The Geography of Apple v. Samsung

I'm writing my post from my "13-inch Late 2007 MacBook" while I follow updates regarding Tropical Storm Isaac on my iPad 2. I have my iPhone 3GS within arm's reach as my iPhone is the only phone I own. While appreciate Apple's devices, I am not an Apple fanboy. I cut my proverbial teeth on MS-DOS and PC-DOS, have experience in Sun Microsystem's Solaris (both Unix and x86 flavors), in IBM's AIX (another Unix flavor), and have used a variety of Linux versions. However, due in part to wide-spread adoption of Microsoft programing and operating system environments, I have some experience with every MS OS since Windows 3.

Apple's victory over Samsung will have some interesting ramifications for the technology industry, some good, some not so good, and some bad.

Of some note is the disparity in international legal decisions with respect to Apple's legal claims as pertains to their patents. Most Americans may not be aware Apple has sued Samsung not only in the United States, but in Germany, in Italy, in the UK, in South Korea, in France, in the Netherlands, and in Australia.

Apple won an injunction in Germany against Samsung and the Galaxy Tab 10.1. However, Apple itself is being sued by Motorola over push-notification technology in Germany. Motorola developed a push-notification technology for pagers upon which current push-notification technology is based. Sort of.

In Europe, and in South Korea, Apple has not made much headway in patent battles. The reason behind their inability to find favor abroad seems to be related to courts abroad being immune to notions that rounded corners should be a patentable feature.

Abroad, patenting environments are considerably different than in the United States. In the United States, an idea sketched on a napkin has the potential of being patented. A square or rectangle with arrows denoting various features has the potential of being enough to capture a patent license. Writing a bit of software code has the potential of being patented.

The idea behind patenting is to protect a real and useful "concrete" technology from being stolen by others and to provide the developer time enough to recover costs and make a little money. The idea must be able to be engineered and  implemented. The idea must represent a new and unique advancement of the natural sciences. In other words, mathematical formulas, business processes, the presentation of information, and software cannot be patented. Yet, another way, you cannot hold a formula or process in your hand; you can hold the tangible outcome of the utilization of a process in your hand, but not the process itself.

Are consumers really so dumb as to think the Samsung is literally a generic iPhone?

Can a shape be patentable? Should a shape be patentable? Should a gesture be patentable?

My response to the above is, no, shapes and gestures are "open source." In other words, they are not unique and represent no form of technological enhancement or contribution. In fact, language is "open source," too.

If language were not "open source" imagine the complexity of paying people who license every word imaginable and also licensed every permutation of every possible letter combination which might result in a new word. Every author would become instantly bankrupt.

Yet, in the United States, that seems to be where we are heading. The US Patent Office allows companies to patent their software code. Allowing patenting of software code is much like allowing Stephen King to patent all the words in his books so no one else could use those books. What S King does is copy-protect his stories, and to some extent he is offered protection from other writers deriving verbatim his works. Musicians cannot copyright the notes they use, but they can copyright the composition and lyrics.

In Europe and abroad, computer languages are seen much like spoken or written languages. Companies are limited as to what they can protect with software patents. Code which accesses a DVD drive, or a software port, or a mouse, or calculates the volume of a sphere - I'm sure there are better examples cannot be patented simply because of the finite number of ways such events can occur. To sue someone because of button placement, button appearance, or button behavior is simply asinine in most European countries because these do not meet the criteria of being new and unique advancements.

In the United States, though, we seem to be heading down the path where even small snippets of code are patentable.

Take the Oracle v. Google lawsuit related to Java. Google was able to eke out a winning decision v. Oracle. In Europe, a similar lawsuit would doubtfully succeeded, as well. The judge did say the judgment did not apply to all APIs, however. The European High Court ruled against the US company SAS, stating "a computer language or the functionality of a computer program cannot be copyrighted."

The theme behind my comments reflects the changes the US patent system must implement to ensure and promote innovation and squelch those who simply want to be paid for property which is falsely labeled as "intellectual." Rounding edges, pinching screens, and vague descriptions of techniques for communicating using copper wire or via wireless communication networks need to be filtered before entering the patent system.

