Catching up on a few things, I got to read this article by Amy Sullivan on Romney, Mormonism and electability. One thing struck me as true and having some interesting consequences.
All of this leaves Romney in a real pickle. Thus far, he's tried to follow in the tradition of other Massachusetts politicians and "pull a John Kennedy," declaring personal faith irrelevant to his qualifications for office. This is a nonstarter. We live in a political era in which, thanks largely to Republicans, candidates are virtually required to talk openly about their religious views. There is no way a Republican, especially in a GOP primary, can avoid the issue—if for no other reason than the press won't let them.
It's nice to know the spirit of the First Amendment is alive and well on the Right.
Personally I would never vote for or against someone based solely on their religion and never have. They all seem equally foolish to me and a sign that the candidate is subject to the will and judgment of priests, clerics and other ghost chasers.
It does highlight the problem of the Big Tent GOP though. Sullivan says that 30% of the GOP is made up of evangelicals to whom Mormonism isn't even a branch of Christianity. Given Bush fatigue, and other factors at play (the usual corruption, incompetence and spendthriftiness of whatever party is in power), it seems like the Right might have a harder struggle in 2006 and 2008 than they've had the past decade or so. There may be a crop of moderate candidates on the way in the near future, and if the other 70% of the GOP doesn't pick up the pace, those moderates might not be majority Republican.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
ThingsThat Begin with the Letter R
As everyone probably knows by now, it's very unusual (but still within the Gaussian) to get to named storms with the letter R in September.
I was talking to some folks in London yesterday and they asked if I thought it was climate change (or global warming, take your pick). I said I'm post a short piece with some references to explain what I was saying in the cab.
The terms climate change and global warming have become fungible in their common use although they do have different meanings. Global warming is a sub-set of the larger term climate change, and the outcome of global warming (what it causes) may be some other area of climate change (e.g. glaciers, "water world" etc.)
The current spate of hurricanes may or may not be a result of climate change (I know that's not real helpful). It turns out that the current models don't predict statistically more named storms, but do predict that that the storms occur will be stronger and more violent. Hurricanes are powered by the temperature of the surface water over which they travel. The warmer the water, the more evaporation, the stronger the storm (the contrapositive of this also appears to be true). If the ocean temperature is increasing due to surface warming, then storms will be stronger.
You won't get more storms because the forces that cause the storms are correlated with a lot of conditions besides ocean temps (wind patterns, weather in the Sahara, the jet stream and the deep ocean circulation pattern). Climate change may or may not cause more storms, it's not clear. The data so far though only suggest a high Gaussian season so far in the Atlantic, the Pacific and Indian areas seem to be closer to the norm, although there too the intensity is up.
Bill Gray does a good job of making the black art of hurricane prediction more approachable. Back in the day I met Dr. Gray at a AAS conference and have been a fan ever since. He's one of the folks that got me thinking about climate change in the first place.
A Note on Climate Change: The Earth's climate is very complex. The entire discipline of Chaos Theory was founded while trying to tease apart the complex, interacting systems of Earth's energy balance and turn it into a set of simple rules. It's not simple by any means and any conclusions based on simple cause and effect are more likely to be wrong than right and if, right, it's almost always by coincidence. It's roughly equivalent to taking digital computer operating systems and applying them to the analog human brain. Conceptually attractive, but denying the basic physics and certainly the wrong approach.
Real climate models predict strange things in response to surface temperature increases, in part based on the cause of those changes. It’s a complex set of interlocked differential equations, with sometimes odd answers. There are also a lot of factors invloved beyond just the surface temperature which could act as "force multipliers" to amplify some effects out of proportion. These amplified effects feed into other systems and the whole climate moves to a new state vector.
There seems to be two stable attractors in the equations; the current Warm Solution which humanity has mostly evolved in and the White Earth Solution. Neither are fully stable and it seems like the Earth lips back-and-forth between at least these two attractors (they may be more).
The point here is this: It’s a hard problem we don’t understand and, the Earth is not guarantee to be, at all times, habitable. At least not to humans. My advice (since I was asked yesterday), be suspicious of simple cause and effect explanations for or against climate change and, keep in mind the stakes are surprisingly high. In the end, there may be nothing at all we can do about it, except adapt.
Update: In the cab I mentioned some reference to the Martian Climate runaway. References here here and here
I was talking to some folks in London yesterday and they asked if I thought it was climate change (or global warming, take your pick). I said I'm post a short piece with some references to explain what I was saying in the cab.
The terms climate change and global warming have become fungible in their common use although they do have different meanings. Global warming is a sub-set of the larger term climate change, and the outcome of global warming (what it causes) may be some other area of climate change (e.g. glaciers, "water world" etc.)
The current spate of hurricanes may or may not be a result of climate change (I know that's not real helpful). It turns out that the current models don't predict statistically more named storms, but do predict that that the storms occur will be stronger and more violent. Hurricanes are powered by the temperature of the surface water over which they travel. The warmer the water, the more evaporation, the stronger the storm (the contrapositive of this also appears to be true). If the ocean temperature is increasing due to surface warming, then storms will be stronger.
You won't get more storms because the forces that cause the storms are correlated with a lot of conditions besides ocean temps (wind patterns, weather in the Sahara, the jet stream and the deep ocean circulation pattern). Climate change may or may not cause more storms, it's not clear. The data so far though only suggest a high Gaussian season so far in the Atlantic, the Pacific and Indian areas seem to be closer to the norm, although there too the intensity is up.
