The gunk that unleashed the dogs of law

The gunk that unleashed the dogs of law

HIDDEN behind a row of trees and a rusted barbed-wire fence on a rutted dirt road in the Ecuadorean jungle, Shushufindi 61, a pit in which oil waste is dumped, is hardly a beauty spot. But it has attracted a string of visitors ranging from Hollywood actresses to Ecuador’s president, Rafael Correa, and managers from Chevron, an American oil company. It is one of several hundred such pits that are at the centre of a long-running legal wrangle between Ecuadorean and American activists and Chevron. For the activists, the case shows that oil companies are nowadays held accountable for their actions in developing countries.

For Chevron’s supporters, the case amounts to an attempt at judicial extortion that throws doubt on whether multinational oil companies can ever get a fair deal in parts of Latin America today.

At issue is waste dumped by Texaco (bought by Chevron in 2001) as long ago as the 1960s in the region around Lago Agrio in the Ecuadorean jungle. From 1977 onwards, Ecuador’s state-owned oil company (now called Petroecuador) took a 62.5% stake in the field, though Texaco continued to operate it. In 1992 Petroecuador took over the whole operation and Texaco withdrew from Ecuador.

In a suit first filed in a New York court in 1993, lawyers representing 30,000 people in the Lago Agrio area argued that billons of gallons of waste dumped by Texaco in several hundred pits such as Shushufindi 61 caused damage to human health as well as to the jungle. They also argued that the oil company should compensate Indian people for their forced displacement. American judges ruled three times that they had no jurisdiction over the matter.

But as a result of the publicity generated by the cases, Texaco agreed with the Ecuadorean government that it would clean up 161 pits, or its share of the total, at a cost of $40m. The work was done by 1998 and the government signed an agreement releasing Texaco from any further liability. Petroecuador was supposed to clean up the rest of the pits, but didn’t do so, partly because it continues to use some of them (including Shushufindi 61).

Meanwhile Ecuador enacted an environmental law, something it had previously lacked. This is not retroactive. Nevertheless the plaintiffs filed a claim against Chevron under this law in 2003 in a court in Lago Agrio. They sought $6 billion in damages. Last year a court-appointed expert, Ricardo Cabrera, filed a 4,000-page report arguing that Chevron was liable for no less than $27.3 billion in damages. Of this $9.5 billion is compensation for 1,400 deaths from cancers that he alleges were caused by the pollution; $8.4 billion is for “unjust enrichment”; the remainder is for environmental clean-up.

Chevron has filed a 9,000-page rebuttal of Mr Cabrera’s report. It disputes his fitness as an expert, arguing that he has little experience of the oil industry. It found evidence that he used the Amazon Defence Front, a group working for the plaintiffs, to collect soil samples from sites. Sections of his report repeat verbatim documents filed by the plaintiffs. Chevron also notes that in 2007 a California court dismissed as fabricated some individual claims that the pollution caused cancers; it fined one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers for this. As for “unjust enrichment”, a Chevron manager points out that Texaco’s total profits from its operations in Ecuador were only $497m, while over the 20 years to 1992 Ecuadorean governments received $25.3 billion in profits, taxes and royalties from the field.

The judge in Lago Agrio, Juan Nuñez, is expected to rule on the case later this year. He has made no secret of his sympathy for the plaintiffs. The lawsuit appears to have the backing of Mr Correa’s government. Last year it objected to the 1998 agreement with Texaco, arguing that since the company was the operator of the field it should have cleaned up all of the pits. The attorney-general charged seven former senior officials who had signed the agreement with fraud, as well as two Ecuadorean lawyers for Chevron.

Chevron has filed a claim in an international arbitration court in The Hague and has asked the American government to review Ecuador’s trade preferences. But it faces political pressure in the United States as well as in Ecuador. On May 4th Andrew Cuomo, New York’s attorney-general, sent a letter to Chevron requesting information on the case on behalf of the state’s pension funds, which have more than $1 billion invested in the company.

If the Ecuadorean courts rule against Chevron, the plaintiffs’ lawyers can be expected to file suit in the United States to collect the settlement. Since they are working on a contingency basis, they stand to gain a substantial portion of any damages.

Texaco may have benefited from Ecuador’s past lack of environmental standards. It is questionable whether any of the pits would have been cleaned up had it not been for the campaigners. But the lawsuit may now be preventing Chevron from helping Petroecuador to clean up the rest. Ecuadoreans were the main beneficiaries from the oil—although some of them suffered some damage from it. They will also be the most important victims if the Chevron case shows that the rule of law is the servant of politics in Ecuador.

El Blog de Reda

REDA es un especialista en tecnologia digital y por eso mismo nos interesa tenerlo aqui en mi Blog.

people's reaction times

Researchers at Edinburgh University and the Medical Research Council in Glasgow in Britain have found that people's reaction times are a far better indicator of their chances of living a long and healthy life.

The finding of the study is that men and women with the most sluggish response times are more than twice as likely to die prematurely. The study has been published in the 'Intelligence' journal.According to the researchers, people's reaction times are a measure of their intelligence which in turn is an indicator of their body's "system integrity", that is, how well it is wired together.

The sample of the study consisted of 7,414 people over 20 years (since 1980s) and analysed their responses to come to the conclusion. Since then, 1,289 have died, 568 of them from heart disease.The subjects’ reaction times were measured with an electrical device fitted with a small screen and five numbered buttons.

They had to press the matching button when a number appeared on screen.The results showed that people with slow reactions were 2.6 times more likely to die prematurely from any cause.The researchers said, "It has been hypothesised that reaction time, as a measure of speed of the brain's information-processing capacity, may be a marker for bodily system integrity."This way, slower reaction times, or poorer information-processing ability, might be an indication of suboptimal physiological functioning, which may in turn be related to early death." The researchers reasoned.

MIT y la Crisis en USA

El Economista Simon Johnson del MIT tiene un excelente BLOG que denomina BASELINES SCENARIO, y por ese motivo he colocado en el enlace de arriba el tema: LA CRISIS PARA PRINCIPIANTES... (Crises for beginners)es decir para los que quieren entender realmente lo que ha pasado y esta pasando en USA. Como ha todos nos interesa conocer este asunto, vamos a tratar de leer, en un buen ingles, estos IMPORTANTES ensayos de Simon.Ademas, es necesario recordar que el MIT esta considerada la mejor universidad de USA y una de las mejores del mundo.

SIMON nos dice en su introduccion lo siguiente:
We believe that everyone should be able to understand how the financial crisis came about, what it means for all of us, and what our options are for getting out of it. Unfortunately, the vast majority of all writing about the crisis – including this blog – assumes some familiarity with the world of mortgage-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, credit default swaps, and so on. You’ve probably heard dozens of journalists use these terms without explaining what they mean. If you’re confused, this page is for you. Over time, we will be adding more explanations and more links to external sources, so check back for updates. (Some of the explanations on this page are simplified and not 100% accurate; their goal is to explain the key concepts to a general audience.)

El Parque HERMANN en Houston (Texas)

Hoy estuvimos visitando el Parque Hermann en Houston (Texas)...el enlace del parque aparece arriba.

Google adds new filters

Google adds new filters, visualized results
by Tom Krazit

Google introduced three new enhancements to its search engine Tuesday, giving searchers new ways to filter results and adding new types of data to the search results themselves.

Marissa Mayer, vice president of search products and experience, led a parade of the company's product managers on stage at Searchology 2009 to demonstrate the new features, known as Google Search Options, Google Squared, and Rich Snippets. Search Options will be rolling out gradually on Tuesday, giving searchers ways to filter their results based on factors like timeliness, result type such as image or videos, or a desire to see search results in visual form.

The announcements "center around how can you find more, and what can you do with it," Mayer said. Google last held a Searchology event in 2007, when it introduced Universal Search, blending regular search results with images, video, and news results.

Building on Universal Search, Mayer and Nundu Janakiram, an associate product manager, showed how Search Options allows users searching for information on the Hubble Telescope, for example, to filter their results with a "Show Options" link at the very top of the search results page. Clicking on that link brings up a new page with a list of options on the side, somewhat akin to the current Google News user interface.

By opting for the most recent information on the space telescope, the subject of a current NASA mission, users will be given a mix of news and blog results. If they prefer, they can click a filter that will sort those stories with images pulled from those stories.

Other options include new ways to visualize search results, such as the News Timeline introduced last month, as well as something called Wonder Wheel that visually represents data as rays of a star spreading out from the center of a search result.

Google Squared is the newest addition to Google Labs. This project allows searchers to create a spreadsheet based on Web results. Users can filter the data accessed through the Google Squared search, request additional categories to create a custom spreadsheet with the results that matter the most to them, and even fact-check the results by accessing the source of the data as well as alternate sources.

The other enhancement discussed Tuesday is called Rich Snippets, which is a partnership between Google and certain publishers, including CNET, to display information from Web pages within the box that encompasses a search result. Google is backing open standards called RDFa markup and Microformats markup One of the two projects, News Timeline, lets people browse history through Google's eyes, with a sliding chronological framework that draws information from newspapers, Wikipedia, and other sources. The other, Similar Images lets people search for images that look like one they've already found.


Google's R.J. Pittman

(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)Overall, Google wants more people to try its experiments, to "engage the user as soon as possible and get the products calibrated for success," in the words of R.J. Pittman, director of product management for Google's consumer-oriented technology.

Google generally would rather gather feedback quickly and adjust course accordingly than present the world with what it deems to be a completed product, even if that risks having to withdraw products or features that flop or misfire, he said.

"Launch early and launch often," Pittman said. "There's a growing backlog of interesting things coming from Google."

The new labs site, built on Google App Engine, unifies various other labs work, including Gmail Labs, and lets people rate and comment on projects.

"We're trying to create awareness so people know when we're trying out new stuff," Pittman said. "For us to be realistic about the products, to get adaptive, we have to have a fast iteration rate."

that allow Web publishers to highlight aspects of their Web page to show in the search results.

The CNET example used in the presentation displayed the number of stars assigned by a CNET reviewer to a GPS device in the search results for a particular product. Likewise, Yelp's user-generated restaurant ratings will show up in the search result for a certain restaurant.

11 Tips for Growing a Social Media Presence

CIO & IT Strategy
by
Peter B. Giblett

Peter B. Giblett (C-Suite Strategist) posted 5/8/2009
Having leveraged social media as a part of my job search over the past few months I thought I would pass on to others some of the things that I have found successful in building a personal social media presence.

