Hello, Chicago.

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

 It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen, by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different, that their voices could be that difference.

It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled. Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.

We are, and always will be, the United States of America.

It's the answer that led those who've been told for so long by so many to be cynical and fearful and doubtful about what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.

It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America.

A little bit earlier this evening, I received an extraordinarily gracious call from Sen. McCain.

Sen. McCain fought long and hard in this campaign. And he's fought even longer and harder for the country that he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine. We are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader.

I congratulate him; I congratulate Gov. Palin for all that they've achieved. And I look forward to working with them to renew this nation's promise in the months ahead.

I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart, and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with on the train home to Delaware, the vice president-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

And I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last 16 years the rock of our family, the love of my life, the nation's next first lady Michelle Obama.

Sasha and Malia I love you both more than you can imagine. And you have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the new White House.

And while she's no longer with us, I know my grandmother's watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight. I know that my debt to them is beyond measure.

To my sister Maya, my sister Alma, all my other brothers and sisters, thank you so much for all the support that you've given me. I am grateful to them.

And to my campaign manager, David Plouffe, the unsung hero of this campaign, who built the best -- the best political campaign, I think, in the history of the United States of America.

To my chief strategist David Axelrod who's been a partner with me every step of the way.

To the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you've sacrificed to get it done.

But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to. It belongs to you. It belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn't start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington. It began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston. It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give $5 and $10 and $20 to the cause.

It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep.

It drew strength from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on doors of perfect strangers, and from the millions of Americans who volunteered and organized and proved that more than two centuries later a government of the people, by the people, and for the people has not perished from the Earth.

This is your victory. 


And I know you didn't do this just to win an election. And I know you didn't do it for me.

You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime -- two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.

Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.

There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after the children fall asleep and wonder how they'll make the mortgage or pay their doctors' bills or save enough for their child's college education.

There's new energy to harness, new jobs to be created, new schools to build, and threats to meet, alliances to repair.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.

I promise you, we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can't solve every problem.

But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it's been done in America for 221 years -- block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began 21 months ago in the depths of winter cannot end on this autumn night.

This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were.

It can't happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other.

Let us remember that, if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

In this country, we rise or fall as one nation, as one people. Let's resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.

Let's remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House, a party founded on the values of self-reliance and individual liberty and national unity.

Those are values that we all share. And while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress.

As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

That's the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we've already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that's on my mind tonight's about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She's a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing: Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons -- because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America -- the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.

She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.

A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination.

And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change.

Yes we can.


America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves -- if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment.

This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.




ㅁ 해석(그냥 참고만, 음음)

동시번역(YTN)
http://tvpot.daum.net/clip/ClipView.do?clipid=11250650&lu=v_best12_04

Posted by ukmie
,
고도의 병렬 컴퓨팅 프랙티스를 이해하고, 대규모 분산 컴퓨팅의 새로운 패러다임을 보다 효과적으로 다룰 수 있도록 하기 위해 마련되었다고 한다.

Google과 University of Washington에서 개발한 분산 시스템, Eclipse용 MapReduce Tools
등의 리소스들을 사용해 볼 수 있다고 한다.

인터넷 스케일 컴퓨팅 프로젝트의 예를 들자면?

워 싱턴대학교의 컴퓨터 공학과 학생들은 상당한 분량의 Wikipedia를 스캐닝 하여 스팸을 가려내는 프로그램을 개발했고, 전 세계 각 지역별로 글로벌 뉴스 아티클을 구성하는 프로그램을 개발했습니다. 이러한 프로젝트들은 인터넷 스케일의 컴퓨팅 이니셔티브의 본질을 시사하고 있습니다.


인터넷 스케일 컴퓨팅: 차세대 인터넷을 맞이할 준비가 되었습니까?

Posted by ukmie
,
"이더넷 개발, 유비쿼터스 개념 창시 등 세계 컴퓨팅 업계 흐름을 주도해 온 제록스연구소가 이번에는 시맨틱 웹을 기반으로 한 차세대 검색엔진 ‘팩트스포터(FactSpotter)’ 개발에 성공했다."

구글보다 낫다는 극찬을 받은 검색엔진이란다. 왜냐?!

