Mountain Views News          Saturday, May 15, 2010

8

The World Around Us

 Mountain Views News Saturday, May 15, 2010


Setting Sail for the Stars

THE SPRING WINDS gusting across the Southland today almost 
had me grumbling about wind chill and such—but instead, the 
wind-pressure at my back suddenly brought a flood of pleasant 
recollections of my sail-skating days as a college student.

The University of Wisconsin at Madison, where I was attending the 
fall-winter term, is built on the shore of beautiful Lake Mendota—
which froze deeply and as smooth as glass that year. Having 
discovered the pleasure of going skating on the lake at night after 
studying, I built myself a makeshift sail from two broomsticks and 
a bedsheet, and soon I had learned how to not only sail downwind 
on my skates but also to tack crosswind and into the wind like a 
seasoned sailor, reaching crosswind speeds of at least 20 mph in a 
10-mph breeze and going miles out to explore the lake under the 
stars. It gave me an early taste for adventure, and a love for the 
wind.

It’s a long way from my broomstick-and-bedsheet sail to a solar-
sail-propelled space mission, but the principle is more or less the 
same—using a natural power source to push against a sail, instead 
of burning fossil fuel. In the case of a spacecraft soon to be launched 
by the Japanese Space Agency JAXA, that power source—sunlight—
will be used both for propulsion and electric power.

A solar sail uses sunlight for propulsion by the pressure of photons 
against a large plastic membrane; while a solar “power” sail gets 
electricity from thin film solar cells on the membrane in addition 
to acceleration by solar radiation. What’s more, if the craft’s ion-
propulsion engines are driven by such solar cells, they become 
“hybrid” engines that combine with photon acceleration to realize 
fuel-effective and flexible missions.

The project name for this mission is IKAROS (Interplanetary 
Kite-craft Accelerated by Radiation Of the Sun). The craft will be 
launched together with Japan’s Venus Climate Orbiter, AKATSUKI 
(PLANET-C), using their H-IIA launch vehicle. This will 
be the world’s first solar-powered sail craft employing 
both photon propulsion and thin-film solar-power 
generation during its interplanetary cruise.

MEANWHILE, CLOSER TO HOME, The Pasadena-
based Planetary Society is preparing to launch its own 
solar sail mission. Its LightSail-1 spacecraft, scheduled 
for launch near the end of this year, will be propelled 
(after it is placed in orbit by a conventional launch 
vehicle) only by photon pressure from sunlight, using a 
kite-shaped sail, 32 square meters in size. Although the 
acceleration would be low, it would be constant and over 
time the craft would reach high speeds. The estimated 
cost of LightSail-1 is $1.8 million, being raised from 
private sources. It is being built in San Luis Obispo by 
Stellar Exploration Inc.

ULTIMATELY, SETTING SAIL BY PHOTON 
PROPULSION may be the way in which we humans first 
reach the stars. Accelerating constantly and spiraling 
gradually outward from the Sun (and perhaps assisted by 
the push of a powerful Earth-based laser beam), a solar-
sail craft might eventually reach speeds that could carry 
it—perhaps in a single lifetime—the 26 trillion miles to 
our nearest star, Alpha Centauri.

For an artist’s conception of the Japanese IKAROS hybrid 
solar-powered craft in space, see: http://www.jspec.jaxa.
jp/e/activity/images/ikaros/pic_10_l.jpg

You can contact Bob Eklund at: b.eklund@MtnViewsNews.
com.

 
This has not been a good week 
for the issue of user data privacy, to 
say the least. An Indian outsourcing 
firm has announced the formation 
of a data handling center. The 
proposed center is to be operated 
and staffed by the inmates of local 
prison. While using prison labor to 
reduce operating costs is hardly a 
new business practice, their use for 
handling sensitive data is a matter 
for concern. 

 The latest upgrade to the popular 
e-Reader 
Kindle 
contains 
a software 
routine that 
tracks users’ 
highlighted 
passages and 
sends the 
information 
to Amazon, 
which then uses this information to 
customize offerings to its readers. 
Users have also reported receiving 
unsolicited offers that often 
mirror their highlighted passages 
from other third-party vendors, 
with which they have no direct 
relationship.

