Immigration and the United States

The reasons that immigration shouldn't be opened to anyone that wishes to come include: the need to filter out terrorists, the possible disruption of the economy, and the need to document all those that come so they cannot easily change their identity and hide amongst the people.

As for the need to filter out terrorists, how effective is that? The government of the country of origin could give us a criminal history of the person, but could terrorists somehow sneak into the country? Immigration has become stricter since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, but how far should the Government go in filtering immigrants?

As for the possible disruption of the economy, the economy has proven to fix itself in many instances. If work becomes scarce, people will move to places with higher demand for labor. The problem of welfare freeloaders could be exacerbated. Many already complain that immigrants are taking their jobs. Such complaining comes from those that are too lazy to find other employment or to rise to the competition that the immigrants supply. Utah County is experiencing a labor shortage that could be alleviated by immigrants that are willing to work. If one believes they aren't getting paid fairly, he should find another job that pays better and switch rather than fight his current employers for higher pay. If everyone acts like this, those that don't pay enough will either have to pay more or go out of business due to a shortage of employees. The trucking industry seems to be in such a position. It has been difficult for them to attract drivers: potential drivers don't seem to believe that the pay compensates for the cost to them to be drivers (time away from family, boredom, long hours). The market will correct itself if everyone plays the market right. In some cases, it is necessary to involve the Federal Government to correct some things. For example, food safety, workplace safety, and the enforcement of contracts. But it would be better for the Government to not meddle with prices or wages: the market will take care of those things.

The need to document people as they enter is necessary since they don't have a birth certificate in the United States, another way must be found to uniquely identify them. Perhaps an immigration record would suffice.

One of the possible reasons Rome finally collapsed in the 500's or 600's was the desire of the Romans to not let the Germanic peoples become part of the empire of Rome. Are we making the same mistake? Shouldn't we be friendly to all? We can be friendly to all and still maintain our interests.

Not All Religions Lead to Heaven

Many people believe that in the end it doesn't matter which religion you follow, you'll get to heaven anyway. But Matthew 7:13-14 says, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." And verses 21-23 of the same chapter say: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

One isn't necessarily following Christ by joining a religion that professes to believe in Him. To know which religion to join: ask God.

Open Source and Free Software

Neither the Open Source movement nor the Free Software movement are strong enough to topple the commercial software industry. The progress on software projects developed by the community can be slow at times, and it can be difficult to keep up with commercial products. The people who work on community software must have jobs to generate income since it is difficult to profit from community software, thus they can dedicate only a limited amount of time to developing community software. Granted, some companies have employees who spend their working days developing community software, but those companies must also pay attention to their profits to stay in business. Therefore, the work done on community software by such companies is limited. Due to these limitations, community software will not replace commercial software as long as we live in a capitalistic society. Someday, I hope we all can live in ideal society, but today is not that day.

Family Internet Safety

Some of the advice to parents to help them protect their children from the perils of the internet is wrong - like advice on filtering and supervision.

Filters can be more harmful than helpful. Sometimes filters go too far and block sites that contain extremely helpful information. Having objectionable sites blocked is beneficial, but smart browsing is more useful than filtering.

As for supervision, putting the family computer in a place that is clearly visible and frequently passed by is helpful in encouraging users to avoid objectionable material, but reviewing the browser's history and talking to the parents of friends about the methods they have implemented to keep their kids safe to make sure your kids are safe is too much. All you can do with the browser's history is realize your kids have visited sites, but it doesn't tell you their reaction to the sites. The kids might have closed the window immediately, or the kids might have lingered on the site for a while. As for talking to the parents of your children's friends, what will you do if they don't do much to keep your kids safe? Will you tell your kids they can't go over to the homes of their friends because the parents of their friends don't filter the internet, even though their friends browse smartly? The solutions presented by filtering and supervision are best solved by properly teaching your kids smart browsing. As your kids learn to browse smartly, they will be prepared to avoid evil as they use the internet at locations outside of your control - including the homes of friends and the public library.

iPhone Wars

The hackers have made more headway in the war against locked iPhones. Now iPhone users can unlock their iPhones without rendering the phones unusable.

Apparently, the hackers have pledged to modify every new update Apple publishes so that the unlocked phones are never rendered useless again. But a security issue arises: how does one know the hackers aren't adding anything malicious to the updates? They could modify the updates to grant them access to the phones. How would one know? Anything that can affect your computer can affect your iPhone, like viruses and spyware. Is slightly better customer service worth the risk of an insecure phone?

