Communications problem

This past week at a CTIA (Cellular telephone industries association) conference it was highly speculated that Verizon wireless would debut one or both of their up coming phones. These being the availability of the nexus one on the Verizon network and also the HTC incredible. Verizon debuted neither and instead only demonstrated their new found compatibility with skype. However Sprint did debut the HTC EVO 4G which will be available this summer. This phone has some definite pluses over both of the speculated Verizon phones including the ability to be a hot spot, bigger screen, and my favorite two cameras one of which would be used for video conferencing.

Until this week i was eager to here a release date for the HTC incredible and was convinced i was going to buy it as soon as it came out. Now I'm not so sure. The longer Verizon waits to announce a release date, the more i am considering leaving Verizon for sprint and this obviously better phone. However if Verizon releases the incredible next week this idea will vanish and i will remain a happy Verizon customer for the next 2 years.

This issue highlights my ever complex relationship with Moore's law. Both of these phones represent points on what i call the Moore's line of innovation and development. For smart phones this line has some pretty intense curvature at this point in time so a 2 year contract basically grantees that your next phone will be a generational jump. However i have to "settle" eventually or I'll never be able to reap any of the benefits of new generation technology.

Right now i can see the Moore's line in front of me and can justify the incredible if and only if it is available now. Three months from now this phone will look old compared to the EVO 4G. I know i am not alone in this thought. Many news article have came out over the past few days criticizing Verizon for "missing the boat". I have to say I'm with them. I can see Verizon loosing considerable share of the smart phone market if they wait much longer. The droid was a good step but that was 4 months ago, that's a long time on the current stretch of the Moore's line. To be competitive in this market you can't wait around. Verizon may be planning to announce the incredible release on Monday and have it in stores by Friday, which will make my worries all for naught, but until yesterday when it was clear Verizon's lips were sealed i had not considered leaving at all. Now i have looked at Sprint's coverage and plans and even calculated what early termination costs would look like for me and my fiance, all because Verizon left the door open by with holding information.

Ignorance is Bliss

I just finished reading an article in the 3/13-3/19 issue of New Scientist that has left me unusually troubled. The article stated that a couple US states have started mandating that public schools integrate a "balanced approach" to teaching about climate change. The article then begins to state that several studies have shown that creationists are statistically more likely to be man made global warming naysayers. The existence of this demographic is what is particularly troubling since this particular demographic commonly referred to as evangelical Christians is also the source of the major pro-life movement who don't want safe sex taught in schools.

My perception of how this group view the world is best described by this sentence:

"God has created the earth for us to do our best to increase the population density as high as possible with out any repercussions."

Now this viewpoint is extremely dangerous. Uncontrolled population growth is directly responsible for our current carbon emission rate which is due to the lack of contraceptives. Now the evangelical viewpoint fits perfect in the theory of evolution (that they refuse to accept). In pre-modern societies excessive procreation was commonplace to ensure genetic security since life expectancy was so low. If a couple only tried to have 1 or 2 kids there was a low chance that either child would live long enough to reproduce, therefore the societies that preached massive procreation were more likely to survive the ages. This value was ingrained into the cultures of the successful societies since it was one defining characteristic that made them so.

Obviously things have changed so why has this one ideal so hard to expunge from society? I believe the answer is hope. Hope that the statement above is true. Hope so strong that amid excessive amounts of contradicting evidence that this hope remains.

My hope is that we can rid the world of this dangerous hope. One thing i think we'll get us there is the site Wikipedia. I have always shuttered at the idea of charity since i can't get over the idea of normal charity just being a band aid and that the real problem can always be traced back to over population. But i can say with confidence that i will be contributing substantial contributions to Wikipedia once i have the financial standing to do so. My contributions will be aimed specifically to ensure that Wikipedia is forms that is available to all ages and un-blockable by parental controls.