but usually, it seems to me, they are agricultural or resource-based. I would rather see Canada focus on creating value-add to these resources to stimulate growth, which would be a result of immigration where people create their own companies or products, and would not be a result of creating a lower-income workforce, which would simply encourage existing businesses to harvest and export, leaving a minimum of value in Canada. With respect to high-growth sectors, first, the fact that they are high-growth suggests that they do not need additional support, and second, a more generous immigration policy, as recommended above, would address this need.

• How can immigration fill in the gaps in our demographics and economy?

I don't know what you mean by "fill in the gaps" but it vaguely suggests we use immigrants for janitors and McDonalds clerks. I would rather see companies pay these employees more money, and therefore do not see employment shortages in these sectors as "gaps". I don't think that there's some sort of demographic 'balance' we should be seeking. It's hard not to be offended by this question.
 

• What Canadian values and traditions are important to share with newcomers to help them integrate into Canadian society?

Canada is not a 'melting pot' and so it is important to understand that we do not expect newcomers to 'fit in' to the dominant religion and culture. Having said that, we are a nation based on "peace, order and good government," and so it is paramount that newcomers accept that they will be subject to the law of the land. We expect peaceful and orderly conduct. This in Canada is established by various legal codes and in particular the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which should be respected by all Canadians. We allow and embrace the fact that people have different religions, different cultures, and different ways of life, and we negotiate difference and conflicts between these peacefully, by rule of law. Nobody has the right to impose their way of life or cultural beliefs on another. Ideally, we would like to have people embrace these differences. Our freedom to be ourselves, and our sharing and compassionate society, are defining features of Canada, and we would hope people embrace this in the same spirit in which it is offered to them.

• Currently, immigration levels are planned yearly. Do you agree with the thinking that planning should be multi-year?

I think immigration should be planned as a capacity rather than according to targets. Think of the immigration system as a flow, an incoming stream of people that is supported on an ongoing basis. We should be looking (and adjusting) how many immigrants we can support per day, rather than per year. Targets create ebbs and tides of immigration, which alternately underuse or strain capacity. 

• What modernization techniques should Canada invest in for processing of applications?

I'm not really sure what modernization techniques would be appropriate because, first, I don't know what level we're at, and second, a lot of this depends on the capacity of other countries to support our system, and this varies a lot. probably there is no single standard. We shouldn't do silly things like require police records from countries where there is no functional police, or paper records from a country that is fully computerized. Importantly, Canada should recognize that it is not a part of the United States and that American policies and procedures are neither relevant nor necessary. I did not appreciate having by full background information shared with the United States when it happened about five years ago; as a native-born Canadian there was no demonstrated need, and no right to this information had been established (I do benifit occasionally by being TSA pre-approved on flights).

• What should Canada do to ensure its immigration system is modern and efficient?

To stay modern and efficient we should make the investment. We should research and test new technologies and processes, running pilot programs, and implementing incrementally rather than all at once. We should offer full training and support to officials required to implement the new technology, and fully document the new processes and procedures to enable people offering support systems outside government to adapt and upgrade.

• Is there any rationale for providing options to those willing to pay higher fees for an expedited process?

Offering an expedited process for a higher fee runs contrary to the manner in which we run Canada in general (or, at least, it should). People who are right do not have special rights or preferred access to government services. In the same way, the payment of fees should not secure premium access to health care, preferred outcomes in court cases, or modifications in public policy. There are sometimes good grounds for an expedited process, and these grounds should be made clear, and an efficient application process should be able to make this adjudication. 

• Is it important for Canada to continue to show leadership in global migration? If so, how can we best do that?

It's not that we're showing leadership in migration; there is no preferred level of migration. Rather, we should be showing our commitment to the rest of the world, our willingness to share our wealth and our good fortune, and our desire to see a better world for all. We should be clear that we would like to do as much to support people living in their home country as to those wanting to or needing to relocate to Canada. We need to offer an example to show how good governance and a generosity of spirit can overcome the tensions inherent between different nationalities and cultures.

• How can Canada attract the best global talent and international students?

I don't think we should be interested in attracting "the best global talent and international students" - immigration is not about raiding other countries for their most valuable citizens. In any case, I'm not even sure how to define "the best". Usually the most reliable predictor is wealth, but I would be very unhappy with a system that selected immigrants according to their wealth. I think that as an alternative we should look for those who would benefit most by immigrating to Canada. In a sense, we should be looking for potential, not existing achievement. 