"Oh, a smoothed rectangle works well in pockets, briefcases, and backpacks. Now, let's build a brilliant phone"

One comment I read this morning hinted the decision might be a good one for the industry. The judgment against Samsung will foster MORE innovation, not less, the contributor argued, because people will have to be more creative to avoid Apple's design elements. Companies need to stop jumping on the bandwagon, for sure. Samsung is a global telecommunications company and has been a dominant player in the smartphone market. True, Samsung made some very bad choices which essentially gave the jury no choice but to find in Apple's favor. However, if Samsung had simply said, "Oh, a smoothed rectangle works well in pockets, briefcases, and backpacks. Now, let's build a brilliant phone" they probably would have been OK. Instead, they opted to nearly reverse engineer an iPhone, which is really dumb, and now Samsung's own stupidity has brought a queasiness sense of dread to an entire technology sector, putting everyone on edge. Hopefully, though, the verdict will act as a cold splash of Reality in the faces of technology design teams around the world. "Oh, shit, we've been mesmerized by Apple. Duh. OK, everyone lets get creative."

As a direct result of the decision, lawyers will undoubtedly play an even bigger role in technology design simply to prevent further patent legal issues. Is this really good for innovation, to have more legalese involved simply to make sure Technology A does not "steal" from Technology B? Do we really want lawyers designing our technology?

"No, the radius of the curve is 0.57. The i6 has a curve radius of 0.54. That is only an 8% difference; that will never hold up in court. Your going to have to use a chamfered corner, instead.

No, you cannot use rounded icons. Let me consult the list of open source shapes, and those shape which have yet to be patented. Hmm, well, octogons are out. The octogon shape has been patented by the UFC. Uhm, no pentagons, either. Homeland Security doesn't want terrorists to be constantly reminded of what the Department of Defense building looks like. No triangles, either; GLBT have patented all triangle variants and most shades of pink and purple. Well, I'm going to have to get back to you on this."

All of this might seem silly, yet in light of swimmer Ryan Lochte wanting to patent the word "Jeah!" my comments seem pretty realistic.

Patents, in a sense, create a monopoly for the owner. In a corporate sense, hegemony, which is worse. Hegemony means complete ownership and domination. An examination of Apple's suits worldwide, as I discussed earlier, almost argues Apple is looking not simply for protection of intellectual property but complete hegemony over the global telecommunications markets, using local, regional, national, and international court systems.

I realize the jury made their judgment based on current US legal doctrine. The judgment might be "lawful" but was their judgment "prudent?" Recently, the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Brievik was sentenced to 21 years in prison for his crimes, the maximum legal judgement in Norway. In the United States, with 100% surety Breivik would have spent his remaining days in prison, or been executed. In Norway, Breivik's sentence was "lawful" in that he was punished to the maximum Norwegian courts allow, but was his punishment in proportion to the deaths of 77 people, most of them schoolchildren? That is my point. Sometimes, what is lawful is not necessarily proportional to the crime nor prudent.

Sidenote: Breivik will probably never again see the light of day. After commenting in court he didn't kill enough people, the judges will most likely extend his sentence. In Norway, while the maximum sentence is 21 years, options exist for extending prison terms by 5-year increments.

Patents were designed to be granted for tangible objects which represent new and unique technologies developed from knowledge of the natural sciences. A CD, or DVD, or Blu-Ray, or SD card reflect patentable materials. However, patent laws in effect today have not changed much to account for technology, innovation, or rapidly changing global economies. Pharmaceuticals are in the same IP/Patent boat which affects the prices we pay for medication, potentially keeping them artificially higher than they should be.

The patent process needs to be fully examined to ensure fair and equitable standards are implemented which work to the benefit of designers, developers, and consumers.

Business Model? We Don't Need No Business Model!

