VMware Fusion connect to guest from host only

In VMware (I use VMware Fusion), sometimes you just want to connect from host (MacOS in my base) to your guest OS.
It's kind of funny how few instructions you can find on how to do it.

First of all, it seems there is no specific "guest" hostname that VMware created your guest automatically.  Something like a "client" hostname Citrix provide its tenants.

Second, it was kind of surprisingly easy if you configure your guest to Host-only (or even NAT) model.  There would be relatively easy!!!

If your guest is configured to connect to Host-only network, then you should be able to access it at 192.168.133.128 - 192.168.133.254 range, depending on the sequence of your VM starts (i.e. your first VM started with Host-only network would have IP address 192.168.133.128)

Your guest OS will be relatively safe in this case, because there would be no route to the outside world, as long as your host is free of malware, etc.

Similarly, your host can also connect to your guest that is configured as NAT.  The address of that would be in the 172.16.210.128 - 172.16.210.254 range, again depending on the sequence the guests started.

Here, you might have a little bit risk as the NAT means your guest would be able to see outside world, and you might also get exposed somewhat.

BUT, you may ask, "I want to use Bridge model" for my guest OS, how can I access my guest from my host network?

Well, it turns out easier than most post I can find online (you will need to shutdown your VM for the following):
You just need to create a new network adaptor for your VM, add a new device, "Network Adapter" in the settings for this VM, it will then add "Network Adapter 2" into your VM settings.  Open this new one from your settings page, and check the "Connect Network Adapter" (it should be checked by default actually), and select "Private to my Mac" in the "This network adapter is configured to use:" list.
Start your VM guest, and you should see your guest has 2 network NIC now, and the second one is a host-only connection.  And now you can access your guest network from host using 192.168.133.128 address.

(Above was tested on VMware Fusion 10, it should work on other versions of VMware Fusion, and other VMware host should have similar settings as well, but I can't guarantee that).

ZMQ error Installing Jupyter on nVidia Jetson XT2

When you try to install jupyter with

pip install jupyter
 on Jetson XT2, you run into an error saying zmq build failed (see below for logs...

This is because libzmq is not installled on Jetson by default.  To make it work, you just need to install libzmq :

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install libzmq3-dev

That's it, do pip install jupyter afterwards, you will have jupyter running on your Jetson XT2 in no time. 

************************************************

Configure: Autodetecting ZMQ settings...
Custom ZMQ dir:
creating build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/a.out
build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o: In function `main':
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:2: undefined reference to `timer_create'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -Izmq/utils -Izmq/backend/cython -Izmq/devices -c build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o -lzmq -lrt -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers
ZMQ version detected: 2.2.0

Bad libzmq version: Detected ZMQ version: 2.2.0, but require ZMQ >= 3.2
Explicitly allow legacy zmq by specifying `--zmq=/zmq/prefix`

Failed with default libzmq, trying again with /usr/local
{'libraries': ['zmq'], 'include_dirs': ['/usr/local/include'], 'runtime_library_dirs': ['/usr/local/lib'], 'library_dirs': ['/usr/local/lib'], 'extra_link_args': []}
************************************************
Configure: Autodetecting ZMQ settings...
Custom ZMQ dir: /usr/local
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.o
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
Assembler messages:
Fatal error: can't create build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.o: No such file or directory
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -Izmq/utils -Izmq/backend/cython -Izmq/devices -c build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o -L/usr/local/lib -Wl,--enable-new-dtags,-R/usr/local/lib -lzmq -lrt -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers
ZMQ version detected: 2.2.0

Bad libzmq version: Detected ZMQ version: 2.2.0, but require ZMQ >= 3.2
ZMQ_PREFIX=/usr/local
Explicitly allow legacy zmq by specifying `--zmq=/zmq/prefix`

************************************************
Warning: Couldn't find an acceptable libzmq on the system.

If you expected pyzmq to link against an installed libzmq, please check to make sure:

* You have a C compiler installed
* A development version of Python is installed (including headers)
* A development version of ZMQ >= 3.2 is installed (including headers)
* If ZMQ is not in a default location, supply the argument --zmq=
* If you did recently install ZMQ to a default location,
try rebuilding the ld cache with `sudo ldconfig`
or specify zmq's location with `--zmq=/usr/local`

You can skip all this detection/waiting nonsense if you know
you want pyzmq to bundle libzmq as an extension by passing:

`--zmq=bundled` ************************************************
Configure: Autodetecting ZMQ settings...
Custom ZMQ dir:
creating build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/a.out
build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.o: In function `main':
/tmp/timer_createo4b3hvp9.c:2: undefined reference to `timer_create'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -Izmq/utils -Izmq/backend/cython -Izmq/devices -c build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o -lzmq -lrt -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers
ZMQ version detected: 2.2.0

Bad libzmq version: Detected ZMQ version: 2.2.0, but require ZMQ >= 3.2
Explicitly allow legacy zmq by specifying `--zmq=/zmq/prefix`

Failed with default libzmq, trying again with /usr/local
{'libraries': ['zmq'], 'include_dirs': ['/usr/local/include'], 'runtime_library_dirs': ['/usr/local/lib'], 'library_dirs': ['/usr/local/lib'], 'extra_link_args': []}
************************************************
Configure: Autodetecting ZMQ settings...
Custom ZMQ dir: /usr/local
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.o
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
Assembler messages:
Fatal error: can't create build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/tmp/timer_create6ro885h3.o: No such file or directory
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -I/usr/local/include -Izmq/utils -Izmq/backend/cython -Izmq/devices -c build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers.o -L/usr/local/lib -Wl,--enable-new-dtags,-R/usr/local/lib -lzmq -lrt -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/scratch/vers
ZMQ version detected: 2.2.0

Bad libzmq version: Detected ZMQ version: 2.2.0, but require ZMQ >= 3.2
ZMQ_PREFIX=/usr/local
Explicitly allow legacy zmq by specifying `--zmq=/zmq/prefix`

************************************************
Warning: Couldn't find an acceptable libzmq on the system.

If you expected pyzmq to link against an installed libzmq, please check to make sure:

* You have a C compiler installed
* A development version of Python is installed (including headers)
* A development version of ZMQ >= 3.2 is installed (including headers)
* If ZMQ is not in a default location, supply the argument --zmq=
* If you did recently install ZMQ to a default location,
try rebuilding the ld cache with `sudo ldconfig`
or specify zmq's location with `--zmq=/usr/local`

You can skip all this detection/waiting nonsense if you know
you want pyzmq to bundle libzmq as an extension by passing:

`--zmq=bundled`

I will now try to build libzmq as a Python extension
unless you interrupt me (^C) in the next 10 seconds...

1...
************************************************
Using bundled libzmq
already have bundled/zeromq
already have platform.hpp
************************************************
checking for timer_create
creating build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/a.out
build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o: In function `main':
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:2: undefined reference to `timer_create'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
no timer_create, linking librt
************************************************
Fatal: Cython-generated file 'zmq/backend/cython/_device.c' not found.
Cython >= 0.20 is required to compile pyzmq from a development branch.
Please install Cython or download a release package of pyzmq.


