End of A Tech Era - Steve Jobs Resigns as Apple CEO (Video)

Details here.

Sadly, this is likely grim news as I imagine the only reason Jobs would resign is for health reasons.

The multi-episode documentary Triumph of the Nerds is one of the first films to chronicle the early rise of Mr. Jobs and Silicon Valley, as well as Jobs' legendary rivalry with Bill Gates. It features rare, candid interview footage with Jobs.

Embedded below is the Jobs-Apple focussed episode 3, and if you want to skip ahead to when Jobs comes on go to the 9:45 mark.

P.S. The earlier Triumph of the Nerds episodes 1 and 2 are also on Google Video.

Video: Margin Call Movie Trailer

My Dream TV Setup and the Present Nightmare

I'm not a huge TV or movie watcher, but I would like to do the following:

1. hang a flat panel HD TV on my wall
2. connect it wirelessly to broadband internet so the only cable I need is the TV power cord
3. use my smartphone or laptop as my remote
4. and (here's the hard part) watch all the world's video content (in full HD resolution when available), whenever I want for a reasonable price.

That's my seemingly simple (in terms of the necessary technology) TV dream.

Now, let me introduce you to the present state, which amounts to a nightmare of massive fragmentation.

TV Hell

Not surprisingly given the money at stake, nearly every major tech firm, media conglomerate, TV manufacturer, along with a number of innovative startups, are angling for a piece (or more often control) of the connected TV market. The result is today's dizzying array of incompatibile and walled off offerings, such as:

• Content sources: iTunes,  Bravia Internet, Hulu, SeeSaw, Plex, Netflix, Freeview, LoveFilm, etc.
• Wireless technologies: WHDI, WiDI, WirelessHD, Wireless USB, WiGig (see Wired's article for more on this topic)
• Devices: separate boxes like Apple TV, Boxee, Revue, Roku, PS3, Xbox, and TVs like LG's Smart TV and Google TV which have features built into the TV itself

The net-net of this media-tech cacophony is consumer confusion and painfully slow progress on delivering a complete wireless HDTV solution.

The failure is not for lack of effort. Google TV tried to bring it all together and promptly had the door slammed in its face by the major U.S. television networks. Scrappy startups like Boxee and Plex have developed innovative offerings, but they lack the heft at present to deliver the goods. On the content side, Hulu is great, but it engages in an extensive game of cat and mouse to keep users from outside the U.S. and Canada from accessing the site. The same is true of the BBC's iPlayer for users outside the UK. Apple has a lot to offer, but Apple TV can't do full HD and the iTunes pricing model makes it significantly more expensive than Netflix. Lovefilm doesn't stream content in HD, only standard definition at present.

It is Netflix, with its large catalogue of streaming HD content, that is perhaps the best of the lot. But it is only available in North America at present and (worse) the company is still beholden to content owners which means it can't control prices (e.g., the recent unpopular price increase).

In short, many have tried but everyone including some of the most creative and powerful companies in the world have failed to deliver wireless, on-demand HD TV.

Keeping the Dream

For now the Big Boys have all decided that, rather than sharing with other kids in the sandbox they're going to try to keep their toys to themselves. But what they fail to realise is that on demand, HD, wireless, anywhere, any device TV is coming whether content owners (Hollywood) like it or not. Hollywood can either get out in front of this tsunami and try to ride the wave of the future, or it will get crushed by it.

The future of TV will look something like Spotify or Netflix, meaning it will be:

• On demand
• HD
• With a comprehensive library of content
• And reasonably priced for all you can watch

When? The wireless and smart device technology exists right now, so it's all about content licensing. It was hoped that 2011 would be the breakthrough year for connected TV, but it's July and I don't see it happening.

Hollywood and content owners are fighting tooth-and-nail to maintain the lucrative status quo for another season. Freeview, talk of Netflix international expansion, and perhaps other important steps are in store for 2012, so here's to hoping we'll see major advances in wireless HD TV next year.

Video: Ray Kurzweil on Bill Mahrer

Real Time With Bill Maher: Overtime - Episode... by HBO

Video: Ray Kurzweil on Jimmy Kimmel

Pakistan 101: Bhutto Movie Review and Trailer

Pakistan is complex, messy, and an absolutely crucial place for the world to better understand.

