Don’t worry, I’m not going to tell you that God spoke to me in my dream. This dream was inspired by the movie Inception, which I watched yesterday.

In the movie, the bad good guys try to change the mind of the good bad guy by putting him (and themselves) to sleep and then wiring him (and themselves) up to a contraption that will alter his dreams. Including themselves meant that they could participate in his dream, and thus manipulate it.

The twist was that the idea they want to plant in his mind was so deep that they had to “go down three levels”. In the first dream, they had to repeat the process to create a second dream, where they repeated the process to create a third dream.

The movie also touches on the tantalizing subject of lucid dreaming – the theory that you can learn to become aware of the fact that you are dreaming, and then to control your own dreams. One problem with this theory is that, even if you succeed, there’s no way to prove it to another person. It’s a bit like proving that God has spoken to you. But that’s another story.

I’ve tried for years to learn lucid dreaming, and I dreamt that I had finally mastered the art. I don’t recall much about the lucid dream, except that in the dream, I remembered a technique offered in the movie to find out whether you are dreaming or not. Something about trying to push one finger through the other hand. I couldn’t see my hands in the dream, but I thought I knew where they were, so I gave it a try.

Lo and behold, my left hand was not where I thought it was! That’s when I realized I was dreaming. I cautiously opened one eye, being careful not to wake up, and sure enough, my hand was not where I thought it was. It was up by my face, where it usually is when I sleep. As I looked around, I could see bits of the real world all around my dream world.

At first I couldn’t move my real hand, because of course I was asleep. Yet with a bit of effort, I could become awake just enough to move my hand, and eventually to control the rest of my body, without losing the dream.

How exciting! With a bit of practice, I could change my mental focus to move in and out of the dream at will. I got so good at this that I found I could remain permanently in a sort of dual reality, both awake and dreaming at the same time. I floated around in the real world, explaining to everyone that my dazed state was because, while I was awake, I was also dreaming. What fun!

Then of course, I woke up, this time for real, and of course it was all just a dream. I had finally experienced the wonders of lucid dreaming, even if only in a dream.

I can’t wait to go back.

Sweat dreams!

John Dory & Co.

On Saturday my friend Harry took me out fishing on his little 20-foot sloop.

It’s winter time here in New Zealand — not the best time for fishing the Hauraki Gulf. The weather can be foul, the water is cold, which means the fish are not that hungry, and most of them have moved away from the sheltered waters around Auckland.

Today was scheduled to be different, at least in terms of the weather. For a change, we’d be sitting under one of those big fat high’s that come swirling off the hot-plate they call Australia. At least until late afternoon, when the high would say goodbye, we’d have a cloudless, calm day.

The trip out

It was a brisk 8℃ (46℉) at 5 AM, as Harry paddled out us to his mooring at Northcote Point. With no wind, we would have to motor for at least two hours to reach favorable waters. We chugged out the Waitemata (Auckland’s harbor), North up the Rangitoto channel and then towards the East, into a gorgeous sunrise, to Rakino Island.

This was the first time I’d been in that area, and it’s beautiful! Rakino is covered in dark green and surrounded by dark blue. The occasional cluster of houses interrupt the green, as clusters of rocky islets interrupt the blue. Little masts, just like ours, poke up from behind the headlands that surround the welcoming bays.

A Sloop, similar to Harry's

We anchored in about 20 m (65′) of the dark blue stuff just North of Rakino. The fish-finder insisted there were plenty of fish below us. We threw lines out, drank coffee, and waited. Then we waited. Then we waited some more.

Then I waited alone, while Harry went below to make breakfast — bacon, eggs, sausage, beans, toast and, of course, more coffee.

Enter Johnny

We were expecting Snapper, so Johnny came as a bit of surprise. I’ve never caught a Dory before, but I’ve caught enough Snapper to know that whatever had my line was not a Snapper.

A Snapper will thrash around, presenting frequent, strong tugs on the line, interspersed with longer, more determined pulls downwards. This little fellow was moving around slowly and gently, apparently not so little, yet not really resisting the pull upwards.