----------------------------------------
Command "/usr/bin/python3 -u -c "import setuptools, tokenize;__file__='/tmp/pip-build-jx8cxtk1/pyzmq/setup.py';exec(compile(getattr(tokenize, 'open', open)(__file__).read().replace('\r\n', '\n'), __file__, 'exec'))" install --record /tmp/pip-9xas1kip-record/install-record.txt --single-version-externally-managed --compile --user --prefix=" failed with error code 1 in /tmp/pip-build-jx8cxtk1/pyzmq/
You are using pip version 8.1.1, however version 18.0 is available.
You should consider upgrading via the 'pip install --upgrade pip' command.

I will now try to build libzmq as a Python extension
unless you interrupt me (^C) in the next 10 seconds...

1...
************************************************
Using bundled libzmq
already have bundled/zeromq
already have platform.hpp
************************************************
checking for timer_create
creating build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O2 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC -c /tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:1:1: warning: return type defaults to ‘int’ [-Wimplicit-int]
main (int argc, char **argv) {
^
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c: In function ‘main’:
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:2:5: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘timer_create’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
timer_create();
^
aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -pthread build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o -o build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/a.out
build/temp.linux-aarch64-3.5/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.o: In function `main':
/tmp/timer_createvil73p56.c:2: undefined reference to `timer_create'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
no timer_create, linking librt
************************************************
Fatal: Cython-generated file 'zmq/backend/cython/_device.c' not found.
Cython >= 0.20 is required to compile pyzmq from a development branch.
Please install Cython or download a release package of pyzmq.


----------------------------------------
Command "/usr/bin/python3 -u -c "import setuptools, tokenize;__file__='/tmp/pip-build-jx8cxtk1/pyzmq/setup.py';exec(compile(getattr(tokenize, 'open', open)(__file__).read().replace('\r\n', '\n'), __file__, 'exec'))" install --record /tmp/pip-9xas1kip-record/install-record.txt --single-version-externally-managed --compile --user --prefix=" failed with error code 1 in /tmp/pip-build-jx8cxtk1/pyzmq/
You are using pip version 8.1.1, however version 18.0 is available.
You should consider upgrading via the 'pip install --upgrade pip' command.

MacOS R Studio via AnaConda installing nloptr

If you installed AnaConda and used RStudio coming with it, You might have run into issues install.packages("car")
It would tell you Configuration errors trying to compile nloptr package telling you can't compile C++ code and ask you to try --host option.

Basically the failure is because car depends on nloptr package and newest nloptr package is only distribute as source (Mac binary is several years behind). Yet you can't compile C++ code from within R Studio (actually R) that was launched from Conda nevigator.

There is no solutions posted online although quite a few people ran into this issue.
The solution is to install nloptr using conda command (sudo)

Like:
conda install -c conda-forge r-nloptr 

You may need to sudo on MacOS (or Linux)

This command actually works on MacOS, Linux and windows.

Get pip of python install to work behind proxy

OK, here is a simple task, use pip to install packages...
Other than if you are behind a proxy that uses https.

What happens is even though you issue the proper command line like below:
# pip install virtualenv --proxy http://user:pass@proxy:8080
you still get an error message like this:
.....
CertificateError: hostname 'proxy' doesn't match either of 'www.python.org', 'docs.python.org', 'bugs.python.org'.....

You tried to use HTTP_PROXY environment variable as well, still this Cert error??!!

Hmmmm.... what is going on?

It is because the ssl.py actually checks the hostname of the certificate subjectAltName, which would be python.org hostnames.  However, the 'hostname' it connected to is actually your proxy server, not the python servers.

OK, here is what you need to do - update the /usr/lib64/python2.7/ssl.py file
# vi /usr/lib64/pyton2.7/ssl.py

look for "if len(dnsnames) > 1:"

immediately before this line, you should insert below block:
value = 'proxy'
if _dnsname_match(value, hostname):
    return
dnsnames.append(value)

This is tested on python 2.7 behind a firewall.

Not all proxy servers will cause this problem, but if it does, here is the quick fix.

Common Sense solution to Monty Hall question - a "hotly debated" Math (Probability) topic

Descret statistics and experiment design.

Monty Hall problem keeps popping back up recently, most of them with a catchy headline “even geniuses/ Ph.D. got it wrong”.

Well since it was originated from one of the Berkeley profs, where I study now.   I might jump in to support the intellectual exercise. 

Some people made their names by sounding as if she is smarter than the smartest Mathematicians by claiming "they were all wrong" (i.e. here: The Time Everyone “Corrected” the World's Smartest Woman and here http://marilynvossavant.com/game-show-problem/)

As much as a catchy title, the real math is much more interesting... The truth is to claim to be "the" smartest, it needs a lot of assumptions.
Here is why:  (according to Wikipedia) 

"The behavior of the host is key to the 2/3 solution. Ambiguities in the "Parade" version do not explicitly define the protocol of the host. However, Marilyn vos Savant's solution (vos Savant 1990a) printed alongside Whitaker's question implies "

So she implied something in her solution that was not explicitly mentioned in the text.  While those implied assumptions are given support, her answer would be correct.  However, it is also fair for people to argue, if those assumptions does not hold, other answers might be correct.  

Ok, according to Wikipedia, Marilyn later corrected (clarified) her question in a followup post.  However, that also means "most people" who disagreed with her answer, weren't wrong, they were merely given a vague question that only got clarified after they had provided their solutions.  Her "implied" original posted question which is still available to see on her website: 

Suppose you’re on a game show, and you’re given the choice of three doors. Behind one door is a car, behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say #1, and the host, who knows what’s behind the doors, opens another door, say #3, which has a goat. He says to you, "Do you want to pick door #2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice of doors?

Craig F. Whitaker
Columbia, Maryland

For this particular question text, take it literally without assuming information out of the text, the answer should be "I don't know" like most Mathematicians PhD argued.  (see host behavior section of the Wikipedia page)

But, Marilyn's solution would be correct if she spells out "The HOST will NEVER open a door with the car"!!! 

(in other words, there WAS NO chance that the door the host opens first would be the car.  This is the key, you did NOT lose a 1/3 chance because the HOST will never give it to you, which means this had not been a 1 chose 3 game ever. 

What does that mean?  Why most Mathematicians got it "wrong"? 

Well, there is a thing called Mathematical model ... basically, that's the process of expressing a question in mathematical equations.  Here is what went wrong.  Marilyn built a mathematical model that "implied" the player KNOWS the host will always open a door with Goat.  The other PhDs, did not build this into their model. 