Pakistan is described as a military that happens to have have a country attached to it. The Economist recently argued that the Pakistani-Indian border is the world's most dangerous (although I'd argue back that the North Korean-South Korean border is perhaps equally if not more dangerous). The country has nuclear weapons and has trafficked nuclear technology to North Korea, Iran and Libya. It is also perhaps ground zero in the War on Terror.

In the U.S., many questions have arisen since Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan about just how reliable a friend is Pakistan? Since 2002 the U.S. has sent nearly $20 billion in military and other aid to the country, with another $3 billion slated for 2011. How is that aid being used? Is this policy helpful or harmful to not only the U.S.'s interests, but Pakistan's?

The film Bhutto, which premiered at the Sundance Film Festival last year, is well made, engaging, informative, and highly recommended. While it perhaps can justifiably be accused of painting a positively-biased picture of Benazir Bhutto, it does not shy away from interviewing her critics and pointing out at least some of the accusations of corruption made against Bhutto and her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, the current President of Pakistan.

This film is a recommended piece of edutainment for anyone interested in learning more about Pakistan and who likes learning through movies. It provides a helpful introduction to the history of Pakistan and the significant role the Bhutto clan have played.

Even more highly recommended is the book Ghost Wars by Steve Coll (who is interviewed in the film), which you can find on the right side of this blog in the Good Books and Films section.

Video: Moneyball Movie Trailer

The Flaw Movie Trailer

The Guardian reviews and compares this film to Charle's Ferguson's Academy Award winning Inside Job here.

Video: How to Live Forever (Movie Trailer)

Video: Existential Star Wars (In French with English subtitles)

Film Review: Transcendent Man & Reflections on San Francisco Premiere

Ray Kurzweil in Transcendent Man

On Thursday evening I attended a showing of the film Transcendent Man at the San Francisco Palace of Fine Arts. The evening included a pre and post-film talk/Q&A with the film's star, Ray Kurzweil, and the director, Barry Ptolemy. Peter Diamandis of the X Prize Foundation was also on hand to moderate.

Here are my thoughts on the film:

• The film is well made and provides a very up-close and personal look at inventor, scientist and futurist Ray Kurzweil, including a tour to Ray's home, his 200 vitamins-a-day regimen, and a moving visit to his father's grave.
• In terms of the content level it aims for a more general audience, making the film accessible to non-science types. You'll see a few graphs but you won't find any math equations or overly technical jargon in the movie.
• The film provides an intimate look at some of Ray's and the Singularity's more interesting proponents and critics, such as Kevin Kelly (founder and 'Chief Maverick' of Wired) and Dr. William Hurlbut, Professor of Neuroscience at Stanford University (who was in attendance).
• If you're someone who is already familiar with Ray's exponential technology development forecasts and his ideas about the Singularity you might find some of the the content less fresh, even repetitive. However, if you're a fan the I think you will still really enjoy the film.
• One criticism I have of the film and Ray is that while there is ample mention of the many predictions Ray has been right about (e.g., predicting in the early 1980s that a computer would beat the best human chess player by the late 1990s), there was no mention of Ray's wrong predictions. Predicting the fall of the Soviet Union and other happenings is impressive, but it would be even more impressive if I knew more about Ray's overall track record.
• Another question I have is the potential bias Ray brings to his forecasting. It cannot be overlooked that Ray is projecting that radical life extension will arrive within his expected lifetime. How much does Ray's self-optimism factor into this timing forecast?

And some thoughts on the overall event and what it's like to meet Ray:

• The Palace of Fine Arts event (not surprisingly) attracted an eclectic, rather geeky crowd. In terms of demographics, largely caucasian with a wide age distribution.
• What was surprising was that unlike the previous showings in London, New York, LA, etc. the San Francisco event (the last in the tour) did not come close to selling-out. This is particularly surprising as the San Francisco Bay Area is arguably Ground Zero for the Singularity movement. Whether this was due to the fact that there was a previous San Jose showing in February, or that the film has been available on iTunes for awhile now, is unclear. Back-to-back showings in LA both sold out.
• A couple interesting points made during the Q&A: 
• Ray stated that there is a mistaken perception that technological progress is occurring much faster with hardware than software.
• The cost of solar power is quickly approaching the cost of fossil fuels.
• Ray stated that technology is a "doubled-edged sword" and does not dismiss potential dangers to the human race to advancements in technology.
• Ray says he reads all his email and tends to make decisions about big things (like Barry's movie proposal) quickly and agonize over small things, like where to eat lunch.
• Ray was very generous with his time throughout the evening. There was a pre-movie meet and greet where I was able to speak with Ray in person. I confessed to Ray that I haven't been as disciplined in following the diet advice in his excellent health book, Fantastic Voyage, as I would like. 
• Ray is one of the most even-keeled people I've ever met. He is also is very diplomatic and kind with his responses during the Q&A.