Besides, a John Dory, aka St. Pierre, or kuparu in Māori, won’t take cut bait, the way a Snapper will. Johnny likes his dinner still flapping, or at least pretending to flap, like one of those new-fangled soft plastic baits.

So imagine our surprise when this huge, beautiful Dory popped up to the surface and just lay there, almost motionless, fins spread out in all their glory.

Not what we were expecting.

Enter Jack

It wasn’t until we netted her that we noticed the two little yellow bits of tail fin sticking out of Johnny’s mouth. We lay her gently on the bench, and with a silent prayer of appreciation, quickly dispatched her in the traditional way. It’s not pretty, it’s not nice, but I’m sure it beats being swallowed alive and slowly suffocating while being digested. Which, it turns out, is exactly what Jack was going through.

A Dory with her mouth extended

My next surprise came when I opened Johnny’s mouth to see what was attached to that tail fin. I’ve never seen a live Dory before. I’ve also never seen a Dory as big as Johnny before, dead or alive, not even in the fish market. I’ve definitely never seen inside a Dory’s mouth before.

The mouth of a John Dory is a masterpiece of engineering. A complex system of interconnected hinges and diaphragms opens and extends to form an almost perfectly cylindrical tube, running fron the huge mouth opening all the way to the belly.

As the mouth is rapidly opened and extended and the tube forms, water rushes into the tube, carrying with it whatever is swimming in the water.

A Dory with her mouth extended underwater

In this way, the Dory literally inhales its prey head first.

Johnny’s mouth tube was so big, I could have fitted my whole hand in, up to and including my wrist. Except for the fact that Johnny’s mouth tube was already occupied.

The little yellow tail fin sticking out was attached to a large Jack Mackerel. I reached in, grabbed the tail fin, pulled gently, and out came Jack.

Jack was so big, his mouth would have been about where Johnny’s black spot is. At its widest, his girth was the size of a soda can.

The story unfolds

Jack had taken my bait, which he still held in his teeth. But Jack had not been “hooked”, because before there was time for that, Johnny had taken Jack. The hook still dangled loosely from Jack’s mouth, the bait still attached.

A Jack Mackerel

Jack was still alive, though shivering in shock. The front of his body was covered in green stomach fluids.

We let Jack go, although it’s doubtful he will survive.

Johnny went into the ice-bin.

The end

As for the rest of the day, the fish had much more luck than we did. By three o’clock the wind was starting to pick up and it was time to head back. We hoisted sail and sailed all the way back to the harbor.

By the time we got back, the wind was quite fresh and a swell had started to develop. As we pulled up to the mooring, the first light rain came, a warning of what was to come.

Back on the hard, we divided Johnny and each went home to a delicious, healthy, fresh dinner.

The High says "Goodbye", a Low says "Hello"

For the record, Johnny weighed about 3.5 kg (7.5 pounds), not counting Jack.

The high pressure zone has moved away, but the high of the trip will stay with me forever.

Thank you, Harry.

Thank you, Johnny.

Thank you, precious Ocean.

How can you be so cruel?!

I knew you’d ask that.

Hurting something that you don’t intend to kill, that’s cruel.

Killing something that you don’t intend to eat, that’s unforgivable.

Humans are the only species that does both deliberately. I do neither.

How can you still go fishing, while the oceans are being destroyed?

I thought you’d never ask.

Our oceans are indeed being destroyed, by overfishing, by destructive fishing methods and by pollution. If we continue along this path, our oceans will soon be reduced to a massive toxic slime pond.

There is a way out, but it will take an Ocean Defense Force to make it happen.

First, we need to stop pouring our junk into the oceans. All that junk gets broken down and consumed by micro-organisms, then it makes its way up the food chain to our dinner tables.

Susan Shaw's Toxic Body Burden

Skeptical? Get your blood tested, as Susan Shaw did.

Susan submitted a sample of her own blood to the same tests routinely performed on dolphins and other marine mammals found dead or dying on the beaches of the world.

The results should not come as a surprise, considering that we are all part of the same global food chain. Directly or indirectly, we eat what dolphins eat. Some of us even eat Dolphins.

Next, we need to increase the extent of our ocean reserves from the present 1% to 20%. The commercial fishers will complain like hell, yet the harvest will increase in just a few short years.