1 - Become a Resource to Others

Alongside this blog on IT Toolbox I have also setup my own website, called CIO Perspectives which is focused on writing professional articles to help the IT Leader. Companies that I have previously worked for have charged large amounts of money for views I have proffered freely on CIO Perspectives, or even here.

2 - Have a Unique Personality

People worry that in writing they must lose themselves and become stiff and formal. Actually personality is important, that is what had made blogging a worldwide sensation. But also give powerful information as part of your value proposition.

3 - Invest Time in Social Media

I have heard it said so many time you get out of social media sites in proportion to what you put in to them. For example it is no good simply setting up a LinkedIn account, setting up your profile as a copy of your resume then that is the last time you use it. Make connections, get involved in the community, answer people's questions, offer your opinion. I have made a personal transition in this area and expect to continue to improve.

4 - Be Controversial (a Bit Anyway)

It is important to stand out from the crowd a little. Offer an alternative viewpoint that may not have been considered by other contributors. I find it helps not to be the first person to answer a question, then you can see what else has been said and identify something that has not been said.

5 - Give, Give, Give

Social Media is about giving. Whenever I make a new connection I always say "I am happy to be a part of your network" not "I am happy to have you in my network".

6- Try to Make One New Connection Every Day

In addition to making a new connection it is important to try to humanise that connection. Too many people leave the connection as a set of bits and bytes. This is one reason why I like to download their details into Outlook, then I send out an irregular update on what I am doing (OH! that reminds me it is time to do just that).

7 - You are There to Make Relationships (Please Don't Sell)

Social Media is about building trust and building relationships. Any selling that comes as a result comes after building that relationship.

8 - Be Consistent Across Platforms

You use LinkedIn, FaceBook, Twitter, IT Toolbox, My Space, etc, etc. It is important to be consistent across all social media platforms. Now I have heard some people say that they use Facebook to communicate with friends. The irony is that friends can help you to connect to business prospects so it can be difficult to separate the friend relationship from the business one.

This also extends to the use of pictures, they are expected and need to be reasonably professional. I hated having my picture on the web, not I use it everywhere.

9 - Listen to the Community

In order to be successful in the business world it is important to listen. The same is true in Social Media, but it can be a little more public. I have always found this to be my biggest personal challenge and I pinch myself every time I make a mistake.

10 - Help Others Unconditionally

When you respond to others give advice even if you would normally charge $150 an hour for it. People will see the value in the advice that you give. The majority of my Social Media connections have come from the advice that I have given.

11 - Be Yourself and Have Fun

I hope this shows in the things that I write - I also try not to be too serious. I usually look out for the Sunday Question on LinkedIn from Mary Lascelles as it is normally a fun way to spend the relaxing day of the week.

World's Happiest Places

World's Happiest Places
A new report reveals where people feel most positive about their lives
By
Lauren ShermanDenmark
World's Friendliest Countries

According to a new report released by the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, a Paris-based group of 30 countries with democratic governments that provides economic and social statistics and data, happiness levels are highest in northern European countries.

Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands rated at the top of the list, ranking first, second and third, respectively. Outside Europe, New Zealand and Canada landed at Nos. 8 and 6, respectively. The United States did not crack the top 10. Switzerland placed seventh and Belgium placed tenth.

The report looked at subjective well-being, defined as life satisfaction. Did people feel like their lives were dominated by positive experiences and feelings, or negative ones?

To answer that question, the OECD used data from a Gallup World Poll conducted in 140 countries around the world last year. The poll asked respondents whether they had experienced six different forms of positive or negative feelings within the last day.

Some sample questions: Did you enjoy something you did yesterday? Were you proud of something you did yesterday? Did you learn something yesterday? Were you treated with respect yesterday? In each country, a representative sample of no more than 1,000 people, age 15 or older, were surveyed. The poll was scored numerically on a scale of 1-100. The average score was 62.4.

Why did the northern European countries come out looking so good? Overall economic health played a powerful role, says Simon Chapple, senior economist from the Social Policy Division of the OECD, which put together the report.

While the global economic crisis has taken a toll on every nation, the countries that scored at the top still boast some of the highest gross domestic product per capita in the world. Denmark, which got the highest score, is not only a wealthy country, it's also highly productive, with a 2009 GDP per capita of $68,000, according to the International Monetary Fund. The United States' GDP per capita, by contrast, is $47,335. Though the U.S. got an above-average score of 74, it did not break the top 10.

Wealth alone does not bring the greatest degree of happiness. Norway has the highest GDP per capita on the list — $98,822 — yet it ranked ninth, not first. On the other hand, New Zealand's happiness level is 76.7 out of 100 on the OECD list, but its 2009GDP per capita is just $30,556.

According to a 2005 editorial, published in the British Medical Journal and written by Dr. Tony Delamothe, research done in Mexico, Ghana, Sweden, the U.S. and the U.K. shows that individuals typically get richer during their lifetimes, but not happier. It is family, social and community networks that bring joy to one's life, according to Delamothe.

The OECD data shows that another important factor is work-life balance. While Scandinavian countries boast a high GDP per capita, the average workweek in that part of the world is no more than 37 hours. In China, which got a low score of just 14.8, the workweek is 47 hours and the GDP per capita is just $3,600.

Low unemployment also contributes to happiness. "One thing we know for sure," says the OECD's Chapple, "not having a job makes one substantially less satisfied." Denmark's unemployment rate is just 2 percent, according the C.I.A.'s World Factbook. Norway's is just 2.6 percent. The Netherlands: just 4.5 percent. Many economists concur that a 4 percent unemployment rate reflects a stable economy. The U.S. unemployment rate is currently 9 percent.

Obama y Chavez

O grande lance de Obama ao estender a mão
José Miguel Vivanco*, THE WASHINGTON POST

O presidente dos EUA, Barack Obama, foi muito criticado por ter se dirigido ao presidente venezuelano, Hugo Chávez, durante a Cúpula das Américas. Os críticos dizem que Obama errou por ser amistoso com um líder estrangeiro famoso pelas piadas contra os EUA.

Como sou um defensor dos direitos humanos que documentou as políticas autoritárias de Chávez e sofreu as consequências nas mãos de suas forças de segurança, era de se esperar que eu aprovasse essas críticas. Mas acho que o tempo pode mostrar que Obama agiu certo.

O gesto de Obama tornou mais difícil para Chávez usar sua disputa pessoal com o governo dos EUA para desviar a atenção de seus problemas internos. E vai tornar mais fácil para Obama continuar com seus esforços para pressionar o governo venezuelano a mudar seus métodos autoritários.

A Venezuela é um país complicado. Possui partidos políticos independentes, eleições competitivas, imprensa, sindicatos e organizações civis. Embora o país tenha problemas crônicos de direitos humanos, não há uma rejeição das liberdades fundamentais como em Cuba. Nem um conflito armado com uma violência generalizada por parte de grupos ilegais como na Colômbia.

Mas Chávez vem minando as instituições democráticas, essenciais para a salvaguarda do Estado de Direito. Ele fortaleceu o poder do Estado para reprimir a liberdade de imprensa e abusa de seu poder regulador para ameaçar e punir a imprensa que critica seu governo.

Chávez tem violado o direito dos trabalhadores de se reunir em sindicatos e sabotado o trabalho dos defensores dos direitos humanos. Talvez mais preocupante seja o fato de o governo ter neutralizado completamente o Poder Judiciário. O desrespeito pela independência judiciária aumenta o temor de que a recente onda de acusações de corrupção contra opositores seja uma campanha de perseguição política orquestrada pelo governo. Embora a corrupção seja objeto de ações judiciais, é preciso que haja um Judiciário independente para que esses processos sejam confiáveis.

Para desviar as críticas de sua política autoritária, Chávez usa uma tática defendida por seu mentor, Fidel Castro, que é acusar os defensores dos direitos humanos de conspirar com os EUA para derrubar seu governo. Quando a ONG venezuelana Provea divulgou seu relatório anual sobre direitos humanos, em dezembro, o ministro da Justiça e Interior de Chávez declarou que os funcionários da instituição eram "mentirosos" e "pagos em dólares".

No meu caso, depois que a Human Rights Watch divulgou seu relatório em Caracas, no ano passado, um colega e eu fomos detidos pelas forças de segurança de Chávez e expulsos do país. Como justificaram esse abuso de poder? Alegando que violamos as condições de nosso visto e estávamos conspirando com o Departamento de Estado americano.

Essas absurdas alegações encontram eco em alguns setores da sociedade venezuelana porque o governo dos EUA tem uma longa e sórdida história de conspirar para derrubar governos democráticos na América Latina. E quando os opositores de Chávez quiseram destituí-lo num golpe de Estado em 2002, o governo Bush acolheu com agrado a tentativa, em vez de condená-la, como fizeram os governos democráticos da região.

Esse grave erro prejudicou a credibilidade de Bush no campo dos direitos humanos e da democracia. Isso facilitou para que Chávez inserisse o debate sobre suas políticas como sendo uma parte de sua briga pessoal e política com Bush. Obama deu um passo importante para acabar com essa dinâmica ao estender a mão para Chávez.

Claro que um aperto de mão não vai solucionar os problemas dos direitos humanos na Venezuela, mas vale a pena reduzir a tensão entre Washington e Caracas porque isso cria uma oportunidade de concentrar a atenção da região para o que ocorre no país.

Nos próximos meses, Obama precisa aproveitar a oportunidade e expressar sua preocupação com as políticas de Chávez que estão corroendo a independência das instituições democráticas venezuelanas. Os EUA precisam também trabalhar com aliados regionais para estabelecer um fórum multilateral apropriado para envolver a Venezuela nesse tema.

Os gestos simbólicos de Obama foram essenciais na preparação do terreno para um envolvimento positivo. Se seu governo seguir com essa política, da próxima vez que Chávez reclamar de uma conspiração americana, poucas pessoas o levarão a sério.



*José Miguel Vivanco, diretor do Human Rights Watch, foi expulso da Venezuela em 2008

El BLOG de MIguel Angel Santos

Este BLog del profesor del IESA es interesante para mantnerse informado de los asuntos economicos y financieros de Venezuela.

Apple and Twitter

Facebook tried to buy Twitter. Google and Microsoft have been giving the red-hot Internet-messaging startup the eye. But we hear it's Apple that's closest to sealing a deal, possibly for as much as $700 million.

A source who's plugged into the Valley's deal scene and has been recruited by Apple for a senior position says Apple and Twitter are in serious negotiations, with the goal of unveiling a deal by June 8, when Apple's annual Worldwide Developers Conference launches in San Jose.

