The New York Times editorial page will create a huge wave of viewing of a video created by a 15 year old criticizing the Bush Administration. ICT democratizes the power of information, enabling a teenager from rural Alabama to get into the New York Times, be heard around the world, and labeled a "New Campaign Media Guru".

The ability of housewives, kids, and geographically dispersed and isolated persons to mine for and assemble stories of misdeeds, corruption, or just bad decisions is enabled by information communication technology. As modern-day pamphleteering that our Founding Fathers were so fond of, we need to continue to explore this and push growth in information and communication technology in Africa and elsewhere. Information gets transformed into knowledge leading to pressures to increase quality of life across all segments of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Isn’t that a good thing?

John Markoff and Saul Hansell write in the New York Times today about a massive computing complex Google is building in Washington state. Oddly, Markoff and Hansell miss the big picture and instead focus on Google as a "search engine":

Google is known to the world as a search engine, but in many ways it is foremost an effort to build a network of supercomputers, using the latest academic research, that can process more data — faster and cheaper — than its rivals.

The need to slice milliseconds off query results is only part of what Google seeks. The authors only, while google-eyed at the power of the distributed computing network that by their words is greater than the NSA’s computing power (an interesting comparison to be made), hint at other services by way of the a quote, "Google is like a Borg", and the comment on the culture of secrecy in Google derived from not discussing revenue sources.

Google does so much more than return results, as I’ve written about in the past. It is unfortunate this front page, below the fold, NYT story misses this. Google is probably happy they did.

I wonder if Negroponte’s $100 laptop or Gates’ cellphone computer can do this… Gone in 20 Minutes: using laptops to steal cars.

High-tech thieves are becoming increasingly savvy when it comes tostealing automobiles equipped with keyless entry and ignition systems.
While many computer-based security systems on automobiles require some
type of key — mechanical or otherwise — to start the engine, so-called
‘keyless’ setups require only the presence of a key fob to start the
engine.

The expert gang suspected of stealing two of David Beckham’s BMW X5
SUVs in the last six months did so by using software programs on a
laptop to wirelessly break into the car’s computer, open the doors, and
start the engine.

“It’s difficult to steal cars with complex security, but not
impossible. There are weaknesses in any system,” Tim Hart of the Auto
Locksmith Association told the U.K.’s Auto Express magazine.
“At key steps the car’s software can halt progress for up to 20 minutes
as part of its in-built protection,” said Hart.

Because the decryption process can take a while — up to 20 minutes,
according to Hart — the thieves usually wait to find the car in a
secluded area where it will be left for a long period. That is believed
to be what happened to Mr. Beckham — the crooks followed him to the
mall where he was to have lunch, and went to work on his X5 after it
was parked.

While automakers and locksmiths are supposed to be the only groups
that know where and how security information is stored in a car, the
information eventually falls into the wrong hands.

According to the Prague Post leaving such information on a
laptop is what got Radko Souček caught for stealing several cars. “You
could delete all the data from your laptop, but that’s not good for you
because the more data you have, the bigger your possibilities,” he
says. He says any car that relies on software to provide security can
be circumvented by other software. “Every car has its weak spot,” he
says. Souček faces up to 12 years in prison.

The Leftlane Perspective: Many modern cars now rely on software entirely
for security. Gone are the days where microchips supplemented
mechanical locks as an additional security measure. In the case of true
‘keyless’ systems, software is the only thing between a thief and your
car. As computers become more powerful, will stealing cars become even
easier? Never mind future cars with better security — what about
today’s cars a few years down the road? With cars as inexpensive as the
Toyota Camry offering entirely keyless systems, these concerns a
relevant to all consumers.