The problem is, we are eating into our capital. Once we increase our reserves, we will be able to live off the interest. At least until 2050, when we hit the 9 Billion mark.

But that’s another story.

Lots more to learn about this subject here.

Thanks for caring.

Well now there’s a serious proposal for version 1.0 of such a device. Not yet my complete vision but definitely the next step towards it.

In later versions, the raw materials will be simple molecules, like water and amino acids. Perhaps later, individual atoms, mainly carbon. The device will extract some raw materials, like hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen, from the atmosphere.

It will be like a microwave, except you insert an empty plate, select a recipe (for which you pay per use, if the marketers get their way), and in a few minutes you have your meal. Optionally produce the plate as well.

It will also be like a printer, in that you will have to replace the cartridge(s) from time to time. So the device itself will be sold for almost nothing, as a loss leader.  The money will come from the raw materials and from the software recipes.

And the next next step?

Clothing.

Why wash, when you can reprint?

I suggested that, with the new formula, bars would be assigned linearly across the full range of signal strength, from what I called zero, where a connection could not be established and maintained, up to some maximum.

With the new software now released, and after independent analysis, we are able to check my prediction.

Quantifying the Prediction

My prediction was deliberately more qualitative than quantitative. To be strictly quantitative requires that we first agree what “zero” and “full strength” mean. This is somewhat arbitrary. The zero point is determined in part by the performance of proprietary digital signal processing algorithms. The maximum measurable signal strength is a design point.

Nevertheless, to make a comparison, we must first quantify the prediction. At this point, an astute engineer will see that I could carefully choose these two points to make my prediction more closely match reality. I will resist any temptation to do that, and allow the community to set those points for me.

The online consensus seems to be that “zero” is -113 dBm and “full strength” is -51 dBm, a range of 62 dB. Dividing that range uniformly across five bars gives 12.4 dB per bar. We would thus expect the bars to change at -101, -88, -76 and -63 (rounded to the nearest whole dB).

Reality Check

The following chart shows the prediction vs the before and after reality:

Where I was right

With the exception of a small correction on bar number two, I was correct in predicting linearity.

Where I was nearly right

I came close on the range increase. The range went from 22 dB to 45 dB.  My prediction was (in effect) 49.6 dB.

Where I was half right

I predicted an increase of 28 dB for the fifth bar. In fact the increase was only 15 dB. While my theory was correct, I was wrong to take it to the extreme.

Where I was not wrong

I did not predict that the zero point would be lowered, as it has been, by 8 dB, to -121 dBm.

This is perhaps one of the most astounding changes. 8 dB represents a drop in signal strength of more than six times. It is impossible to imagine that the iPhone digital signal processing performance is that much better than the competition.

The only explanation I can see is that, consistent with my prediction, Apple have redefined bar number one. Whereas it used to mean “you have at least a half-decent signal”, it now means “you have some signal, but not much”.

Where I was overwhelmingly right

In his brilliant fireside chat, Steve Jobs made it abundantly clear that he wanted users to learn more about how their own behavior affects the performance of any phone, and that he wanted his bars to provide an accurate, reliable tool for managing that behavior.

I was spot on. Steve went to extraordinary lengths to explain how behavior affects performance.  Apple’s bars now provide a uniform measure of signal strength over a much wider range than before.

I also implied that Apple were intending to set a new standard. Indeed, Steve almost challenged the industry to “follow the leader”.

What shocked me the most

I was stunned when Steve gave out the relative dropped call number. Steve told us that iPhone 4′s dropped call rate was indeed worse than before, but that the change was less than one call per hundred. That numerator is scary.

Think about it. We can assume that the true number is quite close to one (in a hundred), for if it were much lower, Steve could have said something like one in two hundred, or one in a thousand.

Steve also implied that this was a relatively insignificant change. But for that to be true, the real dropped call rate must in the double-digit numbers per hundred! That is atrocious! Dropped call rates should be much smaller, barely measurable in calls per thousand or even calls per ten thousand, not calls per hundred!

AT&T smartly refused to allow Steve to release the dropped call rates, but they were foolish to allow him to report even the delta.