Twitter turned down a $500 million offer in cash and stock from Facebook, in part because Twitter's investors couldn't agree on whether Facebook's stock was worth as much as Facebook said it was. But Apple could easily pay cash. A source familiar with the thinking of Twitter's board says the company would be hard-pressed to refuse an all-cash offer in the range of $700 million. (Is Twitter really worth that? Since it's business is nothing but a fantasy at this point, any valuation, high or low, is a matter of make-believe.)

What does Twitter, an adorable but unprofitable startup, have to do with a hardware company like Apple? The iPhone is the obvious driver of the deal: The many iPhone apps like Tweetie that people use to post Twitter messages are hot sellers for Apple. But Apple gets the benefit of Twitter-addicted iPhone users whether or not it owns Twitter. And it seems like an odd cultural fit, since Apple's hardly known for its Web prowess.

That's where the deal makes a certain amount of sense, if you understand the particular culture of those who work on the Web. While Apple might have its pick of hardware designers and software engineers, Web developers are a breed apart — and they have balked at working at a company like Apple, which may look innovative to the world at large, but seems fusty and hidebound to the Mission hipsters who build websites. You'll hear the complaints: Apple's secretive and paranoid, resistant to the wide-open ways of the Web.

Twitter , of course, is open in both nature and spirit. Users overshare every last detail of their lives, while Twitter makes these updates available on its website, via RSS, and through third-party applications. Apple is surely realizing it needs to play in this world, and needs someone to show it the way. Is it coincidence that Apple has put Twitter executives on stage so frequently, or that it profiled Twitter as a "business" recently?

If Apple buys Twitter, it won't be about making money. It will be about making a statement. In 140 characters or less.

Romance: Chaves's daughter and Salvador Allende's grandson

Romance between Chavez's daughter and grandson of a famous Salvador Allende

She is the daughter of political Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, he is a doctor, a grandson of the deposed Chilean socialist president Salvador Allende. Descendants of symbolic families of the Latin American left, star in the romance of fashion in Chile and Venezuela.

Hugo Chavez was himself who launched the news on Sunday at his weekly program 'Alo Presidente' revealed that his daughter Maria Gabriela, 29 years, was the "companion" of Allende Pablo Sepulveda, 32, grandson of a political figure most admired by him.

"Pablo, Chilean physician, companion of Mary, and grandson of Salvador Allende," said Chavez in the program, where a tour of a production of drugs in Caracas.

The media in Chile show that the Chavez introduced the couple last November at the opening of the "Feria del Libro de Caracas" dedicated precisely to the work of Salvador Allende, to which Paul attended with one of his cousins.

Chavez learned of the presence of the grandson of Allende would have officiated by Cupid, deliberately sitting together in a ceremony that gave scholarships, according to the press in Santiago.

Beyond the crush was immediate. So much so that Maria Gabriela came to look for him in January to bring Chile to live in Venezuela.

Today, both live in Caracas. She conducts the first lady, while he continues to act as a medical clinic that bears the name of his grandfather.

The disclosure of the romance, however, fell to the wrong family Allende, who preferred to remain outside of the media.

"I will not say, nor will my sister Carmen Paz. It is absolutely a private matter for the family," said Congresswoman Isabel Allende.

"It's his life. "Maravilloso" has been in love. If Chavez came to speak, is a matter for him," he added.

Paul is the son of Carmen Paz Allende, the second of three daughters of Salvador Allende. Has dual Chilean and Mexican citizenship, where all his family went into exile after the military coup of September 11, 1973.

That day, amid the military uprising that included land and air bombardment of the presidential palace, Salvador Allende chose to commit suicide before handing over power to General Augusto Pinochet, a courageous gesture that often highlight Chavez, who calls it 'president martyr '.

Physician and his grandfather, Paul is also the grandson who most resembles him politically. He studied medicine in Cuba and is a strong supporter of the socialist project in Chile which left unfinished.

Until January he was in a public medical center in the city of Coquimbo, northern Chile, where he was remembered as a doctor "sensible" that he felt "frustration" because he could not attend as he loved his poor patients.

Tech expert: Twitter is fun but overhyped

Q&A
Tech expert: Twitter is fun but ‘overhyped’
By PURVA PATEL
Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle

Jason Pontin, of Technology Review, says it’s hard to find venture funding.

Jason Pontin, editor and publisher of MIT Technology Review, was in Houston recently to talk about emerging technologies. The magazine has published its list of top 10 emerging technologies for 2009.

Chronicle reporter Purva Patel talked to Pontin about the list and the state of technology amid the recession. Here is an excerpt from that conversation.

Q: Which of the new technologies you’re presenting could impact Houston soon?

A: I think alternative fuels, health care and nanotechnology trends are going to affect Houston the most. I was just at Shell and they were talking with great interest and excitement about their biofuels initiative. In terms of health care, the Obama administration has mandated $14 billion be spent on medical electronic records. That’s a huge amount of money. And technology and consulting firms here will be responsible for taking that money and turning it into usable products. Nanotechnology trends will have a broad impact across a variety of industries. I think it’s reasonable to expect Houston will be, with other areas, one of the alternative energy capitals for the U.S.

Q: What technologies didn’t make the list?

A: I believe the most overhyped technology in America right now is micro-blogging, like Twitter and status updates on Facebook. I know it’s popular and Oprah endorsed it on her show the other day. But what I look for in a technology is, is it really going to have a broad commercial impact? Does it have real market pull? It has to be solving an actual real problem, a pressing need in the world. The technology has to represent a breakthrough in some way. There has to be a real reinvestment over the years to create an elegant solution to whatever the problem was. And finally, it needs to be defensible because of technology patents or a long-term investment by one party that would make it hard for anyone to compete. If you look at Twitter, I don’t know how important a need it is to be able to post 140-word microblogs ... I think Twitter will survive as some part of a communication company and be bought by Google or Facebook.

Q: Wouldn’t some claim you’re just saying that because you’re a journalist?

A: I’m on Twitter. I think it’s a lot of fun. I just don’t understand how it’s a sustainable business. Twitter doesn’t release how many people are using it, but it’s somewhere between 10 million to 13 million. By contrast, Facebook has 200 million users, and it isn’t even profitable.

Q: What’s the state of tech startups during this recession?

A: This is not the dark night of the soul, but it is very challenging for many technology startups, at least for those who took venture funding. Venture capitalists expect their investments to outperform the market on an aggregate basis for every year of their investment, and they expect to see an exit strategy in the form of an IPO or an acquisition within two to seven years. At the moment companies aren’t buying because their cash reserves are low and because they don’t want to do stock swaps. ... In the absence of any exit strategies, venture capitalists are not investing in any new companies at all. The investments they are making are in their existing portfolio companies and they’re being very mean spirited about it.

Q: What do you mean by that?

A: They’re not putting much money in. They’re telling companies to “live off the money we’re giving you, cut your expenses way back and change many of your ambitions. And … we expect you to start creating revenues now.” That’s really difficult for companies that thought they had a long development cycle.

purva.patel@chron.com

Desde Cuba

el unico blog cubano...

Comunicacion con Mexico

El enlace de arriba tenemos una herramienta de comunicacion con Mexico.

Aporkalypse Now: What Happens When We're at Phase 6?

Aporkalypse Now: What Happens When We're at Phase 6?
You would have to put the entire population in quarantine. And you can't do that, can you?
Nicolas van der Leek (Nick)

Published 2009-05-01

It's a dilemma. You have to quarantine everyone, but you can't. You have to keep people in one place because where people go this virus is going to go. The problem is, if everyone goes home, how are ordinary things that we take for granted going to happen - news gathering, food in shops and restaurants, fuel for transport. All of that stuff freezes too.

Make no mistake, if there is a lock down, everything will shutdown (everything will run out) within a period of time so short most people will be horrified at how just-in-time are lives actually are. Capacity is threadbare as it is. There will be shortages of food and fuel, so if you hear a Phase 6 announcement you'll want to stock up (if there is anything left by the time you do this) on brown rice, bottled water, and a few hundred tins of canned beans. Fruit that takes a while to rot is also worth getting a-hold of: apples, oranges (whichever is in season) and perhaps avocados and pineapples. Buy pasta instead of bread. Stay away from refined foods and especially foods high in sugar. Get plenty or rest and enough sun (vitamin D) on your skin.

If you get sick, isolate yourself but seek medical help either by phone or on the Internet. Blog or twitter about the experience.

If we can count on people to keep their cool, it is possible to defeat this virus this time around by essentially waiting it out. That means, no one goes to work or school and while we may become uncomfortable and even hungry (living on rice and water a la survivor) the virus won't really go anywhere it isn't already and will burn itself out. These types of viruses mutate very quickly and in a few weeks they disappear. The next year they come back entirely different (which may or may not be a good thing).

So it's a possible strategy, but it's not much.

Can people be counted on not to lose their cool? Can they keep their growing fears at bay? Will people who are used to Monday Night Football, fast food and Convenience-on-tap go gently into the dark night when the power cuts start and water runs out? I doubt it. I see a lot of opportunity for trouble. Looting, unrest, the have-nots suspecting they have a chance to grab a few fistfuls of gold. If this gets out of hand it could affect the ability of the grid, of the whole system, to reboot once (if) the disease clears and the season passes.

I predict things will get a lot worse, whether this pandemic manifests as a s**t storm nightmare or not. Here's why:

- There's a Pandemic after this one that may be much worse. It's going to come back worse and worse because the ingredients for the pandemic [unhygienic farming and environmental setups that enhance their virulence (warming temperatures)] are increasing; the trend is worsening, far from improving.

So if we survive this pandemic there are certain to be successive waves that become more and more lethal. Probably we will develop a better and better capability to wipe them out, but a virus has the edge on humanity. It can change faster than we can track it, and it can render vaccines and medicines useless pretty quickly (a trend that has been happening for some time in medicine).


- Climate Change. No one believes in probably the most potent force happening out there. Climate Change on its own is going to spread and changes diseases. Thanks to Climate Change new diseases are being born and are spreading into entirely new areas. Things like malaria and West Nile Disease and Ebola. If you follow the news you hear about some killer sicknesses coming out, like Dengue Fever.

- Population Growth. The implications of our industrialised society are many. Pollution is one (impacting on Climate Change) but there are many others. Habitat destruction, genetically engineered plants and to some extent animals (it has already been theorised that experiments on human diabetics and animal tissue samples in a Mexican hospital could have stimulated this genetic recombination.

