LyrArc Article Gist
The Editorial Board of the WSJ says German chancellor Scholz waited far too long to approve sending the Leopard tanks to Ukraine. It says there was an uproar in Germany and most parties including some parts of the SPD support the decision, including many in the media. 

LyrArc Article Gist
With the decline of its hardware business making iPhones Apple is looking at other fields. It is launching cheap online TV subscriptions in streaming wars in competition with Netflix and others. Apple is launching a new TV streaming service Apple TV+ in 100 countries for 4.99 British pounds a month undercutting Netflix's price of 5.99 pounds. The new service will be started November 1, 2019. Disney plans a streaming service for 7 pounds a month starting November 12. This service is alongside iPhone 11 launch and anew iPad, a new iWatch. Buy any new Apple device and you get a 1 year streaming service free.  Sales of iPhones fell 14% in the April to June 2019 quarter to 39 million units. Samsung's business is growing by 4% to 75 million units and Huawei by 16% to 58 million units. Apple sees the need to increases its services business with a target of $50 billion in 2020. Apple sees itself more as a media and cloud services company as it makes this change. In markets such as India Apple's growth is limited by its failure to lower prices on new iPhones. In China it faces strong competition from Huawei. The trade tensions are increasing the strength of Chinese brands in the Chinese market. The market in U.S. and Europe is saturated after years of expansion. New iPhone models are costly and bring peripheral advantages such as more and better cameras and features such as screens that are not breakable- for the iPhone 11- not dimensions that are critical for making a costly purchase. After years of growth tech companies such as Apple, Google, Alibaba, Amazon are reaching a point where incremental growth is not what it used to be and most of the rapid growth behind them. Trade tensions are also limiting the outlook in the Chinese market, and pricing remains a major factor in the Indian market. Western markets are saturated. There are fewer and fewer substantial new ideas from these tech companies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks of the NYT is critical of the way Google CEO Sundar Pichai handled the Damore email affair. Pichai cut the discussion short and fired a 28 year old engineer who wrote a controversial memo about women and working in the software industry. Brooks says the memo actually makes things harder for women in a male dominated tech world.  Not mentioned here or in the coverage in the media is that Google could have used this as an opportunity to refocus the discussion on how to correct the exaggerated tilt in favor of men in the male dominated tech world- about 80% male. Even with the differences between men and women is such a huge tilt a good idea? How could it be handled by giving women better opportunities and changing the culture itself to ways that can make it good for both sexes. An extremely competitive environment with its corresponding behaviours is not the best environment for all. Most of the male dominated tech world does not walk the talk by actually helping women in tech in multiple ways, including changing their own culture- this itself could have become the focus of the discussion. Google could turn its gaze inward and say this is happening because it was too late or not doing enough, and use this as a wake up call- letting people be heard, yet quietly redoubling its efforts as some contrary voices explain how the current situation happened, is another way to respond effectively that eluded Google.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Takes some of the aura surrounding his long service in Washington under different administrations and at the Fed by bringing the real life person behing the media figure.

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says Putin acted emotionally by letting impulsive reaction to the anti-Russian feelings in western Ukraine determine Russian policy following the collapse of the Yakunovych government. The months long Russian response in Crimea and eastern Ukraine may have secured Russian pride at a large cost. This includes the damage to the relationship with Germany, seting the EU on a path to look for other sources of energy to reduce dependence on Russian gas, a natural gas deal with China in which the price was kept "a secret" and may have provided China with a bargaining edge considering the timing of the negotiations. The most severe impact is in the loss of confidence within Russia, reminding the Putin administration that though the economy has grown in the Putin years it is still fragile and connected to the global economy. The capital outflows of the magnitude of $160 billion at a time of high inflation and sharply slowing growth actually put at risk the gains Putin and Russia made in the last decade, and risk the future agenda to improve the standard of living of the Russian people eyond the major cities. Putin's own assessment would eventually be closer to that of Alexei Kudrin. Kudrin, finance minister in Putin's previous term, correctly saw the dangers of impulsive policy concentrated in one figure, and the suppression of other voices including the opposition needed for Russia to be governed in a manner similiar to western Europe, to attain a similiar level of economic progress and standards of living. In today's global economy even the U.S., France, UK and states inside Germany need foreign investment for jobs, new ideas and technology, and the opinion expressed on media television and internet shapes investor sentiment to a larger degree than fully understood....

