Check this story from Wired out - TorrentFreak has introduced a Firefox add-on that places a “Download 4 Free” button on Amazon.com pages selling music.  This button provides a link to the leading The Pirate Bay torrent for that album, and I can personally say that it works very well.  While the website that originally launched the app, Pirates-of-the-Amazon.com, is a school project website that has removed the offending file due to legal threats from Amazon, the add-on is still available from TorrentFreak.  While it may not be all that useful, this IS slick, and quite funny.  Try it out.

One interesting aspect of Canada’s economy compared to nearly all the other G8 members is that it remains myopically focussed on our extractive primary industries, without pushing that growth into education, research & development and the emerging industries and manufacturing that will help strengthen and broaden the base of our economy and international competitiveness. The US economy, though not based on natural resources to nearly such an extent, has also fallen victim to letting its manufacturing industry and technological dominance languish, ‘growing’ their economy almost solely on the premise of financial markets. While the EU’s sectoral growth in manufacturing has lagged behind those of emerging economies (unavoidably, given the latter’s momentum), growth in many EU countries at least remained positive - and in the case of Sweden, Germany, and Denmark, quite dramatic, based on the strength of wind manufacturing.

While the Canadian government’s emphasis on taking our natural resources for all they’re worth may lead to huge surpluses in boom times, that same emphasis has damaging repercussions in a recession. For instance, in an ironic twist, the $78/bbl of oil that Alberta built their 2008-2009 budget on was considered comically conservative (which led the opposition to question the transparency of a government that expected a ‘hidden’ surplus of $5B+), but with the price of oil now under $50 and still dropping, that same government faces a deficit. By failing to separate our economy from the vagaries of the market for natural resources (a folly we share with such shining examples of economic foresight as Nigeria), it reduces our ability to weather shifts in demand.

Of course, to sound like a broken record, I continue to believe that the strongest move to generate long-term economic growth is a re-emphasis on technology, innovation, and sustainable development and manufacturing that will reap dividends regardless of the economic climate. Of course, oil will rebound back up to $150 and beyond, no doubt, but it seems like it befits a healthy economy to view that as a windfall to be plumbed back into future growth, rather than the sole basis of our economic platform. This notion of “green-collar” manufacturing was one of the soundbites that led me to support Obama early in his campaign, and I can only hope that Canada has the presence of mind to adopt a similar policy.

While my time in Bujumbura, Burundi has not exactly been a mindblowing thrill ride, it has certainly given me plenty of time to chill out and read. Books are hard to come by in much of East Africa, and so I decided that having burned through one of the books I brought already, I would borrow Obama’s latest book from a friend here to see what all the fuss is about.

In a sentence, this book is pretty much exactly what you would expect from an ambitious then-Senator. It’s eminently readable, with an easy, conversational, but intelligent style, and Obama writes with the same charisma that he demonstrates as an orator. Releasing it was immensely politically savvy, giving him an opportunity to describe (only beating us over the head with it a little bit) his character, values, and vision. It’s also cloyingly patriotic, and some of his policy recommendations land somewhere in the category of ‘glittering generality,’ but these, too, are undoubtedly intentional - this is by no means a book for policy wonks, and is a bestseller because of it.

From a policy point of view, many of the suggestions for reform that he makes come across almost as obvious (from a Canadian perspective, anyway), but they are at least thoughtfully constructed, and well-defended, if not overly detailed. In his perspective on the overall political landscape, this wide-angle lens is helpful, as well, and he is apt at providing clear and concise views of the history and context that has shaped the modern political environment in the US. The book held the most interest for me in his descriptions of political behind-the-scenes, and the sorts of situations that turn politicians into politicians (as spat out by the layman, with a roll of the eyes). The campaign process, especially when it comes to fundraising, lobbies, and media, are apparently somewhat poisonous to people with integrity who hope to maintain any sort of real connection with the average person, and his frank descriptions of the mechanism by which that transformation into politicians can occur are interesting. While the writing certainly entails some cringe-worthy language (for cynical, international readers like me), it has definitely given me greater respect for his character - the sense of morality that seems to guide his approach is grounded and nuanced (and while there is an entire section on ‘faith,’ it is by no means a default morality, in his eyes).

Assuming the ruinous environment of the current economy doesn’t completely shatter any attempts at reform, I’m quietly optimistic about the slow turn that the US may be taking. Having cautiously surrounded himself with experienced staff (including Clinton), I think he’s aware that any Change will take time, especially given his inexperience. Despite it, though, as an inspiring leader, I can’t think of many better choices for the country.

And he certainly beats Harper.