Bill Gray does a good job of making the black art of hurricane prediction more approachable. Back in the day I met Dr. Gray at a AAS conference and have been a fan ever since. He's one of the folks that got me thinking about climate change in the first place.
A Note on Climate Change: The Earth's climate is very complex. The entire discipline of Chaos Theory was founded while trying to tease apart the complex, interacting systems of Earth's energy balance and turn it into a set of simple rules. It's not simple by any means and any conclusions based on simple cause and effect are more likely to be wrong than right and if, right, it's almost always by coincidence. It's roughly equivalent to taking digital computer operating systems and applying them to the analog human brain. Conceptually attractive, but denying the basic physics and certainly the wrong approach.
Real climate models predict strange things in response to surface temperature increases, in part based on the cause of those changes. It’s a complex set of interlocked differential equations, with sometimes odd answers. There are also a lot of factors invloved beyond just the surface temperature which could act as "force multipliers" to amplify some effects out of proportion. These amplified effects feed into other systems and the whole climate moves to a new state vector.
There seems to be two stable attractors in the equations; the current Warm Solution which humanity has mostly evolved in and the White Earth Solution. Neither are fully stable and it seems like the Earth lips back-and-forth between at least these two attractors (they may be more).
The point here is this: It’s a hard problem we don’t understand and, the Earth is not guarantee to be, at all times, habitable. At least not to humans. My advice (since I was asked yesterday), be suspicious of simple cause and effect explanations for or against climate change and, keep in mind the stakes are surprisingly high. In the end, there may be nothing at all we can do about it, except adapt.
Update: In the cab I mentioned some reference to the Martian Climate runaway. References here here and here
A Very Unique Pet Peeve
I can't stand it when people use the phrase "very unique" when they really mean "very unusual". Unique means "one of a kind" and therefore cannot take a modifier like very.
I was just listening to NPR and a teacher, a teacher for Christ's sake, talked about her "very unique students" who had gone to Iraq. A teacher!
Someone should wash her mouth out with soap, talking to students like that.
I was just listening to NPR and a teacher, a teacher for Christ's sake, talked about her "very unique students" who had gone to Iraq. A teacher!
Someone should wash her mouth out with soap, talking to students like that.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
The McKeithen's
I'm tired and jet lagged, so this struck me as hilariously funny.
I'm pretty sure this was done over at Lileks at some point, but I'm tired enough that I think I need sleep more than closure.
Love the hair on Aunt Bea there...
I'm pretty sure this was done over at Lileks at some point, but I'm tired enough that I think I need sleep more than closure.
Love the hair on Aunt Bea there...
All the President's Notes
A bit was made last week of a photo from Rueters which caught the President seeming to ask Condi Rice for permission to go tot he bathroom. It was a non-story but provided some relief from the Roberts non-story and used up some column inches while they prepare the death tolls from Rita.
I got home from London a hour or so ago, caught this, and it made me laugh (mostly becuase it reminded me of this). Your milage may vary.
I got home from London a hour or so ago, caught this, and it made me laugh (mostly becuase it reminded me of this). Your milage may vary.
Grasping at Straws 1 in a suspected series
I didn't quite know what to make of this at first. I thought it might be a joke of some kind:
Recruits Sought for Porn Squad
Let's see; Hunt for OBL?, no luck, theWar on Drugs?, Drugs plentiful, rights compromised, the War on Terror? Budget blasted, world not safe... why would the FBI ...??? The I read this paragraph:
Applicants for the porn squad should therefore have a stomach for the kind of material that tends to be most offensive to local juries. Community standards -- along with a prurient purpose and absence of artistic merit -- define criminal obscenity under current Supreme Court doctrine.
Ah. The President' spoll numbers are down and his looking to increase his popularity among republicans before the mid-term elections.
Here's a suggestion: Find OBL!! You'll be popular with everyone!
Recruits Sought for Porn Squad
Let's see; Hunt for OBL?, no luck, theWar on Drugs?, Drugs plentiful, rights compromised, the War on Terror? Budget blasted, world not safe... why would the FBI ...??? The I read this paragraph:
Applicants for the porn squad should therefore have a stomach for the kind of material that tends to be most offensive to local juries. Community standards -- along with a prurient purpose and absence of artistic merit -- define criminal obscenity under current Supreme Court doctrine.
Ah. The President' spoll numbers are down and his looking to increase his popularity among republicans before the mid-term elections.
Here's a suggestion: Find OBL!! You'll be popular with everyone!
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
I Am Not a MacArthur Genius
I can honestly stay I would never have thought of this:
David Plotz crunched the numbers to find out who is most likely to get the unexpected call announcing the fellowship. The verdict? "All the rules suggest that the perfect MacArthur genius is still out there: a one-named Berkeley professor who choreographs interpretative jazz dances about how genetically modified food will destroy humanity."
I once invented a way to do surface integrals on a Mobius strip, worked out how to keep the North Koreans from cheating on the NTBT using crypto, invented my own non-Euclidean geometry, co-authored a paper on (so-called these days) Horvath-Arabadjis Polynomials and worked with gas-phase fractal chemistry. I have a measured IQ almost a sigma above Weschler genius level. However, I am clearly barking up the wrong trees.