Few things raise my hackles more than irrational or illogical behavior. And, in this collection I also include my own behavior. Take for example the recent news of a student, Timothy Arnold, a University of Central Florida student, who developed an application. His application, UCouldFinish, helped students find courses with open seats. Armed with this knowledge, over 500 students found acceptable courses in which to enroll. In higher education, 500 students x 3 credit hours equals 1,500 credit hours. Now UCF charges $208 per credit hour (site). Doing some simple math...1,500 x $208 equals (make this easy: 15 x2 x1000) about $300,000 dollars. Hypothetically, Mr. Arnold helped UCF bring in $300,000 with his application.

Consulting the UCouldFinish web site, Timothy has been subjected to punishment for being so bold as to help his university improve the conditions of his fellow students and also helping improve the financial environment of his university. Mr. Arnold's application earned him 3 semesters of academic probation, a research paper on the management of MyUCF, and counseling on how to make good choices.

To throw some positive vibes on this debacle, the 3 semesters of probation is not a big deal. Timothy sounds like a smart guy. He will either make those semesters pass easily, or he will bid UCF adieu and find a more suitable uni to finish his education. My sense is a company, like Google, or Facebook, or Twitter will offer him a job. Writing a research paper on the IT on the UCF ERP system will undoubtedly require some research. He should need to speak with many IT folks, network analysts, programmers, and system admins to get a sense of the breadth and depth of the inner workings of the ERP system in order to understand the impact his application had upon UCF IT. All of his research will undoubtedly result in more experience dealing with systems, programming, and the entire ecosystem of higher ed IT, giving him even more insight into the trials and tribulations of systems administration. Thus, in writing the research paper, he could end up with even greater knowledge of how to exploit...er, augment educational IT systems.

In a broader sense, Timothy Arnold v. UCF illustrates a much more important and sobering issue in Higher Education. Traditional higher education, public & private colleges and universities, are being assaulted on numerous fronts. Set aside for a moment the Conservation/Right-wing/GOP gutting of education, in general. The literal attacks committed against Education by Republicans is well-documented and is a true source of concern. However, critical thinking requires us to ask, Why? Why is their such animosity against Education, especially Higher Education?

I submit one essential reason: Higher Education has become sclerotic, hard, calcified, resist to change and adapt, entrenched in a management mindset at least a century old. For traditional colleges and universities to not only remain relevant but to serve current and future educational needs, the Higher Education business model needs to evolve from the 19th century academic mindset into a a mindset capable of being nimble and adaptive to 21st century educational needs. If Higher Education had been more vigilant in adapting and evolving new business and academic models, these specious attacks would have no merit

A propose a number of remedies to address the improvement of our College and University business models. First, classes need to be able to be added & dropped as needed. Doing such will require some transcript flexibility. Department chairs and deans are best able to support student advising and transcript adjustment. ERP systems need to be able be adaptive enough to manage student academic records, as well.

Colleges and Universities must be allowed to leverage faculty, staff, and student expertise. Unquestionably and undeniably, colleges and universities must be open and receptive to using on-site knowledge, experience, and expertise to address the daily and long-term mission of the institution. As Timothy Arnold attempted, when a need is identified, such as the notification system Timothy developed, those needs should be immediately addressed. Students should be allowed to help design and implement CMS and help manage institutional web sites. Students should be allowed to help develop institutional applications which help the overall function of the institution. One of the greatest complaints new graduates have, and have always had, is that of experience, having none. Students assisting with all aspects of institutional management, planning, and IT will have experience upon graduation. Perhaps experience with Drupal, Joomla!, PHP, Python, WordPress, Javascript, HTML5, SQL and SQL Server, or Oracle. Graduating student would have experience in application development, design, implementation, and enhancement. A phenomenal example of such a team is the InfoGraphics Lab in the Department of Geography at the University of Oregon.

Online courses, for-private schools, and now the growing presence of massively open online courses (MOOC), with the movement of so much content into "the cloud" is going to push universities to evolve into something new. Those who do not evolve, who do not revolutionize their educational business model are going to slide away into obscurity.

Current business models and the closely related academic models will need to evolve into something else. Global economic forces change faster than seasons or global climate change predictions. Business, industry, and global commercial sectors need employees who can adapt to change and work within fluid environments. Industry needs nimble thinkers who can address current business trends yet also be able to act quickly and foresee changes in technology, consumer tastes, trends in raw materials and labor markets which are embedded in Globalization.