• In what ways can Canada be a model to the world on refugees, migration and immigration?

The way we can be a model, therefore, is to offer a different approach to immigration. We do not approach immigration in a selfish manner, though we do recognize the benefits that will accrue to the nation as a whole when we support immigration. We do not think of immigrants as cheap labour, or a permanent subclass, but we welcome them into the fabric of society, embracing (rather than tolerating) their culture, backgroun, and individual perspective. We are interested in immigration from a human development perspective, and our priority is to support and improve the lives of immigrants, in the sure knowledge that they will pass on the same benefit to other Canadians, and to the world at large. 

noreply@blogger.com (Stephen Downes), Half an Hour, Jul 11, 2016

---

The following is a set of questions and my responses to a Canadian government request for feedback the future of immigration in Canada (it would be nice if these surveys had a 'blog this' button; in the mean time they advise that the results will eventually be posted on Open.Canada.ca, which of course I support.
How many newcomers should we welcome to Canada in 2017 and beyond?I don't want to fix on a specific number that might be interpreted as a maximum, but I strongly encourage increased immigration into Canada How can we best support newcomers to ensure they become successful members of our communities?This second question would require a book. I think we should be drawing on community support and community organizations more, because in the case of the Syrian refugees resources that were available were untapped. I think that we should encourage settlement in the Maritimes, if possible, as this region is insular and depopulated and would benefit from the infusion of new people; make it clear federal resources are flowing into these provinces (and hence helping the locals). The obvious support services are language training in the official language of their choice, housing and basic income, employment support and placement, other education, access to health care, etc. Do we have the balance right among the immigration programs or streams? If not, what priorities should form the foundation of Canada's immigration planning? No we do not. We are currently favouring people who can buy their way into Canada. The points system is recognized internationally as a fair approach, however, we should understand that people who have not benefited from economic activity are equally viable immigrants. We should greatly increase our support for refugees. We should support students on student visas, focusing on people in developing nations who would not otherwise have access to further education. How can immigration play a role in supporting economic growth and innovation in Canada?If you look at the enormous wealth in supposedly 'poor' nations generated simply by virtue of their human resources, this question would not be necessary. Adding more people supports additional development in Canada, and we can show that this development is possible without generating poverty and inequality as seen elsewhere. Immigration is basically an economic stimulus program; our resources are focused into the lowest income strata, where it is more likely to be spent (we should expend similar resources on the lowest income strata already resident in Canada, and especially First Nations). As we work to improve the strengths and abilities of newcomers, they will devise strategies for economic growth and innovation (we don't need to manage it for them, just create opportunities). Services developed for newcomers - such as innovation zones or business development hubs - can be made available to all Canadians. Our economy will grow best not by giving more money to companies that are already successful, but by helping new companies take root and flourish. Should there be more programs for businesses to permanently hire foreign workers if they can't find Canadians to fill the job?I don't agree with programs designed to help business hire foreign workers. When they say they "can't find Canadians" what they often mean is they can't find people willing to work at the wage they are offering in the location (often remote) offered. These programss for business are effectively business subsidies, and I would rather see subsidies reach people directly, rather than support otherwise unviable business models. What is the right balance between attracting global talent for high-growth sectors, on the one hand, and ensuring affordable labour for businesses that have historically seen lower growth, on the other?Again, the purpose of immigration is not "ensuring affordable labour". This is an approach to immigration that will fail, and will spark resentment among people whose wages will be depressed as a result. I'm not sure what business you mean that "have historically seen lower growth" but usually, it seems to me, they are agricultural or resource-based. I would rather see Canada focus on creating value-add to these resources to stimulate growth, which would be a result of immigration where people create their own companies or products, and would not be a result of creating a lower-income workforce, which would simply encourage existing businesses to harvest and export, leaving a minimum of value in Canada. With respect to high-growth sectors, first, the fact that they are high-growth suggests that they do not need additional support, and second, a more generous immigration policy, as recommended above, would address this need. How can immigration fill in the gaps in our demographics and economy?I don't know what you mean by "fill in the gaps" but it vaguely suggests we use immigrants for janitors and McDonalds clerks. I would rather see companies pay these employees more money, and therefore do not see employment shortages in these sectors as "gaps". I don't think that there's some sort of demographic 'balance' we should be seeking. It's hard not to be offended by this question. What Canadian values and traditions are important to share with newcomers to help them integrate into Canadian society? Canada is not a 'melting pot' and so it is important to understand that we do not expect newcomers to 'fit in' to the dominant religion and culture. Having said that, we are a nation based on "peace, order and good government," and so it is paramount that newcomers accept that they will be subject to the law of the land. We expect peaceful and orderly conduct. This in Canada is established by various legal codes and in particular the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which should be respected by all Canadians. We allow and embrace the fact that people have different religions, different cultures, and different ways of life, and we negotiate difference and conflicts between these peacefully, by rule of law. Nobody has the right to impose their way of life or cultural beliefs on another. Ideally, we would like to have people embrace these differences. Our freedom to be ourselves, and our sharing and compassionate society, are defining features of Canada, and we would hope people embrace this in the same spirit in which it is offered to them. Currently, immigration levels are planned yearly. Do you agree with the thinking that planning should be multi-year?I think immigration should be planned as a capacity rather than according to targets. Think of the immigration system as a flow, an incoming stream of people that is supported on an ongoing basis. We should be looking (and adjusting) how many immigrants we can support per day, rather than per year. Targets create ebbs and tides of immigration, which alternately underuse or strain capacity. What modernization techniques should Canada invest in for processing of applications?I'm not really sure what modernization techniques would be appropriate because, first, I don't know what level we're at, and second, a lot of this depends on the capacity of other countries to support our system, and this varies a lot. probably there is no single standard. We shouldn't do silly things like require police records from countries where there is no functional police, or paper records from a country that is fully computerized. Importantly, Canada should recognize that it is not a part of the United States and that American policies and procedures are neither relevant nor necessary. I did not appreciate having by full background information shared with the United States when it happened about five years ago; as a native-born Canadian there was no demonstrated need, and no right to this information had been established (I do benifit occasionally by being TSA pre-approved on flights). What should Canada do to ensure its immigration system is modern and efficient?To stay modern and efficient we should make the investment. We should research and test new technologies and processes, running pilot programs, and implementing incrementally rather than all at once. We should offer full training and support to officials required to implement the new technology, and fully document the new processes and procedures to enable people offering support systems outside government to adapt and upgrade. Is there any rationale for providing options to those willing to pay higher fees for an expedited process? Offering an expedited process for a higher fee runs contrary to the manner in which we run Canada in general (or, at least, it should). People who are right do not have special rights or preferred access to government services. In the same way, the payment of fees should not secure premium access to health care, preferred outcomes in court cases, or modifications in public policy. There are sometimes good grounds for an expedited process, and these grounds should be made clear, and an efficient application process should be able to make this adjudication. Is it important for Canada to continue to show leadership in global migration? If so, how can we best do that?It's not that we're showing leadership in migration; there is no preferred level of migration. Rather, we should be showing our commitment to the rest of the world, our willingness to share our wealth and our good fortune, and our desire to see a better world for all. We should be clear that we would like to do as much to support people living in their home country as to those wanting to or needing to relocate to Canada. We need to offer an example to show how good governance and a generosity of spirit can overcome the tensions inherent between different nationalities and cultures. How can Canada attract the best global talent and international students?I don't think we should be interested in attracting "the best global talent and international students" - immigration is not about raiding other countries for their most valuable citizens. In any case, I'm not even sure how to define "the best". Usually the most reliable predictor is wealth, but I would be very unhappy with a system that selected immigrants according to their wealth. I think that as an alternative we should look for those who would benefit most by immigrating to Canada. In a sense, we should be looking for potential, not existing achievement. In what ways can Canada be a model to the world on refugees, migration and immigration?The way we can be a model, therefore, is to offer a different approach to immigration. We do not approach immigration in a selfish manner, though we do recognize the benefits that will accrue to the nation as a whole when we support immigration. We do not think of immigrants as cheap labour, or a permanent subclass, but we welcome them into the fabric of society, embracing (rather than tolerating) their culture, backgroun, and individual perspective. We are interested in immigration from a human development perspective, and our priority is to support and improve the lives of immigrants, in the sure knowledge that they will pass on the same benefit to other Canadians, and to the world at large. [Link] [Comment]

Another tech company has embraced the opt-in nature of encrypted user data.