LyrArc Article Gist
Issues raised by the huge mismatch between revenues and investment for AI. $400 billion estimated investment by 5 Tech firms in 2025 alone with revenue of about $40 billion and huge uncertainty about when AI will produce returns. Articles seen this week of November 17 in the WSJ and NYT on this issue, podcasts, discussions in other media outlets. Could this lead to a dot com bubble type economic crisis? Could that lead to a recession? Alongside these articles another article in the WSJ on Nov 17 shows the benefits small firms get by using AI, benefits which are on the fringes of their business, not essential but with some experimenting firm owners/managers able to tweak AI information for use in business. Nothing significant which firms will pay much money for. The uncertainty is a major factor. Should geopolitics trump all these concerns? Is the competition with China require this scale of investment, and is China following a more utilitarian approach as reported in a WSJ article this month, of investing in AI in a utilitarian way targeting its use in improving manufacturing, improving infrastructure, and not wildly throwing money at experimental uses that are unlikely to yield much result. In geopolitical sense would the country that not only promoted AI but used it efficiently and cost effectively, used it in ways that promote the overall public good, get the WIN. In short it behooves everyone of us to ask hard questions of AI, to dehype the hype, to look for the public good that comes out of this from it's efficient use. To ask the tough questions when $400 billion generates only $40 billion in 2025 and the $3 trillion planned investment over 5 years is half unfunded, is it going to crowd out energy needs for homes and business, push renewable energy targets back, crowd out essential investments in the crumbling aging infrastructure of the US and Europe, crowd out essential investments in education, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing, that hold better promise for our People. Will it also put retirees at risk when corporate bonds from retirees money fund the unfunded portion of AI? This means making the political dimension not about migration, settling the illegal migration issue that was meant to be settled a long time back, or about cultural issues that have little day to day impact on our lives which are about groceries, childcare, housing that are non ideological. Making the political dimension not about remote countries that one knows little about except when it affects public safety and health as with fentanyl. Capital allocation decisions to the vital needs of America can then be free of politically induced error, so that it can be subjected to the test of how best it serves the public interest and the people of the Nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Census Bureau reports that 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty in 2010. This is an increase of 2.6 million over 2009. This is the highest number of Americans living in poverty since 1958, when this statistic was first measured. Poverty is defined for 2010 as income at or below $22,314 for family of four. Also relevant is the median household income which went down to $49,445 in 2010, a decline of 2.3% from 2009. The typical household earned less in 2010 than in 1997, in inflation adjusted terms. The Census Bureau reports 16.3% of Americans had no health insurance coverage in 2010, the same as 2009.