"
예를 들어 구글에서 ‘링컨’과 ‘부통령’이라는 단어를 검색하면 링컨대통령의 약력이나 네브라스카주 링컨시에 위치한 대학 소개가 먼저 나오지만 ‘팩트스포터’에서는 링컨대통령 시절의 부통령이 한니발 햄린이 검색된다. 또 ‘링컨대통령 시절 부통령은 누구일까요?’라는 문장 형식으로 검색해도 같은 결과가 나타난다."


그렇군. 문서관리 시스템용이기에 검색의 품질 향상에 중점을 둘 수 있지 않았나 싶나. 아무래도,
웹서비스의 경우에는 이것저것 걸리는것이 많을테니까. 그런데 http://www.xerox.com 사이트에 분명히 FactSpotter 관련 기사가 있는데 사이트내의 검색기능을 이용해서는 찾아지지가 않는다. 웹사이트에도 신경 좀 쓰지 --. 아무튼,
써보진 않았지만 쓸만한 녀석이길 기대해본다. 우리나라에도 문서검색 솔루션들 많던데 어느정도
수준일까. 그건그렇고,
내 컴의 문서들은 언제나 정리가 되려나. --

*** 참고사이트
Surpassing Search: New Xerox Text Mining Software Goes Beyond "Keywords"
To Deliver More Relevant Information


http://www.zdnet.co.kr/news/enterprise/etc/0,39031164,39158849,00.htm

http://www.etnews.co.kr/news/detail.html?id=200706210047

Posted by ukmie
,

GPLv3 가 얼마전에 OSS 의 승인을 받았다
특허권 , 배포 관련해서 명시적인 조항을 넣는 업데이트가 있을 예정이라고 했었는데,
이런저런 말들이 많은것 같다.

- GPLv3 : http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
- GPLv3 를 둘러싼 공방 :
   http://www.zdnet.co.kr/news/enterprise/os/0,39031185,39151564,00.htm
- GPLv3 의 위험과 문제 :
http://www.joinc.co.kr/modules/moniwiki/wiki.php/Site/Development/Forum/etc/GPLv3
- FSF 의 GPLv3 소개 :
http://gplv3.fsf.org/


" The Apache Software Foundation believes that you should always try to obey the constraints expressed by the copyright holder when redistributing their work. "
  -
from ASF

"The only way to make software development safe is to abolish software patents, and we aim to achieve this some day. But we cannot do this through a software license. Any program, free or not, can be killed by a software patent in the hands of an unrelated party, and the program's license cannot prevent that. Only court decisions or changes in patent law can make software development safe from patents. If we tried to do this with GPLv3, it would fail. "
  - from Why Upgrade to GPLv3

오픈소스 라이센스의 세계도 자유소프트웨어 vs 오픈소스 진영으로 의견이 나뉜다.
논의의 핵심은 이 부분일것이다.
"GPL을 지지하는 측에서는 BSD라이센스를 선택하는 것은 기업들이 소스를 변형하여 2차 저작물을 작성하여 이에 대해 독점적인 라이센스 정책을 취할 것이며, 일반인들의 자유사용이 제한되므로 진정한 자유소프트웨어는 될 수 없을 것이라고 비판한다."

뭐가 좋은지 나도 모르겠다. 그냥 이런걸 어떨까.
" 이 소프트웨어는 이렇게 말할때 적용되는 법에 적용받는다. "

주요 오픈소스 라이센스
(출처 : http://wiki.kldp.org/wiki.php/OpenSourceLicenseGuide )

GPL 2.0
GPL은 현재 가장 많은 OpenSource 소프트웨어가 채택하고 있는 라이센스이다. OpenSource 라이센스들 중에서 가장 많이 알려져 있고 의무사항들도 타 라이센스에 비해 엄격한 편이다. GPL의 주요 내용은 다음과 같다.

