Since computers are, if nothing else, starkly logical, for as long as they have been around, there have been people who have hoped that the machines might serve as an example to their human overlords, helping to make certain human affairs--politics, say--a little more logical too.

One of them is Scott Aaronson, a computer scientist at M.I.T. with an idea for a program designed to help people appreciate that the logical path they have just traveled in a political or other discussion might not have been entirely straight and narrow.

Despite being just 27 years old and in only the second year of his professorship, Aaronson is widely known in his field, quantum computing.

Quantum computers work in ways utterly different from conventional ones, and can do some tasks--breaking encryption, say--unimaginably quickly. So far, only small-scale, prototype quantum computers have been built, and it's not yet clear whether one big enough to be useful will ever be technically possible.

Aaronson's work involves quantum software, meaning, as members of his field like to say, that he spends his time thinking about programs for machines that might never get built.

One of his side projects, though, is a work-in-progress political program called the Worldview Manager. It has nothing to do with quantum machines or, indeed, of advanced computing of any sort. In fact, it's so simple and straightforward an idea that you could write it with macros in Excel.

The goal of Worldview Manager, explains Aaronson, is to help people appreciate the inconsistencies and contradictions that might crop up in their social and political beliefs.

The country that once welcomed the tired, poor, huddled masses is now asking for a little reciprocation. And Canada,Germany and Australia are heeding the call.

They top a list of the countries most welcoming to expats. There, relocators have a relatively easy time befriending locals, joining a local community group and learning the local language.

Canada is the most welcoming; almost 95% of respondents to HSBC Bank International's Expat Exploreer Survey, released today, said they have made friends with locals. In Germany, 92% were so lucky and in Australia 91% befriended those living there. The United Arab Emirates was found to be the most difficult for expats; only 54% of those surveyed said they'd made friends with locals.

In Depth: World's Friendliest Countries

Behind The Numbers
The study surveyed 2,155 expats in 48 countries, spanning four continents, between February and April 2008. Respondents rated their country in four categories: ability to befriend locals, number that joined a community group, number that learned the language and percentage that bought property.

"We conducted this survey to better understand expatriate needs and get insight into the emotions of expats. The banking business is all about trust, especially with the recent credit crisis," says Martin Spurling, CEO of HSBC Bank International and Head of HSBC Global Offshore. "We want them to build a relationship with their wealth manager regardless of where they travel."

For Americans, traveling abroad to start over is becoming increasingly common. America used to have it all: good jobs, booming economy, skyrocketing stock market and plentiful housing. What a difference a year can make. The boom has gone bust and people are now heading for the exits en masse--with an eye abroad.

It's no wonder they likely find Canada so welcoming. It has an accessible language, diverse culture and low levels of government corruption, says Patricia Linderman, editor of Tales from a Small Planet, an online newsletter for expats.

It also has other expats. This is important, Linderman says, since even the most gracious locals already have busy, established lives and can be unwilling to put in the effort to befriend someone they know could leave within several years.

"I'm not suggesting that it's good to live in an 'expat ghetto'. It's immensely rewarding to live among local people and make friends with them," she says.

Linderman says other expats are important because they share similar needs like making friends and adjusting to life in a new country. They also understand the frustrations daily life brings.

President-elect  Barack Obama calls it "the largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s." New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg compares it to the New Deal -- when workers built hundreds of bridges, dams and parkways -- while saying it could help close the gap with China, where he recently traveled on a Shanghai train at 267 mph.

Most of the infrastructure spending being proposed for the massive stimulus package that Obama and congressional Democrats are readying, however, is not exactly the stuff of history, but destined for routine projects that have been on the to-do lists of state highway departments for years. Oklahoma wants to repave stretches of Interstates 35 and 40 and build "cable barriers" to keep wayward cars from crossing medians. New Jersey wants to repaint 88 bridges and restore Route 35 from Toms River to Mantoloking. Scottsdale, Ariz., wants to widen 1.5 miles of Scottsdale Road.

On the campaign trail, Obama said he would "rebuild America" with an "infrastructure bank" run by a new board that would award $60 billion over a decade to projects such as high-speed rail to take the country in a more energy-efficient direction. But the crumbling economy, while giving impetus to big spending plans, has also put a new emphasis on projects that can be started immediately -- "use it or lose it," Obama said last week -- and created a clear tension between the need to create jobs fast and the desire for a lasting legacy.

"It doesn't have the power to stir men's souls," said David Goldberg of Smart Growth America. "Repair and maintenance are good. We need to make sure we're building bridges that stand, not bridges to nowhere. But to gild the lily . . . where we're resurfacing pieces of road that aren't that critical, just to be able to say we spent the money, is not what we're after."

Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak is proud that his city was able to quickly rebuild the Interstate 35 bridge that collapsed into the Mississippi River in 2007 while making sure to include capacity for a future transit line on it. But he worries that many of the road and bridge upgrades around the country will not be done in a similarly farsighted way, given the time pressures.

"The quickest things we can do may not be the ones that have the most significant long-term impact on the green economy," he said. "Unless we push a transit investment, this will end up being a stimulus package that rebalances our transportation strategy toward roads and away from [what] we need to get off our addiction to oil."

Mayors say there would be a better chance for a long-term impact if the money were focused on metropolitan areas where investments could make the most difference in reducing congestion and lessening dependence on cars. They doubt that will happen if infrastructure funding goes directly to state capitals.

In Seattle, Mayor Greg Nickels said that the list of projects submitted by Washington state included only one in Seattle, for a ferry dock, while the city has ambitious hopes for removing a hulking highway ramp in a revitalized neighborhood and accelerating a light-rail expansion.

"Metro areas really are the engines of the economy, and to the extent that this can go directly to the metro areas rather than a cumbersome state process, it will have more effect," Nickels said. "States can do a nice job in rural counties, but in metro areas it's not always a good relationship or very nimble."

As it stands, Congress, wanting to keep things simple, plans to disburse the money under existing formulas -- funding for roads and bridges will go to state governments, while money for public transit will go to the local agencies that receive transit funding.

State officials are playing down concerns about their proposed projects' value. New Jersey Gov. Jon S. Corzine said repairing a swath of roads and bridges is ambitious in its own right. "We could spend money on further provision of rail to Port Elizabeth and Port Newark, but if the highways weren't paved, we actually wouldn't have the ability to have the trains get to the spot to take the goods to the local distribution outlet," he said. "Those deferred maintenance investments are fundamental to maintaining a capital infrastructure."

Oklahoma transportation director Gary Ridley justifies his state's wish list in similar terms. Its highway pavements "are probably 40 years old, and some of them have been replaced, but a lot of them haven't," he said. "It's not like we're grabbing these out of the air."

What will it take for A-list actresses to earn as much as actors?

The ninth-highest grossing movie of the year so far--with $153 million in U.S. box office sales--is Sex and the City, a film that features four leading women and a cursory supporting role for Mr. Big. The 11th highest grossing film is Mamma Mia, another estrogen fest, which has earned $144 million.

So with female-centric movies performing so well at the box office (between them, the two films have earned $980 million worldwide), why are women still earning so much less than their male counterparts?

Only two women make the list of the top 10 earning actors in Hollywood between June 2007 and June 2008. Cameron Diaz comes in fifth with $50 million for her work in solid romantic comedies like What Happens in Vegas and The Holiday. She also earned big for her voice work in the Shrek films as the far-from-helpless Princess Fiona.

But she earned a full $30 million less than Hollywood's highest earner, Will Smith, who cashes mega paychecks for films like the post-apocalyptic I Am Legend. In the same time period, Smith earned $80 million.

While women earn less than men in all fields, the difference is particularly egregious in Hollywood because of a long-standing belief that female stars are bad for box office, according to Professor Martha Lauzen of the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film at San Diego State University.

Some of the reasons for that belief are based in reality. A study by Lauzen showed that of the top 100 worldwide grossing films of 2007, those that starred men earned an average $101 million at the box office versus an average $54.5 million for female-starring pictures. In addition, the female-focused movies opened on fewer screens and tended to move out of theaters more quickly.

Which would seem to lend credence to the Hollywood practice of underpaying women. If their movies consistently earn less--why pay them more?

But Lauzen found that the difference in box office performance had more to do with the size of the budget than the sex of the lead movie star. When the size of the budget was held constant, films with female stars earned about the same as films with male stars.

Big action movies, like Smith's I Am Legend, typically have bigger budgets and therefore tend to earn more at the box office and star men. Female-staring movies tend to have smaller budgets.

Steve Jobs' Greatest Surprises

Brian Caulfield, 12.12.08, 12:00 AM EST

Apple's chief executive is the master of surprise--and not just when he's launching new products.

BURLINGAME, Calif.--Mark your calendars. Thanks to Steve Jobs, January has become the season of surprises for the technology industry.

Over the past decade, Jobs has taken over the global music business, turned Apple's (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) clunky computer business into a juggernaut and stormed through the wireless industry with the iPhone. As a result, the Cupterino, Calif., company's shares have risen more than 1,000% over the past 10 years. By contrast, mighty Microsoft's (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) shares have fallen more than 40%.

So what's next? Nobody knows. That's what makes Apple so dangerous. The only certainty: Apple will surprise us with something during the first full week of January at MacWorld in San Francisco. The week is usually marked by big news from Apple Chief Jobs.