LyrArc Article Gist
The close alliance between the CDU and the CSU in Bavaria appears to be unraveling. The immigrants at German borders have dwindled down a trickle, about 11,000 immigrants today compared to the wave of immigrants entering Germany in 2015. The CSU's prime minister in Bavaria Mr. Soder and the Federal Interior minister from the CSU Mr. Seehofer, blame the conflict between the two parties on the 2015 decision by Merkel on immigration. The German ARD broadcaster shows 62% of Germans favor stronger action on immigration. The pressure on the CSU comes from the gains by the anti-immigration party AfD in recent national elections. The CSU hopes that by shifting its own position on immigration to a standoff with the CDU and Merkel's position it can hold off the Afd in the elections in Bavaria in October 2018. The pressure on Merkel comes from members in the CDU and from the SPD leadership, which have accomodated some of the criticism of open immigration to reduce the immigrants at German borders, yet now see the need to meet any challenges to Merkel's authority. This is why the head of the SPD, Ms. Nahles called Mr. Soder's push for a confrontation on the immigration issue as acting "like a bonzai Trump." The CDU party leaders in Bavaria call for a "axis of the willing" joining leaders of the governments in Austria and Hungary. and the newly elected government in Italy to impose immediate controls on immigration at the borders. Merkel says she is open to different points of view within the CDU-CSU alliance, but action should be based on keeping the European Union together, and be taken after EU meetings in Brussels. Will this result in a fall of the government? Angela Merkel has adapted to the changing situation on immigration leading to the small trickle in new immigrants at German borders today. Even if the AfD anti immigration party joins the CSU the percentage of the vote for the AfD is mainly in the eastern part of Germany, and CSU in Bavaria, with 12.6% voting AfD in 2017 elections, and about 7% voting CSU mainly in Bavaria. This compares with the Left at 8.9%, Greens at 9.2%, and SPD at 20.5% for a combined 38.6% of the vote that favor Merkel's new coalition policies. This combined with the 25% of the vote gained by Merkel's CSU party gives it about 64% of the vote and about 489 seats in the 709 seat German parliament. A test of Merkel's authority is not likely to be sustained. By making this a pro-European position Merkel has shifted the issue from one of immigration which is now minimal and one on which Merkel has adapted her policies to a stand on Germany as leader with France of the European Union. At this particularly sensitive time when Germany and France are negotiating with the U.S. on trade and Britain on Brexit, German public opinion is likely to consider the impact of new elections and more uncertainty as not good for Germany. With the SPD, Left, Greens and CSU having 64% of the vote, and the anti immigrant parties CSU, AFD about 20% concentrated in the less economically developed eastern part and in Bavaria, the chances that Merkel's position would be weakened or her authority challenged is very unlikely.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A 93 year old hero of the French Resistance, Stephane Hessel, publishes a pamphlet called "Indignez-Vous!," released by a small publishing house from the publisher's home. He calls for resisting the "international dictatorship of the financial markets" and "defending the values of modern democracy." He protests France's treatment of illegal immigrants, the influence on the media by the affluent, cuts to the social safety net, French educational reforms. It was first published in October, and now has sold 1.5 million copies, all through word of mouth advertising. It has been translated into Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, and Greek. New editions are planned for Slovenian, Korean, Japanese, Swedish and other languages. In Britain, it was published with the title "Time for Outrage." The pamphlet is about 4000 words and only 14 pages of text. Its timing is good, as the French are debating what to do in their politics with an election approaching and Sarkozy's standing at new lows. The short length and low price are a big plus, at $4 it made a convenient Christmas gift. Britain, Spain, Portugal and Greece are going through austerity cuts. Public sentiment has been aroused by the cuts, and by the overarching influence of financial markets on the economies of these countries. Some of these countries referred derisively as piigs- Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain -countries in the financial markets. The economic impact has fallen disproportionately on the young, with high jobless rate for young people from Italy to Spain, and cuts in funding for universities and schools in the UK also fall heavily on young people. A sense that something has gone wrong in the free market system and the western world. Austerity cuts in spending in the U.S. create a similiar feeling and joblessness among young people is also high in the U.S....