One of the most basic is that a huge population requires huge resources of energy. Food and fuel. Both of these are under tremendous strain at present. Food stocks (in terms of staple crops) are at very low levels. Oil is depleting at an alarming rate - especially in Mexico and Iraq which are supposed to have some of the world's super giant fields. But in terms of H1N1, large human populations have led to huge industrialised death camps for chickens, pigs and cows.

These animals are kept in unnatural conditions, warehouses, heavily overcrowded to the extent that the animals go mad and get sick. They are kept alive on growth hormones and antibiotics until they have grown big enough to be slaughtered. This Clockwork system artificial feeding - turning cows essentially into fish pellet eating carnivores, chickens into cannibals and pigs into bottom feeders.

Both of the above - population growth and climate change - aren't likely to even slow down any time soon. So the trends we're seeing (killer diseases that smart bomb the human immune system) are going to get better at wiping us out. This is the planet's safety defence mechanism. Because the real pandemic is us.

INFORMACION DESDE EL BRASIL

En el enlace de arriba se puede oir las noticias desde Brasil.

What You Need to Know About Swine Flu

What You Need to Know About Swine Flu
Prof. Robert Bragg, Dept. of Microbial,
Biochemical and Food Biotech at Uni. of Free State, SA
by
Nicolas van der Leek (Nick)

This is a transcript of a recent interview with Professor Robert Bragg,from the Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology at the University of the Free State, South Africa.

Would you say we, as in "the world," lack urgency in response to what we currently know?

No. The veterinary services have a management team looking into avian influenza.

Locally?

Yes. In South Africa there was the ostrich outbreak recently, although it was a slightly different virus.

2003?

Yes. South Africa remains one of the few countries that has successfully eradicated an avian influenza outbreak through isolation and the use of suitable disinfectants.

So we have a good capability?

Yes, we have a good capability and people are monitoring migratory birds that are coming in.

Was SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) an aberration?

SARS was also a virus that went from animals to humans. But it's a different virus. It's a corona virus.

But did it shock and surprise?

Yes.

So it was an aberration?

Yes, it was an unknown virus. You have certain viruses that cross the species barrier. And when they do, they cause problems. Because they've crossed that species barrier they've lost their specificity for specific cells, and that means that they become more virulent.

Flu is at its most infectious when you're asymptomatic. So if you installed airport scanners, would they work?

They worked for SARS as people were only infectious once they started showing clinical signs, eg. high temperature. But they wouldn't work with bird flu. There's basically diddly squat we can do about it.

My information is not scientific. For example, at Hong Kong airport (on Nov. 11, 2005) they were saying to people "you need to wash your hands if you've handled live poultry."

The big scare at the moment is the virus has been able to spread from chickens to humans. Any good hygiene practices, such as washing and disinfecting of hands when working with poultry, is a good idea. The virus hasn't developed human to human transmission.

Is that certain?

No. It's not certain but it's likely. If that happens we're going to have a major pandemic.

I know this isn't very scientific but I watched a documentary with footage of Vietnam where they felt that there had been a human to human (transmission) between a family. That was an isolated thing, but if you look at the trends based on the news?

The main reason the people are culling the birds when there's an outbreak, is to limit the bird to human transmission. The more bird to human transmissions you get the better the chance (the virus will) develop human to human transmission.

The latest information from China indicates that their virus has mutated, but has still not developed human to human transmission. And once it's developed human to human transmission then it's going to grow. And the problem with this virus is it's a nasty virus.

What concerns me, and I've been following this for weeks, maybe months, is that the news reports are increasing. In 1918 (the media) often denied it, even though it was happening.

Under certain circumstances you can understand it. But on a personal level people can limit certain kinds of behaviour like overseas travel and so on. What concerns me is: I lived in the Far East for 4 years, so I'm aware of how dirty and crowded it is there.

And now it's winter there. And today another woman died in China. Even though it's one case. And I still have a mild case of a flu I picked up in South Korea. So you just need one case of someone with the flu getting bird flu, you know?

If you start comparing the 1918 outbreak, and you start delving into what happened, and you start looking at what's happening now, it starts getting a bit scary. We've just got to hope that it doesn't develop human to human transmission.

I feel like that no one's thinking about it really.

No. Ordinary people are not thinking about it.

But shouldn't they be?

There's not really much that can be done about it. If this virus develops, if it gets to the human to human stage, we can pretty much do what we could do in 1918 and that is nothing.

Couldn't you start taking multivitamins?

It's not really going to help. It may boost the immune system, which will help, but basically it is the person's immune system which will have to combat the virus. It's best that (people) don't really realise the full extent of the concern that's going around.

So if you knew something you wouldn't tell your wife?

Ja.

You wouldn't?

(muffled)...uh...The problem is if this virus develops human to human transmission the world's going to know about it anyway.

What do you envisage?

I think the probability that it's going to develop human to human transmission is high.

Yes. And what sort of timeframe?

It's difficult to say. If you look at stuff on the Internet and you're listening to what's on the radio...the disaster management (operations) in Australia and the States ? they're not talking about 'if' it happens, they're talking about 'when' it happens.

I'm aware of that. Branson bought 10,000 vaccines for his airline staff, and he did it now, believing they're on the frontlines of the disease.

That's the other problem. The virus hasn't developed human to human transmission. When the virus develops human to human transmission it might change. So the vaccines that you're using now are not necessarily going to have an effect.

Like Tamilflu?

That's a medication. The vaccines might not work. The virus is changing. There's a good probability the vaccines will work, but the vaccines are produced in eggs and it has to be in special eggs, so called SPF eggs which stands for "Specific Pathogen Free" eggs.

Chicken eggs?

Yes, specific pathogen free eggs. But the problem is that as this is a poultry virus and is highly virulent for poultry, it is difficult to make a vaccine in eggs, because the embryos die before there is a high concentration of virus which is needed for vaccine production, so it's very difficult making the vaccine.

How quickly will it be picked up if there is a case of human to human transmission?

I think the monitoring is in place. The monitoring of migratory birds all over the world (and) coming into South Africa (is there). The monitoring of poultry industries all over the world is very geared towards avian influenza at the moment.

You were saying it's a 'nasty' virus. Are we seeing it becoming more lethal?

In poultry it's deadly. It kills chickens within a few days. If it gets into a poultry house of 30,000 birds, three days later they're dead. When people have got the virus from birds you're looking at a 67 percent mortality rate. The 1918 epidemic was between 3-5 percent.

Where do you think Ground Zero is?

You mean where will it break out? It's in the East. Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, China. Basically where you have the rural environment. People with pigs and chickens living in the same environment.

Is bird flu spreading to pigs?

At this stage I'm not sure it's got into pigs. The 1918 epidemic did have a cycling effect, and quite often the virus does go into pigs. Normally the pig is the mixing vessel. If a pig picks up an avian influenza virus from birds, a human influenza virus from humans and has its own influenza virus, the viruses re-associate in the pig and what comes out of the pig is often a problem.

For people?

For people. This one has skipped out the pig. If it goes through the pig it might increase the probability that there could be problems in terms of human to human transmission.

This concerns me. A healthy economic apparatus. With fast food chains we have an incredible demand for food. We have mass production of chickens and other animals. Does this sort of unnatural production of livestock, of poultry, do you think that is the source (of H5N1)?

No, it wouldn't be the source but whenever you start putting any animal into mass production, your probabilities of diseases increase. But you wouldn't get a spontaneous generous of (this) virus. But you know if you have a small fire it's easy to put out. You can blow a match out but you can't blow a forest fire out.

So is the source of H5N1 and all these HN variants; is it just a natural fluctuation?

Yes. The normal influenza that we get is different combinations, but they don't have the increased virulence. So if you have the flu this year, you're not going to get the same strain next year. They'll be a different combination of H and N. This particular combination that we're getting now is a problem because it makes it virulent.

Okay so we have a natural source, but the world has become so unnatural. We've got six billion people, we've got so many people with AIDS, so aren't the implications quite severe? Are the indications quite serious?

If this virus develops human to human transmission it's going to be really serious. Putting these things into a magazine, you've got to be careful you don't create mass panic.

That's not what I do want to do, because it's South Africa, and because it's my home...

Basically once you get to human to human transmission, there's not a lot that can be done.

What about vaccines?

If the virus mutates the vaccines are going to be useless. The problem is also you can't just all of a sudden produce a whole lot of vaccines. For two reasons: one, the vaccine manufacturers don't know what the virus is going to look like.

So they wouldn't want to produce tons and tons of vaccines and then the virus changes. The problem is you also just can't get enough SPF eggs to produce the vaccine you need. Even if they know what the virus is there's a limit to how many doses of vaccine can be made.

That's a difficult thing to solve, but on a more practical level, what can you do? As far as I know, Australia has already simulated it. Simulated bird flu breaking out.

With SARS, when I was in the Philippines a year ago, they had devices that monitored body temperature installed at the airports. But if you look at the 1918 virus, that virus got around the world three times in eight months when there weren't planes.

I think they went with ships.

Now with international air travel, if it breaks out, if you get serious human to human transmission in, say, Cambodia, in 96 hours it's around the world.

What about...here we are in Bloemfontein, on the Free State campus. We've got the hospital right next door. I mean some kind of emergency plan so that there's not chaos or a situation where we need 1,000 beds.

I don't know what the different countries' disaster management plans are.

That's my concern for this country.

There is a well established disaster management system for this country.

What do you mean?

Managing and controlling situations and disasters. If there's a fire or a flood for example.

Do you think that's adequate?

It probably would be adequate. (Pause) If it develops human to human transmission ? if it breaks ? it's going to be a worldwide disaster on an unprecedented scale.

It's hard to convey that without spreading panic. I see that when it happens, everyone will have to stay home. You'll see an immediate worldwide paralysis.

Yes. They're estimating in Australia, if this virus breaks, it's going to take businesses three years to return to normal.

So people are saying it's inevitable. So what do you think? Next year?

You can't put a timeframe to it.

Is there not a trend?

If you look at the epidemiology the influenza pandemics go in cycles. And when we're pretty much in the stage where it's expected.

You know if you drive on a road, then you see a sign that says, "High Accident Rate Next 7km". So when did our sign start?

They started getting worried, they started feeling that the cycle was coming, 'round 4 to 5 years ago. And that's round about the same time this virus started popping up. Popping up all over the place. It pops up in Thailand, and then they get it under control. Then it pops up in Indonesia, then it pops up in Thailand again. So it's like a boiling pot. You squash it there and it comes up there. And all the time it's the same or a very similar virus.

