Robots go to School: What Does Machine Learning Mean?

Six hours and 54 minutes after embarking on a grueling march over the the Mojave Desert, Stanley, the driver less Volkwagen Toureg stormed accross the finish line in the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge. Charged with completing the difficult 132 mile desert obstacle course, the modified SUV rose to the challenge. DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) issued a challenge to engineers and computer scientists in 2004 to have a driver less vehicle complete a long and difficult course consisting of GPS way points spaced at about the length of a football field. The prize? $2 million. You may be wondering how a robot could be programmed to make the complex, instantaneous decisions that off-road driving requires. The short answer is machine learning (which, incidentally, sounds like the title of another Carpe Daemon series).

Stanley in his victory pose

Indeed, this is the first in a multi-part series about machine learning. You may have heard the term carelessly thrown around in many different contexts. That probably isn't a symptom of underinformed people trying to sound smart but rather a display of how ill-defined the topic is. In general, machine learning refers to algorithms that allow computers to make inferences based on past experience. A program starts out performing a task passably well, then it does the task some more, and then all of the sudden it can do the task better... well, that's machine learning. A more rigorous definition than that doesn't really exist.

You probably encounter tons of examples of machine learning every day. When you feed your hand written check into the ATM and it (somewhat creepily) tells you how much it's worth... that's machine learning. When you go to the grocery store and receive a discount for using your "club card"... that discount was probably computed using machine learning techniques. If you have an Android phone and you use the voice search feature... you guessed it, that's machine learning. When that important email from your professor or boss is diverted into the spam folder only to be discovered long past its expiration date... that's machine learning (or lack thereof). After recognizing such diverse applications of machine learning, it's hard to fathom how all of these things could fall under the umbrella of machine learning.

Machine learning is not one algorithm or even one branch of math or science. It's an aggregation of many different techniques borrowed from statistics, optimization, computer science, and even neurology. It is a set of tools borrowed from all of these fields and codified into algorithms that can be implemented on computers. By bringing the techniques of all these fields to bear on difficult problems, programmers can endow computers with the ability to perform tasks one might not expect them to complete.

In recent months, we have seen some powerful demonstrations of the capabilities of machine learning. First, Watson triumphed over the best human Jeopardy! players. This feat required an understanding of the nuanced English language that many never expected computers to achieve. Fresh off Watson's victory in Jeopardy, Google granted increased visibilty into its semi-secret project to create autonomous cars by releasing this video. Where did Google get all of this autonomous car knowledge? If you guessed the DARPA Grand Challenge, then you guessed correctly. Sebastian Thrun, the leader of the victorious 2005 Stanford team and his colleagues now work at Google.

These feats are somewhat jarring because they represent an encroachment of computers into domains previously dominated by humans. Let's just say that their inexorable march is not finished. Researchers will continue to improve machine learning algorithms, and computers will gain ever more aptitude in surprising domains. I love stoking robot apocolypse hysteria as much as the next person, but surprisingly that's not my point here. My point is that machine learning is an incredibly interesting and powerful tool that is applicable accross an expanding number of domains. Something so powerful must be worth understanding... at least a little bit.

If Watson and Google's driverless car weren't enough to get you excited about upcoming installments, then I guarantee this will be. (Watch until the end. It's worth your two minutes).

Broadening the Definition of Technology

When I say technology, you think of iPhones, hydrogen powered cars, and the space shuttle. Valid, all of them. Gadgets, vehicles, and exotic materials are all obvious examples of technology. However, there is another whole class of knowledge that also classifies--knowledge of processes.

Technology

In his 1999 New Yorker article titled "When Doctors Make Mistakes," Dr. Atul Gawande uses his experience as a surgeon to make a general claim about technology. Peppered with stories of medical malpractice, Gawande's article makes clear the fact that no matter how expert the doctor, room always remains for error. He contends that the main thrust of medical training should not be to protect us from bad doctors but rather from good ones. The sheer volume of cases that pass through the hands of competent, well-intentioned doctors each year almost guarantees that a "silly" mistake will have dire consequences.