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in The Lancet published in February 2018 throws much light on how the ban on gain of function research on virus was lifted -research that carries with it the danger of increasing transmission of virus if something unexpected happens in the manipulation of a virus. It was lifted in 2018 in the US by officials in the US Health Ministry, NIH and HHS. The Cambridge group of scientists and experts opposed lifting the ban on such dangerous research that could make the virus more contagious through manipulation. Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of Harvard School of Public Health wrote at the time that the lab research to create a more lethal strain of virus could lead to "an accidental pandemic" yet he was ignored. The public in America and in the world is unaware of how this created serious risks for public health in the world through the coronavirus.  Did US health officials lift the ban on such research without consulting other countries such as India, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, and the EU on its ramifications. Were public health experts and the publics themselves in the US and around the world not drawn into the discussion of public health and the dangers that existed. Not only did officials in HHS and NIH restart the research by lifting the ban but also sent funds overseas for such research- was this a proper or thoughtful action considering the risks involved.  Is enhanced surveillance of virus- a dubious benefit from manipulation of a virus- something a few health officials can decide for the whole world in addition to the US. How are health officials in one or two countries responsible to the people in India, Brazil, Europe and the poorest populations in the world in the world in Africa, Latin America, and Asia, people who have suffered devastating consequences from transmissibility of the virus, including children and older people with health problems. India, Brazil, Italy, Spain, France, UK, and other countries worst hit by the coronavirus must ask serious questions about how they can protect their people if institutions in the US and international institutions are seen as failing to protect world public health. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard School of Public Health says in Jan 2018 issue of Harvard Chan Institute of Public Health journal that an "accidental pandemic" could result from the lifting of the ban on a risky kind of research favored by some virologist professionals.  In "Three Questions, Three Answers" Lipsitch tells why. Most members of the broader scientific and medical community had serious questions and were fiercely against such research which had questionable value and great risk. At the beginning the interviewer Karen Feldscher writes:  "January 8, 2018- Last month the US government lifted a three year moratorium on funding risky research to genetically alter deadly viruses in ways that could make them even more lethal. Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch of Harvard Chan School thinks the move could create an accidental pandemic." Lipsitch says rejecting the virologists who supported this dangerous research: "Others, like myself, worry that the human error could lead to the accidental release of a virus that has been enhanced in the lab so that it is more deadly and contagious than it already is." He cites an accident in 2014 at US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Lab where workers were exposed to anthrax that was improperly handled. "Another accident like that- if it involved a virus that was both newly created and highly contagious- has the potential to jeopardize millions of people."  Lipsitch points out that this kind of research has given us modest scientific knowledge, was not essential to tackling the virus epidemics, was only one type of many types of research, and a type of research whose aims could be achieved in other ways that were not deadly to humans. Lipsitch pointed this out in The Journal of Medical Ethics stating the ethical considerations at stake. The lifting of the ban led to research at labs that is seen as a possible scenario of what happened to cause an accidental pandemic. The people of the world, and not just in America but the people of the whole world, and the poorest countries with little resources- Asia, Africa, Latin America bearing the consequences of this decision that violated medical ethical considerations of setting up a potential accidental pandemic.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jim Tankersley of the Washington Post looks at the myths and realities of trade following incorrect statements made by Donald Trump about international trade. For example Trump suggests that Japanese automobiles imports are a big problem, though the imports have been cut by over 50% since the 1980's with Japanese companies Toyota and Honda making cars in the U.S. in Kentucky and Ohio. Detroit faces competition from foreign manufacturers based in southern states, including Alabama for Mercedes Benz and Tennessee for Nissan. Mismanagement including lagging in fuel efficiency and quality, and higher health costs for older workers were problems facing Detroit in the past decade. The Obama administration provided support to the auto companies to make the recovery following two bankruptcies in the U.S. auto industry, showing the U.S. has intervened as needed and the auto companies have made transformational changes. A big problem says Trump is the trade agreement with China which he promises to renegotiate. Tankersley points out that no such treaty exists. The U.S. agreed to China's entry into the WTO. This is not something the U.S. can renegotiate as the WTO sets rules for trade for all countries. The likely result of a shift away from Chinese imports would be more imports from countries such as India and Vietnam which are lower cost producers than China. Trump says some of the 2 million jobs lost in the past 2 decades