What is the cycle?

I don't know offhand what the cycle is. But you know the 1918 was the most serious. They reckon over 50 million died in 1918. That was a serious outbreak. It goes in cycles, and timewise we're at a point where it's expected. But it's a biological entity, so you can't apply mathematical formulas to it.

I know migratory birds congregate at Langebaan. What are vulnerable areas in South Africa?

We have a swift bird nest at our house. It's just come back, you know. I don't think the virus really got into Russia by the time they left (for Africa).

Is the primary agent the duck?

Yes, the duck carries the virus without severe clinical signs. The duck doesn't die.

That's interesting. So maybe it comes from a water source somewhere. Should we try to make the vaccine available in South Africa?

There is a vaccine available for poultry. There were some mutterances that the government was going to allow the vaccine in. We're an avian influenza free country, apart from the case of the ostriches in 2003. The country has recently regained its AI free status. As a routine the poultry in this country are not vaccinated. And there's not a ready supply of vaccines.

When you say available, you mean internationally?

Yes.

So wouldn't that be something we should call for: a national stockpile.

It's a bit of a catch 22, the government has successfully controlled disease outbreaks in the ostriches (and others, like foot and mouth virus), and they've got a well established system for localising it and preventing it from getting out. So do you go for the stamping out policy or do you vaccinate? The problem is if you vaccinate you lose your monitoring scheme. You can't monitor if the birds are vaccinated.

I know in China they've found that some of the vaccines used were counterfeit. Okay this might seem like a stupid question: What role does AIDS play in H5N1 and is there any chance of a recombination between HIV and H5N1?

They're totally different viruses. If the pandemic breaks, the only thing that is going to save a person is your immunity. And obviously if a person has HIV their immune system is not up to standard.

Who in South Africa is responsible for dealing with this issue?

From the poultry point of view, the veterinary services have got a committee.

The South African Poultry Association and Veterinary Services are looking at (H5N1) very seriously. There's a lot of expertise in the country on the avian side of the disease.

I don't know what's happening on the medical side.

Last question, what are your latest thoughts on this?

You know, I keep watching the news, and every now and then (I) get on the Internet to see what's happening. Basically my thoughts are: I'm just hoping and praying it doesn't develop human to human transmission. Because if it does ...

When it does.

I'd still like to say 'if' it does...If it develops into human to human transmission, we're going to have a big problem. It's going to be by far the most serious disease outbreak that the world has ever seen. The 1918 (virus) remains the pathogen that's killed the most people on Earth.

Something like 152 people have died so far, with 2,000 infected. But that can change in an hour.

At the moment, as you say, 152 people have died, it may not seem like news headlines. But if you think of the number of times it's been reported, you can start getting some idea of the concern behind it.

For more information: www.nickvanderleek.com

Un viaje especial

Hoy me encuentro fuera de Venezuela. Estoy con mi esposa visitando a nuestra hija Marisol,a su esposo Amilcar y a su hija Sofia Isabel que tienen su residencia en Houston,Texas.Yo no viajaba a USA hace como varios meses y ahora he podido comprobar algo importante: la clase media viven muy bien, el desempleo no se ha sentido ni en la actividad comercial ni en los servicios; esto lo que quiere decir es qu el desempleo se ha producido en las grandes empresas y en la actividad bancaria con grandes corporaciones que han quebrado. En resumen : la crisis es en el campo financiero y en el campo de la industria de la construccion,pero los otros sectores funcionan bien.

La csa queda en la Urbanizacion XX, al entrar desde la Avenida YY, se encuentra primero el CLUB de la urbanizacion que se llama ZZ y se cruza a la izquierda para entrar a la calle South Wimbledon,dr, y al llegar a Copinsay,dr.se cruza a la isquierda y otra vez al llegar a Shining Leaf, ct se entra en esa calle que es una calle cerrada y se buca la casa No. 5927.

An experience of a journeyToday I'm in Houston (Texas). The city is subject to the inclemency of nature and the heavy rains.I travel with my wife and we came to the house of my daughter Marisol,Amilcar and Sofia Isabel. The route was Caracas, Miami, Houston. The trip Caracas / Miami was an Air Bus 300 and the trip up to six hours to Houston.El climate of the city of Miami was nice, but the passport control was very slow (1 hour).My perception of the city (the image of this city) is that downtown is comprised of 20 buildings very high and excellent architectural design. Downtown is connected to the residential areas wish a 12 channels Highway. Houses at residential areas are wish gray and brown roofed  and then the view from the plane is very different from the roofs of the Miami houses that have another colors.

Obama and Welfare Economics

Obama and Welfare Economics
[Analysis] The pursuit of equality
Alfredo Ascanio (askain)
Published 2009-04-25 13:14 (KST)

Welfare economics is a very important branch of economic theory; it serves as a foundation to many applied such as public finance, and the economics of government policy.

Welfare may diverge from utility (or preference). Distinguishing basic value judgments from subjective judgments of fact enhances the role of economist in policy recommendation.

But what is the principle underlying this segment of the economy? The Pareto Principle: This principle says that a change is desirable if it makes some individuals better off without making any other individuals worse off.

This principle is a reasonable sufficient-criterion for a social improvement. However, most policy changes make some individuals better off and some worse off. And that is the big problem that can be presented to President Obama and his team.

Can Obama still have a sufficient criterion for social improvement? Different welfare criterion in terms of compensation tests have been proposed to deal with cases where some individuals are made better off and some worse off.

The problem of social choice is to see whether we can derive our social preference based on the preferences of individuals, satisfying certain reasonable conditions. This seems simple enough and nothing more than the basic requirement of democracy. But a formidable difficulty is encountered in this problem of social choice.

A neo-dictator, he may say that, "the social welfare should just be my preference. Whatever I prefer or whatever I think is good for society should prevail"
The Majority Preference Criterion says that "x" should be preferred to "y" if no one prefers "y" to "x" and at least half of the population prefer "x" to "y."

What is the optimal distribution of income? The analysis concentrate on the choice of a tax schedule and then achieve an optimal balance between the need to provide incentives to work and the reduction of inequality due to differential earning skills.

Nevertheless, this is not the only relevant issue: the difference in skills is not the only cause of inequality; income taxation is not the only problem in economic justice. In fact, some people believe that equality of opportunity is more important than equality of income, because equality of opportunity will lead to equality of income, and equality of income is not an injustice if there is equality of opportunity.

The pursuit of equality by progressive income taxation is usually limited by the consideration of this incentive.

Wider problems related to social welfare are briefly considered and then we have the following question: does economic growth increase social welfare? Answers to such question can only be provided by a complete analysis of all institutional effects. Due to the increasing complexity of modern society, it is likely that more problems are going to involve significant institutional and subjective effects, making a complete multidisciplinary study more necessary.

Had Mr. Obama done a better job of selling his plan, and worked harder at making sure that Republicans were included in drafting it, they would have found it more difficult to oppose his plans.

But The Economist said: "There are some signs that Mr. Obama's administration is learning. This week the battered treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, has at last come up with a detailed plan to rescue the banks (see article and article). Its success is far from guaranteed, and the mood of Congress and the public has soured to the point where, should this plan fail, getting another one off the drawing board will be exceedingly hard. But the plan at least demonstrates the administration's acceptance that it must work with the bankers, instead of riding the wave of popular opinion against them, if it is to repair America's economy."

Alfredo Ascanio is a professor of economics at Simon Bolivar University in Caracas, Venezuela.
©2009 OhmyNews
Other articles by reporter Alfredo Ascanio

Susana Boyle...el talento Irlandés

En las competencias de cantos siempre surge una sorpresa y la de ahora es Susan Boyle que impresion;o al jurado.

The Communications Revolution

The Communications Revolution
A look at the power of feedback in Web 2.0
Alfredo Ascanio (askain) i
Published 2009-04-24 11:29 (KST)

Many of today's online innovations deal directly with new ways to sort, organize, and filter the information and people with which we want to connect. Smarter "bridges" are popping up every day. Truly exciting stuff.

The introduction of Web 2.0 technologies into the enterprise greatly increases the value of your company's most important assets: employees, knowledge, relationships, and initiative.

Making knowledge more visible increases innovation and shortens turnaround times. Increased collaboration accelerates productivity.

Your company transforms into a more-socially connected organization that reacts faster and more effectively to the market.

Oracle Corporation said:

"Making Web 2.0 work for your enterprise is more than just deploying a one-off blog or wiki. Organizations will need to extend beyond to an array of custom social applications that improve productivity across many business processes and spur innovation throughout the enterprise."

The development and enhancement of what has been called Web 2.0 Internet is spectacular.

The concept of Web 2.0 is a way to encourage social networking and was initiated by the publisher Tim O 'Reilly.

The first developments remind us of some sites such as MySpace and Facebook, even in the field of videos YouTube.

Making Web 2.0 Work for Enterprise

Here are four tips to master the use of Web 2.0 and have higher productivity when using Internet.

There is at Internet new ways to communicate. After the revolution of Web 2.0 has appeared several tools you can use immediately. Indeed, there are at least four ways to communicate in this new globalized world. These forms are: Feevy, Twitter, Diigo and Thinkfree.

I'm not talking about the tools. I'm talking about the facility, the method, the way this could move.

I will first explain the use of Feevy. This is a new service through which we can create our own "blogroll" of a dynamic manner. With this service you can add any blog to your web o to your blog or wiki.

If you want to experiment with this server then go to this link http://www.feevy.com/ and find a paragraph that says "get your feevy now"

Now I want to explain the use of Twitter.

Twitter's system, which limits messages to 140 characters, is used to broadcast both mundane and tantalizing information by a diverse group of users that include teenagers, celebrities, news agencies, politicians, police departments and companies. There are more than 6 million people with Twitter accounts, according to Twitter co-founder Biz Stone.

Think for a moment about the way we use Twitter, and the way that facility could change online interactions.

Four authors from the University of Maryland, Department of Computing, said:

"Twitter is a micro blogging and it is a new form of communication in which users can describe their current status in short posts distributed by instant messages, mobile phones, email or the web. Twitter, a popular microblogging tool has seen a lot of growth since it launched in October 2006 the Twitter's social network. We find that people use microblogging to talk about their daily activities and to seek or share information and connect with each other."

Some European newspapers already use this tool as the daily El Pais of Spain in its: http://twitter.com/el_pais

Twitter is the social network where anyone can search and find the affinity or need specific individuals and content to them go and meet. Twitter is a great medium for sharing ideas and getting instant feedback.