In other news, the iPhone will be released in China at some point in the future. It makes me happy to know that people around the world are benefiting from the improvements of technology. On the other hand, many people in the world are unable to enjoy life as they go without adequate food and shelter.

More news on the iPhone:
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/11/iphone_china
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/15433/1103/1/0/

Global Competition

Global Competition

The world is flatter. This is good because those of us in the United States seem to be falling asleep. We aren't as competitive as we used to be. Many expect that they will be guaranteed a well paying job, but that isn't true - it never has been true. More so now than ever, we are involved in a global competition for jobs. We all must strive to perform better than each other if we want to be paid well. This will drive progress.

In an ideal world, we wouldn't compete with each other. Everyone would have a job they enjoy and that they can excel at without competing with others for it. But we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world with naturally lazy people that try to satisfy their desires with the least amount of effort. If all those who choose to be lazy are allowed to do so, society would be severely hindered in its progress. Would the hunters and gathers have become anything more if they had succumbed to laziness? With the incentive of financial power, many are enticed to compete so they can fuel their natural desire for power. Progress is a natural side-effect of competition that benefits many. Compare our life today with life of hunters and gatherers: we can communicate with people all over the world; we live in comfortable buildings; we take food for granted; and we understand more about the world around us.

Everyone will have a job. The number of jobs that can be filled is infinite. When jobs are replaced by technology or outsourcing, more jobs are created. The computer replaced many jobs, but many jobs have been created by the computer: computer scientists, information technology departments, computer factories, and many more. Outsourcing will have the same effect. As jobs are shipped overseas, more jobs will be created at home. The limiting factors are entrepreneurship and education. Those who lag behind the changing environment risk difficulty in finding a job, but not all jobs can be outsourced: on-site construction, counseling, management, and many more. As Thomas Friedman pointed out, those with higher education move up in their jobs to care for the more difficult parts of the job as the menial parts of the job are sent to those who can accomplish them. For example, he pointed out an artist that concentrated on sketches as artists in India filled in the colors and shading. The artist concentrates on the creativity, and artists in India concentrate on completing the picture. The ideas will start at home, and their development will occur abroad. Much knowledge remains to be discovered; therefore, the levels that can be achieved are limitless.

In the end, the flattening of the world is beneficial for all. Those abroad now have higher paying jobs, and those with more education can concentrate their efforts on increasing knowledge and wisdom.

Persistence of Hierarchal Organization

The Library of Congress contained about 20.5 million books at the end of the year 2006 (http://www.loc.gov/about/reports/). If one person read one book per day, that person would finish reading every book in the Library of Congress about 56,126 years after beginning. It is impossible for one person to know everything in this life. Because one person will not know everything, groups of "followers" develop around the respective experts of various fields. If someone wants advice about something, he will seek out someone he knows that he considers the most knowledgeable about the subject.

Instead of replacing hierarchies, the flattening of the world will improve them as current experts are replaced with better experts. People don't have time to read hundreds of blogs to find answers. They prefer to read one blog that is correct and complete than dozens of blogs that contain only part of the information being sought, or that are inaccurate.

Software Patents

Lets say you alone develop and sell software that becomes wildly popular. As you dream of the things you will buy with your coming fortune, a software company develops software that does the same things your software does, except the company sells its software for less and does a better job marketing and maintaining the software. As your dreams of luxury begin to fade with the realization that the software company will inherit your coming fortune, you wish that you could stop the company from stealing your idea. Something exists to prevent others from stealing your idea, and it has been around for many years: patents.

I'm for software patents. If people cannot patent their software ideas, they will be less likely to research better methods without the ability to make money from their improvements.

Software patents not only help large companies, they also help small companies and individuals. If a small company develops a unique software program and patents it, they can profit from it while the larger companies must either pay royalties or find a better way to do the same thing - thus driving progress.

Software patents don't hurt those who don't patent their ideas. If someone can prove the idea existed before a big company came up with the idea, the big company will be unable to patent the idea.

In an ideal world, better algorithms will be shared without charging money, but we live in an imperfect world. We live in a capitalistic society, and we must follow the rules of that society if we are going to progress together. Too many people would take advantage of the system if everything was free, and society would not progress if everyone was a thief.