will come back, yet the shift may be towards lower cost countries from China, with fewer jobs coming back to the U.S. High tariffs would not lead to the growth Trump predicts. A study made by Moody's Analytics at the request of the WP shows a Trump move for high tariffs would lead to a recession and lead to mass layoffs as other countries imposed their own tariffs, leading to large loss in U.S. exports. Trump has made claims such as telling the Post that $19 trillion in federal debt could be paid off in 8 years without raising taxes by fixing trade. No grounding on facts is provided by Trump. One of the failures of the media in the 2016 election campaign is the failure of the media to provide scrutiny for candidates claims and wild exaggerations, which have gone uncontested or unquestioned, or without the persistence till satisfactory answers are given by the candidates making them. Especially when the stakes are so high, for the U.S. and for the global economy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
 China exports to the US $438 billion vs $143 billion the US sends to China - the US deficit with China 2024 equals $295 billion. This is the fact that the media continues to ignore. Behind this is the gutting of the industrial base of the US shipped offshore to China since 2000 by American companies. 5 million jobs lost and tens of thousands of factories destroying the backbone of the economy, America's middle class.  Much of the US exports are oil and gas which can be shipped to Europe, India and other places. The soyabeans and grain from America's farmers is the other part of exports of $13 billion. The US can find other markets for the farm products including India under a trade agreement, and farmers can be supported with agricultural subsidies. It only makes sense to rebuild America's industrial base and pull back from an unfair trade arrangement that can only be the result of serious neglect of their responsibilities of previous administrations before DJT in 2016. The piecemeal efforts 2016-2024 have not worked to rebuild America's middle class,  recover jobs and factories, as a result a new bolder approach is needed in 2025 to rewrite the rules for world trade for an even playing field where everyone is treated with fairness. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Media accounts have given so much attention to the Nixon Feb. 1972 visit to China that most people may be unaware that this was just an important yet small beginning. The significance of what happened after 1972 is not fully understood. In 1973 the US liasion Office was setup in Beijing and China's liasion office in Washington DC.  Beyond this not much happened. Why? In 1972 election year the Watergate scandal started in June of that year only 4 months after the Nixon China visit. Nixon was too engaged with fighting impeachment that there was not much followup to the visit to China. In 1974 Nixon resigned and Gerald Ford became president. Till Carter became president in 1976 and in 1977 negotiations began to upgrade relations with premier Deng Xiaoping visiting the US in 1979. In China too a lot was happening. Mao was hospitalized in 1972 during Nixon's visit to China, the reason for the urgency on the Chinese side. In 1976 within a few months first premier Chou en lai and then chairman Mao passed away. A power struggle led to the head of the Military Commission Deng taking control. It was not till 1977 under Jimmy Carter 5 years after 1972 that China began full normalization, gained diplomatic recognition as the People's Republic of China and trade, cultural contacts were started.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US view of the response by India to a terrorist attack in Phalgam, Kashmir, Indian Union territory with strikes on terrorist camps. J.D. Vance US vice president says- “Our hope here is that India responds to this terrorist attack in a way that doesn’t lead to a broader regional conflict.” “And we hope, frankly, that Pakistan to the extent that they’re responsible, cooperates with India to make sure that the terrorists sometimes operating in their territory are hunted down and dealt with.” Vance was forced to cut short his visit to India after visiting Jaipur, Rajasthan in India when the terrorists with a history of aid from Pakistan killed 31 tourists in Phalgam, Kashmir. A long history of terrorist or militia trained in Pakistan has led to  terrorist incidents all over the world for the last three decades including the Kashmir and Afghanistan conflicts, the last having drawn Russia and the US into long wars which depleted their resources and led to loss of many lives. Yet much of the media remains oblivious of this in the US and Europe, and how it has led to the rise of China using this period of conflict under Bush and Obama since 2000, and the access to US, EU technologies and assistance. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump's conflict with the Justice Department in the last weeks of his presidency to appoint a new Attorney General with intent to contest the results of the presidential election of 2020, is shown in this report in NYT. This created risks for American democracy. The cracks in social cohesion following four decades of foreign wars 1980-2021, irresponsible behavior of financial institutions leading to financial crises and impoverishment of America, incompetent elites, neglect of rural America, ceding of technology and competitive position to China, failure to fund education, healthcare and infrastructure, under presidents Reagan, elder Bush, Clinton,  Bush, Obama, led to a situation of revolt against the status quo by a maverick politician using a new and proven dangerous form of communication social media. Ultimately this put democracy at risk. Lessons from this are only now being learned as people in the Biden administration and outside of it reflect on what happened. In this WSJ report Mr. Trump is seen pressuring officials of the Justice Department to agree to appointment