You can gather a range of opinions and constructive criticism within minutes, which can help enormously, whether you are planning a learning experience, writing a policy, or putting a job application together.

To make your own them you can go to Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/

And the Twitter Directory is: http://justtweetit.com/

Now I want to explain to communicate the potential of Diigo.

Diigo is a powerful research tool and a knowledge-sharing community.

When using the Diigo toolbar, you can see what other people have highlighted, and also comments (sticky notes) they added. That means that you are no longer limited to leaving comments on blogs, you can do so in any type of page

With this tool we can perform at one place and with our own browser, which needs to be done before with several applications.

In fact, we can add pages to a list of bookmarks on-line with export potential links in del.icio.us, furl spurl ... ... adding tags and categories for each link.

You can also select text on the web and save the page or article. Send some text to your own blog. Replace the action bar button for diigolet to do everything smoothly. Search in Google or other search engines with the same bar Diigo.

If you want to experience then do their own in Diigo: http://www.diigo.com/

Another interesting tool is Thinkfree, which you can write a paper, prepared PPS, using excel.

If you want to use this service the links is : http://www.thinkfree.com/

In brief:

Feevy is a dynamic blogroll that you can put in your blog or website by adding a simple html tag in the template.

Twitter and other micro interactions in social Media are changing the way we communicate and interact with one another.

Diigo is a social bookmarking website which allows signed-up users to bookmark and tag web pages. Additionally, it allows users to highlight any part of a webpage and attach sticky notes to specific highlights or to a whole page.


Alfredo Ascanio is a professor of economics at Simon Bolivar University in Caracas, Venezuela.
©2009 OhmyNews
Other articles by reporter Alfredo Ascanio

Chávez se derritió

Alexander Cambero // Chávez se derritió

Unos pocos kilómetros de aguas azules separan a Cumana de Trinidad y Tobago; existe una hermosa relación histórica entre estos pueblos bañados por el Caribe. Desde tiempos inmemoriales sus habitantes cruzaron el mar para conectarse con lugares amigables y tranquilos.

En la primogénita del continente Hugo Chávez volvió a despotricar del imperio. Quiso convertir la reunión del ALBA en la respuesta efectiva ante el liderazgo emergente de Barack Obama. En su discurso parecía un temible león a punto de liquidar a su presa, con gran firmeza lanzaba portentosos improperios contra la administración norteamericana. Muchos analistas pensaban que la Cumbre de las Américas sería un escenario hostil para el primer presidente negro estadounidense.

Al llegar a Trinidad todo cambió. Hugo Chávez, acampó durante minutos para observar a Barack Obama. Cuando vio el despliegue periodístico se abalanzó sobre el líder de la Casa Blanca, buscando que los flashes captasen el momento en que apretaba su mano. Después se deshizo en atenciones. El león inmutable, devorador de cuanta presa pasa a su lado, se transformó en un cariñoso gatito, de esos que les gusta dormir en las piernas de los niños.

Cuando Barack Obama intervenía los primeros y más sonoros aplausos partían de Hugo Chávez. No perdía detalles y buscaba anotar cada frase, para asentar que efectivamente compartía el concepto del hombre al que hace poco tildó de pobre ignorante. Sus amigos del ALBA lo miraban con indignación. ¿Dónde quedó el discurso de Cumaná? En territorio venezolano un león, allá un admirador frenético que se desvive hasta la vergüenza. Cuando le regaló el libro del reconocido periodista y escritor uruguayo Eduardo Galeano, Barack Obama sonrió con ironía y casi de soslayo, hizo un ademán de fastidio ante el acoso presidencial.

Seguramente el servicio secreto extremó sus medidas para que el número uno, pudiese ir al baño con tranquilidad. Sin tener que soportar al nuevo fans enloquecido. Imagínense a alguien en plena micción, siendo torturado por la súplica incesante del huésped de Miraflores, deseando un gesto de cariño del gran timonel del vituperado imperio. Es casi como chorrearse los pantalones.

Son clásicas las posturas de Hugo Chávez. En los momentos decisivos las piernas le tiemblan y termina por arrugar. Cuando está en soledad se presenta como un gigante de poderosos tentáculos. Al momento de sentir algún riesgo huye despavorido hacía otras posiciones, dejando a sus incondicionales en la estocada. Los ejemplos son muchísimos a lo largo de diez años de desventura. Cuentan que su odio por el monseñor Baltasar Porras, viene dado porque el ilustre prelado lo vio llorar amargamente la noche del 11 de abril. Es más, el capitán que conducía el helicóptero que lo trasladaría hasta La Orchila, está preso sencillamente porque presenció cómo sollozaba aquel adalid de la lucha revolucionaria. Berreaba como chiquillo al que le quitaron una golosina.

No es de extrañar entonces, que asuma estas posiciones con Barack Obama. Mañana dirá otra cosa, ante el aplauso cómplice de su séquito de adulantes. Los mismos que han asaltado los dineros del pueblo.

El Napoleón tropical se derritió ante el imperio. Lo que le faltó fue sentarse a su lado para pedirle alguna entrada para el beisbol. Seguramente el presidente norteamericano tendrá que ir al urólogo al llegar Washington. Sus testículos pueden tener algún desgarro ante la enorme guindada del que te conté.

alexandercambero@hotmail.com

La Conferencia en New York sobre la WEB 2.0 (2.008)

Hoy aunque ya se comienza la Conferencia sobre la WEB 2.0 en San Francisco..la primera conferencia se relaizño en New york y las conferencias estás ahora en el enlace que he colocado arriba.

LA PRIMERA LEY DE LA PETROPOLÍTICA

LA PRIMERA LEY DE LA PETROPOLÍTICA (Foreign Policy)
by
Thomas Friedman

El presidente iraní niega el Holocausto, Hugo Chávez manda a los líderes occidentales al infierno, y Vladímir Putin ha sacado el
látigo. ¿Por qué? Porque saben que el precio del petróleo y el ritmo de la libertad siempre se mueven en direcciones opuestas.

Ésta es la primera ley de la petropolítica, y podría ser el axioma que explicara nuestra época.

Cuando oí al presidente de Irán, Mahmud Ahmadineyad, declarar que el Holocausto era un mito, no pude evitar pensar: "Me pregunto si estaría hablando de esta manera si el petróleo estuviera a 20 dólares el barril (15,5 euros) en lugar de 60 o más".

Cuando escuché al presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, mandar al primer ministro británico, Tony Blair, "derecho al infierno" y decir a sus defensores que el Acuerdo del Área de Libre Comercio de las Américas, que promueve Estados
Unidos, podía "irse al infierno" también, no pude evitar pensar: "Me pregunto si estaría diciendo estas cosas si el crudo estuviera a 20 dólares en lugar de 60 o más, y si su país tuviera que funcionar impulsando
la creación de empresas industriales y no sólo perforando pozos".

Siguiendo los acontecimientos en el golfo Pérsico en los últimos años, me di cuenta de que el primer país árabe de la región que celebró elecciones libres y justas en las cuales las mujeres podían presentarse como candidatas y votar, y el primero en llevar a cabo una reestructuración a fondo de su legislación laboral para facilitar la contratación de sus habitantes y hacerlos menos dependientes del trabajo importado fue Bahrein. Y resulta que Bahrein es también el primero donde se agotarán las reservas de petróleo. Además fue el primero en firmar un acuerdo de libre comercio con Estados Unidos. Y no pude evitar preguntarme:"¿Puede todo esto ser sólo una coincidencia?" Al final, cuando examiné todo el mundo árabe y vi cómo
los activistas de la democracia popular en Líbano expulsaban a las tropas sirias, no pude evitar decirme a mí mismo: "¿Es una mera casualidad que la primera y única democracia real del mundo árabe no tenga una sola gota de petróleo?".

Cuanto más ponderaba estas preguntas, más obvio me parecía que tiene que haber una correlación –una correspondencia literal que podría medirse y plasmarse en un gráfico– entre el precio del petróleo y el ritmo, alcance y sostenibilidad de las libertades políticas y de las reformas económicas en determinados países. Hace algunos meses, me dirigí al director de la edición estadounidense de FP, Moisés Naím, y le pregunté si podíamos hacer justo eso: intentar cuantificar esta
intuición de forma visual. A lo largo de uno de los ejes se pondría el precio medio global del crudo y en el otro, el ritmo de expansión o contracción de las libertades, tanto económicas como políticas, de la mejor forma en que organizaciones de investigación y análisis como Freedom House pudieran medirlas. Examinaríamos las elecciones libres y justas celebradas, los
periódicos lanzados o cerrados, los arrestos arbitrarios, los reformistas elegidos para el Parlamento, los proyectos de cambio económico, las empresas privatizadas y nacionalizadas.

Soy el primero en reconocer que esto no es un experimento científico de laboratorio, porque el auge y caída de la libertad económica y política en una sociedad nunca puede ser del todo cuantificable. Pero, dado que no estoy buscando que me den un puesto de trabajo de investigador en ningún sitio, sino más bien intentando confirmar una corazonada, merece la pena intentar demostrar esta correlación entre el precio del petróleo y el ritmo de la libertad, incluso con sus imperfecciones.

Puesto que el creciente precio del crudo va a ser un factor de primer orden que defina las relaciones internacionales en el futuro cercano, hay que intentar comprender sus conexiones con la política global. Y los gráficos aquí expuestos sugieren que existe una fuerte conexión entre el precio del petróleo y el ritmo de la libertad; tanto que quisiera iniciar este debate ofreciendo la primera ley de la petropolítica.

LA 'ENFERMEDAD HOLANDESA'

La primera ley de la petropolítica postula lo siguiente: el precio del crudo y el ritmo de la libertad siempre se mueven en direcciones opuestas en Estados petroleros ricos en crudo. Cuanto más alto sea su precio medio global, más se erosionan la libertad de expresión, la de prensa, las elecciones libres y justas, la independencia del poder judicial y de los partidos políticos y el imperio de la ley. Y estas tendencias negativas se refuerzan por el hecho de que cuanto más sube el precio, menos sensibles son los gobernantes con petróleo a lo que el mundo piensa o dice de ellos. Y, al contrario, cuanto más bajo sea el precio del crudo, más obligados se ven esos países a avanzar hacia un sistema político y una sociedad más transparentes, más sensibles a las voces de la oposición y más centrados en crear las estructuras legales y educativas que maximizarán la capacidad de su pueblo de competir, crear nuevas empresas y atraer inversiones del extranjero.