I don’t know why I’m posting this instead of Andrew, as he’s the one who christened our new site, travels.pulltheskydown.com, but anyways, here I am.  Both Andrew and I have a lot of travelling in our near futures, so we decided to start up our own travel blog.  Yaaay!  We’re so original.  Anyways, if you’re one of our friends (and if you’re on this site you probably are), you might want to check it out.  Andrew already has some sweet stuff about his time in Burundi online… go.. read…

Stephen Harper is a cock munching asshole.  There.  I said it.  How many people do you know who voted Green (or NDP, or other party that clearly was not going to win) because “I just want them to get my two dollars so they can *maybe* get somewhere next time”?  Hopefully you actually know some of these people - I personally know plenty.  Anyway, Harper’s new “economic update” proposes scrapping all this funding, pissing off all three opposition parties.  The NDP, Liberals, and Bloc have actually agreed to bring down the government 6 weeks after an election if this funding cut goes ahead.  On the bright side however, apparently we might not go back to the polls if this happens.  The Liberals and NDP are finally doing what they should have done all along - apparently talks are underway to figure out the logistics of a coalition government.  Even those French assholes, the Bloc, have signalled support.

For some reason, I am incredibly enthusiastic about this turn of events.  It has always seemed to me that a Lib-NDP coalition would be the best of both worlds (progressive politics without handing the country over to unions), and if it happens this way, I just love how badly Harper is getting fucked over.  He is already whining to anyone who will listen that this is undemocratic, blah, blah, because the “Canadian people elected myself over Dion”, forgetting that we don’t have some stupid two party system up here.  In fact, the Canadian people voted overwhelmingly (63%) AGAINST Harper.. and considering virtually every other popular party leans left, it seems like Canadians voted for a left leaning coalition.  So fuck you Stevie, you fucking lose.

The ZENN (zero-emissions, no noise) electric car is one the most promising innovations I have read about over the last couple years.  In their current incarnation, these cars have some significant suburban limitations - 80km range, 40km/h top speed -but for urban commuting the ZENN is ideal.  This utility has been recognized by British Columbia and Quebec, as well as 43 US states.  However, Ontario continues to block the use of ZENN cars on public roadways, citing safety issues.  All that has been approved is a 5 year pilot study, ending in 2011, allowing the use of ZENN vehicles in provincial parks to assess their safety in low speed settings.

What I want to know is why, if jurisdictions across North America are allowing ZENN cars on low-speed limit roadways, why won’t Ontario?  This is a fully enclosed vehicle, based on the chassis of a European diesel car, that meets or exceeds FMVSS 500 standards (the US safety standards governing electric cars) - why are we so slow in allowing these on our roads?  And think about the manufacturing opportunities - the ZENN cars are currently being built in Quebec, but the company is planning on expanding fast - and about to introduce a high-speed all electric car (125km/h top speed, 400km range with a 5 minute charge time) based on a battery that “would instantly turn vehicles like General Motors’ much-hyped Volt into museum pieces,” according to Peter Gorrie of the Toronto Star.  You’d think Ontario would be doing as much as possible to attract such a company to do business here - especially considering the troubles currently facing the auto industry.  But, alas, the ministry of transportation would rather institute measures to prevent teenagers from carpooling.

(Stolen from Cagle.com - please don’t hurt me)

So the global economy is fucked, our overlords claim. However, “the crisis was not a failure of the free-market system, and the answer is not to try to reinvent that system,” according to W.  My question then becomes, why does the current administration support an Obama-esque “socialist” bailout of the financial industry… wait… the financial industry and the auto industry (and probably all big business pretty soon).  Shouldn’t an ardent capitalist decide that companies which have clearly been mismanaged, misguided, or are straight up outdated die a quick death?  There should be no real opposition to high risk/high reward behaviour, as long as all involved parties understand the nature of the risk involved, but this also means that losers must be treated as such - the range of possible results should not range between roaring success and neutral.

I am still torn over this whole bailout situation.  On one hand, I really want to let everything pan out according to the rules of the free market… if these car companies were too stupid to invest in clean technology while their foreign competitors realized that this was where consumer demand was headed, then fuck them.  But then I feel like the realist kicks in, and you have to consider the impact of tens of thousands of laid off autoworkers.  These people were betrayed by greedy unions and horrible corporate policies, and it seems somehow wrong to leave them suffering.  Besides, according to Obama anyway, the cost of social assistance for these people would exceed bailout money many times over.

This post isn’t really going to go anywhere, because despite all the time I have spent thinking about how the economy should be helped, I haven’t really gotten anywhere.  Any thoughts?

Well it has finally happened: a black man is the leader of the free world. While this fact , in and of itself, is probably important enough, this past election’s significance is heightened by America’s unique history of slavery and systemic racism. Blacks, like Jews and Atheists, are a minority that faces prejudice in almost every single country in the world, but the historical Black American experience is a particularly troubling one. Between water cannons, dogs chomping on protesters, and the targeted police oppression of their youth, it’s fairly shocking that the black “community” (I know that word doesn’t mean much) has come this far in what is effectively <40 years. Obama isn’t just any black leader - he’s hyper-educated, articulate, and optimistic almost to a fault; In other words he’s exactly the best kind of role model any minority parent could probably ever hope for. He’s not going to be the miracle worker the hype has made him out to be, but it’s a necessary start.