In Pictures: 10 Great Steve Jobs Moments

So what will it be this year? Rumors abound. Some speculate that Apple will introduce a tablet computer. Others say Apple will roll out a line of low-cost iPhones. Anything is possible. That's in large part because Apple has been so unpredictable over the past decade.

The biggest surprises have been unexpected new products. The pattern was set in 1998, when Jobs unveiled the candy-colored all-in-one iMac. Since then, Jobs has launched a barrage of surprises. The biggest include the MacBook Air and the Cube.

So what will it be this year? Rumors abound. Some speculate that Apple will introduce a tablet computer. Others say Apple will roll out a line of low-cost iPhones. Anything is possible. That's in large part because Apple has been so unpredictable over the past decade.

The biggest surprises have been unexpected new products. The pattern was set in 1998, when Jobs unveiled the candy-colored all-in-one iMac. Since then, Jobs has launched a barrage of surprises. The biggest include the MacBook Air and the Cube.

Even the widely anticipated iPhone was a surprise. While reporters had teased out the new products name, few guessed that Apple would introduce a touch-screen phone that didn't sport any buttons.

Probably the biggest shock was Apple's switch to Intel (nasdaq: INTC - news - people ) processors. While the switch had been rumored for months before the 2005 Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, many had dismissed the rumor as absurd. Instead, it turned out to be true.

New Bubble, Same Old Frauds

Liz Moyer, 12.12.08, 03:50 PM EST

Enron and Worldcom, Madoff and Dreier. Is anyone really surprised?

Warren Buffett likes to say, "It's only when the tide goes out that you learn who's been swimming naked." The same can be said for slime.

This week alone there were two arrests of prominent New Yorkers alleged to be engaged in massive frauds and the arrest of a governor accused of trying to sell a U.S. Senate seat. And if history proves consistent, there will be many more shocking disclosures to come as the world readjusts to another post-bubble era.

It's nothing new. Excesses during bubble times lead to mistakes, big losses and ultimately the unveiling of frauds. Nobody asks questions when things are going well; they scream for justice when things head south.

Bernard Madoff, a well-respected denizen of Wall Street, faces charges he defrauded investors in his advisory firm of $50 billion by running what prosecutors say he admits was nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme.

The alleged fraud unraveled when Madoff, who has run the business by himself for years, faced $7 billion in client redemption requests this fall. Ponzi schemes need asset inflows to work and break down when those inflows dry up.

Until now, nobody asked loudly enough, however, how it was that Madoff could log such steady and consistent positive returns (reportedly always positive for years even as the markets gyrated). His investment management firm, an affiliate of his market-making brokerage operation bearing his name, had $17 billion under management as of the beginning of 2008, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is pursuing separate civil fraud charges.

Rival fund managers and some hedge fund due diligence firms said Friday they had wondered for years how he pulled it off, but few thought to sound alarms with regulators.

More By This Author

Barack Obama has announced the single largest new investment in the nation's infrastructure since the creation of the interstate highway system in the 1950s under Eisenhower. Speculation begins to build up about the precise nature of this investment.

I have been in Singapore for the last two weeks and have been observing how this tiny country has created a superbly modern infrastructure that flows seamlessly by leveraging technology and process automation.

From the minute I walked through immigration, I began noticing the country's well-conceived mechanisms for efficiency enhancement. Singapore residents have a special smart card that lets them clear immigration without human intervention. Taxis link up via transponders to a central system through which the country implements congestion control, including peak hour and business district surcharges.

As I have watched the city in motion during my stay, it has made me think about the possibilities for infrastructure modernization in the U.S., now that we're embarking on a new era. The problems--health care, energy, traffic congestion, education, poverty and security--each have major implications when you apply smart-card-based process control in the Singaporean way.

Dominique Trempont, former CEO of smart-card firm Gemplus Corp. (now part of Gemalto), believes that the U.S. should roll out one multi-application smart card to the entire population in order to automate various government and private-sector functions. "The card can be partitioned into application segments, and the companies rolling out applications on it can pay for the privilege," Trempont says.

The first application category for a smart card is a government-owned, centralized patient record database that then becomes the heart of the U.S. health care system. A patient goes to a new doctor, and the doctor's office can access the records with the card, without the hassle of gratuitous paperwork handling by multiple office administrators and frustration on the part of the patient. Insurance claims and processing could also be integrated with this central system, closing the loop with the doctor's office and the insurance company.