That's why Paul Erdös kept asking a "Common Sense" solution -- he was able to figure it out, but unfortunately for whatever reason Andrew Vazsonyi refused to understand it, instead he decided to stick with his decision tree approach which means he stuck with his mathematical model refusing to understand if his model correctly reflects the actual question. (https://web.archive.org/web/20140413131827/http://www.decisionsciences.org/DecisionLine/Vol30/30_1/vazs30_1.pdf)

So those "smarter than smartest" people have been implying information that was not explicitly provided in the original text, and they even built computer simulations with this assumption built in!

Since Paul Erdös' commonsense solution was lost by Andrew Vazsonyi, here is my common sense explanation and why I call Marilyn's posts intellectual scam. 

Here is the game: 

There are 3 doors, one of them has a car behind it.  you didn't know which one (BUT the host KNOWS), so you randomly chose one, you THINK you have 1/3 chance of winning the car (ACTUALLY YOU DON'T, keep reading!).

Now, the host will open a door, BUT he would *NEVER* open the door you chose!!!   (That's why you never had a 1/3 chance of winning, he will NOT doors randomly, instead, he is using his knowledge to play tricks on you, hence you now have a chance to play it back at him, but this was not explicitly spelled out to begin with).

There SHOULD be the following possibilities: 

1) you selected the door with the car: 1/3 of the chance (but since the HOST won't open it, even though you have 1/3 chance of choosing the door with the car, you DON"T have 1/3 chance winning)

Here, knowing you are not going to win right away (he will always pick a goat door), you LIMITED
the host's choice to 2 doors, (because he will NOT open door 1 whatsoever.)

So remember, if you were correct, the HOST has 2 options to play tricks on you.

2) you selected 1 of the 2 doors with goats, you have 1/3 of the chance to be here as well, however, because your choice was a goat, AND the host will NEVER open the door with the car, you LIMITED the host's choice to ONLY ONE.

Yes, remember, here, the host HAS to open the goat that you did not select!!!  He has NO other options, because he would NEVER open the car in the first round.

3) you selected the other door with goats, this is the same as 2), which is also 1/3 chance.

OK, you have 1/3 chance choosing a door with the car, and allow the host play tricks on you with 2 doors.
HOWEVER, you have 2/3 of the chance choosing a door with a goat, which FORCE the host to open the other goat door for you (remember, in this situation, the host actually has no options to play tricks other than open the OTHER door with goat).

Because in the cases (#2 & #3 you selected a goat door) you forced the host to open the other goat door, you know in this 2/3 of the chances, switching is a sure-fire of the car. 

It's a little bit complicated for #1, because if you already chose the door with the car if you switch, you would have lost the car, so in this 1/3 of the cases, you should stay. 
BUT since you don't know which you chose the first round, you really could not make the adjustment like we did here, BUT you know in 2/3 of the cases (where your chose was a goat), switch is a sure-fire of the car, but in the 1/3 of the cases (your selection was the car), staying would be better...   Since you don't know, you might just switch, because it has higher chance 2/3 .vs. 1/3

OK, the interesting thing comes here: 

According to this text, the host opens another door shows you a goat -- was that by chance?  The text didn't say!  It did mention the host is aware of where the car was, however, it did not specify that the host WILL NEVER open the door with the car!!! 
IF he opened the door to a goat by chance, then you just missed your 1/3 chance of winning, and were given a second chance. 

Then why Marilyn could prove she was correct? Well, she assumed the host will never open the car first round.   Under that assumption, her solution (switch) is the best solution for the math model she built  (here in the explanation of her solution she added "...and the host always opens a loser. ")

This is the key to her "scam", this "always" was not given in the original question (mathematically this means she is adding additional conditions and restrictions and changed the actual model).

OK, now here is the commonsense description of a properly construct the question that Marilyn solved: 

a) a car is randomly placed behind 1 of 3 doors, the other two hide a goat each;

b) you have zero information to begin with other than a);

c) you can choose one of the 3 doors as round 1;

d) the host will then have to open a door with a goat (he is forced by rule to do so, and he is not allowed to open a door with a car behind it, he cannot choose to skip opening a door either, and you KNOW this), this is round 2;

e) you are then asked "switch or stay", this is round 3.

And here is the Commonsense Solution: 

1) for round 1 above, do you agree you have 1/3 chance choosing right, 2/3 wrong? (of course, no one denies that, right?)

2) now it comes the interesting part, because of "host always open a loser", IF your first selection was a loser, then the host is FORCED to open the other loser (so by now both you and the host are holding on to a loser door, but there are only 2 losers, so the leftover must be the winner)  And it does not matter which loser you first selected, because by the rule, the host will have to eliminate the other loser anyways, so either one of the 2 losers you pick, the host had to remove the other loser and leave you with the winner. 

3) so now if I ask you "how likely was your first round choice wrong?" the answer, of course, is 2/3, but if you were wrong, then the only door left has not been chosen by you nor the host would be the car, so in this 2/3 of the cases, you should switch. 

4) because of the host has the option to eliminate one of two losers if you chose correctly during round 1, but this is only 1/3 of the chances which you should stay. 

You ask why? I still don't get it?  like mentioned before, the host was forced by rule to eliminate one of the 3 possibilities (the 1/3 chance where he opens the door showing the car), and if you know this rule, then here are the "possibilities"  (let's say you select door #1)

1) car is behind door #1, the host can freely open either #2 or #3, he is not helping you - you have 1/3 chance

2) car is behind door #2, the host is FORCED by rule to open #3, so if you switch, you get the #2, winner - you have 1/3 chance;

3) car is behind door #3, the host is FORCED by rule to open #2, so if you switch, you get #3, winner - you have 1/3 chance;

See, if you stay, your only hope is it turns out to be 1), 1/3 chance; however, if it was either 2) or 3) above, the host is forced to point you to the winner by open the other loser.   So you have two times of these 1/3 chance winning if you switch. 

This ONLY works like Marilyn solved IF the host is forced by rule to always open a loser, and you KNOW this rule.  Her mathematical model assumed this very specifically, so was her computer simulations -- because the computer model was programmed to "always open a loser", the simulation result supported her claim.

Why it's a scam?  Because the original question did NOT specify this "host has to open a door with goat" which in essence change the round 3 to a different question, and most Mathematicians and PhD actually used common sense to think about it like this (without assuming the player knows a rule forces host to always open a goat):  If you do NOT KNOW the host opened goat door was the rule of the game (instead, you think you were lucky that he did not open a door with car prove you were wrong at round 2), then there is no reason to switch in round 3"

 There have been comprehensive discussion of host behavior and why he opens a door with goat i.e. some variation says host only open a door to goat if he knew you were correct, otherwise he would skip round 2, and ask you if you want to switch without opening a door in which case switch is a sure losing strategy.  Of course Marilyn's math model was not built this way.

The missing "I" in IT (1)

Various articles have pointed out the diminished importance of CIO in organizations. It should not have been a surprise. 


Since the tech bubble in 2000, people should have foreseen this coming, why?
I call it the missing "I" in IT - or as I sometimes say - "IT is about I, before T", or in more avid language, the dog should wag the tail, not the other way around.