Facebook is testing out a new “secret conversations” system that offers users bolstered privacy when they want it. While the feature is currently still in a testing phase, some users are already able to take advantage of it.

Secret conversations are optional, can only be used on one device, and are completely encrypted. To take advantage of the added security feature however, uses should keep in mind that certain features such as GIFs and videos won’t be covered.

Furthermore, users will have the option to set self-destruct timers on messages of a sensitive nature.

“We’ve heard from you that there are times when you want additional safeguards – perhaps when discussing private information like an illness or a health issue with trusted friends and family, or sending financial information to an accountant,” said the company in a blog post.

Facebook is hardly the only social platform to consider end-to-end encryption. It’s subsidiary, WhatsApp, launched end-to-end encryption across its entire service, which comprises 1 billion users.

Google’s recently introduced messaging app Allo also features an opt-in “incognito mode” allowing users to take advantage of the benefits of end-to-end encryption.

This seems to be a happy medium between privacy and the artificial intelligence. The prime dilemma in choosing to encrypt information is loosing access to many of the personalized AI features that come with so many social apps nowadays.

Opt-in encryption potentially holds the solution. By encrypting select pieces of information while leaving others open to data mining, artificial intelligence enabled devices learn from the information users are comfortable with making public and ignore information that users choose to encrypt.

Related reading: Google’s new Allo messaging app isn’t as secure as you think

As each week of chemo treatment passes, the side effects become more challenging. Chronic fatigue is becoming more noticeable like a ball and chain attached to my leg. Whether it is due to the chemo, or an underlying symptom of my cancer, or a consequence of my weight gain, I focus on conserving my energy with naps.

I’m also aware that my chemo is affecting my mental capacities. My attention span has become quite short, my memory seems to be evaporating, and I’m easily distracted. I find that conversations can make me tired and sometimes confused so I try and minimize them in my day-to-day interactions.

That said, my self-portraits continue to be a shining light in helping me cope and allowing me to feel good about myself. On Wednesday I travelled to Cypress Falls on the North Shore. I continue to spend time doing what I love – whether tanning on the beach or capturing my world through photography and self-portraits.

To recap: On Sunday, July 3rd, I completed Cycle 19 Week 1. I have Multiple Myeloma and anemia, a rare blood cancer. It is incurable, but treatable. From February to November 2013, I received Velcade chemo through weekly in-hospital injections as an outpatient. Since February 9th 2015, I have been on Pomalyst and dexamethasone chemo treatment (Pom/dex).

Weekly chemo-inspired self-portraits can be viewed in my flickr album.

May 2014: Steveston

The post Week 73 chemo complete: Doing what I love keeps me happy appeared first on Fade to Play.

TL;DR: Get started with OpenPOWER, help build a better future, and win prizes.

"I like things just the way they are. Let's keep computer architectures stagnant. Let's ensure that everything is powered by the same chip."

Really?

I have to confess: I never liked Monopoly. I'm not a fan of board games in general, but Monopoly has a "special place in my heart"; a place reserved for all those horribly brutish things (and behaviours) that shouldn't exist.

But how do we create a world where we are free from a "winner-takes-all-at-the-expense-of-everyone-else" mentality? In the world of software we open the source, we make projects inclusive, we remix each other's code, and we share.

So why aren't things like this in hardware? Why do we accept, even if tacitly, a world where we're "railroaded" into a single monolithic platform?

We shouldn't. But despite everyone's best intentions, it's often difficult to get started with something new and disruptive. As a result, we stick to the tried-and-true: the easy path. In order to get to a new technology, it is reasonable to need and expect an on-ramp and a bit of help. Ubuntu did exactly that by making it easy for anyone to install a free system and to help build and shape it in a friendly and inviting community.

And, in the way history sometimes rhymes, the fine folks at the OpenPOWER Foundation are making it easy to get started with hardware that is collaborative and forward-looking. We're offering free use of OpenPOWER systems and also prizes to encourage people to tinker and build interesting projects that showcase the values (and value) of an open hardware platform.

I encourage you to join, participate and learn. There are prizes to be won and a brighter future to build. Let's get started.