The underlying engineering issues have been well covered, for example here, here and here.

At first Apple said “Don’t hold it that way”.  That didn’t go down too well.

Now Apple have released a carefully worded statement, which you can read here.

We dismantle Apple’s statement to see what we might read between the lines.

What we know

Reception on every phone gets worse when you hold it.

Reception on iPhone 4 gets much worse when you hold it the “wrong” way.

Unheld, iPhone 4′s antenna performance is exquisite, perhaps the current best-in-class.

We also know that the number of bars shown on any iPhone is generally a bit more optimistic than on other phones — but that is not the issue here.  The differences are tiny.  This, as we will see, is a distraction.

What Apple said

We have discovered the cause of the drop in bars

It is simple, surprising, we were stunned!

We found a mistake in the way we calculate how many bars to show

we’ve been showing too many bars!

The big drop in bars was because the high bars we not real

We will fix this by “adopting AT&T’s formula”

What Apple did not say

Apple neither confirmed nor denied that holding the iPhone 4 in a certain way causes a dramatic drop in signal strength.  We know that it does and that it’s a serious defect.

Apple gave no details on the “mistake” they say they found.  In particular, they did not say that the mistake was in any way related to the optimistically high bar count demonstrated by the reverse-engineers.

Apple gave no details on “AT&T’s recently recommended formula”.  In fact, it seems, no details are available, anywhere.  Nada.  (someone please prove me wrong about this!)

Apple did not say that the “mistake” they found was causing the dramatic loss of signal, which of course it isn’t.  Nor did they say that the new formula would fix the problem, which of course it won’t.

Whats really going on?

Steve Jobs knows a serious problem when he sees one, and this is a serious problem.  The purely technical fix will mean re-engineering.  No doubt that is already in progress, but it will take months to move to production.

In the meantime, what to do? Apple must ride through the problem on a PR wave. Jobs can see no other choice.

So what’s the plan?

Jobs must create a distraction.  ”We found a bug!  Boy, are we surprised!”

Then he must link the bug to the problem.  This is where it gets complicated, because there is no linkage.

So Job’s intends to create a linkage, by changing what the bars mean!

That will take some PR. Jobs proposes to educate the market about what happens when you hold a phone, and to re-educate us all about what the bars mean.  For this he needs backing, which is where AT&T come in.

Jobs want us to think he means, AT&T, the technical authority on wireless.  He really means, AT&T, our business/marketing partner.  In fact, the iPhone 4 antenna issue has nothing whatsoever to do with AT&T, in either capacity.  AT&T are simply playing the role of grand savior in a grand charade that will carry Apple through this “minor technical hitch”.

In the process, AT&T will gain some badly needed cred, the iPhone 4 will be rescued (by obscuring the real issue) and phone users will become a little more aware about what they can do to get their phone to work better.

To understand the details requires a bit of explanation…

What the bars mean now

The bars show signal strength, but in a dumbed down way.

Signal strength is like the water pressure in your shower.  If there’s not enough pressure, you have a miserable shower, or no shower at all.  So with your phone, if there’s not enough signal, you have a bad connection, or no connection at all.

We can un-dumb things easily, by giving signal strength a number, like everything else we measure.  The units don’t matter.  We’ll call them wits, because they’re sort of like power (watts).

There is a lowest signal level at which the signal is “lost”.  We will call that signal strength 0 (zero) wits.  At this level almost every phone will drop the connection and show no bars.

Then there is a highest needed signal level at which the connection is as close to perfect as it will ever get.  On a 3G phone, this level is about 20 wits.  At and above this level most phones show 5 bars.

What happens between 0 and 20 wits depends on whether you’re talking or downloading.  A voice call needs only a tiny signal, maybe 5 or 6 wits, before it starts to break up.  A data connection behaves differently.  Below 20 wits, the data rate is lowered.  You can still download, but it takes longer and longer, depending on how few wits you have.

In practice the signal strength can get much higher than 20.  Standing right near a cell tower, the signal might be as high as 60.  Yet there is no way the phone can take advantage of the surplus.  There is a (technical) speed limit.  So most phones continue to show full signal strength, typically 5 bars.