Apparently, most CIO focused too much on "T", instead of "I", hence deprecated their own value.  (The tail waged the dog)

OK, let's do a quick quiz, in less than 10 words, can you please explain what is "IT"?   "Computer and related stuff" is the most common answer, next ? "Computer and related stuff used in doing business" - at least business is mentioned.

However, both answers are in the T before I camp, not the I camp.  Computers and related stuff are the technology part of IT that "can be used" in processing information.  However, computers can be used to fry an egg in addition to process data.  (for those of you who are too young to know, when Intel first released its 80486 CPU, CPU fans were not around yet, and the CPU generated so much hit, there was a video posted people fried an egg on it.)

IT is about information.   One of the oldest and still widely used IT innovation is pen and paper.  Seriously, it was high tech at the time it was invented, and still very important tool we use this very day - although we don't call it high-tech anymore.

Now, what a low tech pen/paper has anything to do with our discussion of IT?  It was an invention to record information.  Think about it, what pens do to paper is not to make the paper more valuable in terms of weight, or any other physical measure --  instead, it is making marks that is now called information.

I always advocate people think about computers as pen/paper, because
IT should be about using technology to collect and process information.  
Not about how to sharpen your pencil more reliably.

If a CIO's focus is all "I make sure my computers run!" the CIO adds barely any value to a company.  Think about it, a company has all the pencils that are sharp all the time, but barely any one literate, when can these pencils do to help the business?  Unfortunately sharpening pencils that barely used happens all too often, and it depreciate the value of CIO in the business world.

Running the most reliable gadget that does little to enhance information processing within an Organization is a big trap for many CIOs who lost their prestiges status - they are just a glorified pencil sharpener.


IT should be about efficiency, not technology.   Management has always been about information, collect information regarding how things work, process information to understand how things work, analyze information to facilitate decision making, send out information to execute, present information to manage public relationship, etc.

Information is control - the better, more comprehensive information flows within an organization, the better control the leadership has.  Of course technology helps here.  That is actually the core value of IT - helps information flow with in an organization more effectively, efficiently with all the available technologies.

A classic example is inventory level.  Let's say a warehouse retailer, carries 15 days worth of inventory because it does inventory count weekly, it takes 3 days for the vendor to ship the products, and they need 5 days buffer - because they are not sure how fast each item sells.

Now with an inventory management solution, they should no longer need to count inventory every week - each in and out are traced, so they can save 6 days out of 7 days counting cycle.  So this inventory system can save 6 out of 15 days inventory for this retailer.  If this retailer is large, cutting 40% inventory can mean tens of millions.
Now, how about the POS system that tracks all items sold?  That will make 5 day buffer probably no more than 3 days (the order and shipping time).
A forecast system that forecast sales, and inventory level that enables pre-order of short of stock merchant will cut another 5 days off the cycle -- because no buffer needed any more, and orders can be placed early to accommodate shipping time.

So it can maintain 1 day inventory - now this is what now call JIT.  It was revolutionary at the time, and was enabled/enhanced by information technologies.  The companies invented this architecture knows what is IT.  How many CIOs have done anything remotely similar to such innovation?

Next we will talk about

• out sourcing

Cloud-enabled Storage - Hype and opportunities in Cloud computing

Cloud enabled storage - the yet-to-be-born technology that enables a customer to "own" their data yet use computing power on the "Cloud" will be the next big thing.

When SAN and NAS was first introduced, they were considered unnecessary innovation that did nothing but extract money from customer's pocket.   However, gradually, they took over the enterprise storage because of their ability to split data storage from data processing (the servers, etc).  This prove to be a key capability customers need.

Moving to the next big thing - cloud, how can someone capitalized on it?

One key trap for Cloud computing is the ownership and control of data.  For consumers, many are willing (knowingly or not) to trade their ownership of data (i.e. privacy) for free services.  So Googles, Yahoos are all offering "the future of computing - Cloud" with minimum resistance.

The story is different in enterprise computing though, given the number of incidents in the past while related to Cloud computing, privacy breach, data leak, there is enough doubt in the enterprise market that the threat of handling core business data to some one one the Cloud is far out weight the benefit -- after all, enterprise rely on data to survive and make money, unlike consumers who are just consuming convenient data services.

So, what is the next big thing?  Since we have separated data storage from data processing with SAN, NAS, etc, it is logical that we can keep data storage in house, and consume data process (utility computing was not new idea at all).

Of course the current protocol used to access data will not be sufficient for reverse hosting the data.  New protocols and ideas need to be invented.

One probably candidate is in-memory database - which hosts the database in memory, and only need burst network bandwidth to load data initially.

Another approach is let customer run database services in house, and run application services on the Cloud.

On the fly data compression will again be a topic - the data flow through the network pipe between data owner and data processor should be compressed, and encrypted.   We know database access are great candidate for data compression because of the sparsity of the data retrieved.


Splitting data storage and data processing is the key for the success of Cloud computing in Enterprise world.  This won't be easy, and will not be driven by companies like Google or Facebook which business model is to exploit customer data.  New start-ups, or EMC, NetApp may have a chance.

I will be working on an architecture framework that enables secure and efficient data flow between data storage and data processing.

Data Storage <=> Data Processor <=====> Data Access

The new architecture is beyond just data transferring, because the application architecture we are using today are designed based on proximity between data and processor, the remote-access architecture now-a-days are more or less a patch to the data-processor combined model.

The new model need to be built on the assumption that Data Storage can be far away from Data Processor.  This assumption is the ultimate enabler for Cloud in enterprise.

If IBM catches this departing train, the day that most people will be using a handful of super fast computers MAY come back.
Well, since the super computers will not store your data, so they are not as scary as last time they appeared.

Of course part of the architecture is to ensure the data processor can not reconstruct data it processes -- better yet -- the processor's partition that used to process one customers data should be isolated and inaccessible by anyone else.

Sounds like an interesting idea, isn't it?

Error during EHP1 install for SAP NetWeaver JAVA

You may see the following error during READ_PROFILE phase

 Error while reading properties from /usr/sap/C11/SYS/profile/DEFAULT.PFL. Variables [/J2EE/DBSystem/DBTypeFo
rSAP, /J2EE/DBSystem/DBName] not found. A possible reason can be that the start release is lower than 6.40 SPS09.

But you are sure you are running NetWeaver 7.0, after all you are installing Enhancement Pack. 

You tried to add variable "/J2EE/DBSystem/DBTypeForSAP, /J2EE/DBSystem/DBName" to the DEFAULT.PFL manually, but you still get the error. 

You tried to look up these 2 variables in SDN, help, or notes, but found nothing.  Don't blame yourself, there is nothing about these variables.  

You should add: 

j2ee/dbtype = ORA

j2ee/dbname = C11

sure if you use MS SQL, you should add "j2ee/dbtype = mss".