 In addition to all the bad press 
social networking giant Facebook 
has been receiving regarding the 
issue of user data privacy comes the 
revelation of a series of IM’s between 
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg 
and a college friend, where 
Zuckerberg brags about having 
private user data for sale if his friend 
ever needed it. In the exchange, 
he refers to the trusting users of 
the brand-new Facebook service 
as “dumb-f**ks”. Judging by all the 
privacy ups and down Facebook 
users are currently dealing with, it 
may be that Zuckerberg’s attitude 
(and that of those working for him) 
regarding private user data may not 
have changed by much.

 Various governmental agencies 
have begun making noises about the 
need for reform in the area of user 
data privacy protections, but with 
the current state of affairs it doesn’t 
seem likely that users of various 
online services should expect any 
significant changes, any time soon. 
The issue 
of privacy reform for user data 
is starting to get at least passing 
mention in the press, and Facebook 
itself has taken steps to make sure 
that its side of the story is being heard 
by hiring a former FTC chairman to 
represent its interests on the Hill. 
This has also meant significant 
investment by the social networking 
giant in lobbying efforts to bolster 
their presence in D.C. While none 
of these actions are out of the 
ordinary for a business concern that 
has had the good fortune to grow 
in size and presence sufficiently to 
afford such high-powered measures, 
it does lead one to wonder what 
– in light of Zuckerberg’s attitude 
- are the genuine views of other 
companies out there that provide 
online services? And what are 
their feelings toward the user data 
they’ve been entrusted with so far? 
On an individual level, the bits of 
information we have trustingly 
provided may not seem like much 
and, except in the cases of identity 
theft and abuse, the intentional or 
unintentional sharing of this data is 
rarely noticed by end users. 

 Past history indicates that these 
companies feel that they have no 
legal or moral obligation to inform 
end users when something that 
compromises the privacy of their 
data has happened. This attitude and 
custom speaks volumes about what 
current providers of online services 
truly believe about the nature of 
the collective private data of its 
customers: It’s theirs to do with as 
they please. So, User Beware. Once 
your info is “out there”, it’s available 
to anyone for their use (il)legal use. 


Guess Who Doesn’t Care 
About Your Privacy?


Dates to Remember:

 May 24, 2010 Last day to register to vote June 1, 2010 Last day to apply for a vote-by-mail ballot by mail June 8, 2010 Election Day 

PROP 13 - LIMITS ON PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. SEISMIC RETROFITTING OF EXISTING BUILDINGS.

A YES vote on this measure means: Earthquake safety improvements made to unreinforced masonry (such as brick) buildings would not result in higher 
property taxes until the building is sold.

A NO vote on this measure means: Earthquake safety improvements made to unreinforced masonry buildings would continue to be excluded from property 
taxes but for only up to 15 years.

ARGUMENT FOR: Proposition 13 makes a necessary change to our state’s constitution in order to eliminate a dangerous disincentive for property owners to 
upgrade un-reinforced masonry structures in order to improve earthquake safety. This proposition promotes fairness by eliminating the unequal treatment of 
different types of property which undergo seismic safety improvements.

ARGUMENT AGAINST: No argument against Proposition 13 was submitted.

PROP 14 ELECTIONS. INCREASES RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PRIMARY ELECTIONS.

 Changes the primary election process for congressional, statewide, and legislative races. Allows all voters to choose any candidate regardless of the candidate’s or voter’s political party preference. 
Ensures that the two candidates receiving the greatest number of votes will appear on the general election ballot regardless of party preference. Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state and local 
government costs to administer elections.

 A YES vote on this measure means: All voters would receive the same primary election ballot for most state and federal offices. Only the two candidates with the most votes—regardless of political 
party identification—would advance to the general election ballot.

 A NO vote on this measure means: Voters would continue to receive primary election ballots based on their political party. The candidate with the most votes from each political party would continue 
to advance to the general election ballot.

ARGUMENT FOR: 

A YES vote means YOU will be able to vote for any candidate you wish for state and congressional offices, regardless of political party preference. Experts say non-partisan measures like Proposition 14 
will result in elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington who are LESS PARTISAN and MORE PRACTICAL.

ARGUMENT AGAINST: 

The politicians behind Proposition 14 included a deceptive provision, that won’t make primaries “Open” at all. Candidates will no longer be required to list their party affiliation on the ballot. They 
want to look like “independents” while they actually remain in their political party. Business as usual disguised as “reform.

PROP 15 CALIFORNIA FAIR ELECTIONS ACT.