Of current concern is unemployment. As of this writing, 12.8 million people were unemployed. The national unemployment rate is 8.3%. Again, doing some quick math, 12.8 / 0.083 and we arrive at a labor force size of about 156 million Americans, which is about 50% of our population, and that is my "rule of thumb" for determining the size of any country's labor force (about 50% of population, give or take) (Source: BLS).

Also, of this writing there are about 3.8million open job postings. We can debate the accuracy of the number, I will grant that. But, hypothetically, let's say ...entertain me here... 3 million of those open jobs were filled by people from the 12.8 million group. Then, we would have only 9.8 million unemployed. Simple math gives us 9.8 / 156 which equals 6.3% unemployment (Source: BLS)

Now, 6.3% is not bad. Not great, but certainly better than +8%. The question then becomes, "Why are those jobs not being filled by people in the 12.8million group?"

I don't have an answer to that question. I know some factors include unwillingness to move to where the jobs are, the pay of those open jobs, and the experience gap between the unemployed group the experience those open jobs require.

Retraining & re-education can help fill some of those jobs. Re-education requires colleges and universities to be open, fair, and honest with themselves, and be open to new ideas, fail fast, fail often, and learn and grow from those experiences, and be ever-evolving. Self-assessment mandates interaction with business and industry to make sure graduates have both the education and experience necessary for those graduates to succeed.

Higher Education cannot be a stove-pipe themselves, or become educational "silos" immune to local, state, national, or international influences and catalysts. Those institutions who pay attention will succeed by their graduates. Those institutions who fail to adapt to 21st century educational changes and evolving business needs will falter and suffer under constant mis-identification of goals and mis-aligned "mission statements" and find themselves under-going continual identity crises which will do nothing but undermine institutional confidence at all levels.

Institutions of Higher Learning represent a bizarre dichotomy of work environments. On one hand, some of the most brilliant people on the planet are employed by them, and some of the most pedantic, too. Even the educated folks are routinely bound by limited vision and are what I might label as "novice learners" being unable to see past their own discipline, specialty area, or responsibility. Thus, the very institutions which were created to promote critical thinking and openness are just as poisoned as any other institution or corporation.

So, yes, my hackles get up when these institutions victimize innovation, stifle advancement, creativity, and stymy new ideas and concepts, and squash young, middle-aged, an older minds in favor of "tradition" and "that just not the way its done" mentalities.

I invite all rational and reasonable comments :)

PAX

End of Census Heralds Beginning of Moronocracy

The United States government is on the verge of committing one of the gravest mistakes in the history of any modern government - eliminating the U.S. decennial census.

Every legitimate, and in the case of North Korea and Syria, illegitimate government conducts a census of all inhabitants at some regular interval. Even the Soviets collected data on every person in every region throughout its holdings in Asia. Yes, the Soviet Union was a police state, but don't confuse the issue. Every government needs good data on its inhabitants and practices, period.

The very first census was commissioned in 1790 after the Revolutionary War. Even before the United States was ratified into being, the Commonwealth of Virginia conducted a census of all residents.

Collecting data and information about our country is part of our blood, even as much so as collecting taxes!

Inarguably, the United States is one of the most vastly interesting, dynamic, robust, controversial, and diverse countries found on our planet. Collecting information about us helps us understand us. Yes, I understand I have nearly created a tautology in my description of need. However, without information we will eventually be adrift in an Ocean of Ignorance.

Look, our Decennial Census is super-important. The number of representatives in our local Houses and our National House of Representatives is determined by our population, first of all. Secondly, and perhaps most important of all, is the allocation of our tax dollars. Regardless of how you think our tax dollars are to be spent, the allocation of those dollars is based on population.

Allocation to state, regional, and local levels is often based upon "block grants." Block grants are sums of money allocated back to states, based on need, portioned by population, and typically go to schools, law enforcement, and community development. Block grants are determined by population. Larger populations get more money than smaller populations, which makes sense; providing fire, police, and public safety for 100,000 people costs more than for 10,000.