Yeah, as confusing as it is, j2ee/dbtype and j2ee/dbname are the real variables it's looking for.  The 2 shown in the error log, are just "superficial" names. 

Good luck EHP-ing.

 

What's really wrong about iPad from Apple?

It's not a big surprise that iPad disappoints.  While thousands of super smart people all trying to guess what handful of super smart people can bring up to the table -- the guess will always be better than the real -- the guessers simply outnumbers the producers.

OK, I'm no designer, Although I own iPhone, iPod touch, iPod, and 4 Macs, I don't think I'll by an iPad. 

Why? Not because the screen resolution (which I don't like) or the size.

But because iPad was designed totally wrong.  It was designed for Apple shareholders, not Apple customers. 

iPad was designed to avoid cannibalize notebook market.  It was trimmed down not because technical ability, but was because it needs to leave market for MacBooks.  Wrong thinking!!!

The iPad could be revolutionary due to it's interface.  It could be the real game changer for the PC industry.  It should not find itself in a limited squeezed niche.  It should be designed to do everything a notebook can do, but more (the multi-touch interface and new multi-touch apps). 

Why be afraid of cannibalizing notebook market?  Who's there to lose?  It's PC notebooks, they still command over 90% of the market share.  Why does one think Apple can only sell this 3rd category to existing Apple customers?   If this is a full function computer, but with multi-touch interface, there will be more PC users switch.  Now, people have perfect excuse not even give it a try - it's limited, it can't do much....

By "protecting" the notebook category, Apple is not only protecting it's MacBook business, but also protecting the other 90% of notebooks running Windows.  

I think Steve Jobs reached such a point that a line of business is more emotional than practical.  He started Apple selling computers, and he's having trouble letting the notebook business go.  Or Apple share holders want to see "increased income" rather than "replaced" income.  

They don't understand, if you have 90% market share to gain, you don't need to how to limit yourself to save others.  This time, Steve did not understand either.

iPad, could have change the PC industry if it really delivers a MacBook in the shell of 4 iPhones.  

It did not, and it disappointed the world.  I don't know if Steve have a chance to re-try. 

Putty: Server unexpectedly closed network connection

When you try to login to a Unix (HP-UX) system, you typed in correct password, but putty tells you "Server unexpectedly closed network connection".
If you configured public key authentication for this account, you see "Authenticating with public key ``key-name`` from agent, and then pop up window tells you "server unexpectedly closed network connection".

If you login as another users, you don't see any log any where (not in /var/adm/syslog/syslog.log, or any other logs).

CAUSE:
The reason of such error is the account is disabled.
If telnet is allowed in your Unix system, try telnet to it and type in the good password, you'll get error message
"Account is disabled - see Account Administrator".  But this is not shown if you login using SSH.

Since lots of place forbid telnet, you may not get a chance to try this.

Solution:
Reactivate the account in SAM, SMH (depends on your release).
After you re activate the user id, you should be able to login as usual in both SSH and telnet.

Are those Google ad quick money program SCAM?

If they looked too good to be true, then they probably are.

(Note this is not a review of any of these programs, nor a comparison of them)

All this is some common sense that I'd like to warn you, before you throw your money down the drain.

Sometimes, I just feel we, ordinary people are too humble and have too much respect to people we don't even know. Not to say this is always wrong, but from time to time, we may need to look at things in a different way.

We read something on the Internet, written by someone we have no idea who they are, and then sincerely wonder, "wow how smart that idea is, why I didn't know it, I can't wait to start that".

Yes, you are right, I'm talking about all those hypes - get hundreds of dollars per day, by typing, clicking - basic computer skills - nothing to sell, to market.

I generally believes in a rule - "there is no easy money".

I know, you may say there are people with brilliant ideas that made money out of the easiest thing they can do. You are right, except, those are really brave, brilliant attempts that resulted in extreme outcomes that you or me can't reproduce. I mean, you won't get rich by doing that again, because such ideas of making money off the easiest things, is only one time cash cow.

So I've been ignoring all those pop-ups, spam emails, etc. As I always know that easy money does not find me.

Some of those spams even bought adwords to promote those Google Money programs.

Some examples:

Google Tactics

Google Cash 3rd edition

Google Profit

Easiest Home Business Ever

Recently, I started to notice some people even begin to use really "smart" tricks trying to sell these make quick-money programs, or should I say SCAM people's money out of people's wallet?

What tricks can be so smart?

first, call others scam and then sells their idea.

This is smart, because by pointing out others as scam, readers will develop this bond with the writer - "this guy saved me from losing money to those cheaters!" and then read on, some reader may think "hey he pointed out similar things are scams, he must telling us the truth." Well, there is actually no direct link between telling a a truth and always telling truth, although people tend to think a liar is always a liar, actually a smart liar does not always lie, so that he can trick people at times he "really need to".

My warnings to the readers, don't believe someone only because he tells you a truth (in this case others are liar)

Second, calling their program "humble". Typically they say this program is not a "get rich over night" program, you will "only" get $5000 - $7000 per month, etc. This is smart too. Because name a huge number is less idea in 2 ways. a) most people tend to believe the higher the return, the less likely the chance, b) higher number tend to gain attention from scam fighters and been revealed as scam.

So name a more "realistic" number both increase their chance of get some one, but also reduce the risk of been caught by a lot of scam fighters.

However, if you put your mind in your brain and think it through, you will notice something fishy - they always link you to some similar site that ask you to pay 1.95$ with your credit card. You know "credit" is something caused a world wide crisis, so, you'd better be careful giving out our credit card info, because once yo give out your credit card info, whether or not they will only charge you "$1.95" is totally up to their "credit".

And, since the money Google pays out is not infinite, the less people sharing the pool, the more each one will get. So why on the earth someone will spend so much energy in "sharing" their success with others with a cost of "only $1.95"? If they really like to share, what does "$1.95" makes (compare to their $5000 - $7000 / month), if they really don't want competition, why they want to share their "secrete" at the cost of "only $1.95"? That dilute their market share.

The only logical explanation is that the "$1.95" is so significant to those people who are trying to sell you this "secrete", the secret themselves, probably will not earn them more than these "$1.95" accumulated.

It's not totally impossible if there is only one person out there doing this. It is definitely a concern when there are hundreds of people out there that are doing the same thing. It is impossible that so many people are all insane at same price point. No, statistics and probability does not believe this will happen.

What is likely the truth?

(Disclaimer, I did not spend my hard earned money in testing all those programs, sorry, for me the risk is 100% and I do not plan to throw my money down the drain like that. Why? because next day, a new scam will pop out and point to the one I proved false as scam, and say "we are different". I do not have infinite resource to pop all the balloons.)

The likely truth is these scam are profiting from those $1.95 and they will send you something virtually valueless.

It is very common that people tries to sell others something that "cheap" enough, so that a lot of people will buy and they'll make money out of it. (Lots of people think I'll lost less than $2 even if this is a scam).