Gawande's prescription for this malady is somewhat unorthodox. Rather than proposing increased training or harsher malpractice statutes, he suggests that more foolproof protocols be devised.

Every year, several surgeons accidentally operate on the wrong side. Intending to repair a ligament in the left knee, they instead slice open the right. Obviously, this is rare, but it seems that it should be eliminated all together. Clever doctors invented a foolproof method for ensuring that the surgeon operates in the correct place. The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons now endorses the practice of surgeons initialing the body part on which to operate before the patient comes to surgery.

The article contains myriad other examples of processes that reduce the already infrequent incidence of errors in the medical profession. Anything from standardizing the direction that anaesthesia knobs are turned to reduce the flow of gas to decision trees used by emergency room doctors can be considered technology. Following several successes in this arena, Gawande wrote a book titled The Checklist Manifesto. He argues that no matter how expert a professional is, checklists can improve his or her outcomes.

His book brings to mind perhaps the most famous checklist in common use--the pilot's preflight checklist. Before taking off, pilots must complete an extensive checklist intended to eliminate common oversights and ensure the plane's ability to fly safely. This checklist is one of the reasons that air travel is one of the safest modes of travel. It is also a prime example of a process that doubles as a piece of technology.

Another excellent example of an industry in which processes are part of the technology, ironically, is the software development industry. Authors, bloggers, and columnists have pontificated ad nauseum about the value of disciplined software development practices... and they are absolutely justified. Sloppy or lazy development can multiply the final amount of effort required to build a piece of software by a factor of ten or more--something I have experienced.

Frederick Brooks, Jr's book The Mythical Man Month is perhaps the canonical resource on the topic. Written in 1975, the fact that it still ranks #7 in Amazon's entire software engineering category is a testament to the durability of its wisdom. Some aspects of the book are dated (e.g. weighting the size of the source code of a program heavily because storage was so expensive), but the basic thesis is enduring. He argues that adding extra man-power to any behind-schedule project that involves complex interdependencies will only cause the project to fall further behind. The overhead involved in bringing new members up to speed and maintaining communication among the enlarged team is insurmountable.

Brooks's book is an example of a piece of knowledge that was invented by man, solves a problem, and makes life easier. If that isn't technology, then I don't know what is. This fact requires a broadening of our conception of technology to include all manner of managerial, medical, and professional processes. In addition to writing about technology, the work of Gawande and Brooks should be considered technology in and of itself.

Nuclear Crisis in Japan: Implications for the Future of Nuclear Power

Ever since the 9.0 earthquake rocked Japan, non-stop coverage of the tragedy has inundated the media. Satellite images show barren wastelands where vibrant cities stood before, photographs of survivors show grieving Japanese citizens, and urgently worded articles speculate about the effect the catastrophe will have on global financial markets. However, one story seems to stand above the cacophony. Several reactors at the Fukushima I nuclear power plane currently sit precariously on the edge of meltdown, and the media seems unable to focus on anything else.

Fukushima I power plant

The vacuum of knowledge about nuclear power generation among the general public makes the situation at the Fukushima power plant perfect fodder for hysteria. Headlines flippantly compare the unfolding events to the Chernobyl disaster of 1986--widely considered the worst nuclear accident in history. However, futher reading among more sober sources reveals the fact that the current situation is not on the same scale and has little potential for progressing to that point.

You're probably wondering (as I was) just exactly what is happening at the Japanese power plant. Details have become more scarce throughout the past day or so, but this is what is known. When the earthquake originally struck, the electric pumps responsible for pumping cooling water through the reactors were knocked offline. The pumps are critical for the safe operation of the power plant because they prevent the reactor cores from overheating and succumbing to a runaway chain reaction. When these pumps fail--as they did in this case--the reactor is at risk of a "meltdown" a little understood term with myriad sinister connotations.