Maybe I could invent a crime-solving cheese-based dessert, or a theory of economics based on the consumption of prunes... ... wait... that's Reagenomics. shit.
David Plotz crunched the numbers to find out who is most likely to get the unexpected call announcing the fellowship. The verdict? "All the rules suggest that the perfect MacArthur genius is still out there: a one-named Berkeley professor who choreographs interpretative jazz dances about how genetically modified food will destroy humanity."
I once invented a way to do surface integrals on a Mobius strip, worked out how to keep the North Koreans from cheating on the NTBT using crypto, invented my own non-Euclidean geometry, co-authored a paper on (so-called these days) Horvath-Arabadjis Polynomials and worked with gas-phase fractal chemistry. I have a measured IQ almost a sigma above Weschler genius level. However, I am clearly barking up the wrong trees.
Maybe I could invent a crime-solving cheese-based dessert, or a theory of economics based on the consumption of prunes... ... wait... that's Reagenomics. shit.
A Good Idea
Andrew Sullivan has a good idea that I fully support, noting folk who exhibit some modicom of judgement and recognize that occasioanlly recognizing the flaws on your side of the political spectrum, makes you a more credible advocate, not less. He call it the Yglesias Award. Here's a good example:
"For the crime of noting that the president's speech didn't help his poll numbers, I'm getting battered by e-mailers who suggest, among other things, that I am somehow unmanly because I'm not "supporting" the president enough. I never thought a day would come when I -- the author of a book entitled 'Bush Country: How Dubya Became the First Great Leader of the 21st Century While Driving Liberals Insane' -- would be accused of being a fair-weather supporter of GWB. Let me just try to explain something to my e-mailers. The president gave his speech Thursday night in an effort to reverse the decline in his political fortunes... It appears his effort was unsuccessful, in part (I think) because he sounded like a Big Spender and alienated more Republicans without winning over more Democrats... Bush supporters don't help him or themselves any by pretending his troubles are all due to the MSM. He has, for the moment, lost the country's confidence." - John Podhoretz, National Review Online.
Way to go, Sully. I knew there was a reason to very occasionally look at the National Review.
"For the crime of noting that the president's speech didn't help his poll numbers, I'm getting battered by e-mailers who suggest, among other things, that I am somehow unmanly because I'm not "supporting" the president enough. I never thought a day would come when I -- the author of a book entitled 'Bush Country: How Dubya Became the First Great Leader of the 21st Century While Driving Liberals Insane' -- would be accused of being a fair-weather supporter of GWB. Let me just try to explain something to my e-mailers. The president gave his speech Thursday night in an effort to reverse the decline in his political fortunes... It appears his effort was unsuccessful, in part (I think) because he sounded like a Big Spender and alienated more Republicans without winning over more Democrats... Bush supporters don't help him or themselves any by pretending his troubles are all due to the MSM. He has, for the moment, lost the country's confidence." - John Podhoretz, National Review Online.
Way to go, Sully. I knew there was a reason to very occasionally look at the National Review.
Speaking of Madonna
Speak the devil's name and she will appear. I am coming back to my hotel tonight and there is a huge crown in Leicester Square. Paparazzi, cameras, fenced off areas, the whole nine yards. I realize with each step that it seems to be centered on my hotel. Not Good. Further, as I pass the theatre nearby I realize they are celebrating the opening of a new movie (on a Tuesday?????). A Guy Ritche movie. Ut-oh. I wave my hotel card, get through security and into the lobby and who is there but… Madonna. Giving a press conference of some kind in the bar where I was planning on having a snack, reading my book and relaxing. Ugh.
I wish that bitch would stop following me around.
I wish that bitch would stop following me around.
The Last Exorcism of Mary Poppins
Last week Travis had a contest for bad cross-over movie/book/comic deals. I put in a few but one of my favorites was (the Nick-amended title) The Last Exorcism of Mary Poppins. I chucked a lot when I wrote it and thought it was my second best attempt (The best, in my mind, being Harry Potter and the Prisoners of Oz [Penitentiary] )
I didn’t realize I would be in London this week when I wrote that and here Mary Poppins is beyond a pop icon and almost a secular saint. As a result, her image is everywhere, even more than Madonna’s. The idea of her being possessed makes a kind of sense given the movie (sliding up banisters, flying, making objects move, speaking in tongues, fucking the devil). So I was so surprised I laughed out loud and have been giggling all morning by something I saw today; A large cut-out of MP in the sidewalk (maybe advertising cell phones or something) with a bishop (or some other dressed up cleric type) standing next to her. I instantly imagined him turning to her, spraying her with Holy Water and saying “The power of Christ compels you! The power of Christ compels you!”.
Well… *I* thought it was funny.
I didn’t realize I would be in London this week when I wrote that and here Mary Poppins is beyond a pop icon and almost a secular saint. As a result, her image is everywhere, even more than Madonna’s. The idea of her being possessed makes a kind of sense given the movie (sliding up banisters, flying, making objects move, speaking in tongues, fucking the devil). So I was so surprised I laughed out loud and have been giggling all morning by something I saw today; A large cut-out of MP in the sidewalk (maybe advertising cell phones or something) with a bishop (or some other dressed up cleric type) standing next to her. I instantly imagined him turning to her, spraying her with Holy Water and saying “The power of Christ compels you! The power of Christ compels you!”.