That’s a bit like having a speedometer that reads only up to the speed limit.

Could this be the real “mistake” that Apple is referring to?

What the bars will come to mean

Apple and AT&T have agreed (I speculate) to let the bars show true signal strength, from 0 to (say) 60!

This will change the game completely.  The change will be immediate (it’s a tiny software change) and it will be accepted because (a) it is sanctioned by AT&T, (b) the iPhone 4 is an otherwise magnificent phone and (c) lots of other social reasons that Jobs understands perfectly.

How that will “fix” (the perception of) the iPhone 4 problem

The next best thing to fixing the problem is to show the user when he may have a problem.

Holding an iPhone 3GS “naturally” causes a drop of only about 2 wits (ref).

Holding an iPhone 4 in the same (wrong!) way can easily cause a drop of 20 wits or more.

Under the current system, 5 bars may only mean 20 wits.  So while you think you have a strong signal, you may not have enough to survive the grip of death.

Under the new system, a signal of 20 wits may only show up as only one bar.  It won’t seem nearly as strange to lose that one bar by changing your grip.  Having two or more bars will mean you have more than 20 wits, hopefully enough to survive the grip of death.

The rest will be PR history

People with iPhone’s will find themselves with generally fewer bars than their friends, but their phones will work just fine.  Apple will tout how their phones work flawlessly all the way down to one bar, where other phones start to degrade at higher bar counts.  Jobs may even throw in a switch to “use the old formula”, as if to say “we could also pretend we have more signal, if we wanted to.”

All of a sudden the public debate will be about which of the two systems is “right”. Other phone manufacturers will be forced either to follow Apple’s “lead” (and seem to be playing catch up) or to defend the old system.  Either way the attention will no longer be on the iPhone 4 antenna.

The scheme doesn’t have to work.  It just has to work long enough for Apple to fix the hardware.

Update

Bob Cringely wrote an article about this article.   In the discussion that followed, Bob reminded us that “with AT&T losing its U.S. iPhone exclusive in January, Apple doesn’t care what AT&T thinks”.  Bob is right, and I went too far supposing that Jobs had asked AT&T for their opinion.  So I retract that.

Rather it seems that the reference may have been a challenge to AT&T.  My suspicion is that Apple are indeed using something AT&T put out confidentially, but not quite the way AT&T intended it to be used.  Apple seems to be saying, we’re not playing the same old bars game.  So far, it seems, AT&T have not commented, nor has anyone been able to point to any “recently recommended formula” in an AT&T released document.

Apple also said they would make bars 1, 2 and 3 a bit taller.  This reinforced my conjecture that Apple wants users to understand that having few bars is not necessarily a bad thing.  Having more bars just means you can survive all kinds of antenna abuse, like covering the mystical black gap.

Followup

Read my self-assessment.

the tears flow

ok

the sobbing has subsided

Yes, there is a movement afoot

A movement to build up and to engage with our youth

Sunday 13 June 2010

began a particular important

24-hour event, the

Global Enterprise Challenge

At precisely 9:00 pm (NZ time),

synchronously (all at the same time),

over the Internet

direct from bali, indonesia

100′s of 16/17-year-old high school students,

from 14 different countries,

in teams of 8 plus a mentor/sponsor,

received this mission:

The GEC 2010 Challenge

It is two decades from now and the world is a very different place from the one we inhabit today.

Your Challenge today is:
“To produce a working model of an innovative game for a family of four (2 adults + 2 children aged 8-12) that addresses the issues and challenges facing the world in 2030.”

Each team was given no more than 24 hours to respond by uploading a video lasting no more than 3 minutes with no more than 4 slides.

Each team was also required to submit a complete written business plan on no more than two pages.

now then…

Your Mission:

• Watch the winning entry (3 minutes)
• Watch some of the other ideas
• Watch the TED talk
• Tell it to someone you care about
• Make sure you do something like this in your region
• Get behind the kidz! or gtf out of the way

Kidz! They’re our only hope!

i feel much better now, thank you

at least i did, until i watched another talk

i don’t know why, but watching these kidz makes me weep…

how life in NZ compares

with life in the USA.

Why?

Because I claim the differences are hugely important!