Cuanto más cae el precio del oro negro, más sensibles son los líderes productores de petróleo a lo que las fuerzas externas piensan de ellos.

Yo definiría los países petroleros como : (1) aquellos que dependen de la producción de crudo para el grueso de sus exportaciones o de su producto interior bruto (PIB) y que, al mismo tiempo, poseen instituciones estatales débiles o gobiernos autoritarios. A la cabeza de esa lista estarían Azerbaiyán, Angola, Chad, Egipto, Guinea Ecuatorial, Irán, Kazajistán, Nigeria, Rusia, Arabia Saudí, Sudán, Uzbekistán y Venezuela. Luego (2) los que tienen mucha cantidad de este hidrocarburo pero que eran Estados bien asentados con instituciones democráticas sólidas y economías diversificadas antes de descubrir su oro negro, como : Reino Unido, Noruega y EE UU, por ejemplo– Estos países no estarían sujetos a esta ley.

Desde hace tiempo, los economistas han resaltado las negativas consecuencias tanto económicas como políticas que la abundancia de recursos naturales puede tener para un país. Este fenómeno ha sido bautizado como la enfermedad holandesa o la maldición de los recursos.

El primer nombre se refiere al proceso de desindustrialización que puede resultar de la obtención de unos repentinos ingresos procedentes de la explotación de recursos naturales. El término se acuñó en los Países Bajos en los 60, después de que allí se descubrieran unos enormes depósitos de gas natural. Lo que ocurre en los países que la padecen es que aumenta el valor de sus monedas, gracias al repentino flujo de capital procedente del petróleo, el oro, el gas, los diamantes o algún otro recurso natural. Esto hace que sus exportaciones de productos se vuelvan poco competitivas y sus importaciones, muy baratas. Los ciudadanos empiezan a importar como locos, la industria nacional desaparece y se produce la desindustrialización con rapidez. La maldición de los recursos puede referirse al mismo fenómeno económico, así como, en sentido más
amplio, a la forma en que la dependencia de los recursos naturales siempre sesga la política y las prioridades de inversiones y educación de un país, de modo que todo gira en torno a quién controla el grifo del oro negro y quién obtiene cuánto de ello, y no en cómo competir, innovar y producir productos reales para mercados reales.

No pude evitar preguntarme: "¿Es una mera casualidad que la primera y única democracia real de esa región (Líbano) no tenga una sola gota de petróleo?"

Al margen de estas teorías generales, algunos politólogos han explorado cómo la abundancia de riqueza petrolera en particular puede revertir o erosionar las tendencias democratizadoras. Uno de los análisis más agudos que he leído es el trabajo del politólogo Michael Ross, de la Universidad de California (UCLA, Los Ángeles, EE UU).

Empleando un análisis estadístico de 113 países entre 1971 y 1997, concluyó que "la dependencia [de un Estado] de las exportaciones de petróleo o de minerales tienden a hacerlo menos democrático; que otros tipos de exportaciones primarias no causan este efecto; que no se limita a la península Arábiga, Oriente Medio o al África subsahariana, y que no se circunscribe a países pequeños".

Lo que encuentro más útil de este análisis es su exposición de los precisos mecanismos mediante los cuales un exceso de riqueza petrolera obstaculiza la democracia. En primer lugar, argumenta Ross, está "el efecto impuestos". Los gobiernos ricos en crudo suelen utilizar sus ingresos para "aliviar las presiones sociales que de otro modo podrían suponer exigencias de mayor responsabilidad". Me gusta expresarlo de esta otra manera: el lema de la revolución americana era "no hay
impuestos sin representación"; el del líder autoritario petrolero es "no hay representación sin impuestos". Los regímenes respaldados por el oro negro que no tienen que gravar a sus ciudadanos porque pueden perforar un pozo nuevo, tampoco tienen que escuchar a sus ciudadanos o representar sus intereses. El segundo mecanismo es "el efecto gasto".

La riqueza petrolera conduce a mayores desembolsos en mecenazgos, lo que a su vez alivia las presiones democratizadoras. El tercero es "el efecto de formación de grupos". Cuando los ingresos del crudo proporcionan a un régimen autoritario ganancias inesperadas, éste puede utilizarlas para impedir la formación de grupos sociales independientes, los más inclinados a exigir derechos políticos.

Además, argumenta el politólogo, una superabundancia de ingresos del petróleo puede crear "un efecto represión", porque permite a los gobiernos gastar en exceso en policía, seguridad interna y servicios de inteligencia, que pueden utilizarse para obstruir movimientos aperturistas. Por último, el autor ve un "efecto modernización". Una gran afluencia de riqueza petrolera puede reducir las presiones sociales para que se impulse la especialización laboral, la urbanización y la garantía de mayores niveles de educación, tendencias que normalmente acompañan a un amplio desarrollo económico y que también generan una ciudadanía que es más elocuente, más capaz de organizarse, negociar y comunicarse, y que está dotada de centros de poder económico propios.

La primera ley de la petropolítica se rige por dichos argumentos, pero intentando llevar la correlación entre petróleo y política un paso más lejos. Lo que sostengo es no sólo que una excesiva dependencia del crudo puede ser una maldición en general, sino también que pueden conectarse aumentos y descensos del precio del petróleo con incrementos y parones del ritmo de la libertad en los países petroleros. Como demuestran estos gráficos, el ritmo de la libertad empieza a ralentizarse cuando el precio del oro negro comienza a despegar.

La razón por la que merece la pena centrarse ahora en esta relación entre el precio del petróleo y la libertad es que parece que asistimos al comienzo de un aumento estructural de los precios globales del crudo. Si ése es el caso, es casi seguro que tendrá un efecto a largo plazo en el carácter de la política en muchos Estados débiles o autoritarios. Eso, a su vez, podría tener un impacto global negativo sobre el mundo posterior a la guerra fría tal y como lo conocemos.

¿UN 'EJE DEL PETRÓLEO'?

Desde los atentados terroristas del 11 de septiembre de 2001, los precios han subido desde una horquilla de entre 20 y 40 dólares a un rango de entre 40 y 70. Parte de este movimiento tiene que ver con una sensación de inseguridad general en los mercados de petróleo globales debido a la violencia en Irak, Nigeria, Indonesia y Sudán, pero otra parte aún mayor parece ser el resultado de lo que yo llamo "el aplanamiento" del mundo y la rápida entrada en el mercado global de 3.000 millones de consumidores nuevos procedentes de China, Brasil, India y el antiguo imperio soviético, todos ellos soñando con una casa, un coche, un microondas y un frigorífico. Su creciente sed de energía es enorme. Esto ya es, y seguirá siendo, una fuente constante de presión sobre el precio del crudo. A menos que se produzca un fuerte giro ecologista en Occidente o se descubra una alternativa a los combustibles fósiles, en el futuro inmediato vamos a permanecer en este rango de entre 40 y 70 dólares, o más.

Políticamente, esto hará probable que todo un grupo de países petroleros con instituciones débiles o gobiernos abiertamente
autoritarios experimenten una erosión de las libertades y un aumento de los comportamientos corruptos, autocráticos y antidemocráticos. Los dirigentes de estos Estados pueden esperar un incremento significativo de sus ingresos disponibles para crear cuerpos de seguridad, sobornar adversarios, comprar votos o apoyo público, y resistirse a acatar las normas y convenciones internacionales. No hay más que coger el periódico cualquier día de la semana para constatar esta tendencia.

Por ejemplo, un artículo de febrero de 2005 en The Wall Street Journal sobre cómo los ayatolás de Teherán –exaltados por el dinero gracias a los elevados precios del petróleo– están volviéndole la espalda a algunos inversores extranjeros en lugar de sacarles la alfombra roja.

Turkcell, un operador turco de telefonía móvil, había firmado un acuerdo con Irán para construir la primera red de telefonía móvil de propiedad privada del país. Se trataba de un acuerdo atractivo. La operadora acordó pagar 300 millones de dólares (unos 230 millones de euros) por la licencia e invertir 2.250 millones, lo que habría creado 20.000 puestos de trabajo. Pero los mulás del Parlamento congelaron el contrato, alegando que podría ayudar a los extranjeros a espiar a su país. Alí Ansari, un experto en Irán de la Universidad de Saint Andrews (Escocia), señala en The Wall Street Journal que los analistas iraníes llevaban 10 años abogando por las reformas económicas. "La realidad es que la situación es peor ahora", dice. "Tienen mucho
dinero gracias a los altos precios del petróleo y no necesitan reformar la economía".

O bien se puede echar un vistazo a un reportaje sobre la República Islámica en el número del 11 de febrero de The Economist, que apuntaba: "El nacionalismo cae mejor en un estómago lleno y el señor Ahmadineyad es el afortunado presidente que espera recibir, a lo largo del próximo año iraní, en torno a 36.000 millones de dólares en ingresos por exportaciones de petróleo para ayudar a comprar lealtades. En su primera ley presupuestaria, que está tramitándose en el Parlamento, el Gobierno ha prometido construir 300.000 viviendas, dos tercios de ellas fuera de las grandes ciudades, y mantener las subvenciones a la energía, que ascienden a un asombroso 10% del PIB".

O considérese el drama que se desarrolla en la actualidad en Nigeria. Sus presidentes tienen un límite de mandatos: dos de cuatro años. El presidente Olesegun Obasanjo accedió al poder en 1999, después de un periodo de gobierno militar, y fue reelegido por votación popular en 2003. Cuando asumió el poder saltó a los titulares de prensa por investigar violaciones de los derechos humanos por parte de los uniformados, liberar a prisioneros políticos e incluso por hacer un intento real de erradicar la corrupción. Esto era cuando el precio del crudo estaba en torno a 25 dólares el barril. Hoy día, con el crudo a
70 dólares, Obasanjo está intentando persuadir a los legisladores para que modifiquen la Constitución de modo que le permita obtener un tercer mandato. Un líder de la oposición en la Cámara de Representantes, Wunmi Bewaji, ha alegado que "se estaban ofreciendo a los parlamentarios sobornos de un millón de dólares por voto", según se citaba en un artículo de Voice of America News del 11 de marzo. "Y esto lo ha coordinado un alto representante del Senado y un alto representante de la Cámara".