of a new Attorney General shortly after the election. This was seen as an effort to question the results of the 2020 presidential election. A leading senator on the Judiciary Committee says this would lead to "shredding the US Constitution to stay in power." Of this and also of four decades of neglect in America Washington has this to say in his first Inaugural Address on April 30, 1789- "The blessed religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes. Should, hereafter, those entrusted with the management of this government, incited by the lust of power and prompted by the supineness or venality of their Constituents, overleap the known barriers of this Constitution, and violate the inalienable rights of humanity: it will only serve to shew, that no compact among men (however provident in its construction and sacred in its ratification) can be pronounced everlasting and inviolable- and if I may so express myself, that no wall of words, that no mound of parchment can be so formed as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Peggy Noonan reflects on the deep changes taking place in America. Behind the changes is a strong feeling in the middle and working class that it has been ignored by the establishment in both parties. She points to Citizens United and says it is bad for the Republican Party, encouraging large donors and hedge fund billionaires, making the party less accountable to ordinary people. The Clinton's fundraising also raises similar questions. Trade policies depressing wages have worked against the working class, yet espoused by politicians of both parties. The young supporting Sanders, she says have seen little to show capitalism is working for them. Institutions such as Congress, the presidency, the political class, the Supreme Court, the media, are all in an uncertain position, as voters lose faith in the ability of these institutions to work for them. Yet she points out that it is important that the U.S. voters choose wisely- keeping in mind the importance of electing someone who can demonstrate goodness and a sound mind- not obscuring the questions about Trump. Uncouth language, uncouth behaviours reflect sense and sensibilities, it matters a lot, Peggy Noonan tells the Republican Party and America....

LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Friedman of the NYT points out the three aces held by Donald Trump in the U.S. election campaign of 2016. He could move to the centre in a campaign against Hillary Clinton and voters could give him a pass saying he only meant to start a conversation on immigration with his comment on the wall, that his comments on Muslims read carefully only means he would tighten controls on some countries, that he was acting in the way he said in his book "The Art of the Deal." A terrorist attack could change the atmosphere in the election and benefit Trump. And he could set a barrage of ads against Hillary bringing anti-Hillary Republicans back to his side after the divisions in a Republican convention. On the opposite side of this is Trump's penchant for making wild statements that could lead to a break with his support base, especially women who are shifting away according to some recent polls in mid March. Another vulnerability says Friedman is the rough way in which minorities are treated at Trump rallies, which could backfire with a serious incident resulting in hugely negative media coverage....

LyrArc Article Gist
Ted Koppel, managing editor of ABC's "Nightline" news program from 1980 to 2005, says it brings sadness to see the television networks drowning viewers in a flood of opinions designed to confirm their entrenched biases. Its good financially for the networks, he says, but not good for the American republic. He acknowledges the realities of today's journalism- scores of media options, a million or more clusters of consumers, who are harvesting as he puts it, information and news from like-minded providers. That is the way news and information is served up nowadays. And as he points out the shift of news from a public service to a profitable commodity is irreversible. At the same time talk is cheap, and the tendency for strongly held but unsubstantiated views is very prevalent. And yet the need for clear unobjective reporting is greater today than ever before. Covering news in other countries is now more needed than before, but foreign bureaus are expensive and such news harder to collect. As a result many foreign bureaus have seen severe cuts or were closed. Koppel cites Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation that "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Contrary to earlier media reports of Mr Naimi the Saudi oil minister saying that the market was healthy and "well balanced" and that no cuts were expected, it turns out that after extensive debate the OPEC ministers agreed on a cut of 520,000 barrels a day or less than 1% of the world's oil supply. It would put OPEC production back to 32.7 million barrels a day same as the first 3 months of 2008. This was done to avert excess supply in the market but Algeria's oil minister said that this would not affect the downward trend in prices as buyer nations in USA and Europe had already built up supply inventories from weaker demand. Iran, Libya and Algeria argued that there was a supply glut or imbalance from reduced demand. OPEC President is Chakib Khelil of Algeria. Russia's top energy ministers and head of Roseft attended ths OPEC meeting. Sechin head of Rosneft Russia's largest oil company run by the government said tht Russia is preparing a memorandum of understanding for deeened cooperation with OPEC. At tis point OPEC supplie 40% of the world's energy, Russia supplies another 11%. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Five people chosen for the committee to oversee journalistic independence from Murdoch and News Corporation at the Journal. Interestingly the most intriguing choice is from News Corporation that of Negroponte head of MIT media Lab.