I can also see a problem developing. Say the Republicans are successful in abolishing the Census and the sister product, the America Community Survey, leaving all Americans in the dark as to the current and future social and economic changes coming our way. How are we to know precisely if our communities are receiving their correct appropriation of Federal block grant monies? Are we going to rely on self-reporting of population figures from local communities? Really? I can see where some communities would be more than happy to "augment" or "enhance" some figures, like schoolchildren, in order to receive more money. I can see cases where communities might want to "round down" when reporting such details as Median Family Income, making their areas appear more poverty-stricken than they really are. One only has to look at the fudging some school districts have done when reporting the results of standardized testing to see the possible ramifications of removing federally-sanctioned information gathering and relying on self-reporting.

“This is a program that intrudes on people’s lives, just like the Environmental Protection Agency or the bank regulators,” said Daniel Webster, a first-term Republican congressman from Florida who sponsored the relevant legislation."

Mr. Webster is not the genius his name might suggest. Floridians must have a choice between voting for Webster and an alligator, and opted for the worst of two evils. I don't know.

Yes, how dare the EPA reduce the amount of mercury in my air! I love Mercury! It's my 3rd favorite planet, after Mars and Hollywood, after all.

And, after the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiasco of 2008, AIG, the collapse of the housing, and the recent $2B loss by JPMorgan, we have plenty of examples of wonderful, careful, and prudent financial management. Why would we ever want to regulate any banking system? That financial institutions themselves are suggesting more oversight is in ordering is simply crazy-talk. What do they know? They only deal in money which doesn't exist, and derivatives of money which doesn't exist. Not real money like real people use to buy cars, pay rent, food, or maybe put away for retirement. Yeesh!

Seriously, according to the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, methinks Sir Webster qualifies as either "dull," or "borderline deficient."

I'm not sure how he was able to beguile so many Floridians to vote for him. The incumbent, Harvard graduate Alan Grayson, is no moron, not even close. He holds a Degree in Economics, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He successfully prosecuted Iraq war-profiteering, winning a judgement against Custer Battles for $13 million dollars, the only successful fraud prosecution against Iraq War contractors. I'm guessing Mr. Grayson's "Bush Lied, People Died," bumper-sticker did in his political career.

This only proves my point that people get the government they deserve; morons voting to put morons in office results in a Moronocracy.

Oh - I like that word. In foreign policy, we talk about Russia as being a mafiacracy. Some people believe the United States is a plutocracy, a government run by the wealthy.

Sure, I can see this: the plutocrats, some of whom will run for office, will buy their way into the graces of the moronocrats, or will pave the way for the easy-to-manipulate moronocrats to attain office. Those of us who are too busy working for a living will be too consumed with the details of our lives to care or notice. And some Americans, the Mark Zuckerberg's, the American Creative & Entrepreneurial Class are too busying developing the next best tablet/smartphone/social network - people who are actually contributing to society - to really care about their impeding rule by Plutocrats and their Moronocrat minions.

“We’re spending $70 per person to fill this out. That’s just not cost effective,” he continued, “especially since in the end this is not a scientific survey. It’s a random survey.”

Is this a joke? With all due respect to Mr. Webster, he cannot be this stupid. Granted, $70 a survey seems high to me. But, I question is dollar amount, especially when taken into consideration with his other comment about the survey not being scientific because its "random." Seriously, that is an embarrassing comment, and all of our educated European cohorts must be trying hard to suppress giggles. On the other hand, our Chinese friends to the west nod sagely, watching our U.S. technological and societal lead fragment, guided by incompetent hands of moronocrats. The Government Accounting Office places the cost at $42 a person, by the way. The Economist magazine has a good article about census efforts by other countries.

But, those are my thoughts. What do important people have to say about Tea Party Republicans like Daniel Webster.

“Mr Webster is a stupid turd. Knowing what’s happening in our economy is so desperately important to keeping our economy functioning smoothly,” said Maurine Haver, the chief executive and founder of Haver Analytics, a data analysis company. “The reason the Great Recession did not become another Great Depression is because of the more current economic data we have today that we didn’t have in the 1930s.”