More importantly, Obama serves as an icon of modernity and tolerance to a world that has recently written off the United States for being archaic, bigoted, and laughably ignorant. A black man with a “very black name” is now the president of the United States - the international equivalent of this almost seems impossible: an Algerian French President? A Palestinian leading Israel? A woman or open homosexual in the Vatican? An indigenous Prime Minister of Canada? Very unlikely.

Which brings us to an interesting point: If us silly Canadians (or Soviet Canuckistanians, as my right-wing American friends refer to it) live in a land of so-called “diversity”, why have our supposedly backwards neighbours to the south moved forward in this regard before us? Just take a look at the people that have led our country in the past: French or English old men so white that you have to wear sunglasses just to look at them for fear of going snow blind. Our lone woman leader was pretty much an accident - one we vehemently opposed once we were given the opportunity to actually, like, vote on the issue. There hasn’t been a single minority leading the executive branch and, on top of that, Stephane Dion effectively ruined any chances of becoming the first “known” atheist at the helm.

So could a minority ever become a viable candidate within the Canadian political system? Maybe. Less likely, unfortunately, is the idea of a native Prime Minister. Between the calculated oppression and effective genocide of countless indigenous peoples within our nation, the odds of a native person gathering the social and political capital necessary to attain our highest office are slim. Excluding a few recognizable native leaders within the arts and regional politics, most members of this minority are still too busy fighting for the most basic of socio-economic concerns; Without proper education (let alone water) on our native reserves, addressing the pressing concerns in relation to health, mental illness and chemical addiction within the native communities, and countless undocumented instances of physical and sexual abuse against those residing within urban centres, the future looks bleak. While I don’t want to trivialize the difficulties of being a black Canadian (it’s a hard knock life, no doubt), it is undeniable that indigenous people are the “blacks” within our nation. For us to be on par with the Americans, our society has to evolve to the point where an indigenous person (a woman would be nice) could be elected to office. That looks like it’s a long way away.

With Obama in power, Canadians may soon turn away from our conservative slant and the Harper establishment that comes with it; Our particular brand of Canadian self-assured superiority (read: snobbiness) would likely never allow us to fall too behind our “uncivilized” neighbours. While this could pave the way for someone like Dr. Ruby Dhalla (MP of Brampton, Ontario) to make a run for office, it seems much more likely that the Canadian electorate would copy the push for intellectualism instead of the minority angle. If I had to put my money on the line, I’d wager that Michael Ignatieff will be our next Prime Minister, Harvard education and all; The similarities between him and Obama are striking and people are definitely looking for “smart” leadership during our current economic situation. While the push for some brains in office is a small step forward (although Harper is, admittedly, a very bright but misguided individual) this leaves me asking the obvious question: When are these tiny steps going to turn into the giant leaps that the U.S. is taking?

Before the beginning of this summer, I must confess that I rather disliked bicycling. My only real experience with bikes, except as a small child, was on an old mountain bike that was ill-suited to the trail riding and jumping my friends did, and hardly up to the task of a 35 minute commute to high school, either. As a wackjob hippie, I’ve long appreciated the idea of biking, but actually commuting by bike every day always seemed a little bit too hardcore (think Calvin’s dad) for me.

Upon moving downtown, however, I found myself in a situation where biking to get around was not only cheaper, but also more convenient, faster, and infinitely more fun than taking transit. As luck would have it, Toronto’s sparse bike lanes led straight to my office, allaying any initial trepidation. Despite being far too small for me, I grew to really appreciate my old, neglected bike, and it served me well until I finally invested in my current ride, a Jamis flat-bar road bike that I’ve transformed into a lean, mean commuting machine. I’ve since moved farther away, and despite the plunging temperatures and the daily risk of having a door opened into my face at 25 kph, I take a perverse glee in my daily rides. On Monday, after patching a flat tire, I decided to take my bike out for a spin. At night. In the pouring rain. I decided it would be a good time to practice riding with no hands. I have unabashedly fallen back in love with bicycling after a 15 year hiatus.

My attitudes about biking changed abruptly over the course of only a few weeks, and all it took was the taste of freedom (i.e. the ability to sleep for 15 more minutes) and the comfort factor of having bike lanes to ease the transition. Am I atypical, or is that all it takes? How many of you bike to work? How many of you don’t? Why? And more importantly, what would it take to get you on a bike? Is it an issue with the comfort, image, or convenience associated with bikes themselves, or is it the policy and infrastructure that surrounds it?

(My general curiosity aside, I should give full disclosure and say that this line of questioning was spurred by a post at the excellent Bicycle Design blog, which recently posted a design competition to design a commuter bike for the masses. The prize is an incredibly sweet bike. Your feedback will be going towards a good cause - that is, helping me win it.)

So it’s not really a graphic, but it fits the same “holy crap” style of visual comparison as the offshore drilling chart.

The amount of space required to transport the same number of passengers by car, bus, or bicycle, courtesy of our friends in Germany (7 years ago), who seem to get it way better than we do: