The Greek exception

An interesting point by Andreas Andrianopoulos (in Greek), motivated by an article of Gideon Rachman in his blog (FT), on the Greek exception. As Rachman suggests that for nations, small is beautiful. Meaning that today, for a country to be small (both in size and population) is an advantage for prosperity, stability and rapid development. Most of the lists of the top ten countries indexing stability, prosperity, development, social protection are dominated by small countries. This is due to the fact that small countries are more flexible, have greater national and racial homogeneity and can direct their societies towards new and more creative objectives more easily avoiding ineffective practices of the past.

Andrianopoulos claims that despite the fact that the above tends to be the rule, Greece seems to be an exception. I have tried to capture the main idea in English as follows:

“A static society with weak leadership incapable of introducing revolutionary initiatives that runs back to convenient nationalism ideas when perceived as needed. A society lacking of planning, envisioning and dreaming of the future. We turn our advantages into disadvantages. Our small size and our national homogeneity are undermined by the constant desire for fame and wealth of each mediocre.

Altogether the problems indicate a country with a future full of uncertainty. Examples like the current discussion about the insurance system (which hasn’t yet been presented), while indifference characterizes the concerns about education. The examples including OTE (limit on the number of stocks ones is allowed to buy!!!!!), the Public Power Corporation, Olympic airlines and the insurance chaos, are signs of leadership in confusion, labor unions and media in crisis of existence and a society incapable of rejecting what is not useful by selecting people and strategies that will point towards a bright future.

Today, small countries are moving forward with the Greek exception that tries to move forward being stuck looking into the past.”

[via]

Sweden to impose licence fees to computer owners

“Sweden’s television licensing agency Radiotjänst is preparing to push through measures requiring computer owners to pay the annual television license fee of around 2,000 kronor ($327). The move comes just days after Swedish Television (SVT) announced plans to begin broadcasting all its programs live on the internet. “It is our interpretation that a computer may be considered a licensable piece of equipment if an entire channel’s scheduled programming is available over the internet,” said Anna Pettersson, CEO of Radiotjänst.”

This is another pragmatic indication that TV is being substituted by our computers for what it used to offer, and obviously, more. In addition, I wonder if this is going to be embraced by other countries as well. For example, in Greece the fee for the Public Television (EPT) is included in the bills of the Public Power Corporation (ΔΕΗ), should one expect that in the future an additional fee will be introduced for computers ? Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised…

[via]

The war is on, run for your lives (and supplies…)!

Swedes are not very famous for neither their temper nor their patriotic feelings, nevertheless, it seems that we are heading towards an act of retaliation towards the enemy, which in this case is Turkey. One will obviously ask “What the hell are you talking about?”.
Turkey’s attention is on the borders with Iraq and obviously it has a strong impact on the country’s inner social condition.
However, recently a war started online between Sweden and Turkey (read first here and then here). Today, it came to my attention this article accompanied with the viewpoint of the head of the Swedish IT Incident Centre (SITIC) over hacking attacks between the two countries without though being institutionalized. Maybe this is the new form of terror extremist groups? The future will show…
Another example coming to my mind is the recent incident (Sept. 2007) which according to American ­officials, Chinese military hacked into a Pentagon computer network in June in the most successful cyber attack on the US defense department (read here), the accusation was obviously declined (read here).
I could go for hours recalling several examples of such, that is not the point. The point is that since this has gone public, it obviously means, it has been taking place for a long time and reveals signs for the future. The war is on, who will prevail? No idea, I only think it’s an interesting and beneficial observation.
Some countries seem to be ready for that kind of war (ex. China, read here) or are taking steps towards that direction, others are simply increasing the annual expenses on enriching their armies without taking action in that respect (I will call no names ).