A nuclear reactor meltdown occurs when the core temperature spikes from its norm around 550 degrees Fahrenheit to several thousand--hot enough to melt the fuel rods and destroy them. Under these extreme conditions, the fuel rods can melt to the bottom of the steel and concrete enclosure that houses them. It was once thought that the fuel could melt through the bottom of the enclosure "all the way to China"--a scenario referred to as "the China syndrome." Previous meltdowns (Chernobyl and Three Mile Island) have shown that the fuel rods are not hot enough to accomplish this. Thus, a meltdown is a dangerous event and a disaster for the owner of the reactor, but in general it is not a global health threat.

What makes the Japanese reactors safer than those at Chernobyl? First, reactor design outside of Russia is much different than that found at Chernobyl. For instance, the control rods in reactor 4 of the Chernobyl power plant--the reactor responsible for the toxic explosion--were made out of graphite. When a small hydrogen explosion exposed the graphite control rods to the air, they ignited. The fire ejected massive amounts of radioactive material into the atmosphere so that it could be spread far and wide. Where the Chernobyl plant used graphite, the Fukushima plants use water--water doesn't burn. A second major design difference is the containment vessel. The containment vessels at the Fukushima plant are formidable where as Chernobyl had no containment vessel. Current indications from Japan are that the containment vessels at Fukushima are still intact.

Wreckage of Chernobyl power plant (reactor 4 centered)

A small dose of perspective goes a long way in ameliorating hysteria. Headlines blare such vague alarms so as to be meaningless e.g. "Japan: Nuclear plant emits radiation in the atmosphere." Breaking news: "So does your microwave." Not to make light of a serious situation, but such headlines, while good for garnering page views, are also good for inducing paranoia. We are exposed to radiation every day. The dangerous aspect of radiation is its intensity rather than its presence. The amount of radiation emitted by the Japanese plant so far is well short of a disaster and has almost no chance of reaching Chernobyl proportions.

The negative attention drawn to the nuclear power industry at large threatens Obama's agenda of battling America's addiction to oil with nuclear energy. An event such as the one we're witnessing in Japan certainly gives reason to reasses the health risks, but it should not halt a critical march toward energy independence. The safety concerns arising from the Japan incident, while relevant, are somewhat dampened by updates in reactor design. The reactors at the Fukushima plant are so called generation II reactors. The generation III reactors that would be built in the US operate using a passive cooling system thus eliminating the risk of failing cooling water pumps. These design updates are just one of the reasons that Obama, as recently as today, still includes $36 billion of loan guarantees in his budget for the construction of new nuclear power plants.

The earthquake and aftermath in Japan are truly tragic. The country is certainly in dire need of aid and rebuilding. I would even go so far as to say that the media attention helps ensure that the country receives the aid it so desperately needs. However, alarmist headlines focused on largely peripheral issues only serve to engender panic and perpetuate paranoia. Nuclear power is one of the few paths that leads us out of a politically and environmentally unsustainable dependence on oil. Sacrificing this progress in the name of attention grabbing headlines is tragic.

Silicon Valley(ish) Founders Quiz

I've heard a lot of rumblings out there lately. "Oh, I know every Silicon Valley entrepreneur who's ever lived," says one (almost certainly) overconfident technocrat. Another egomaniac claims, "At home they call me Peter Thiel because I'm at the center of the Palo Alto rumor mill." Well, here's your shot to show what you're made of.

Jobs and Wozniak immortalized

Below I've listed 15 rock star tech entrepreneurs of the last decade or so. I've also listed the companies that they founded. Match the entrepreneur with their company and you score a point. Read on after the quiz to see what your score means.