  • 소프트웨어를 배포하는 경우 저작권 표시, 보증책임이 없다는 표시 및 GPL에 의해 배포된다는 사실 명시
  • 소프트웨어를 수정하거나 새로운 소프트웨어를 링크(Static과 Dynamic linking 모두)시키는 경우 GPL에 의해 소스 코드 제공해야 함.
  • Object Code 또는 Executable Form으로 GPL 소프트웨어를 배포하는 경우, 소스 코드 그 자체를 함께 배포하거나 또는 소스코드를 제공받을 수 있는 방법에 대한 정보 함께 제공해야 함
  • 자신의 특허를 구현한 프로그램을 GPL로 배포할 때는 GPL 조건을 준수하는 이용자에게는 로열티를 받을 수 없으며, 제3자의 특허인 경우에도 특허권자가 Royalty-Free 형태의 라이센스를 제공해야만 해당 특허 기술을 구현한 프로그램을 GPL로 배포하는 것이 가능

    LGPL 2.1
    FSF가 일부 Library에 GPL보다 다소 완화된 형태인 GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)를 만들어 사용하고 있는 이유는 오픈 소스 소프트웨어의 사용을 장려하기 위한 전략적인 차원에서이다. LGPL은 링크하는 소프트웨어의 소스코드를 공개할 필요가 없다는 점이 GPL과 가장 큰 차이점이다.

  • 소프트웨어를 배포하는 경우 저작권 표시, 보증책임이 없다는 표시 및 LGPL에 의해 배포된다는 사실 명시
  • LGPL Library의 일부를 수정하는 경우 수정한 Library를 LGPL에 의해 소스 코드 공개
  • LGPL Library에 응용프로그램을 링크시킬(Static과 Dynamic Linking 모두) 경우 해당 응용프로그램의 소스를 공개할 필요 없음. 다만 사용자가 Library 수정 후 동일한 실행 파일을 생성할 수 있도록 Static Linking시에는 응용프로그램의 Object Code를 제공해야 함
  • 특허의 경우 GPL과 동일함

    BSD License
    BSD(Berkeley Software Distribution) 라이센스는 GPL/LGPL보다 덜 제한적이기 때문에 허용범위가 넓다. 이는 BSD 라이센스로 배포되는 프로젝트가 미국 정부에서 제공한 재원으로 운영되었기 때문이다. GPL과의 차이점 중 가장 중요한 사항은 BSD 라이센스는는 소스코드 공개의 의무가 없다는 점이다. 따라서 BSD 라이센스의 소스 코드를 이용하여 새로운 프로그램을 개발하여도 새로운 프로그램의 소스 코드를 공개하지 않고 BSD가 아닌 다른 라이센스를 적용하여 판매할 수 있다. 주요 내용을 요약하면 다음과 같다.

  • 소프트웨어를 배포하는 경우 저작권 표시, 보증책임이 없다는 표시
  • 수정 프로그램에 대한 소스 코드의 공개를 요구하지 않기 때문에 상용 소프트웨어에 무제한 사용가능

    Apache License
    아파치 라이센스는 아파치 웹서버를 포함한 아파치 재단(ASF: Apache Software Foundation)의 모든 소프트웨어에 적용되며 BSD 라이센스와 비슷하여 소스코드 공개 등의 의무가 발생하지 않는다. 다만 "Apache"라는 이름에 대한 상표권을 침해하지 않아야 한다는 조항이 명시적으로 들어가 있고, 특허권에 관한 내용이 포함되어 BSD 라이센스보다는 좀더 법적으로 완결된 내용을 담고 있다. 특히 Apache License 2.0에서 특허에 관한 조항이 삽입되어 GPL 2.0으로 배포되는 코드와 결합되는 것이 어렵다는 문제가 었었는데, GPL 3.0(안)에서는 이 문제를 해결하여 아파치 라이센스로 배포되는 코드가 GPL 3.0으로 배포되는 코드와 결합하는 것이 가능해졌다.
  • http://www.apache.org/licenses/

    MPL(Mozilla Public License)