Overall, I highly recommend seeing Transcendent Man. The film is currently available for viewing on iTunes, online here, or you can purchase the DVD through the 'Good Books and Films' section on the right side of this blog. 

For more from me on life extension, the Singularity and Ray click here.

Video: Transcendent Man Movie Trailer (Featuring Ray Kurzweil)

Video: On the Winnability of Asian Land Wars

In the below classic 'Battle of Wits' scene from the movie The Princess Bride, Vizzini was *dead* wrong on his advice to "never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line".

(For anyone not familiar with this movie and/or the full sequence of events which lead up to this scene's punch line, here's a link to a full-scene length clip.)



Are Vizzini, outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and STRATFOR also wrong about getting involved in a land war in Asia?

Alexander the Great, for one, may possibly wish to posthumously beg to differ.

Inside Job Takes Home Oscar for Best Documentary!

Inside Job Director Charles Ferguson

"Three years after a horrific financial crisis, not a single financial executive has gone to jail — and that's wrong" said Director Charles Ferguson during his Academy Award acceptance speech.

Bravo!

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?

Good question!

Weekend reading from Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone here on why so few prosecutions have been brought by the Obama administration against 'main stream' Wall Street. This has left over-the-top ponzi crook Bernie Madoff as the only high-profile financial villain serving time in the pokey.

Johny Depp in Blow

Speaking of Madoff, fellow ponzi-schemer 'Sir' Allen Stanford was recently moved into Madoff's digs at Butner prison. Will the two get a chance to compare notes?

Docudrama filmmakers: there may be a fun movie here. I'm imagining a screenplay set in part at Butner, perhaps featuring Stanford and Madoff as cellmates, with flashbacks to their pre-arrest glory days ala the stylized cocaine caper, Blow.

Video: Atlas Shrugged Movie Trailer Disappoints

My first reaction: it has the look and feel of a Left Behind type film in terms of production quality (not good). And please don't ask how I know what a Left Behind movie looks like.

Second reaction: setting it in the modern world is a questionable call. It's easy to criticize Atlas Shrugged today, but it's important to remember the context and historical period in which it was written. Aesthetically, there's not enough art deco in this trailer, and it should be in black and white, preferably filmed in a Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow grain. 

Also for such a long-winded story to have any chance of holding the attention of a general audience it probably needs A-Listers. While I'm not a huge fan of Angelina Jolie, perhaps she could pull off Dagny; maybe Antonio Banderas could play Francisco, etc.

Atlas Shrugged and its characters in particular captured my imagination when I was younger, but as I blogged previously Rand's ideas are (for starters) inconsistent.

Last word on the film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged goes to Tiger Beatdown:

I myself am greatly looking forward to the movie. Because the whole point of it – superior people make superior products and earn superior money because they're superior! – is going to be really complemented by the spectacle of this broke-assed movie made with former WB stars for like five cents.

Inside Job Nominated for Oscar!

Full list of Academy Award Oscar nominees here.

Review Roundup: Inside Job (The Movie)

Charles Ferguson's excellent documentary, Inside Job, the story of the people behind the recent financial crisis, is coming to the U.K.

If you have not already had the chance to see it I cannot recommend this film highly enough. It pulls off the not so easy feat of both clearly explaining the financial crisis in sufficient detail while managing to keep your attention throughout.

(Update: Inside Job is an Oscar nominee for Best Documentary. The below list will be updated regularly with additional reviews and please feel free to post links in the comments)

Here's a roundup of some of the film's reviews which I'll try and regularly update as more reviews come in:

Guardian
Felix Salmon
Naked Capitalism / Yves Smith

INET

New Yorker
The New Republic
LA Times
Rotten Tomatoes

And some additional reviews from Yahoo Movies:

Critics Reviews Average Grade:   A-
Source	Brief Review	Grade*
Boston Globe Wesley Morris	"The movie succeeds at upsetting you not by losing its cool, the way so many similar films do, but by slow-cooking its argument." more...	A
Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert	"...an angry, well-argued documentary about how the American financial industry set out deliberately to defraud the ordinary American investor." more...	A
Filmcritic.com Chris Cabin	"Like No End in Sight, the key to Inside Job's power is how clearly Ferguson maps out each step towards disaster..." more...	B
New York Times A. O. Scott	"...meticulous and infuriating..."more...	A-

The Three Way Intersection: Ethics Problems Atop the Economics Academy?