Well… *I* thought it was funny.
With a Name like Methlabs.org ...
I'm not sure what else I would have expected:
The majority of the Methlabs.org administration and development team have been forced out of their web site following a series of threats and incidents. The member of the group that had been trusted to handle the finances and servers slowly managed to take over each individual part of the web site's assets, eventually claiming control over the entire group and locking out the majority of staff.
The organisation's founders, Tim Leonard and Ken McKelland, as well as the majority of the organisation's staff and developers (including the main developer of the PeerGuardian2 application, Cory Nelson and the staff members responsible for auditing the PeerGuardian Blocklists) have all been forcibly removed from the servers that were funded from donations given to the organisation by happy users, and from text advertising placed on the web sites forum and project pages.
The money, which was to have been used to help fund the development and hosting costs of the group is now unavailable, stolen by the one who was trusted to keep it.
Just a reminder, 80% of financial attacks against an IT organization are insider jobs.
The majority of the Methlabs.org administration and development team have been forced out of their web site following a series of threats and incidents. The member of the group that had been trusted to handle the finances and servers slowly managed to take over each individual part of the web site's assets, eventually claiming control over the entire group and locking out the majority of staff.
The organisation's founders, Tim Leonard and Ken McKelland, as well as the majority of the organisation's staff and developers (including the main developer of the PeerGuardian2 application, Cory Nelson and the staff members responsible for auditing the PeerGuardian Blocklists) have all been forcibly removed from the servers that were funded from donations given to the organisation by happy users, and from text advertising placed on the web sites forum and project pages.
The money, which was to have been used to help fund the development and hosting costs of the group is now unavailable, stolen by the one who was trusted to keep it.
...
Here's where I snickered a little:
Adam Hoier, Cory Nelson, Eric Mayuk, Fox Lowe, James Shanelec, Joseph Farthing, Ken McKelland, Steffen Tuzar, Tim Leonard
aka
braindancer, D3F, fox, FuRiOuS1, JFM, KuKIE, method, phrosty, r00ted
r00ted!
Just a reminder, 80% of financial attacks against an IT organization are insider jobs.
"A Great White Canvas
... on which we write all our hopes and all our fears." - Description of the act of reviewing movies I hard once.
Andrew Sullivan has a reasonably sane take on those folks projecting all sorts of their hopes and fears onto "The March of the Penguins"
I want to see it because, well, I havea soft spot for penguins.
Andrew Sullivan has a reasonably sane take on those folks projecting all sorts of their hopes and fears onto "The March of the Penguins"
I want to see it because, well, I havea soft spot for penguins.
Monday, September 19, 2005
London
I got here late Sunday night, unsuccessfully tried to sleep, got up at 5:30 and hauled my bippy out to Reading for my meeting with HSBC. Sleepless and jet-lagged I still managed to talk to them for more than 3 hours straight on Payment systems, rt market data feeds and web-service based enterprise service buses. Not shabby. The rest of the day was taken up the same meeting although I was not critical to it. Then back here, a light dinner a few calls and then bed.
Today is much less hectic, so I'm hoping I'll get a chance to walk around town and do a few things. London is second only to Amsterdam in my ranking of cities and very easy for an American to along in, despite recent tensions. Some people know have compared visiting the UK to visiting a 52nd state. I completely disagree. I think it's like visiting a foreign country where folks happen to be good at English (if not always understandable). If you treat London as a version of America, well you sort of miss the point altogether.
I'm staying at the St. Martin's Lane hotel, which is right off Trafalgar Square. Convenient to a lot of places, including the office, near theatres and, in general, a great place. I was in London a lot in 2001 when we were raising our C round for Certco and I stayed in this same area. Therefore, falsely confident, I took the Tube back from Paddington yesterday instead of a cab, got off at the wrong stop (Piccadilly Circus) which I thought must be nearby, then wandered around with a full computer bag for an hour seeing lots of things that were familiar, but not near my hotel. oh well. I know I get lost easily and make time for that in most of my plans. Despite the heavy pack, it was fun and I often forget just how beautiful London really is.
Today all my appointments are in the afternoon so I'm going to spend some time this morning wandering around on my way to the office. I should be done by 6:30pm and, barring a last-minute client dinner, I've resolved to go spend some time in a pub tonight.
Home tomorrow evening after another trip to Reading and a speech at some conference.
Today is much less hectic, so I'm hoping I'll get a chance to walk around town and do a few things. London is second only to Amsterdam in my ranking of cities and very easy for an American to along in, despite recent tensions. Some people know have compared visiting the UK to visiting a 52nd state. I completely disagree. I think it's like visiting a foreign country where folks happen to be good at English (if not always understandable). If you treat London as a version of America, well you sort of miss the point altogether.
I'm staying at the St. Martin's Lane hotel, which is right off Trafalgar Square. Convenient to a lot of places, including the office, near theatres and, in general, a great place. I was in London a lot in 2001 when we were raising our C round for Certco and I stayed in this same area. Therefore, falsely confident, I took the Tube back from Paddington yesterday instead of a cab, got off at the wrong stop (Piccadilly Circus) which I thought must be nearby, then wandered around with a full computer bag for an hour seeing lots of things that were familiar, but not near my hotel. oh well. I know I get lost easily and make time for that in most of my plans. Despite the heavy pack, it was fun and I often forget just how beautiful London really is.