A second application category could belong in the realm of security and identity. Passports and driver's licenses could be implemented on the smart card: It can enable a smooth transition through immigration and other functions, such as traffic management. After all, why do we need cops to monitor whether drivers are staying within the speed limit? If there is scientific evidence that the most energy-efficient speed at which cars should be driven is 60 mph, then drivers should pay for driving above that speed limit. Fines can be automatically charged on a smart card. Congestion-control applications can also be implemented on the same infrastructure based on time, geographical zoning, vehicle type (with incentives for fuel-efficient cars and penalties for gas guzzlers), etc.

"Not only is a smart-card-based infrastructure great for efficiency enhancement, it can be a major revenue generator," Trempont says. No kidding! If every car that drives above 60 mph is charged a fine, and there were an efficient way of collecting congestion taxes, that revenue alone could be enough to finance the $136 billion that the nation's governors need for infrastructure projects related to roads, bridges and railway. It will also generate ongoing revenue for years to come that can pay for many more ambitious projects.

It's a once-a-year opportunity to have a fantastic time. And damage your career.

There's a legendary story they often tell this time of year at a large New York public relations firm. It's about when a new hire fresh out of college had too much to drink at the company holiday party. She shared a cab home to the same neighborhood with one of the firm's vice presidents, and, well, she barfed in his lap.

Probably not what you'd call a good career move.

Don't be that person this year. Be merry and festive--have a few drinks and laugh with your colleagues. But don't overindulge. If you get drunk and act foolishly, no one will forget. No one needs any blemishes on his scorecard this year, when layoffs loom at so many employers.

Instead, use this as an opportunity to mingle with higher-ups and staffers in other departments. Holiday parties are a great opportunity to meet important people at your company in a less formal setting.

In Pictures: How To Behave At Your Office Party

"The most important thing employees should always remember regarding office holiday parties is, regardless of where the party is held, it is an extension of the workplace, and you need to behave accordingly," says Lori Erickson, vice president of human resources at Monster.com.

At Bliss PR in Manhattan, founder John Bliss doesn't take chances. For more than 15 years he has required his employees to eat at a pre-party pizza dinner. He orders enough pizza for the 30-member staff at around 4:30 and watches to make sure everyone has a few slices. It's the best guarantee possible that no one will drink on an empty stomach.

"It makes sure people have something in them like blotting paper before starting the party," he says. "That way, you have fun without getting embarrassed."

Companies like Bliss have a lot at stake. When they invite clients to their parties, the last thing they need is a drunken staffer. That might be less of a concern this year than in the past, though. With budgets tighter than ever, less alcohol is being served. Only 71% of all parties will offer alcoholic drinks this year, according to an annual survey on holiday celebrations by the executive search firm Battalia Winston. Alcohol service hit a high in 2000, when 90% of firms served booze, according to the 20 years of Battalia reports.

The dwindling amount of alcohol reflects the state of the economy. "Throughout the years, we've learned that the percentage of company parties is directly linked to the health of the economy," says Dale Winston, Battalia Winston's chief executive.

It's likely a blessing in disguise. Annmarie Woods recalls a holiday gathering a few years ago for her sales team at a leading financial services firm. The group began the evening at a downtown restaurant and then headed to a dance club. This being a celebratory evening, their boss picked up the bill for a limousine to get them from the restaurant to the club. While en route, one of the staffers got sick and ended up vomiting into her purse.

"The next day at the meeting everyone was talking about it. Their opinion of her had been altered," Woods says.

The problem with talking about jobs-per-kilowatt hour.

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The details of President-elect Barack Obama's stimulus plan for early next year are not yet drafted, but one thing is clear: Obama wants a lot of the stimulus focused on creating "green jobs."

A supposed benefit of technology like wind power and solar power is that it creates more jobs per kilowatt hour than investments in other industries. So if you want to tackle the environment and unemployment, why not plow money into whichever green technology creates the most jobs per kilowatt hour?

A recent report from the Center for American Progress, the liberal Washington think tank with many of its scholars now helping develop policy for the Obama administration, cites this as one of the most compelling reasons for a "Green Recovery." CAP claims that its $100 billion plan would "create nearly four times more jobs than spending the same amount of money within the oil industry and 300,000 more jobs than a similar amount of spending directed toward household consumption."

The American Wind Energy Association claims it is wind power that creates the most jobs per kilowatt hour. One oft-cited statistic is that there are 27% more jobs per kilowatt-hour from wind than from coal, and 66% more from wind than from natural gas.

Is that true? And does that make it good policy?

"I'm not sure how clearly it's been empirically demonstrated," says Kenneth Green, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "To the extent it's true, it illustrates these technologies aren't that efficient."

Green says this focus looks an awful lot like the "broken window fallacy." The fallacy is this: A kid throws a rock through a shopkeeper's window and therefore has helped the economy by creating work for window makers. If he breaks windows every night, he might even create a job for a janitor to clean up the shards.