Bill Gates at the U of Chicago

I managed to snag tickets to Bill Gates' talk at the Graduate School of Business yesterday through a nifty online lottery for students. Annoying seating corral-gals aside (what's with that - people in business school can't seat themselves?), the talk itself was pretty interesting. He spoke for about 30 minutes, primarily on the topics of rapid technological growth and how it will impact education, health care and the human machine interface, although he did touch on what what he termed at Davos "Creative Capitalism." A video of the talk can be had here (WMV, 76 MB)

Some of the highlights:

• He opened the talk by replaying his hilarious farewell video that originally aired at CES - celebrity appearances include Jay-Z, Steve Balmer, Bono, Clooney, Obama, and more. Even funnier in person.


• A brief discussion of the evolution of software and hardware industries - he posits an interesting theory that the spread of personal computers, cell phones, etc. works in a positive feedback loop with the growth of software companies - thoughts on this later


• The Future of Interaction - Natural User Interface. This was the part I found the most interesting. He discussed how the shift taking place already with the iPhone and Microsoft Surface will eventually transform how we interact with machines. The next iterations will involve touch, speech and visual recognition, and natural writing implements. Cool.


• Technology and Healthcare - another cool point, where he demonstrated Microsoft's HD View, being used in conjunction with Harvard to create ground-breaking brain imaging. He stressed the idea that technology should be accesible, so that it enables innovation in a variety of fields, rather than hinders it. He also stressed the applicability of Machine learning and AI to solving puzzles like the AIDS virus.


• During the question period, he also addressed a variety of applications of both technology and "Creative Capitalism," particularly in terms of improving inner-city education via charter schools and accountability testing, eradicating malaria and other diseases, and enabling biological research.

My Thoughts:
I think Gates is on to something when he talks about the ability of non-government, privately funded agencies to address certain market failures - particularly the collaboration of the Gates Foundation with GlaxoSmithKline to share the substantial financial risk involved in developing a malaria vaccine. I'm more skeptical, however, when he tries to replicate these successes, and this approach in general, in situations where the markets appear more efficient - for example, his ongoing project to raise African coffee farmer's wages. Improving productivity and efficiency is a good target, as they have done with a separate Indian farming program, but simply seeking to inflate wages a la Fair Trade Coffee isn't.

CUBA LIBRE (?)

Castro Resigns! What's next? More to come, when I'm awake of course...

Re-examining McCain

Now that the nomination on the GOP side seems all but locked up, it's time for those of us who supported other candidates in the primaries to examine the relative merits of presumptive nominee John McCain. The AP, in typically unsourced fashion, published a list of "Main Reasons Conservatives Oppose McCain" (link) that serves as an excellent jumping off point for weighing his shortcomings, and for re-examining what may turn out to be some of his better, more conservative principles. While several of the critiques ("Works with Democrats" and "Kerry Veep") don't really carry much weight, and his fiery temper may well prove an asset, their core criticism are important, and disconcerting. Yet I believe that his overall platform is the best of the remaining alternatives. And while many of his policy positions are in stark contrast to the more "conservative" nominees, upon closer examination actually embody more traditionally conservative values. In many ways McCain may be the closest to a Federalist, small government candidate we'll see in 2008.

As noted by the AP, he opposes the Federal Gay Marriage Amendment. And he should! The Constitution and the Supreme Court have no standing to deal with the issue of marriage (or abortion, or prohibition for that matter), and a true conservative stance is identical to McCain's - he opposes the Federal amendment on principle, but he supports a state-level ban on gay marriage in Arizona. Here McCain mirrors Thompson's unorthodox, but correctly Federalist, stance on Abortion that favors overturning Roe but supports a state-level referendum.

With the important exception of campaign finance reform, McCain's biggest weakness is immigration. The AP writes:

"McCain has been a vocal supporter of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, although he now says he understands the border between the U.S. and Mexico must be sealed first."

Here's where I think conservatives are starting to miss the boat. Economics and small government conservatism both tell us that the government doesn't have much business meddling in the labor supply market. And the fact that so many illegal immigrants are employed only indicates that there is a shortage of labor supply. That so many of the same conservative politicians who decry (rightly, in fact) irrational wage increases and bullying union tactics are so vehemently opposed to more comprehensive immigration reform indicates a dearth of rigorous intellectual analysis in favor of gut-check politics.

The problem, one which McCain has only recently figured out, is that merely legalizing the existing workers only fixes half the problem, and only for a little while. Unless we enact comprehensive reform, including an overhaul of the immigration and visa-issuing process, a stronger focus on cultural blending and assimilation, and a rigorous, funded mandate for real border security, we are only further incentivizing marginal immigrants to come here illegally. Yet where McCain trumps several of his former competitors is the understanding that border security alone does not address the very real question of how to deal with the immigrants already here, and how to fill the demand gap in the US labor market. Nor does it approach the asinine, outdated isolationism that embodies our current immigration program. What possible economic reason could we have for limiting the number of visas we issue to post-graduate degree holders other than protectionist nonsense? And for that matter, why is there even a limit on gardeners and dish-washers coming legally, if we know there is such a demand for them that employers are willing to resort to the black market to fill positions?

I mentioned that immigration is McCain's biggest problem, other than campaign finance - that's because campaign finance was the primary reason I didn't support him in the primaries. While I admire his willingness to follow conviction over party, his refusal to recognize the folly of his vote to limit free speech, a vote that spawned the creation of a PAC army doing exactly what the bill was intended to prevent from happening, still worries me. I hope that he will come to a better understanding of the issue, and its practical implications - he certainly has on immigration. Given the primary landscape, and the implications on our national security this election entails, I think it would be folly not to support McCain at this juncture.

Indiana Jones Trailer is Out!

Watch it. Now.