OK, all they need is millions of people think this way.

You know what, the $2 secret is likely "join us and sell these $2 thingies like we do".

If you are here to see someone who has wasted his/her money and proved these programs are scams, you will be disappointed. However, if you really don't want to risk your $1.95 and would like to see the result of other people throw their money down the drain, here is something you may find useful.

Most of those sites has some comment praising their kit, however, you will see you can't post comment at all. So the source of those comment are questionable. I don't mean they are definitely forged, but who ever posted those comment are special -- you and me can't even post, even if we want to praise them.

What is true about Google cash?

Well, it is true that some people made money by using Google AdSense. And Google is giving out money to people who used their website (blog, forum, bbs, etc) to show Google ads.

If you are really good at marketing your website, and you can drive enough traffic to your site, you can make a fortune from Google. This is no secrete, and this does not worth any $1.95 shipping free to learn.

Is there a way to profit from Google AdSense without selling anything? Yes. Actually, there are millions if not billions web pages that are basically useless, and contains nothing but links and Ads. When people search from something, these pages may show up high in the search list, and when people click on them, the useless web page shows the ads, boom, the owner of those sites get profit. (have you every tried to search with "review", "compare", "price" of something? Have you ever wondered, why there are so many pages has very limited (if any) content and still show up? Yeah, that's why.

While I know there are people made money using Google AdSense, I am also sure there is no easy way of doing it (unless you are a marketing genius), you may get some advise in how to make your web pages more popular, however, its not a guarantee you will out do others and make thousands of dollars over night. It by no means can be considered easy, or autopilot (people change, their search term changes too, so you can't always drive same amount of traffic to your sites at the same rate.

Yes, some of the "training" actually tells you to use Google AdWords to buy traffic. This actually MAY be a good idea if you really know what you are doing (don't expect people searching on Google will appreciate though), but for ordinary people, it's just a waste of money. Because it's very hard to make enough money to cover your advertisement cost.

In short, making money off Google is possible, but don't expect you can buy the secrete with $1.95 and profit with little work. It will be a lot of work (not necessarily labor intensive, but ) you got to learn a lot of Google and other search engines way of positioning search results. Their algorithm changes too. It is also irresponsible wasting other people's time just trying to drive traffic to your pages so you can make money.

There are other means you can make money online, but most of them all involves selling something (yes with Internet store front, you don't need to stay up all day to make sales, but that's far from "autopilot" as some described). You can sell some "digital content" without worrying about shipping and handling, (i.e. the $2 secrets). That's the "easiest" you can get.

Honestly, if you really have some content that you believe people may be interested in, market it with all means. Try to benefit from it while people are spending quality time reading your writing. People will actually help you to promote your content if they find it's valuable.

If you don't have much to say, and don't think you can produce any helpful info, don't bother. You probably can use your time to do better things. Your web page won't earn you money like "autopilot" as someone claimed to be. Even if someone made fortune by producing useless page just to trick people to click on their ads, it doesn't mean it always works. And intentionally waste other people's time to earn profit is not ethical.

Thanks for reading, and saving yourself $1.95.

Using your BlackBerry (or other bluetooth phone) as a "remote control" for your PC

I'm not talking about VNC. Remote desktop is totally irrelevant here.

What I'm going to talk about is something light, just click through your PowerPoint slides, or change to next track in your iTunes' or Windows Media Player.



They use Bluetooth, instead of your air time/air packets. So basically the connection will be "local" - which means you are not depended upon Internet, cell phone connectivity, etc.



I've found several solutions sofar:

Vectir [Free! Well paid version is more powerful] - http://www.vectir.com/

Mobile Witch Remote Control [Free!] - http://www.mobilewitch.com/bluetooth-remote-control.php
Bluetooth Remote Control - http://www.blueshareware.com/bluetooth_remote_control.asp

WMOUSEXP - http://www.clearevo.com/wmousexp/



An application (sounds) very promising is Salling Clicker. However, the Balckberry support is still under consideration by the author, not available yet. http://www.salling.com/Clicker/windows/



Vectir seems the easiest to use from my perspective. However, it is realatively limited. Applications are supported through "plug-in" and so far only 4 applications are supported this way. No 3rd party development plan published. However, you can config mouse mapping and do mouse similation, which I am not a big fan of. Anways, if you only want to control iTunes/Win Media player, try Vectir first. Nice and easy.





Other interesting stuff - use your headset to control powerpoint:
http://www.headsetpresenter.com/



I don't like other hardware solutions given the tradition of hard to upgrade limitation. Saying that, the impatica ShowMate worth mentioning http://www.impatica.com/showmate/.

It's not too expensive and you don't need your Notebook at all. It's a piece of small hardware connects to VGA port of a projector and accepts screen from Blackberry via Bluetooth or USB. A piece of software need to be run on the Blackberry.

Well, I still have trouble buying into it yet, as the flexibility of Blackberry is not yet satisfying my last-minute update of PPT habit.

Crude Oil price and UFO - a conspiracy theory

UFO? Oh, now I got your attention. No it’s not the UFO you think – Unidentified Flying Object.
It’s Unidentified Financial Organization.

Well, all is saying Oil price has been rising because the emerging market (namely India and China)’s rising demand caused it. Well, the thing is neither India nor China is “new” emerging market, both of them have been “emerging”. Saying in the past 6 years, the whole world gradually realized India and China were emerging is an insult on human kind’s intelligence – at least.

And while US energy consumption is dropping, the Oil price continues to set new record highs. And US is still the biggest consumer of Oil, so the link between demand and supply seems not so convincing here.

One more piece of evidence is OPEC actually claims some of their member is struggling to find buyers of their Oil.

OMG! If the theory of supply and demand relationship determines price holds true, should the price come down, so that people who want to sell, can make a deal?

Common wisdom seems not so wise here J

OK, here is my theory.
With Oil price rising for the past 6 years, it became common knowledge that to swing Oil price up, you adjust supply. You don’t need to stop Oil production altogether, you only need to reduce the output marginally, so that supply is lower than demand.

So when supply and demand are relatively balanced, you only need a small amount of supply reduction, to cause some buyer to pay more to avoid being the one who can’t fill their demand, and given the essential status of Oil, it’s likely that lots of buyers are willing to pay more rather than be left out.

It’s not only a theory, it’s reality too. We know that OPEC actually only output less than 50% (in average about 40%) of world’s Oil production, and adjustment of their output by less than a million dollar barrel a day which is less than 2% of total output of crude oil in the world, they can swing Oil price heavily.

However, this time around, it might not be OPEC who is flirting with record Oil price. There were various studies suggesting Oil over 50$ - 60$ USD means lots of alternative energy sources will economically sound. And my maintaining Oil price around 60$, OPEC can maximize their money inflow, while still keep “alternative” energies at the bay – as soon as those alternatives go into mass production, the cost of those are likely to drop and people may opt for the alternative rather than 60$ Oil.