1. Biz Stone
2. Larry Ellison
3. Bill Gates
4. Steve Wozniak
5. Mark Pincus
6. Larry Page
7. Jack Dorsey
8. Elon Musk
9. David Karp
10. Pierre Omidyar
11. Mark Zuckerberg
12. Steve Jobs
13. Sergey Brin
14. Eli Harari
15. Max Levchin


A. SanDisk
B. Twitter
C. Tumblr
D. Square
E. PayPal
F. Microsoft
G. Apple
H. Facebook
I. Oracle
J. Google
K. Zynga
L. eBay

Ok, now that you've written your responses down, I've got to kill some screen space before I give you the answers. Here are the scoring ranges and their respective merit levels.

0-3: You've had your head in the sand... or worse. I can't decide whether this is tragic, inexcusable, or both.
4-6: Not exactly up on your tech news, but at least you know that Bill Gates founded Microsoft. More Carpe Daemon definitely needs to be on your agenda.
7-10: You're getting there. Maybe you get your news from the technology section of the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times. If you get brave, try to widen your purview to some well regarded blogs like TechCrunch and Engadget.
11-14: You're up to date on Silicon Valley happenings. Perhaps you're an aspiring founder trying to learn from the pros?
15-16: Yes, 16. Attuned readers noticed that Jack Dorsey indeed founded not one, but two companies on the list. I'm impressed... and honored to have you among the Carpe Daemon readership.

Whether you scored a 2 or a 16, the only way to get better (assuming you even care about these things I spend my life obsessing over) is to practice. I already mentioned a couple blogs that will keep you up to speed. You could also follow some of the founders I mentioned on Twitter. Whatever your course of action, I hope you enjoyed the quiz.


Answers:
1. B
2. I
3. F
4. G
5. K
6. J
7. B, D
8. E
9. C
10. L
11. H
12. G
13. J
14. A
15. E

The Art of Computer Programming: Programming Languages

Today I'm bringing you the second installment in an ongoing series intended to demystify the practice of computer programming. Last time, I wrote about the utility of a good text editor to a programmer. Though relatively useless to the average person, a good text editor is indispensable for a developer. Why do programmers need such a good text editor? Most of a developer's day is consumed by writing source code in a particular programming language, and the ability to do so painlessly and efficiently can have a huge impact on productivity. This brings me to today's topic--programming languages.

Java is one of the most commonly used languages today

"Programming languages" share half their name with "natural languages." Indeed, the two are fundamentally in the same business, that is, communicating information between two parties in a mutually understandable form. In the case of programming languages, the two parties are not humans, but rather a human and a computer. When one needs to communicate with a friend from overseas, one learns a foreign language. Similarly, when a programmer wishes to convey information to a computer, he or she learns a programming language. (A minor difference exists in that programmers usually regale computers with mind-numbingly repetitive instructions rather than study-abroad stories.)

You might be wondering why we need programming lanugages in the first place. Why can't we just describe what we want the computer to do in English? Natural languages are imprecise, which is a problem in critical situations. The same sentence can have multiple meanings depending on interpretation, not to mention inflection, body language, and other context. As we saw on Jeopardy a few weeks ago, the state of the art in natural language processing is not nearly capable of handling nuanced requests. Watson confused Toronto for a US city which is relatively harmless. What if Watson confused your bank account for someone else's or thought you wanted to send email to Margaret your paramour rather than Margaret your boss?

We've established the need for programming languages, so the next logical step is putting our heads together and coming up with one perfect method of communicating with machines--if only. Wikipedia lists somewhere between several hundred and a thousand programming languages. Granted, most of these languages have long been extinct, but a dizzying array of languages are still in common use. The reason for this technological Tower of Babel is the diversity of applications for programming languages. For example, PHP, Python, and Ruby are considered "internet" languages because they include a lot of features that enhance the process of web development. C and C++ are languages that are used when a programmer needs to optimize a program for speed. Java is a mainstay in the corporate and mobile spheres due to its security and the ability for programs written in the language to be run on a wide range of different computers. Still other languages, such as ML, are considered academic languages and are used more for study than application. (Yes, the high frequency trading firm, Jane Street, uses a variant of ML, but no this does not qualify as wide non-academic use.)