They explain

at least in part

WARNING:  here comes that darn conceptual leap again

much of your (usans) suffering

What suffering?!

Ok, next question …

In NZ:

• Prostitution is legal and regulated
  • no comment
  • we just need to get that one out the way right from the start
• Children talk to adults and vice versa
  • after all, they’re just little people, aren’t they?
  • the dividing line is imaginary
  • curiously, some visitors think NZ kids are cheeky
• Strangers talk to one another
  • except for some tourists
  • on the street, in the supermarket, we interact
    • even kidz, who thus learn to trust their instincts
• Kids prefer bare feet
  • even though everyone has shoes
  • even when its cold, dark, rainy
    • i saw at least three on my walk last night

(to be continued)

i’m not going to sit in the corner and not not not make a noise

not hide

make sure no-one sees me us we

us you we me the it not

lay low, stay cool, don’t hurt anybody

ok?

please?

pretty please?

I’ve been writing, experimenting with blogs.

This is the latest of several quite unsatisfactory attempts.

why so miserable?

i’ll have to blog about that, i suppose.

• it’s hard!
• not as interactive as buzz
• the graphics tools are still infantile!
  • i prefer my whiteboard
    • but making a good video is ominously hard too!
• maybe i need an iPad
• maybe i need an iMac
• maybe i need to ask for help?

maybe i should go play my guitar

what potus said, but hopes you missed:

• the worst is yet to come

what potus did not say:

• we’re gonna get those criminals
• we’re gonna stop deepwater offshore drilling forever
• the $20 Billion is really only $5 Billion a year over 4 years
• that’s about 3 months profit for BP
• that’s barely enough to pay for 3 months of cleanup
• sorry about the stupid booming hoax
• the barrier island thing is a hoax too
• we’ve had 2 Million barrels so far, expect from 10 to 50 more

• our nation (what is that?  is it:
  • all US citizens?
  • all US legal residents?
  • all present in the US?
  • the US territory?  flag?  military?)
• faces a multitude of challenges (in any particular order?)
  • at home, out top priority, recession (and who’s fault is that?)
  • abroad, al Qaeda (whatever that means)
  • tonight, oil spin spill (man made volcano)

defining the terms:

• on tuesday 20 April, an explosion (oops!  sorry!  not our fault!)
  • ripped through BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig (technically:
    • it was a blowout, the blowout preventer failed
    • BP is just the convenient cash-rich scapegoat)

framing the cause and effect:

• because (no fault of ours) there has never been a leak this size at this depth
  • stopping it has tested the limits of human technology
• That’s why (what is why?) just after the rig sank (about three weeks later, actually)
  • I assembled a team
    • of our nation’s best scientists and engineers
    • to tackle this challenge –
  • a team led by Dr. Steven Chu,
    • a Nobel Prize-winning physicist and
    • our nation’s Secretary of Energy.
  • Scientists at our national labs (hey, mr an ms us nation, did you know you had a lab?) and
  • experts from academia and
  • other oil companies
    • have also provided ideas and advice.
• As a result of these efforts (success, already!)
  • we’ve directed BP (under what authority?)
    • to mobilize additional equipment and technology (OMG!)
  • these efforts should capture up to 90 percent of the oil leaking out of the well.
    • ok, so is that like a promise?  you promise they will not capture more than 90 percent?  is that what you’re saying?  so, at least, say, 5,000 gallons a day?
  • This is until the company finishes drilling a relief well later in the summer that’s expected to stop the leak completely.

ok, now that i’ve got your attention:

Already, this oil spill is the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. And unlike an earthquake or a hurricane, it’s not a single event that does its damage in a matter of minutes or days. The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years. (so it it months, or is it years?  there’s a big difference, you know)

We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got (left, after fighting the nasty recession, and al Qaeda) for as long as it takes (up to term limits).

ok, now that I’m totally over-committed, the fabulous 3x plan:

1 .  We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And

2.   we will do whatever’s necessary (no restrictions apply?) to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy (not necessarily to accomplish anything, just to help)

3.   wait, let’s start again…

Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we’re doing to:

1. clean up the oil,
2. help our neighbors in the Gulf (which neighbors?)
3. make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again yeah right!