Larry Summers and Secretary Geithner

For anyone interested in the subject of ethics, conflict of interest, and disclosure of financial relationships by academic economists, here is a great read from Nancy Folbre, an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

A related article which I highly recommend is Inside Job filmmaker Charles Ferguson's scathing critique of the academic economics profession (and Larry Summers in particular). From the article:

Summers is unique but not alone. By now we are all familiar with the role of lobbying and campaign contributions, and with the revolving door between industry and government. What few Americans realize is that the revolving door is now a three-way intersection. Summers's career is the result of an extraordinary and underappreciated scandal in American society: the convergence of academic economics, Wall Street, and political power. 

In my film you will see many famous economists looking very uncomfortable when confronted with their financial-sector activities; others appear only on archival video, because they declined to be interviewed. You'll hear from:

Martin Feldstein, a Harvard professor, a major architect of deregulation in the Reagan administration, president for 30 years of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and for 20 years on the boards of directors of both AIG, which paid him more than $6-million, and AIG Financial Products, whose derivatives deals destroyed the company. Feldstein has written several hundred papers, on many subjects; none of them address the dangers of unregulated financial derivatives or financial-industry compensation.

Glenn Hubbard, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in the first George W. Bush administration, dean of Columbia Business School, adviser to many financial firms, on the board of Metropolitan Life ($250,000 per year), and formerly on the board of Capmark, a major commercial mortgage lender, from which he resigned shortly before its bankruptcy, in 2009. In 2004, Hubbard wrote a paper with William C. Dudley, then chief economist of Goldman Sachs, praising securitization and derivatives as improving the stability of both financial markets and the wider economy.

Frederic Mishkin, a professor at the Columbia Business School, and a member of the Federal Reserve Board from 2006 to 2008. He was paid $124,000 by the Icelandic Chamber of Commerce to write a paper praising its regulatory and banking systems, two years before the Icelandic banks' Ponzi scheme collapsed, causing $100-billion in losses. His 2006 federal financial-disclosure form listed his net worth as $6-million to $17-million.

Laura Tyson, a professor at Berkeley, director of the National Economic Council in the Clinton administration, and also on the Board of Directors of Morgan Stanley, which pays her $350,000 per year.

Richard Portes, a professor at London Business School and founding director of the British Centre for Economic Policy Research, paid by the Icelandic Chamber of Commerce to write a report praising Iceland's financial system in 2007, only one year before it collapsed.

And John Campbell, chairman of Harvard's economics department, who finds it very difficult to explain why conflicts of interest in economics should not concern us.

Education Site: Others interested in joining the study of economics should check out Online-MBA.

Video: Inside Job Director Charles Ferguson on Charlie Rose

Click here for the 30 minute interview where Inside Job Director, Charles Ferguson, discusses his documentary on Wall Street and the financial crisis, Secretary Hank Paulson's motivations behind allowing Lehman Brothers to fail, how "Obama had a once in a century opportunity and blew it", and other topics.

Neither Ferguson or Rose appeared very comfortable during the interview, perhaps due to the fact that Rose is buddy-buddy with prominent New York based bankers such as Steven Rattner, Felix Rohatyn, etc. Kudos to Rose for perhaps risking some of his Wall Street cocktail party invitations by bringing uber-Wall Street critic Ferguson on his show.

Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to see his film. Apparently Ferguson was encouraged by Sony Pictures to cut some of the more embarrassing footage, such as this stunning clip of former Fed Governor Fred Mishkin speaking about his infamous report titled "Financial Stability in Iceland". Sony's and Ferguson's concern was that the film's central message -- that the financial crisis was a crime that should be prosecuted (which has largely failed to happen to date) -- would be overshadowed the utter destruction of Mishkin's, etc. other's credibility.

More from Charles Ferguson on the "subversion of economics", which includes a scathing critique of Larry Summers, and on "Obama's Depressingly Rational Decision to Give In to Wall Street".