Learning a programming language can be a fun and intellectually stimulating experience. The most important part is resisting the urge to throw up your hands in the first five minutes and say, "This is impossible." If you had had the option, you probably would have done the same thing when you were learning English. Plenty of languages offer a gentle introduction to programming. For instance, Javascript is already installed on your computer and can be run in your browser without downloading any new software. If you get brave enough, Google a tutorial and give it a shot.

The Next Big Steps for Egypt

I’m excited to bring you Carpe Daemon’s third guest blogger. Michael Maag is a 2009 graduate of Princeton University. He currently lives in New York and works for an Internet advertising analytics company. He’s a four minute miler--which doesn’t qualify him to write about economics. However, his economics degree does. Read on to see what he thinks the next big step is for Egypt.

- 44 Maagnum

There are two unemployment rates in Egypt depending on your level of education: 5% and 17%. If you are an Egyptian who has decided to invest the time and money necessary to obtain a college education, you will probably be disappointed to find you’ve earned yourself an unemployment rate more than 3x that of your illiterate countrymen. Yes, you read that correctly. College educated Egyptians are 3x as likely as illiterate Egyptians to be unemployed . This is a problem.

So why is it that Egypt’s most productive workers sit idle while day laborers, chambermaids, and dish washers find work like it’s America in the 90’s? It turns out, the answer probably has something to do with Egypt’s recent economic success and the government’s reinvestment of that success in education.

In last week’s New Yorker article (cleverly) entitled “Prophet Motive”, John Cassidy examines the interplay - apparent tension, even - between Islam and economic prosperity. Nations with predominately Muslim populations by and large remain stuck on the bottom rung of the economic ladder, but Cassidy is careful to acknowledge the exceptions to the rule - namely Turkey and Egypt. The governments in Turkey and Egypt (97% and 90% Muslim, respectively) have both managed to shepherd their countries to robust economic growth in recent years. The economic expansion itself is good, but the the recency and alacrity of said expansions have combined to produce some serious growing pains. In Egypt’s case, one of the pain points is a mismatch between the supply of educated labor coming from the universities and the demand for that labor coming from corporate sector.

To Egypt’s credit, the government has been taking a good portion of it’s recent economic winnings and investing them in education, producing an ever larger cohort of college educated 20 somethings. With the preponderance of evidence indicating that educated labor will continue to win higher and higher wages relative to uneducated labor (see: income inequality in America), the Egyptian government’s investment is likely to pay big dividends in the long run. Only problem is, right now, kids are graduating and have no place to work. Egypt simply hasn’t had the time to build a large enough corporate sector to absorb all the educated labor the country’s education system is churning out. So today, Egypt has a large, educated, and very frustrated younger set that’s clamoring for the Egyptian government to lend a hand.  

How the Egyptian government decides to do so is a huge question mark. Given the populist conflagration presently raging, the impulse to saddle the government with the entire burden of recovery is surely strong. Of all the institutions in Egypt, the government is probably the one poised to act most swiftly, but it would likely prove unable to sustain high employment for educated workers deep into the future (see: Greece). Thankfully, Egypt has other options that will stimulate demand for educated labor in the near term and beyond.

This is where technology comes in (and, conveniently, where this post becomes contextually relevant). Egypt needs to encourage - through the usual means like low taxes, free trade, simple laws surrounding incorporation, forgiving bankruptcy law, etc - an influx of foreign investment. If Egypt can’t build it’s own corporate sector overnight, the next best thing is to have a developed country install an outpost of it’s own. And remember, we’re not talking about Nike building a shoe factory that will employ the rural poor; we’re talking about college graduates working lab and desk jobs. By doing so, the educated and unemployed gain employment doing fulfilling work at a skill level the native industry has not had the time to reach.... yet. The immediate effects of foreign investment are good, but the real beauty of this strategy is manifest in the inevitable scenario where the employees of those foreign firms, after learning the tricks of the trade, grow weary of working for IBM Egypt (or Caterpillar Egypt, Toyota Egypt, SIEMENS Egypt...you get the idea) and decide to take a crack at doing their own thing. On this road Egypt gets to have its cake and eat it too: a high quality boost to employment today and an enduring tack towards a native industrial compliment to their strong educational system.