Ms. Haver did not say, "Mr. Webster is a stupid turd," but I have no doubt she was thinking something along the line. Many, many, many companies use Census data for their business. I know; I have worked with some.

Years ago, I did research for a government development agency. One of our business recruitment tools was Census data. Companies, business, industries desperately need to know where their consumers are located, and not simply consumers, but also their labor force.

Site Location & Analysis is a field in geography devoted to the examination of characteristics which make some places attractive for business and other areas not so much. Knowing how educated a work force is can tell a company whether or not they will find an appropriate number of qualified people to work in each company division. Knowing something about wages and income will tell them about the labor markets wage structure and composition. Knowing something about household income will help them determine if and where stores or products might be most successful.

The Census is one of the most economically important efforts our government performs for the benefit of all U.S citizens.

I know the data I examined and the maps developed from said Census data helped bring industries into my region. I know use of the data back in the 1990s helped my area obtain a competitive advantage over other areas as I was told to my face by company personnel no one had included Census maps in their marketing packages. Those maps grabbed their attention, for good or bad, but the knowledge the data and maps imparted was invaluable to siting industry.

TARGET went so far as to make a video in support of the Census, citing data use to help locate new stores and find employees.

“What really promotes business in this country is liberty,” he said, “not demand for information.”

Eh, maybe I was being too gracious earlier in my reference to his intelligence. Yes, that is precisely what businesses want, maps that help them find "liberty." "Can you should me places with your computer-gizmo where there is a large amount of liberty? That's going to be a great place for my store. I'd like to see 5-, 10-, and 15- mile radii showing me Liberty Catchment Areas."

Has Mr. Webster ever picked up a copy of the Miami Business Journal? Or, the Orando Business Journal? Or, even the Wall Street Journal? Yeah, those business rags are always clamoring about the deficit in data on "liberty.

Mr. Webster and his moronocrat minions even suggest the Census is unconstitutional. Hmmm...

From the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

I think Mr. Webster (R-FL) read the word "power" in the first Article and the notion went right to his brain cell which lacked a partner to tell him to hush before he made a fool of himself.

The impending disaster is larger than Mr. Webster seemingly overtaxed neuron. Republicans and spineless Democrats are actually debating about making the Census "voluntary." Hey, if anything is "voluntary," that pretty much means I'm not going to do it. So that means we end up with a bunch homeless people, winos, bored people, or people who simply like filling out surveys filling out surveys upon which $400 BILLION DOLLARS IS DEVIED OUT TO STATES.

Yeah. Sounds about right.

Oh sure, there might be a few civic-minded people who will do an honest job, but, really, we can't even turn out to vote for the President of the United States. More people turn out to see Bruce Springsteen or Lady Antebellum or Justin Beiber than turn out to vote.

I find all the negativity directed at the Census by the Grand Obsolescence Party (GOP) and pandering Democrats as strikingly odd. In Education, we have been invested for decades in data collection in the forms of assessments and Standardized Testing with the idea of using the data to improve all educational efforts. To not report information results in punitive measures against states. Yet, our Congresspeople want to eliminate all data collection efforts which would help assess and evaluate our country, as a whole. Even more insidious, though, is the potential for mismanagement, misguidance, or even deliberate obfuscation of information by our political leaders to distribute tax payer dollars based on Good Old Boy Networks and encourage the expansion of Pork Barrel Politics. After all, if no one really knows where the real need is, who can really question how the money is spent?

What better way to avoid Transparency in Government than to simply not collect information?

With the Census, as with any data collection effort, garbage in=garbage out, and the time, money, and effort is simply a waste. Dr. Kenneth Prewitt summarizes best:

“If it’s voluntary, then we’ll just get bad data,” said Kenneth Prewitt, a former director of the census who is now at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. “That means businesses will make bad decisions, and government will make bad decisions, which means we won’t even know where we actually are wasting our tax dollars.”

Moving into the future, we need information - good information. For the U.S. to remain economically viable, perhaps even solvent, and be prepared to meet any economic challenge head-on, the U.S. needs good data. The errors of the past, i.e. Iraq, the Challenger Space Shuttle, Vietnam, Korea, Nixon's Price Fixing Scheme, the Great Depression, both tactical and strategic, do not need arise again simply because the lack of vision of a few misguided moronocrats who want to save a few bucks.