    MPL은 Netscape 브라우저의 소스코드를 공개하기 위해 개발된 라이센스이다. MPL은 공개하여야할 소스코드의 범위를 좀더 명확하게 정의하였다. GPL에서는 링크되는 소프트웨어의 소스코드를 포함하여 공개하여야 할 소스코드의 범위가 모호하게 정의되어 있지만 MPL에서는 링크 등의 여부에 상관없이 원래의 소스코드가 아닌 새로운 파일에 작성된 소스코드에 대해서는 공개의 의무가 발생하지 않는다. 따라서 MPL 소프트웨어 그 자체는 어떻게 하든 공개를 해야 하지만 원래 소스코드에 없던 새로운 파일들은 공개하여야 할 의무가 발생하지 않으므로 GPL에 비해 훨씬 명확하다. 주요 내용을 요약하면 다음과 같다.
  • 소프트웨어를 배포하는 경우 저작권 표시, 보증책임이 없다는 표시 및 MPL에 의해 배포된다는 사실을 명시
  • MPL 코드를 수정한 부분은 다시 MPL에 의해 배포
  • MPL 코드와 다른 코드를 결합하여 프로그램을 만들 경우 MPL 코드를 제외한 결합 프로그램에 대한 소스코드는 공개할 필요가 없음
  • 소스코드를 적절한 형태로 제공하는 경우, 실행파일에 대한 라이센스는 MPL이 아닌 다른 것으로 선택가능
  • 특허기술이 구현된 프로그램의 경우 관련 사실을 ‘LEGAL’파일에 기록하여 배포


    참고 사이트

    KLDPWiki: 오픈소스 소프트웨어 라이센스 가이드
    Open Source Definition (10가지 조건이 있슴)
    Open Source License Category (OSS 에 승인된 라이센스 종류..많다--)
    공개소프트웨어 라이센스에 대하여 (첨부된 pdf 파일 있슴.)


  • Posted by ukmie
    ,
    2007년 6월 7일 하버드 대학 졸업식 연설문입니다. 
    당연한 것일수도 있겠지만 참 빌게이츠스럽다(?)는 느낌이네요.
    복잡성의 제거와 접목시켜서 불평등에 대한 이야기를하는군요. 그럴듯합니다.

    원문해석 : http://extended.tistory.com/306

    Remarks of Bill Gates

    Harvard Commencement


    President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:

    I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”

    I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.

    I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.

    But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

    Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.

    Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.

    One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.

    I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.

    What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

    But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.

    I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

    I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

    But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.

    I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.

    It took me decades to find out.

    You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

    Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

    For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

    During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.

    We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.

    If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”

    So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”

    The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

    But you and I have both.

    We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

    If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

    I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.” I completely disagree.

    I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

    All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.

    The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

    To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.

    Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

    But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”

    The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

    We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.

    If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

    Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

    Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

    The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior.

    Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.

    The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.

    You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.

    But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.

    I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.

    What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?

    You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.

    Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.

    The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

    Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”

    Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.

    The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.

    The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

    At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion -- smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.

    We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.

    Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.

    What for?

    There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?

    Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:

    Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?

    Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the prevalence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?

    Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?

    These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.

    My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: “From those to whom much is given, much is expected.”

    When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.

    In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.

    Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.

    You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort. You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.

    Knowing what you know, how could you not?

    And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.

    Good luck.

    원문 http://www.commencement.harvard.edu/



    Posted by ukmie
    ,
    ZDNET 의 인터뷰 기사
    - 정부의 역할에 어느정도 기대를 해야하는 걸까, 이 정도 지원이면 SW강국이 될수 있는걸까.
    우리가 SW 강국이 될만한 배경을 가지고 있는걸까. 뭔가 2프로의 부족함이 느껴지는 것은 왜일까.
    아무쪼록, 하시는일 다 잘되길 바랍니다. (please..)

    Posted by ukmie
    ,

    Saas(Software as a Service - 이게 맞습니다. 아래 기사가 잘못됨) 국내 도입 현황에 대한
    전자신문 기사. 아무튼, 이 모델이 중소형 솔루션 업체들에게 많은 도움이 되길 기대~~
    http://www.etnews.co.kr/news/detail.html?id=200707250128
    Posted by ukmie
    ,
    티스토리 BlogAPI,Callback! 기사스크랩,도용이 역지사지?

    http://www.designlog.org/2510905

    음음,,조금 나아진것 같군.

    Posted by ukmie
    ,
    패러키는 파이어폭스의 창립자 블래커 로스와 조 휴이타가 만든 신생업체이다. “문서작성, 파일검색, 정보 공유 등을 지루하지 않고 편하게 해야 한다”는 것이 업체의 모토. 특히 이메일, 사진, 영상, 드라이브상의 모든 것을 조작하는 툴 등을 위한 플랫폼 역할을 수행하고 있다.

    http://www.zdnet.co.kr/news/internet/etc/0,39031281,39159680,00.htm

    Posted by ukmie
    ,