1st thing

the cleanup

From the very beginning of this crisis, the federal government has been in charge of the largest environmental cleanup effort in our nation’s history — an effort led by Admiral Thad Allen, who has almost 40 years of experience responding to disasters. We now have (number, numbers) nearly 30,000 personnel who are working across four states to contain and clean up the oil. Thousands of ships and other vessels are responding in the Gulf. And I’ve authorized the deployment of over 17,000 National Guard members along the coast. These servicemen and women are ready to help stop the oil from coming ashore, they’re ready to help clean the beaches, train response workers, or even help with processing claims — and I urge the governors in the affected states to activate these troops as soon as possible.

Because of our efforts, millions of gallons of oil have already been removed from the water through burning, skimming and other collection methods.

Over five and a half million feet of boom has been laid across the water to block and absorb the approaching oil. that’s not what booming does!

We’ve approved the construction of new barrier islands in Louisiana to try to stop the oil before it reaches the shore, and we’re working with Alabama, Mississippi and Florida to implement creative approaches to their unique coastlines.

As the cleanup continues, we will offer whatever additional resources and assistance our coastal states may need. Now, a mobilization of this speed and magnitude will never be perfect, and new challenges will always arise. I saw and heard evidence of that during this trip. So if something isn’t working, we want to hear about it. If there are problems in the operation like booming?, we will fix them.

But we have to recognize that despite our best efforts, oil has already caused damage to our coastline and its wildlife. And sadly, no matter how effective our response is, there will be more oil and more damage before this siege is done. That’s why the

2nd thing

we’re focused on is

the recovery and restoration

of the Gulf Coast.

You know, for generations, men and women who call this region home have made their living from the water. That living is now in jeopardy (or already destroyed?). I’ve talked to shrimpers and fishermen who don’t know how they’re going to support their families this year. I’ve seen empty docks and restaurants with fewer customers -– even in areas where the beaches are not yet affected. I’ve talked to owners of shops and hotels who wonder when the tourists might start coming back. The sadness and the anger they feel is not just about the money they’ve lost. It’s about a wrenching anxiety that their way of life may be lost.

I refuse to let that happen.

Tomorrow, I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him (by what authority?) that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company’s recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent third party.

Beyond compensating the people of the Gulf in the short term, it’s also clear we need a long-term plan to restore the unique beauty and bounty of this region. The oil spill represents just the latest blow to a place that’s already suffered multiple economic disasters and decades of environmental degradation that has led to disappearing wetlands and habitats. And the region still hasn’t recovered from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. That’s why we must make a commitment to the Gulf Coast that goes

beyond responding to the crisis of the moment.

• I make that commitment tonight. Earlier, I asked Ray Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, who is also a former governor of Mississippi and a son of the Gulf Coast, to develop a long-term Gulf Coast Restoration Plan as soon as possible.
• The plan will be designed by
• states,
• local communities,
• tribes,
• fishermen,
• businesses,
• conservationists and
• other Gulf residents.
• And BP will pay for the impact this spill has had on the region.

The 3rd part

of our response plan is the steps we’re taking to ensure that a disaster like this does not happen again and never again will a US president make a promise he can’t keep. A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider now there’s an iron fist ruling! new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe –- that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken.

That obviously was not the case in the Deepwater Horizon rig, and I want to know why.

The American people deserve to know why.

The families I met with last week who lost their loved ones in the explosion — these families deserve to know why.

And so I’ve established a National Commission to understand the causes of this disaster and offer recommendations on what additional safety and environmental standards we need to put in place. Already, I’ve issued a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. I know this creates difficulty for the people who work on these rigs, but for the sake of their safety, and for the sake of the entire region, we need to know the facts before we allow deepwater drilling to continue. And while I urge the Commission to complete its work as quickly as possible, I expect them to do that work thoroughly and impartially.

One place we’ve already begun to take action is at the agency in charge of regulating drilling and issuing permits, known as the Minerals Management Service. Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility — a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations.