Repeals ban on public funding of political campaigns. Creates a voluntary system for candidates for Secretary of State to qualify for a public campaign grant if they agree to limitations on spending 
and private contributions. Each candidate demonstrating enough public support would receive same amount. Participating candidates would be prohibited from raising or spending money beyond 
the grant. There would be strict enforcement and accountability. Funded by voluntary contributions and a biennial fee on lobbyists, lobbying firms, and lobbyist employers. Fiscal Impact: Increased 
revenues (mostly from charges related to lobbyists) totaling over $6 million every four years. These funds would be spent on public financing for campaigns of Secretary of State candidates for the 2014 
and 2018 elections.

A YES vote on this measure means: The state ban on public funding for political campaigns for elected offices would be lifted. For the 2014 and 2018 elections, candidates for the office of Secretary of 
State could choose to receive public funds to pay for the costs of campaigns if they met certain requirements. Charges related to lobbyists would be increased to pay for these costs.

A NO vote on this measure means: The state ban on public funding for political campaigns for elected offices would continue. Candidates for the office of Secretary of State would continue to pay for 
their campaigns with private funds subject to current rules. Existing charges related to lobbyists would not change.

ARGUMENT FOR: YES on 15: The amount of money in politics is outrageous and corrupts the system. The League of Women Voters of California says Prop. 15 will get politicians out of the 
fundraising game so they will focus on California’s priorities. Elections should be won, not bought by special interests. 

www.YesOnProp15.org

ARGUMENT AGAINST: Proposition 15 is a trick. It raises taxes with no accountability to provide millions in taxpayer money to politicians to fund their negative campaigns AND ALSO ALLOWS 
politicians to continue to raise money from special interest groups. Prop. 15 is not real campaign reform. Please vote NO on Prop. 15.

PROPOSITION 16 IMPOSES NEW TWO-THIRDS VOTER APPROVAL REQUIREMENT FOR LOCAL PUBLIC ELECTRICITY PROVIDERS.

Requires two-thirds voter approval before local governments provide electricity service to new customers or establish a community choice electricity program using public funds or bonds. Fiscal 
Impact: Unknown net impact on state and local government costs and revenues—unlikely to be significant in the short run—due to the measure’s uncertain effects on public electricity providers and 
on electricity rates.

A YES vote on this measure means: Local governments would generally be required to receive two-thirds voter approval before they could start up electricity services or expand electricity service into a 
new territory. A NO vote on this measure means: Local governments generally could continue to implement proposals involving the start-up or expansion of electricity service either through approval 
by a majority of voters or actions by governing boards.

ARGUMENTS FOR: Proposition 16 is the Taxpayers Right to Vote Act. It requires two thirds voter approval before local governments can spend or borrow public money to enter the retail electricity 
business. In tough economic time like these, taxpayers should have the final say in how government spends our money.

ARGUMENT AGAINST: Proposition 16 does two things: First, it drastically limits your choices on who provides you with electricity. Second, it lets the for-profit utilities in California raise your 
electricity rates again and again, by protecting their monopoly and eliminating competition. For more choice and lower electric bills, NO on Proposition 16.

PROP 17 ALLOWS AUTO INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BASE THEIR PRICES IN PART ON A DRIVER’S HISTORY OF INSURANCE COVERAGE. 

Permits companies to reduce or increase cost of insurance depending on whether driver has a history of continuous insurance coverage. Fiscal Impact: Probably no significant fiscal effect on state 
insurance premium tax revenues.

A YES vote on this measure means: Insurance companies could offer new customers a discount on their automobile insurance premiums based on the length of time the customer had maintained 
bodily injury liability coverage with another insurer. A NO vote on this measure means: Insurers could provide discounts to their long-term automobile insurance customers, but would continue to be 
prohibited from providing such discounts to new customers switching from other insurers.

ARGUMENT FOR: Yes on 17 can save insured drivers up to $250 by eliminating a surcharge for changing insurance companies. 17 allows insured drivers to take continuous coverage discounts with 
them if they change insurers, just like good driver discounts. A flaw in California law prevents this. 17 saves consumers money.

www.YesProp17.org

ARGUMENT AGAINST: Mercury Insurance is spending millions on Proposition 17 so auto insurance companies can RAISE PREMIUMS AS MUCH AS $1,000 on good drivers. It reverses a voter-
approved law and allows new insurance surcharges that will harm middle-class families and lead to more uninsured motorists. Consumer advocates OPPOSE Prop. 17.

CALIFORNIA JUNE PRIMARY BALLOT PROPOSITIONS

Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285 Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com