Today all my appointments are in the afternoon so I'm going to spend some time this morning wandering around on my way to the office. I should be done by 6:30pm and, barring a last-minute client dinner, I've resolved to go spend some time in a pub tonight.
Home tomorrow evening after another trip to Reading and a speech at some conference.
Note from England
I was reading the Independent and came across an interesting article:
What has happened to Iraq's missing $1bn?
Interesting Bits:
The money, intended to train and equip an Iraqi army capable of bringing security to a country shattered by the US-led invasion and prolonged rebellion, was instead siphoned abroad in cash and has disappeared.
...
Most of the money was supposedly spent buying arms from Poland and Pakistan. The contracts were peculiar in four ways. According to Mr Allawi, they were awarded without bidding, and were signed with a Baghdad-based company, and not directly with the foreign supplier. The money was paid up front, and, surprisingly for Iraq, it was paid at great speed out of the ministry's account with the Central Bank. Military equipment purchased in Poland included 28-year-old Soviet-made helicopters.
...
I can start to see why it's taking so long to get a security force in order there.
Illogical Bit:
The writer makes this sort of illogical leap:
The sum missing over an eight-month period in 2004 and 2005 is the equivalent of the $1.8bn that Saddam allegedly received in kick- backs under the UN's oil-for-food programme between 1997 and 2003. The UN was pilloried for not stopping this corruption. The US military is likely to be criticised over the latest scandal because it was far better placed than the UN to monitor corruption.
Actually, the $1.8B isn't illogical (the writer justifies the total), but comparing these two things is highly illogical. The UN program was a bad apple. This is a bad orange. They are not comparable in their badness, only in some coincidental details.
Apart from that its worth a read.
What has happened to Iraq's missing $1bn?
Interesting Bits:
The money, intended to train and equip an Iraqi army capable of bringing security to a country shattered by the US-led invasion and prolonged rebellion, was instead siphoned abroad in cash and has disappeared.
...
Most of the money was supposedly spent buying arms from Poland and Pakistan. The contracts were peculiar in four ways. According to Mr Allawi, they were awarded without bidding, and were signed with a Baghdad-based company, and not directly with the foreign supplier. The money was paid up front, and, surprisingly for Iraq, it was paid at great speed out of the ministry's account with the Central Bank. Military equipment purchased in Poland included 28-year-old Soviet-made helicopters.
...
I can start to see why it's taking so long to get a security force in order there.
Illogical Bit:
The writer makes this sort of illogical leap:
The sum missing over an eight-month period in 2004 and 2005 is the equivalent of the $1.8bn that Saddam allegedly received in kick- backs under the UN's oil-for-food programme between 1997 and 2003. The UN was pilloried for not stopping this corruption. The US military is likely to be criticised over the latest scandal because it was far better placed than the UN to monitor corruption.
Actually, the $1.8B isn't illogical (the writer justifies the total), but comparing these two things is highly illogical. The UN program was a bad apple. This is a bad orange. They are not comparable in their badness, only in some coincidental details.
Apart from that its worth a read.
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Off to London
I'm headed to London in the morning at 7am. After that it's Redmond until the 30th, back here for a few days and then, if all goes well, to corporate housing.
I Want a New Flag
I saw this, and just had to write a song to go with it.
I want a New Flag (with Apologies to Huey Lewis and News)*
I want a new flag
One that will really stick
In the craws of all those liberals
And other folks I think are sick
I want a new flag
One with baby Jesus instead
One to praise the angles and get me
Into heaven when I’m dead.
One that shows the whole world
What a Christian country we are
One that makes the Bible law
For all white men, near and far
I want a new flag
One beyond red white and blue
One with lots of pretty girls
And maybe some angels too
I want a new flag
One that inspires the troops
One that can’t be burned
But could be worn on all my suits
One that shows the whole world
Just what this country can do
‘cause when were done with the towel heads
We’ll be coming after you
Oh we’ll be coming after you
I want a new flag
One that does what it should
One that fills me with pride
One that makes me feel real good.
I want a new flag
One without a doubt
One that flys over Moscow
And makes the cheerleaders shout
One that won’t make me nervous
With all those confusing rights
One keeps down the blackies
And helps me sleep at night.
And helps me sleep at night.
*Views expressed in this song are not the express views of the management
-Signed, The Management
"I Want a New Drug" is a song probably under a lot of copyrights. This parody should, in no way, be mistaken for the real product.
I want a New Flag (with Apologies to Huey Lewis and News)*
I want a new flag
One that will really stick
In the craws of all those liberals
And other folks I think are sick
I want a new flag
One with baby Jesus instead
One to praise the angles and get me
Into heaven when I’m dead.
One that shows the whole world
What a Christian country we are
One that makes the Bible law
For all white men, near and far
I want a new flag
One beyond red white and blue
One with lots of pretty girls
And maybe some angels too
I want a new flag
One that inspires the troops
One that can’t be burned
But could be worn on all my suits
One that shows the whole world
Just what this country can do
‘cause when were done with the towel heads
We’ll be coming after you
Oh we’ll be coming after you
I want a new flag
One that does what it should
One that fills me with pride
One that makes me feel real good.