When Ken Salazar became my Secretary of the Interior, one of his very first acts was to clean up the worst of the corruption at this agency. But it’s now clear that the problem there ran much deeper, and the pace of reform was just too slow. And so Secretary Salazar and I are bringing in new leadership at the agency — Michael Bromwich, who was a tough federal prosecutor and Inspector General. And his charge over the next few months is to build an organization that acts as the oil industry’s watchdog — not its partner.

So one of the lessons we’ve learned from this spill is that we need better regulations, better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling. But a larger lesson is that no matter how much we improve our regulation of the industry, drilling for oil these days entails greater risk. After all, oil is a finite resource. We consume more than 20 percent of the world’s oil, but have less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And that’s part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean — because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.

For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered.

For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And

for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires.

Time and again, the path forward has been blocked — not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor.

The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight.

Countries like China how many countries like China are there? are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be should be? right here in America. Each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our future he means hypothetical wealth (he means debt) to foreign countries for their oil and other junk. And today, as we look to the Gulf, we see an entire way of life being threatened by a menacing cloud of black crude.

We cannot consign our children to this future. The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America’s innovation and seize control of our own destiny.

This is not some distant vision for America. The transition away from fossil fuels is going to take some time, but over the last year and a half, we’ve already taken unprecedented action to jumpstart the clean energy industry. As we speak, old factories are reopening to produce wind turbines, people are going back to work installing energy-efficient windows, and small businesses are making solar panels. Consumers are buying more efficient cars and trucks, and families are making their homes more energy-efficient. Scientists and researchers are discovering clean energy technologies that someday will lead to entire new industries.

Each of us has a part to play in a new future that will benefit all of us. As we recover from this recession, the transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of jobs -– but only if we accelerate that transition. Only if we seize the moment. And only if we rally together and act as one nation –-  hmmm, interesting juxtapositions follow…

When I was a candidate for this office, I laid out a set of principles and what exactly are those? that would move our country towards energy independence. Last year, the House of Representatives not the senate? acted on these principles by passing a strong and comprehensive energy and climate bill –- a bill that finally makes clean energy the profitable kind of energy for America’s businesses.

Now, there are costs associated with this transition. And there are

some who believe that we can’t afford those costs right now. I say

we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy -– because

the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.

So I’m happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party -– as long they

seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested

raising efficiency standards in our buildings

like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should

set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power. Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high-tech industry does on research and development -– and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development.

All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But

the one approach I will not accept is inaction.

The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that

this challenge is somehow too big and too difficult to meet.

You know, the same thing was said about our ability to

produce enough planes and tanks in World War II.

The same thing was said about our ability to

harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon.

And yet, time and again, we have

refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead,

what has defined us as a nation since our founding is

the capacity to shape our destiny -–

our determination to fight for the America we want for our children.

Even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like.

Even if we don’t yet know precisely how we’re going to get there.

We know we’ll get there. really? there’s a destination?

ok, here we go with the supermagic again…

It’s a faith in the future that sustains us as a people.

It is that same faith that sustains our neighbors in the Gulf right now.

Each year, at the beginning of shrimping season, the region’s fishermen take part in a tradition that was brought to America long ago by fishing immigrants from Europe. It’s called

“The Blessing of the Fleet,” and today it’s

a celebration where clergy from different religions gather to say

a prayer for the safety and success of the men and women who will soon head out to sea -–

some for weeks at a time.

The ceremony goes on in good times and in bad.

It took place after Katrina, and it took place a few weeks ago –- at the beginning of the most difficult season these fishermen have ever faced.

And still, they came and they prayed. For as a priest and former fisherman once said of the tradition, “The blessing is not that God has promised to remove all obstacles and dangers. The blessing is that He is with us always,” a blessing that’s granted “even in the midst of the storm.”

The oil spill is not the last crisis America will face. This nation has known hard times before and we will surely know them again. What sees us through -– what has always seen us through –- is our strength, our resilience, and our unyielding faith that something better awaits us if we summon the courage to reach for it.

Tonight, we pray for that courage. We pray for the people of the Gulf. And we pray that a hand may guide us through the storm towards a brighter day. Thank you, and the obligatory God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. you’ve been asking for that for years.  is it working?

and then we hold thumbs.

good luck dudes.