That means Oil price so high (as the writing it’s over 126USD), it’s actually against OPEC’s long term interest.
OPEC’s complain about some member cannot find buyers of their Oil production is an early indication of the troubles ahead.

Indeed, China – one of the “emerging” country that sighted repeatedly by market participants is the most advance market in terms of Alternative energies like solar power.

Is it possible that OPEC countries cannot resist the temptation of 200$ Oil? Maybe, however you got to realize that lots of the OPEC countries are monarchy or semi-monarchy, and they do care more about their descents than most of the “democratic” countries. Besides, their big money hired economists would have definitely done the calculation for them.

And finally their complain about members can’t find buyers for their Oil, shed a light on why they are not eager to increase production – it’s no use, if at current production level, there are excess supply, increase supply will simply make it worse for all OPEC members, because while price is high, there will be more Oil sitting and waiting for buyer.

So what’s going on here? You may ask. The buyers don’t like it, the sellers’ are hurt from it, and why the price still sits there?

Well, here is where UFO comes in.
There are Unidentified Financial Organizations, who noticed a small supply adjustment can swing the price of Oil significantly – they noticed how Saudi Arabia did that in the past.
They also noticed the demand and supply of Oil is GRADUALLY getting balanced as the steady rise of demand in emerging market is nothing unpredictable.
They figured out, if Saudi can swing the price by adding or reducing a fraction of supply, what can’t WE do that?

Yes UFO does not produce Oil, however, everyone can buy Oil.

UFO with trillions of dollar in their pocket, can stock up Oil by purchasing it. And function as “dummy” demand, drives up Oil price, during the course, they can rolling sell and buy Oil to make money. And because they now function like a counter-Saudi Arabia, they know where the Oil price is going, so they can make lots of money out of it.

Why there are OPEC countries can’t find buyer for their Oil? Because UFO works in future market more than real market, when they gouge the price, they may need to purchase excess future that they don’t really need or can’t sell, they will simply void those excess future they bought and the real Oil producer will stumble to sell the real product cause they cannot simply void the physical barrel of Oil when UFO voids their future contract.

So, who are those UFO? I don’t know. I know they are very wealth, very strong and with lots of money.

It does not look like a government’s deed, because the effects of these actions are beyond borders. And the effects are relatively hard to predict compare to other means governments can exercise.

What sees to be true is they have infiltrated many governments, media and investment houses. There are numberless reports citing “emerging” markets, “resilient” US markets, etc which are all true but were also true when Oil was 26$/bbl.

All in all I don’t think it’s a bad thing fro Oil consumers and hopefully the earth. As Oil price so high, many many alternative energy businesses are lucrative. And much cleaner cars are been adopted in US and Europe at unforeseen pace.

Things like nuclear power are back on to agenda. While we still think nuclear is unsafe, Oil burning pollution and green-house-gas, are killing us anyways, how much worse can nuclear be? At least it does not emit Green-house-gas and only kills us in accidents, rather than gradually kill up non-stop like Oil consumption.

So,
“Dear UFO,
If you happen to see this article, please forgive me. I have no intention to portrait you as a dark force; I actually think you are doing a good thing for all of us.
And no one will believe me anyways so I don’t think this will stop your money making machine.
So please don’t send in your commando to kill me.

Worship you.”

Apple wants to charge existing iPod touch owners $20 for 5 new applications.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate Apple like many people do.
In fact, I own 4 Macs 4 iPods and bought an iPod touch on Jan 12, 2008 3 days too early to get an iPod touch with the 5 additional new apps pre-loaded. see here

I believe it's an marketing BUG in Apple's operation -- it seems their pricing department misunderstood one single business logic -- which is more important $20 or a loyal customer that have spent dozens of thousands dollars on Apple product over the years -- put it straight, I do have $20 -- I donated more than that to software writers and charities.  

I have no problem spend my money on Apple products either, I've spend dozens of thousands of dollars on Apple products. 

However, when the apps are free to iPhone and NEW iPod touch users, 

PUNISHING CUSTOMERS ADOPT APPLE PRODUCT EARLY IS STUPIDLY GREEDY.

It is even worse than the $200 price drop of the iPhone which resulted a $100 credit for early iPhone buyers -- this $20 charge for apps specifically identified a special group -- namely the iPod touch buyers bought iPod touch before Jan 15th 2008 -- read "hey stupid buyers, since you can $400 on an unfinished product, apparently you are rich, and should pay $20 more now to get your product complete, Oh, for those smart enough not to jump in and give their hard earned money to us early (so that we can sustain the product line) we'll though in the apps as free so that we can attract people that don't buy unfinished products even if it's from Apple -- read those people don't love Apple as much".

Keep doing this Apple, you will get lots of $20 bills and will loss lots of loyal customers that have came back to Apple and purchased again and again.

$20 is a great income for Apple, it is also an easy way to send away customers that could have spend much more on Apple products. 

As a hi-tech company you need to keep the early adopters happy.  Those are the ones buy your products when they are still in its infancy, so that you can sustain your new products.  Bad business practice like charge $20 simply because we bought a product early, is stupid -- even if we give you this $20 this time, do you think we will buy your other more expensive products again?

Wake UP, Apple, you are good, but not that good!

Your pricing department needs some serious business 101 training. 

I'm putting all my Apple purchasing (planed spending is over $2000) on hold until Apple provide free update to existing iPod touch owners so that we can upgrade our iPod touch to the level of the new units sold after Jan 15, 2008

BTW, you can sign a petition for this matter if you already owns an iPod touch. there are lots of petitions about this issue, this one has the most signed owners (on Jan 21, more than 10K). 

Economy "De-Couple"? Is rest of the world really ignoring US resession and enjoys their growth?

One rhetoric topic these days is “because the emerging economy, the rest of the world no longer coupled with US economy”, specifically, the rest of the world will not have a recession if US goes in to recession.

If you look at world currency market, it is even more convincing – the USD has been depressed more than 1/3 in the past 4 years.

Is it really true? Well, on one hand because the emerging markets are becoming bigger economies and hence have more resilience to external turbulence (read US recession), so the influence of US economy to other economies are less significant than it use to be.

However, somewhere in the world there is a saying – the thinnest camel is bigger than a horse – which is very true in describing the current situation of US.

The “reduced” influence of US economy is still too significant to be “ignored”.

The truth is in the past 3 to 4 years, it is not a US recession, rather the fear of a US recession drove US dollar down. And the fact that it’s the “fear of recession” instead of a real recession is the cause easily explains the “de-couple” theory.

Because US is not in a recession, US consumers are still spending, so the rest of the world can still sell to US, and that’s why their economy is still growing -- why its not “de-coupling”? -- Because US economy was also growing, despite wide spread fear of a recession. That has been the case for the past 3 years.

Or you can say it was the “fear” de-coupled, not the economy. In China and India where economy expands in double digits, it’s far harder for them to think about recession – in comparison to in the US where economy was growing 2 or 3 percent a year, it is much closer to the magical number “0” – where positive and negative cross.

