Friday, February 27, 2004
Making the Nation Safer: The Role of Science and Technology in Countering Terrorism: This is the National Academy / National Research Council report, in essence a book with many detailed chapters - reminiscent of old OTA reports - available as a PDF file.
Friday, February 06, 2004
SECURITY Through Science announcement of NATO support for studies in this area
BBC - Horizon - The Dark Secret of Hendrik Sch� Good story of scientific fraud and nanotechnology - despite being begun and ended by grey goo scaremongeing and a lot of unfounded waffle about Moore's Law. Transcript of a HORIZON programme:
"...after four months the investigation revealed the truth. The investigation established that Schön had behaved recklessly and that he had deliberately fabricated some data. When the committee cross-examined his colleagues they found that no one had actually witnessed any of his most significant results. When they asked to see the raw data that allowed him to come to his remarkable conclusion they discovered that he had deleted virtually all of it, apparently because his computer lacked sufficient memory. Suddenly the reason why he had seemed so far in advance of anyone else began to make sense."
"... here was this person that was the golden boy of condensed matter physics and it appeared that a large fraction of what he’d done looked fraudulent. ... The news hit Nature like a thunderbolt."
"...after four months the investigation revealed the truth. The investigation established that Schön had behaved recklessly and that he had deliberately fabricated some data. When the committee cross-examined his colleagues they found that no one had actually witnessed any of his most significant results. When they asked to see the raw data that allowed him to come to his remarkable conclusion they discovered that he had deleted virtually all of it, apparently because his computer lacked sufficient memory. Suddenly the reason why he had seemed so far in advance of anyone else began to make sense."
"... here was this person that was the golden boy of condensed matter physics and it appeared that a large fraction of what he’d done looked fraudulent. ... The news hit Nature like a thunderbolt."
Thursday, February 05, 2004
More U.S. Cattle Likely To Have Mad Cow Disease (washingtonpost.com)b This is an interesting story, not least because of the treatment of expert opinion by the industry involved; but also as a fine case iof transscience (Weinberg's term).
From the newspaper article: "The expert panel made recommendations that it said were necessary to keep the disease from spreading ... for instance, that the government must ban the feeding of beef brains and central nervous system tissue to pigs, poultry and pets.... because of the risk that infected tissue might inadvertently make its way into the feed given to cattle. Industry officials said it would cost $700 million a year to meet that standard.
The panel also recommended significantly expanding the testing for animals showing any signs of mad cow disease. While the USDA now tests a sample of animals that have died on a farm, cannot stand up or show signs of neurological disease, the panel said that all animals in those categories -- which beef industry officials say could number as many as 195,000 a year -- should be tested.
'Now that it has been established that the [mad cow] agent is circulating in North America, the surveillance program in the USA must be significantly extended in order to measure the magnitude of the problem....'
The panel consists of the same five experts -- three Europeans, one American and a New Zealander -- who analyzed Canada's response to its discovery of an infected cow last May. The group's work has been embraced by the Canadian government as it tries to convince other nations that it is taking the steps necessary to keep mad cow disease from becoming a major public health problem.
The beef industry reaction to the panel's conclusions was far more critical: "Clearly, some members of the panel do not have a full understanding of the systems we have in place in the U.S.," said Gary Weber, the beef association's executive director of regulatory affairs. "Many of the panel's recommendations are based on the European model and overlook scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates the long-standing firewalls in place in our country have been effective."
The group's vice president, Chandler Keys, took strong exception to panel chairman Kihm's remark, quoted by Reuters, that the United States "could have a case a month" of mad cow disease... based ... on "logical thinking" and the experience of such nations as Denmark and Italy. "That was a pretty irresponsible remark from the scientist," Keys said."
(Remember the unpopular alarmist scientists in the UK?)
From the newspaper article: "The expert panel made recommendations that it said were necessary to keep the disease from spreading ... for instance, that the government must ban the feeding of beef brains and central nervous system tissue to pigs, poultry and pets.... because of the risk that infected tissue might inadvertently make its way into the feed given to cattle. Industry officials said it would cost $700 million a year to meet that standard.
The panel also recommended significantly expanding the testing for animals showing any signs of mad cow disease. While the USDA now tests a sample of animals that have died on a farm, cannot stand up or show signs of neurological disease, the panel said that all animals in those categories -- which beef industry officials say could number as many as 195,000 a year -- should be tested.
'Now that it has been established that the [mad cow] agent is circulating in North America, the surveillance program in the USA must be significantly extended in order to measure the magnitude of the problem....'
The panel consists of the same five experts -- three Europeans, one American and a New Zealander -- who analyzed Canada's response to its discovery of an infected cow last May. The group's work has been embraced by the Canadian government as it tries to convince other nations that it is taking the steps necessary to keep mad cow disease from becoming a major public health problem.
The beef industry reaction to the panel's conclusions was far more critical: "Clearly, some members of the panel do not have a full understanding of the systems we have in place in the U.S.," said Gary Weber, the beef association's executive director of regulatory affairs. "Many of the panel's recommendations are based on the European model and overlook scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates the long-standing firewalls in place in our country have been effective."
The group's vice president, Chandler Keys, took strong exception to panel chairman Kihm's remark, quoted by Reuters, that the United States "could have a case a month" of mad cow disease... based ... on "logical thinking" and the experience of such nations as Denmark and Italy. "That was a pretty irresponsible remark from the scientist," Keys said."
(Remember the unpopular alarmist scientists in the UK?)
Governmentontheweb - Access Our Papers
website with links to a lot of good material on emerging issues of e-government and theoretical and empirical approaces (mainly political science).
Papers include the following, based on on research carried out for the National Audit Office (NAO) or the UK ESRC Future Governance Programme.
* Incentivization of e-government (New Posting - 11/12/03)
* E-government and Policy Innovation in Seven Liberal Democracies
* Leaders and Followers: E-government, Policy Innovation and Policy Transfer in the European Union
* Cultural Barriers to E-Government
* Policy Learning and Public Sector Information Technology
* The Cyber Party
* The Advent of Digital Government: Public Bureaucracy and the State in the Internet Age
* The Advent of a Digital State and Government-Business Relations
website with links to a lot of good material on emerging issues of e-government and theoretical and empirical approaces (mainly political science).
Papers include the following, based on on research carried out for the National Audit Office (NAO) or the UK ESRC Future Governance Programme.
* Incentivization of e-government (New Posting - 11/12/03)
* E-government and Policy Innovation in Seven Liberal Democracies
* Leaders and Followers: E-government, Policy Innovation and Policy Transfer in the European Union
* Cultural Barriers to E-Government
* Policy Learning and Public Sector Information Technology
* The Cyber Party
* The Advent of Digital Government: Public Bureaucracy and the State in the Internet Age
* The Advent of a Digital State and Government-Business Relations