I want a new flag
One without a doubt
One that flys over Moscow
And makes the cheerleaders shout
One that won’t make me nervous
With all those confusing rights
One keeps down the blackies
And helps me sleep at night.
And helps me sleep at night.
*Views expressed in this song are not the express views of the management
-Signed, The Management
"I Want a New Drug" is a song probably under a lot of copyrights. This parody should, in no way, be mistaken for the real product.
I'm No Fan of PETA but..
This is intolerable.
Revolting video footage posted on the Web site of the Dallas Morning News shows officers shooting dogs. At least one of their victims survived the gunshots and was apparently left to die a slow, agonizing death amid debris from the storm.
Of course, shooting is not an approved, reasonable, or reliable method of animal control. In fact, The 2000 Report of the AVMA [American Veterinary Medical Association] Panel on Euthanasia—the veterinary medical authority on euthanasia—states, "[G]unshot should not be used for routine euthanasia of animals in animal control situations." This dangerous method often fails to achieve instantaneous unconsciousness; animals can be injured by initial gunshots and suffer tremendously before dying, as seems to be happening in St. Bernard Parish. Gunshot is also categorized as an inhumane method of killing in The Humane Society of the United States' "General Statement Regarding Euthanasia Methods for Dogs and Cats."
Revolting video footage posted on the Web site of the Dallas Morning News shows officers shooting dogs. At least one of their victims survived the gunshots and was apparently left to die a slow, agonizing death amid debris from the storm.
Of course, shooting is not an approved, reasonable, or reliable method of animal control. In fact, The 2000 Report of the AVMA [American Veterinary Medical Association] Panel on Euthanasia—the veterinary medical authority on euthanasia—states, "[G]unshot should not be used for routine euthanasia of animals in animal control situations." This dangerous method often fails to achieve instantaneous unconsciousness; animals can be injured by initial gunshots and suffer tremendously before dying, as seems to be happening in St. Bernard Parish. Gunshot is also categorized as an inhumane method of killing in The Humane Society of the United States' "General Statement Regarding Euthanasia Methods for Dogs and Cats."
Media Training 102
While I'm on the subject of media training...
I note with no pride that my jobs for the 6 or 7 years, a majority or all of my job has been in the marketing department (as it currently is right now). As a result I've had an inordinate amount of media training. Not just the "get up and do a speech" kind, but dealing with the press (hostile and friendly), writing for publication, how to be on television, the 10 tricks to get into the papers and the 5 tricks to stay out, persuasive writing, use of visuals etc. A full course in other words. I'm at a point in my career where I have even spent time training others.
I found this web site some time ago and was looking at it today. I point it out not for it’s snarky attitude or partisan bias (although I somewhat enjoy the latter in much smaller doses than this), but because the analysis of the visuals is spot on. Ignore the text and just look at the pictures. I've added this to my collection of teaching/reference materials for marketing and persuasive writing becuase it's just too good to pass by despite the fact that it's being done by someone with whom I disagree politically.
They do things like this well at the White House and current administration is really exceptional. Look past the mock outrage the author is using to make his point and you’ll see a real masterpiece of Media Staging worthy of the heftiest Hollywood Movie or Product Placement Ad.
I’m impressed with the President’s staff. They’re really good at this.
I note with no pride that my jobs for the 6 or 7 years, a majority or all of my job has been in the marketing department (as it currently is right now). As a result I've had an inordinate amount of media training. Not just the "get up and do a speech" kind, but dealing with the press (hostile and friendly), writing for publication, how to be on television, the 10 tricks to get into the papers and the 5 tricks to stay out, persuasive writing, use of visuals etc. A full course in other words. I'm at a point in my career where I have even spent time training others.
I found this web site some time ago and was looking at it today. I point it out not for it’s snarky attitude or partisan bias (although I somewhat enjoy the latter in much smaller doses than this), but because the analysis of the visuals is spot on. Ignore the text and just look at the pictures. I've added this to my collection of teaching/reference materials for marketing and persuasive writing becuase it's just too good to pass by despite the fact that it's being done by someone with whom I disagree politically.
They do things like this well at the White House and current administration is really exceptional. Look past the mock outrage the author is using to make his point and you’ll see a real masterpiece of Media Staging worthy of the heftiest Hollywood Movie or Product Placement Ad.
I’m impressed with the President’s staff. They’re really good at this.
Why Can't they Just Boil the Water?
After the inital Katrina disaster, Geoff asked me why the relief workers were shipping water into New Orleans when it seemed they already had more than they needed.
"Why can't they just boil it?"
I explained, but the photo goes it justice.
This is your drinking water on entropy. Any questions?
A Good Blog to Check Out
Lee.org
Interesting and very occasionally controversial. I've never met Lee in person ( I don't think), but he's a life long friend of TJIC and, like me, seems to have found a kind of philosophical neutral buoyancy with him.
Check it out, it's worth a few moments of your time (if nothing else, the Burning Man photos are cool).
Interesting and very occasionally controversial. I've never met Lee in person ( I don't think), but he's a life long friend of TJIC and, like me, seems to have found a kind of philosophical neutral buoyancy with him.
Check it out, it's worth a few moments of your time (if nothing else, the Burning Man photos are cool).
Interesting Thoughts on Oil
from a blogger and FinServ analyst:
Some nuggets, but read it all. This is what real-world, rubber-meets-road financial services economics looks like.