If you haven't been to the Bureau of the Census web site, well, you should visit. You help pay for it, after all; you should see what you get for your money. Honestly, the web site is not the easiest to navigate. If you are willing to spend the time, though, the Census site is a fascinating look into our country, and other countries, and is a product and service which has real and immediate benefits to nearly any user.

Are You Raising A Global Child?

A good friend of mine lived abroad when she was of middle-school age. Her mother was in the military, stationed in Okinawa, Japan. Living abroad when old enough to notice the life going on around you, having a life in the States to compare to, and being old enough to appreciate the details and differences of people with whom your rub elbows with every day has an effect on a child. I would argue a good effect. While living abroad is rough on a young person, away from friends, having to learn to adapt to a different culture, she learned to appreciate the differences she saw. Having to adapt meant having to develop initiative to problem-solve, learning to use the subway, buses, eat a different diet, work at a different pace, and perhaps be differential towards elders.

Children, foreign nationals living outside their country of birth, may have a distinct advantage above children which do not live abroad, or later in life, choose to "study abroad." Children exposed at early ages to different food, a different set of cultural or societal rules, different languages, and even different climates should develop skills and attitudes which should make them more successful later in life than their stay-at-home peers in our increasingly globalized world society.

I see adult students every day, living in fear of moving to another county or an adjoining state for education. Students, male and female alike, literally tremble at the thought of the unfamiliar a mere 60+ miles (90km) away. Meanwhile, 10%-15% of campus is comprised of students not hundreds of miles from home, but 8,000 miles or more from home.

The United States' geography is both blessing and course. The U.S. has avoided the devastating effects of two world wars. Historically, North American was not the convenient cultural crossroads of Asia Minor or Europe. The benefit of distance has encouraged us to be aloof, buffered from political, economic, and cultural interactions common throughout Europe. Sure, we have experienced our own discord, our Civil War, our Civil Rights, literal battles over organized labor. We have had the added benefit, though, of not also having to worry about disagreements brought about by cultural factions, as evidenced by the controversial European Union, language barriers, or multiple currencies, to name only a few complicating forces.

Our geography has made us aloof, given us a sense of protection and ease, which few other global realms enjoy. We have only two immediate neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Canada is very similar to the United States culturally, politically, and with a shared British and French history. We expect immigrants to conform to our society and make little to no allowance to accept theirs. Immigrants fare better in urban areas where cultural diversity is normal and people from the same ethnic background offer support. Rural areas, locations of most state colleges and universities, immigrants and foreign students are met with more varied reactions.

The remainder of the world, I argue, does not realistically have an option to ignore or downplay the influence of their neighbors. They are forced to learn, listen, cope, i.e. interact with their neighbors as a part of doing business.

Children capable of handling diversity, being introduced to diversity in language, arts, culture, and expression I see as being the future.

For more reading: How To Raise A Global Kid (Lisa Miller, Newsweek)

The above article highlights many issues associated with the increasing amount of global interaction our current generation is a part of. But, we cannot simply be a part of the interaction without some analysis of how to better prepare both ourselves for what lay ahead tomorrow and prepare our children for lies ahead for them.

"I a worried that in this interconnected world, our country risks being disconnected from the contributions of other countries and cultures" (Arne Duncan, U.S. Education Secretary, 2010.)

I am worried, as well. I can't raise a global child; I don't have any children. I spend most of my time attempting to convince adults to become "Global Adults." My hopes are my students will accept some of what we discuss in class, what they learn themselves by reading English-language editions of foreign newspapers, and what they read in their textbooks, and through what little exposure I coach, the realization will dawn on them how much they need to pay attention to current events, if not for themselves, but for their children, and their children's children.

200 million Chinese schoolchildren are studying English

Some U.S. citizens say, "Yeah, our language is important. Good for them!" I don't disagree but the problem is the learning transaction is only one-way. Few of us are learning Chinese. They have a greater ability to understand us than we have of understanding them - and there are 4x's more Chinese than U.S. citizens.