Ultimately, the employment problem in Egypt is a good sign - it wouldn’t be happening unless Egypt was progressing. Now that the Egyptian people have their scalp, it’s time to get to work building the foundations of an economy designed to employ the skilled labor Egypt already has in plentiful supply.

Monday Mailbag: iPad Puts on a Suit and Goes to Work

I'm excited to introduce you to a new feature that will be running on Carpe Daemon. It's the Monday mailbag! From time to time, I'm asked questions about technology that I think would be great blog posts. The Monday mailbag will just formalize the process open the floor to everyone. I think I know the burning question that's on everyone's mind right now--where do I send my fan mail... uh.. I mean questions?!?! And the answer to that excellent question is 44maagnum@gmail.com

The other day I was asked how technology is changing the medical field. This is an area where I readily admit that I'm no expert (one of the few). However, I do have a few thoughts. This TechCrunch article details an iPad app called DrChrono that doctors can use during patient appointments to take notes and write prescriptions. DrChrono represents a huge leap forward for a few reasons. Most importantly, it allows wizened doctors to look hip using a chic new Apple gadget, but also allows doctors to keep electronic medical records without the unnecessary and cumbersome intermediate step of writing them down on paper.

Electronic medical records have been one of Obama's priorities since he took office. He claims they will eliminate billions of dollars in health care costs--more than relevant coming from a president whose healthcare plan is decried as unsustainably expensive. In addition to saving money, electronic medical records can help prevent doctor error. For example, when a doctor writes a prescription, software can check a patient's history for problems regarding the specific medication or similar medications. Software programs may have a poor bedside manner, but they are adept at sifting through large amounts of patient history and medication information looking for potential problems. The examination room isn't the only professional workplace the upstart iPad is making noise.

While we're talking about taking our iPads to work, let's talk about the FAA's recent approval of using the iPad in place of paper flight maps. A particular charter jet operator has recently gained FAA approval to stop using paper maps and rely solely on the iPad. The company went through a strenuous approval process, and apparently their success does not mean that other companies have the same approval. However, it certainly sets a strong precedent, and I'm sure that many other companies and airlines will follow in their footsteps. Using the iPad instead of paper maps just makes too much sense.

Though these are just two examples of the iPad moving into the workplace, they are representative of a larger trend of using the iPad for activities other than entertainment. Apple bills the iPad as a device for consuming media and online content because the consumer market is their focus. However, the ability for third party app developers to create applications for professionals allows the iPad to be used in novel settings. Apple probably never imagined pilots relying on the iPad in the cockpit, but they did have the foresight to open the door to developers who could make it a reality.

It's time to give all those nagging technology questions a voice. Why not just email them to 44maagnum@gmail.com right no

Are We Living in the Future?

I know you were all promised flying cars a long time ago, so this is going to be a hard sell. That isn't going to prevent me from trying to convince you that yes, indeed, we are living in the future. I'll give you several proofs, any of which would be conclusive taken individually. Taken in aggregate, they are indisputable.

Perhaps most simply, you're currently reading this post on a machine that contains somewhere between 50 and 400 million transistors. Before the tansistor was invented, vacuum tubes were used in their place. Each tube was approximately the size of a light bulb--say 10 fluid ounces or so. If your computer used vacuum tubes, your CPU alone would roughly fill a medium sized college football stadium. Good luck throwing that in your backpack and going to class--especially because your screen is now the size of a small lake.