Another chestnut is that "oil is doing the Federal Reserve's job for it", which I heard yesterday on a business news show---the implication being that Alan Greenspan and the Fed don't need to raise interest rates since higher oil acts to slow the economy just as higher rates do. More nonsense. Oil does not do the Fed's job; it reflects the job the Fed is doing. All else being equal, the more money the government prints, the higher oil goes. And indeed, over the past year all else has been equal. Despite the constant media hype about Chinese demand, last week Morgan Stanley analyst Andy Xie noted that oil's demand-supply relationship has not changed this year---but oil prices are up about 70%.
...
This leads to yet another oft-spoken absurdity about oil: even though it is near an all-time high, "it's still well below its inflation-adjusted high" of the 1970's. In other words, the price of oil is rising due to inflation, but we've printed so much money over the past 25 years that we've made oil cheap! So goes that line of reasoning, which is cognitive dissonance, denial, and circular logic all wrapped into one. Want a good prediction on where oil will be trading a year from now? Tell me exactly what the Fed's monetary policy will be and how much liquidity will be created or drained over the next twelve months, and I'll give you a pretty good guess on where oil will be trading.
Here's a good example of non-Guassian events causing market indices to temporarily uncouple from the market itself. In much the same way a weather vein will point the true direction of the wind most of the time, but become randomized in a storm, market indices have boundaries in which they are valid.
But parts of German society did quite well during this chaos, particularly those with access to the river of money creation. This included the staid banker class, as well as leveraged stock and real estate speculators---in other words, today's investment bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate insiders, and real estate flippers. At the height of its inflation during the early 1920's, Germany's stock market began a stunning climb that masked and defied the underlying economic chaos. This happened because people were desperate for any type of return on their money in order to meet their ever-increasing daily living expenses. Twenty-five year old stock traders got rich, while prudent savers and middle class pensioners lost everything to inflation. It is impossible to overstate the impact this had on traditionally conservative and ordered German society. The nation was turned upside down, and people were both fascinated with and enraged by the chaos that defined their daily lives. The public's reaction to this paved the way for the rise of Hitler, who railed against the "greedy money changers" who had benefited from the economic insanity. Importantly, Hitler's appeal increased exponentially after the great credit collapse of the early 1930's, when the inflation and debt creation of the previous decade unwound quickly. We know what happened after that.
...
If you knew the government would pay for your temporary relocation, rebuild your house, give you a job, and send you a nice check after a natural disaster, would you buy insurance? Would you live in a place less vulnerable to a natural disaster? Would you evaluate your overall risk profile rationally and take appropriate measures to protect yourself? And importantly, what incentive does government have to live up to its own responsibility to prepare for disasters if the printing press is always available as a salve when something happens?
A point I've been harping on for about a year now:
Since oil is currently priced globally in dollars, using a different currency for both pricing and transactions would remove the only way outside of direct military action the U.S. exerts control over a critical natural resource it does not own. This poses a direct threat to dollar hegemony and thus the system of debt creation upon which we rely.
There is, unfortunately a long section of reasoning-by-analogy in this, but I think it's more pedagogical and he isn't relying on the answer for anything more than an illustration of the larger principle of dollar-inflation.
The comments and critques are good as well. I don't agree with all of it, but it does reflect some of what I and others who work in the industry have been thinking.
Some nuggets, but read it all. This is what real-world, rubber-meets-road financial services economics looks like.
Another chestnut is that "oil is doing the Federal Reserve's job for it", which I heard yesterday on a business news show---the implication being that Alan Greenspan and the Fed don't need to raise interest rates since higher oil acts to slow the economy just as higher rates do. More nonsense. Oil does not do the Fed's job; it reflects the job the Fed is doing. All else being equal, the more money the government prints, the higher oil goes. And indeed, over the past year all else has been equal. Despite the constant media hype about Chinese demand, last week Morgan Stanley analyst Andy Xie noted that oil's demand-supply relationship has not changed this year---but oil prices are up about 70%.
...
This leads to yet another oft-spoken absurdity about oil: even though it is near an all-time high, "it's still well below its inflation-adjusted high" of the 1970's. In other words, the price of oil is rising due to inflation, but we've printed so much money over the past 25 years that we've made oil cheap! So goes that line of reasoning, which is cognitive dissonance, denial, and circular logic all wrapped into one. Want a good prediction on where oil will be trading a year from now? Tell me exactly what the Fed's monetary policy will be and how much liquidity will be created or drained over the next twelve months, and I'll give you a pretty good guess on where oil will be trading.
Here's a good example of non-Guassian events causing market indices to temporarily uncouple from the market itself. In much the same way a weather vein will point the true direction of the wind most of the time, but become randomized in a storm, market indices have boundaries in which they are valid.
But parts of German society did quite well during this chaos, particularly those with access to the river of money creation. This included the staid banker class, as well as leveraged stock and real estate speculators---in other words, today's investment bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate insiders, and real estate flippers. At the height of its inflation during the early 1920's, Germany's stock market began a stunning climb that masked and defied the underlying economic chaos. This happened because people were desperate for any type of return on their money in order to meet their ever-increasing daily living expenses. Twenty-five year old stock traders got rich, while prudent savers and middle class pensioners lost everything to inflation. It is impossible to overstate the impact this had on traditionally conservative and ordered German society. The nation was turned upside down, and people were both fascinated with and enraged by the chaos that defined their daily lives. The public's reaction to this paved the way for the rise of Hitler, who railed against the "greedy money changers" who had benefited from the economic insanity. Importantly, Hitler's appeal increased exponentially after the great credit collapse of the early 1930's, when the inflation and debt creation of the previous decade unwound quickly. We know what happened after that.