"South Korean parents ... demand that their children begin English instruction in the 1st grade, rather than the 2nd grade."

Again, no argument from me, yet South Korea is one of the most important economies in all of East Asia and Southeast outside of China. Having competent people who can play well with others, and raising competent people who can play nice can has all sorts of benefits, from the individual to our general U.S. social fabric.

"Not training our kids to be able to work and live in an international environment is like leaving them illiterate."

Raising a global child is about helping your kids be successful. Traits developed in making them a "global child" also make them into good people. There is no downside. Essentially, parents of "global children" are helping their children be "globally literate" and "globally functional." Our geography impairs us, creating a sense of aloofness, a false sense of security, and an inflated ego, that we are better than we really are.

We can see evidence of our national ego today. Our foreign policy certainly exemplifies our national ego, e.g. "You either stand with us or against us," and our unilateral policies associated with Afghanistan, Iraq, and our demands for China to devalue its currency against the dollar. We can literally stand apart and command without having to face any immediate threat or retaliation, unlike South Korea, Taiwan, or Israel.

Some U.S. schools are making some progress. Last year, I wrote a brief post on a Delaware school introducing Chinese language classes ("Red Clay CSD Building Chinese language program".) I have not followed-up with the program, and one of the concerns voiced was how well the program would fare in light of the demands of state and federal curriculum standards and assessments. To wit, I respond with, to hell with those standards; those standards obviously not only do not set a very high bar, they do not address the future needs to students, the state of Delaware, or our country, in general.

At times, I often wonder why "algebra" has not been banned. Or, perhaps not banned, but legislation written, changing the name of the bane of all high school and some college students to a more Anglo-friendly term, like "Freedom Math," or "Patriot Math," or other nonsense. Our so-called "English" language is rife with foreign words and derivatives and I await the pronouncement from some heretofore anonymous group to announce they have written legislation removing all Arabic, Chinese, or African words from the American language lexicon. Yep, I'm cynical.

See, the another danger of being so physically remote from other cultures is the perceived threat Americans have from those different from us. Should our children learn Chinese, they could become stark raving mad atheist Communists. Or, even worse, should they learn Arabic, they might come home one day with a mullah beard, reciting the Qu'ran, and proclaim the house and all which falls under the roof as the "domain of Allah."

Recently, in Arizona, some people were upset over the term, "haboob." No, not because the second syllable references slang for human anatomy, but because the term is of Arabic origins, meaning "dust storm." No seems upset over "alcohol" or "banana," though.

For further reading: "Haboobs cause storm of complaints" (July 12, 2011; Time)

Antagonism towards diversity has only negative consequences. At an individual level, antagonism to diversity inspires fear, trepidation, bigotry, and bias. We succumb to stereotypes and myths are are no better off today than yesterday, and the future won't be much different. Adults who ascribed to these traits pass them along to their kids. A mother in one of my classes related how her son was called names and berated for looking Arab during local high school games. Even more disgusting, the coaching staff of the opposing team not only did nothing to stop the abuse but assistant coaches were right there with the players shouting the same insults. The family was not Arab but Greek, but dark-skinned. The family has since moved from the area.

Old news, from last year, a Texas school tried to institute Arabic language classes. Community outcry halted progress on implementing the language program.

For further reading: "Teaching Arabic Is No Cause For Fear" (February 2011, CNN)

As long as all domestic policy is viewed through the lens of 9/11, we will never be as free, as creative, or as adaptable as we need to be in order to ensure our long-term economic and social success. Yes, 9/11 was tragic, yet the more insular we become, the more fears of diversity we harbor and pass along to our kids, the weaker our society becomes. Our leaders, from local school boards, governors, to National figures, have allowed our society to be compromised and undermined and weakened by the actions of 19+ men. Even Europe has overcome aversion to Germans, the Wehrmacht, and the Nazis, for the most part.

So, to you parents coaching yourselves to be "Global Parents" so your kids will be "global kids," you tuck the Fate of the World in every night. You should be proud of that.