Let's take a second to think about how this blog post got to your computer in the first place. The last hop on it's travels across the internets was most likely taken through thin air. Of course, it wasn't magic. Rather, the information traveled on an electromagnetic wave oscillating about 2 and a half billion times a second. If you tried to count that high, you would be counting for about 20 years. Your wireless card does that every second.

I'm assuming you're an international reader. (My extensive traffic logs indicate that I have a lot of these.) In that case, this post made several hops between my computer in America and your computer in Belgium. One of these hops must have spanned the Atlantic ocean. Surely a boat was involved. At the very least an airplane... Not at all. The packet travelled through an undersea cable. What's so impressive about that? The first trans-Atlantic telegraph cable was laid in 1858. Unfortunately, that cable wasn't made out of glass and couldn't transmit at several hundred gigabits per second.

Perhaps you're not an international reader, and maybe you're not reading on a laptop over WiFi. That means you're probably reading this on your Android cell phone which has about 200,000 times as much memory as the lunar lander. The screen (reportedly) has more pixels than your eye can distinguish. When you're done reading this post, boot up your maps application. With a few keystrokes, you can be looking at a picture of your current location taken from a satellite orbiting 22,000 miles above sea level. Turn on GPS tracking, and your cell phone will start communicating with a separate constellation of satellites orbiting at the same height.

Because you're reading a blog, I'm assuming you're not driving a car. However, soon you might be able to do both simultaneously. Google is increasingly forthcoming about its once secret project to create a car that can drive itself. The car drives so aggressively that its tires chirp when cornering, and it can drive along in normal traffic. Cars might not have come through on their aviatic promises, but at least they're driving themselves.

Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant

Louis Brandeis, who presided over the US Supreme Court from 1916 to 1939, famously stated, "Sunlight is said to be one of the best disinfectants." Far from offering medical advice, he was emphasizing the power of openness and transparency to battle evil and corruption. Though his December 1913 Harper's Weekly article specifically lambasted the concentration of wealth amongst an oligarchy of investment bankers and financiers, the maxim certainly applies in other contexts. Very few recent examples of the power of information are as salient as the uprisings in the Middle East.

Much ado has been made about Facebook and Twitter concerning their role in the recent revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. (Guilty as charged.) However, yesterday Thomas Freidman wrote a refreshing list of alternate forces motivating the unrest in the Arab world in his opinion column in the New York Times. Friedman lists several "not-so-obvious forces" for revolution. Among them is a piece of technology that has been available in the US since 2005 and has captured few headlines during the current events. I'm talking about Google Earth.

Friedman lists Google Earth as a force driving change because it enables young Bahrainian men to see just how unequal the distribution of land is in the country. Friedman tells the story of one man who used Google Earth to see just how much land the royal family controls. He lives in a cramped house with 17 people. Of course, this is just the example Friedman chose, but you can imagine a host of similar scenarios. Protesters have seized the opportunity that Google Earth presents and urged people to use the tool themselves to hold the government accountable.

Why is this a huge deal? Google Earth wasn't created as a tool for demonstrators or rebels. It was first used to give virtual fly-over tours, locate all the gas stations in your neighborhood, measure the length of the bike ride you just finished, and other such subversive activities. Google Earth is used for lots of things, but its inspiration doesn't come from any of its applications. It was created by a company in love with information and born solely out of that devotion.

Google's mission statement is "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." The company's commitment to openness partially stems from founder Sergey Brin's childhood experience of anti-semitism and oppression in the Soviet Union. Google's idealism, somewhat rare among companies with a $193 billion market capitalization, results in literally world-changing, regime toppling technology like Google Earth. The company's faith in the power of information allows it to pursue products like Google Earth that provide no obvious or immediate modes of monetization.