Clement Nwankwo, uno de los principales activistas de los derechos humanos de Nigeria, me dijo en marzo que desde que el precio del petróleo ha empezado a subir, "las libertades públicas [han ido] en fuerte declive: se han producido arrestos arbitrarios, se ha asesinado a adversarios políticos y las instituciones democráticas han sufrido daños". El petróleo representa el 90% de las exportaciones del país africano, añade Nwankwo, y eso explica, en parte, por qué, de repente, se ha producido un aumento de los secuestros de empleados extranjeros de petroleras en el delta del Níger, muy rico en crudo. Muchos
nigerianos creen que estos trabajadores deben estar robando crudo porque lo que está llegando a la población es una parte muy pequeña de los ingresos del oro negro.

Con mucha frecuencia, en los países petroleros no sólo ocurre que toda la política gira en torno a quién controla el grifo del crudo, sino que el público adquiere una noción distorsionada de en qué consiste el desarrollo. Si son pobres y sus dirigentes son ricos, no es porque su país no haya promovido la educación, la innovación, el Estado de derecho y la creación de empresas. Es porque alguien se está llevando el dinero del petróleo. La gente empieza a pensar que, para hacerse
ricos, no tienen más que pararles los pies a quienes se lo llevan, y no construir una sociedad que promueva la educación, la innovación y la creación de empresas.


Si George Bush se asomara hoy al alma del presidente ruso (Putin II, el del crudo a 70 dólares el barril) vería que está muy negra, tan negra como el petróleo.El vínculo entre los precios del oro negro y el ritmo de la libertad es tan estrecho en algunos países que un aumento repentino del primero puede desviar del sendero de las reformas económicas y políticas hasta
a los dirigentes más previsores.

Considérese Bahrein, que sabe que su crudo se está agotando, y ha sido un modelo sobre cómo la caída de su precio puede impulsar las reformas. "Ahora nos va bien gracias a que el precio del petróleo está alto. Esto podría llevar a los gobernantes a ser complacientes", señaló recientemente a Gulf Daily News Jasim Husain Alí, director de la unidad de investigación económica de la Universidad de Bahrein. "Esta tendencia es muy peligrosa, ya que los ingresos del crudo no son sostenibles. La diversificación [de Bahrein] puede ser suficiente para los niveles del Golfo, pero no según los
estándares internacionales".

LA GEOLOGÍA MARCA LA IDEOLOGÍA

Con el debido respeto a Ronald Reagan, no creo que él hiciera caer a la Unión Soviética. Obviamente hubo muchos factores, pero el colapso de los precios del petróleo en todo el mundo hacia finales de los 80 y comienzos de los 90 desempeñó, sin duda, un papel clave (cuando la Unión Soviética se disolvió oficialmente el día de Navidad de 1991, el precio del barril rondaba los 17 dólares). Y también ayudaron a encaminar el Gobierno poscomunista de Boris Yeltsin hacia una profundización de Estado de Derecho, una mayor apertura al mundo exterior y más sensibilidad a las estructuras legales exigidas por los
inversores globales. Y luego llegó Vladímir Putin. Piénsese en la diferencia entre el presidente ruso de cuando el petróleo estaba en un rango de entre 20 y 40 dólares y el de ahora, que se sitúa entre 40 y 70. Entonces, tuvimos lo que yo llamaría : "Putin I". Después de su primer encuentro con él, en 2001, el presidente Bush dijo que se había asomado al "alma" del ex director del KGB y que vio un hombre en el que podía confiar. Si el presidente de Estados Unidos se asomara hoy al alma del presidente ruso (Putin II, el de 70 dólares el barril) vería que está muy negra, tan negra como el petróleo. Observaría que el líder de Moscú ha utilizado las ganancias inesperadas del crudo para tragarse (nacionalizar) la enorme compañía petrolera rusa, Gazprom, varios periódicos y cadenas de televisión, y toda clase de empresas rusas e instituciones antaño
independientes.

Cuando, a comienzos de los 90, los precios estaban en el nadir, incluso países petroleros árabes como Kuwait, Arabia Saudí y Egipto –este último, poseedor de unos sustanciales depósitos de gas– por lo menos hablaban de reformas económicas, cuando no de tímidos cambios políticos. Pero desde que comenzaron a subir, todo el proceso se ralentizó, sobre todo en el campo político. A medida que se acumule más y más riqueza de crudo en los países petroleros, esto podría empezar a distorsionar mucho todo el sistema internacional y la naturaleza misma del mundo posterior a la guerra fría. Cuando cayó el
muro de Berlín, se extendió la creencia de que también se había desatado una marea imparable de mercados libres y democratización. La proliferación de elecciones libres en todo el mundo durante la década posterior convirtió aquella oleada en algo muy real.

Pero en la actualidad se está encontrando con una contramarea imprevista de petroautoritarismo, que está siendo posible gracias a que el petróleo está a 70 dólares el barril. De repente, regímenes como Irán, Nigeria, Rusia y Venezuela están batiéndose en retirada de lo que parecía un imparable proceso de democratización, y autócratas elegidos en las urnas están utilizando estas repentinas ganancias para acomodarse en el poder, comprar a adversarios y defensores, y ampliar el control
estatal sobre el sector privado.

Aunque el petroautoritarismo no representa la amenaza estratégica e ideológica que el comunismo supuso para Occidente, su impacto a largo plazo podría corroer la estabilidad mundial. No es sólo que algunos de los peores regímenes tendrán dinero extra durante más tiempo que nunca para hacer las cosas más horribles, sino que países democráticos –India y Japón, por ejemplo– se verán obligados a doblegarse o a mirar hacia otro lado ante el comportamiento de Irán o Sudán, debido a su
fuerte dependencia de ellos.

Quisiera destacar de nuevo que me consta que las correlaciones que estos gráficos sugieren no son perfectas y, sin duda, hay excepciones. Pero creo que ilustran una tendencia general que uno puede ver reflejada en las noticias todos los días: el creciente precio del petróleo tiene un impacto negativo sobre el ritmo de la libertad en muchos países, y cuando se suman suficientes Estados con suficientes impactos negativos, la política global empieza a envenenarse.

Aunque no podemos influir sobre el precio del crudo en ningún país concreto, sí podemos hacerlo en su valor global, alterando la cantidad y el tipo de energía que consumimos. Cuando digo "podemos", me refiero a EE UU en particular –que absorbe en torno al 25% de la energía mundial– y a los países importadores de petróleo en general. Pensar en cómo alterar nuestros patrones de consumo energético para reducir el precio del oro negro ya no es simplemente un hobby para activistas del medio ambiente; es un imperativo de la seguridad nacional. Por lo tanto, cualquier plan de EE UU que promueva la democracia y no incluya también una estrategia creíble y sostenible para encontrar alternativas al petróleo y para hacer bajar su precio es insignificante y está abocada al fracaso. Hoy día, al margen de dónde se esté en el espectro de la política exterior, hay que pensar como un geo-verde.

Del Tio Sam al Tio Tom?

¿Del Tío Sam al Tío Tom?

Por Diego Arria
Diplomático

Cuando el barril de petróleo rondaba los 140 dólares pocos líderes internacionales se libraron de los insultos de Hugo Chavez, jefe del petro-régimen venezolano. Algunas perlas de su arsenal oral fueron: “cachorro del imperio” (Vicente Fox); “analfabeta” (Condoleeza Rice); “mafioso” y “cobarde” (Álvaro Uribe); “hitleriana” (Angela Merkel); “corrupto” (Alan García); “fascista” (José María Aznar); “criminal”, “el propio diablo” (George W. Bush); y “pendejo” (José Miguel Insulza).

Sin embargo, la caída de los precios del petróleo lo ha obligado a moderarse. Por ejemplo, al presidente electo de los Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, lo llama “El hombre negro”, y ahora predica la ne- cesidad de normalizar las relaciones con los países a cuyos líderes ha injuriado a lo largo de su mandato.

¿Pero que significa para Hugo Chávez y para los presidentes de Colombia y de los Estados Unidos normalizar relaciones?

Para Hugo Chávez, que los países integrantes de la OEA continúen sin ni siquiera registrar sus violaciones a la Carta Democrática Interamericana.

Para el presidente Uribe, no arriesgar el provechoso comercio hacia Venezuela reservándose las pruebas de la colaboración del régimen venezolano con el grupo narco terrorista de la FARC hasta que a Colombia le convengadevelarlas, como cuando amenazó con llevarlas a la Corte Penal Internacional obligando a que Chávez retirara la fuerza militar que había movilizado a la frontera con Colombia.

Pero para el Presidente Barack Obama la normalización implicaría llegar a un entendimiento con un régimen unipersonal y militarizado, que ha aprovechado la impopularidad del señor Bush como excusa para esconder su antiamericanismo,
y que colabora con cuanta organización enfrente a su país.

La única forma de superar las diferencias que separan a los Estados Unidos con el régimen venezolano, sería que el gobierno norteamericano esté de acuerdo en darle rienda suelta al régimen para que continúe promoviendo la política de intervención
subversiva en nuestra región, y convierta definitivamente a Venezuela en un auténtico santuario de movimientos terroristas.

Es evidente que los norteamericanos escogieron a un nuevo presidente, pero no escogieron renunciar a los principios que fundamentan su democracia, ni tampoco decidieron asociarse a regímenes que representen una amenaza real a sus intereses
y a su seguridad nacional.

Por su parte, Chávez pensará que “normalizar las relaciones” implica que Obama, por ejemplo, anule el juicio en Miami, que revela la inmundicia del manejo de los recursos de los venezolanos por parte del jefe del Estado.

Los asesores de Obama no se engañan y conocen que el régimen venezolano ha convertido su antagonismo en la máxima prioridad tanto de su política doméstica como la exterior. Saben que Chávez es un enemigo activísimo de todo lo que representa la democracia de su país, y saben que se conduce a lo largo de América Latina a contravía de los valores inherentes del país del norte.

Pero el obstáculo que hace inviable la normalización con los Estados Unidos es el propio Hugo Chávez, quien para mantener su posicionamiento nacional e internacional necesita a Estados Unidos como su enemigo.

Sin ese país se quedaría boxeando con su sombra y tendría que enfrentar la realidad: a pesar de haber recibido durante su mandato ochocientos mil millones de dólares, gracias a la incompetencia y la corrupción de su régimen ha llevado a Venezuela cerca del colapso.

No sorprenderá que en las primeras confrontaciones que Hugo Chávez tenga con el gobierno norteamericano volverá con sus insultos y calificará al presidente Obama de “Tío Tom”, término sacado de la novela de Harriet Beecher Stowe y que se utiliza en EE.UU. para insultar a los ciudadanos negros que se muestran serviles con los blancos importantes.