And recently, when US is really in the recession (at least US business and consumers are spending less), you can see all over the world, the economy starting to choke. Some people out there was surprised and said world economy “re-coupled” – not quite right, it is just this time, the wolf really attacked, unlike previous occasion “wolf is coming” was shouted just for the sake of fear.

I feel some people are driven by fear and hatred more than hope and love. The new order of the world is not that US collapse, it is that other nation rise – it’s not about US getting unimportant, it is about other nation also getting important – it’s not about US is in trouble, it is about other nations are out of trouble.

For the “new order” of economy, I would not expect in the short term that US will be irrelevant – a US recession, will still cause world economy slow down. The change is, now if China goes into recession, the world economy will also slow down, big time!

It’s not that world de-coupled with US, it is other economies are coupled with the world better now.

Oil exporting country dump USD peg .vs. China allow its currency to rise.

Stop using USD as Oil price currency will be long term bull for USD, although that is unlikely to happen any time soon.

I seldom comment on issues out of IT industry -- you can tell from my other blog posts. Well, let's do something new in the New Year then. (Not really, I majored in ERP which is a hybrid combining IS with business.)

OK, here is what the topic about -- in 2007 about US Dollar. Lots of buzz that crude oil exporters will decouple from the USD and every time this rumor surface, the USD had a big hit – it depreciate in response.
On the other side of the coin, every single US politicians is pushing China to let its' RMB to appreciate significantly. . .


"USD is oil dollar!" if oil exporters abandon selling oil in USD, USD will worth nothing -- at least Iranian president said so.

Wait a minute, that's too straightforward to be true though (if that's really that simple, I guess we don't need PhD in Economy anymore - one of the most daunting topic is now simply understood by everyone). Usually I doubt about things that too obvious -- something too good seldom is true.

Let's have a look at crude oil price -- fundamental only for now, (the speculators and opportunists are the ones who want us believe in "simple rules" so they can predict our reaction and take advantage of us.)

Oil is priced in USD, at beginning of Jan 2002 it was $16.65; at the end of Dec 2007 it was $95.98 -- a 5.8 time rise.

During the same period, EUR/USD rose from 0.86 to 1.4586. So, if you measure Oil in Euro, it only appreciated 3.4 times.

So in the face of rising oil price, America took 5.8 time hit, while because of the freedom Euro zone enjoyed, they only took a hit of 3.4 times. No wonder why Euro economy is much less hit by the recent recession (though some may argue a recession is yet to come in US).

All exporters are greedy (hey nothing wrong about that, if I have a crude oil well in my backyard, do you think I will offer it as charity? It's perfectly humane to be greedy when you have something other people want!) They (with the help of opportunists) see a chance to get more money. Because Oil is valued in USD, so US has to take the biggest hit (I'm not talking about why US gets the biggest hit which everyone has their own speech to make, just the math no politics please). While for all other economy who can fluctuate their currency, can ward off this hit somewhat by allowing USD to depreciate - so that the increase in Oil price is offset a little.

Why Euro zone economy is still robust when its currency nearly doubled in the past 5 years? One thing is in current global economy energy cost is one of the biggest part of all cost, and why Euro appreciated, Oil is measured in USD, so the real cost of energy to Euro zone companies are not as huge as it is for the US companies, and because the appreciated Euro, workers in Euro zone relatively had enjoyed a somewhat more "affordable" life compare to their US counterparts - so they can spend "more". (or in other words, they were hit much less than their US counterparts).

So is it really true that if Oil is no longer valued in USD, USD will collapse? Well in short term it might. Because if that's the case, Oil exporting countries may need to sell some USD, and European companies will no longer need USD to by Oil.
However, that's not the end of the world, why? Cause if you check who has the biggest reserve of USD outside of US? You guessed right, China.

Some people say that USD can maintain its dominancy only because Oil is valued in USD. While it may sound like music to anti-American ears (which means – a lot of people), it stands on shaky ground.

Oil is not exported by US, they don't have control over Oil -- if they did, there would be no Oil crisis in the 70's and it will not reach 100USD in 2008. Yes, they want to control it, (who doesn't?) but they simply can't.

OPEC controls it and like it or not, they decided to price Oil in USD. Why? Because US buys the most of the Oil. And since China's RMB is pegged to USD, the combined volume of Oil sold in USD is much higher than any other currency. So selling Oil in USD, makes Oil exporter's financial book much easier to keep.

So if someone really thinks that it’s US warship in the gulf kept Oil exporters to sell Oil in USD, they are politics obsessed. I found most of this kind of people has a background of living in an arbitrariness or dictatorship – where everything is controlled by the government.
In a free world, there are more than politics in this world. It’s not that the “governments in a free world” are any ethic, it’s just they don’t have the arbitrary power dictatorship enjoyed to implement their will.
However, people with experience living in a dictatorship tend to over estimate the ability of governments (in other words tend to underestimate influence of other forces in a free world).

Now why it’s long term bull for USD if Oil is sold in another currency? We mentioned that because Oil is priced in USD, US actually saw a 5.8 time price rise while Euro zone only see a 3.4 time rise. So Euro is having a much lighter hit than US has. That’s why. If Oil is priced in something else, let’s say something hyper theoretical – OPEC-D. Euro and USD then will each price their currency against this Oil Dollar. And Euro won’t need to depress USD to reduce the Oil price impact.

Of course in short term, lots of countries will sell some USD to buy OPEC-D, but that’ will not be the end of the world -- As long as China do not sell its' USD, USD will be ok. May loss another 10% or 20% but will not collapse.

And at the end of the day, Oil exporters and China have the same reason to peg their currency to USD – they export to US and USD is what their biggest customer (read United States) will give them. So it’s interesting to see that many US politicians WANT Oil exporters to use USD to price Oil (another evidence that US is managed by a bunch of stupid politicians) and on the same time, pushes China to un-peg their currency.
Like it or not, the consequence of China un-peg its currency is far more destructive than Oil priced in Euro.

sapinst hang at "import java dump" stage when installting SAP NetWeaver 7.0

When installting SAP NetWeaver 7.0 on HP-UX 11.23, the sapinst comes to an halt. A java process "/opt/java1.4/bin/java -classpath /tmp/sapinst_instdir/NW04S/SYSTEMORA/CENTRAL/ASinstall/sharedlib/launcher.jar... uses 100% CPU not not doing anything)

Your JDK is 1.4.2_10

there is a problem in the Java VM 1.4.2_10 that will cause the installation to hang at this stage. It has been reported on Sun Solaris, but not on HP-UX yet. Apparently it affects HP-UX (IA64) too.

So, upgrade to 1.4.2_13 (patch 14,15,16 has know issue with Kerbose authentication). 1.4.2_17 should work too. But don't forget the installation guide tells you Java 5.0 is NOT supported.

OK Good luck.