Brandeis struck an enduring chord when he made his famous pronouncement in 1913. Almost 100 years later, totalitarian regimes still thrive on opacity and privileged information. Technology, especially the Internet, is making this strategy less sustainable. (Why do you think China is so afraid of an uncensored Internet?) Bahrain, Egypt, and other Middle Eastern countries are making this truth abundantly obvious. Brandeis also wrote, "Electric light is the most efficient policeman." Perhaps Google Earth is the most powerful rebel.

The Giving Pledge: Bill Gates's Annual Letter

Though Bill Gates is best known for creating the software behemoth that is Microsoft, lately he has made a much greater impact in the philanthropic arena. Gates worked his last full day at Microsoft in 2008 after working there since he founded the company in 1976. Even before his official departure, he gradually transitioned his efforts toward the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation--an organization that he created in order to effectively give away his prodigious fortune. Every year since he transitioned to working for his foundation, he has written an annual letter detailing the state of affairs at the organization. Last month he published the third of these letters. He writes about three notable initiatives that I'll discuss--foreign aid, education, and the Giving Pledge.

Microsoft in 1978 (Bill Gates bottom left)

The first half of Gates' letter is a plea to the rich countries of the world to maintain or even increase the resources they devote to foreign aid, even in a time of economic hardship. He states that less than 1% of developed nations' budgets goes to foreign aid, and yet that slice of the budget is on the chopping block in a time when austerity is in vogue. He especially focuses on the financial viability of the erradication of polio, a disease that only lingers in 4 countries.

Gates makes a strong case for the use of vaccinations in preventing childhood mortality. First, he argues that childhood mortality is counterintuitively a cause of overpopulation. Reduction in childhood deaths is linked to smaller family sizes, and the change takes effect within a generation. Reducing overpopulation in turn ameliorates problems such as hunger and insufficient resources for education. Second, vaccines are incredibly cheap and effective. For instance, the US could buy polio vaccine for all people living in affected countries for the price of just one F-22 Raptor fighter jet. (Vaccine = 13 cents, Jet = $150 million). If that's not a convincing case for foreign aid, then I don't know what is. Additionally, it's far from obvious to me that the vaccines would do less in the way of projecting American influence abroad than the jet--assuming this is the goal of the jet in the first place.

1,153,846,154 polio vaccines

One of Gates's persistent projects is domestic education. His focus in this area is unsurprising given his origins in an industry that relies on a highly educated workforce in order to remain competitive. The US ranks between 16th and 30th among 35 developed nations in math, reading, and science. A study by the Programme for International Student Assessment found that US students are in the classroom for fewer hours than their foreign peers. Even more disturbingly, the study found that America does very little to reward teacher excellence. In a country that readily admits the fact that much of its material wealth owes to its free market system, the absence of a similar incentive structure in the education system is worrisome and counterintuitive.

Bill Gates is regarded as an intelligent man who has spent the last few years contemplating this issue. He writes, "I think it is clear that a system can be designed that teachers agree is fair, has modest overhead, and rewards the teachers who are doing the most for their students." This is a strong opinion that critics of merit based pay need to deal with.

Finally, Gates discusses the Giving Pledge. In 2010, Gates joined forces with Warren Buffet to propose an unprecedented philanthropic venture. They urged billionaires to pledge to giving more than 50% of their wealth to philanthropic causes before or after their death. Buffett himself pledged 99% of his wealth. Thus far, 58 billionaires have pledged a minimum of $125 billion. The pledge counts Mark Zuckerberg, Michael Bloomberg, Carl Icahn, and Larry Ellison among its signatories. This example, set by the two richest men in the country, is tremendously encouraging.

Many would retire from the emotional rollercoaster of founding Microsoft to enjoy their fortune in private. Commendably, Bill Gates has become a very public philanthropist not only committed to solving some of the world's toughest problems but also committed to enlisting the help of other fantastically wealthy individuals. Whatever your opinion of Gates's actions while at the helm of Microsoft, one can't help but be inspired by his generosity after the fact.