...
If you knew the government would pay for your temporary relocation, rebuild your house, give you a job, and send you a nice check after a natural disaster, would you buy insurance? Would you live in a place less vulnerable to a natural disaster? Would you evaluate your overall risk profile rationally and take appropriate measures to protect yourself? And importantly, what incentive does government have to live up to its own responsibility to prepare for disasters if the printing press is always available as a salve when something happens?
A point I've been harping on for about a year now:
Since oil is currently priced globally in dollars, using a different currency for both pricing and transactions would remove the only way outside of direct military action the U.S. exerts control over a critical natural resource it does not own. This poses a direct threat to dollar hegemony and thus the system of debt creation upon which we rely.
There is, unfortunately a long section of reasoning-by-analogy in this, but I think it's more pedagogical and he isn't relying on the answer for anything more than an illustration of the larger principle of dollar-inflation.
The comments and critques are good as well. I don't agree with all of it, but it does reflect some of what I and others who work in the industry have been thinking.
The Powers of the Unelected Career Politician
This is more than a little frightening.
Elizabeth Reyes, 30, was terminated Sept. 6 after being quoted in The Washington Post three days earlier saying it was potential vote fraud to register in a place where you don't actually live. Ms. Reyes said that she was answering a hypothetical question, that she didn't know she talking with a reporter and that Mr. Rove's name never came up. The Post acknowledged that Mr. Rove's name was not mentioned but said the reporter did identify herself as working for the newspaper.
...
Secretary of State Roger Williams said that he decided to dismiss the lawyer after talking with Mr. Rove but that the White House adviser didn't request that he do so. "Absolutely not," said Mr. Williams, a longtime supporter of President Bush and a major GOP fundraiser. "Karl called me. He had read the article and wanted to know if it was our stance" that his voter registration status in Texas might be in jeopardy, he said. "I told him it wasn't and that the person who gave that opinion was not authorized to do so."
Not frightening because it's boogy-man Rove, frightening because a) it gives the strong appearance of being done at Rove's request and b) he's not an official elected to do anything. Just a guy who advises the President. There was a time in this country where people got all het-up around even the appearance of impropriety.
I remember the "scandal" at the beginning of the Clinton administration when elected officials fired some career bureaucrats from the WH Travel Office. This lead to Congressional Investigations even though everyone was perfectly within their charter and, it lead to nothing. Again the 'liberal' press had a field day throwing mud at the President and nothing was accomplished.
I somehow doubt that's going to happen here.
Elizabeth Reyes, 30, was terminated Sept. 6 after being quoted in The Washington Post three days earlier saying it was potential vote fraud to register in a place where you don't actually live. Ms. Reyes said that she was answering a hypothetical question, that she didn't know she talking with a reporter and that Mr. Rove's name never came up. The Post acknowledged that Mr. Rove's name was not mentioned but said the reporter did identify herself as working for the newspaper.
...
Secretary of State Roger Williams said that he decided to dismiss the lawyer after talking with Mr. Rove but that the White House adviser didn't request that he do so. "Absolutely not," said Mr. Williams, a longtime supporter of President Bush and a major GOP fundraiser. "Karl called me. He had read the article and wanted to know if it was our stance" that his voter registration status in Texas might be in jeopardy, he said. "I told him it wasn't and that the person who gave that opinion was not authorized to do so."
Not frightening because it's boogy-man Rove, frightening because a) it gives the strong appearance of being done at Rove's request and b) he's not an official elected to do anything. Just a guy who advises the President. There was a time in this country where people got all het-up around even the appearance of impropriety.
I remember the "scandal" at the beginning of the Clinton administration when elected officials fired some career bureaucrats from the WH Travel Office. This lead to Congressional Investigations even though everyone was perfectly within their charter and, it lead to nothing. Again the 'liberal' press had a field day throwing mud at the President and nothing was accomplished.
I somehow doubt that's going to happen here.
Friday, September 16, 2005
First-hand account of outrunning Katrina
An outstanding writeup from one of the CNN teams that were on the ground during Katrina from fellow-Bryce artist Lee Hughey.
Notes from Media Training 101
On Wednesday I noted Ankle Biting Pundits citing an unpublished Gallup poll. I checked back yesterday and it still hadn't been published. Today however, it was.
Good news: The numbers were correct and slightly higher, but within the error bands, of the other polls.
Less good news: It doesn't support ABP thesis that the media is ignoring or under-reporting a story. It is, simply a non-story. Nothing much has changed and so, it's not really news. I note, in balance, the media in general a) conduct their own polls with higher error bars that are consistent with Gallup and b) the media are not beating the drum much on their own polls either. It's simply not real news in comparison to other stories. Media Training 101.
The other interesting thing to note is that a lot of right-leaning people are complaining that the media is not reporting "positive news on Iraq", and cite this as liberal bias. I would point out two things (also out of Media Training 101). First, the media almost never reports "positive news" on national stories like that. Simply, they are not interesting and don't sell as many papers as negative/divisive news does. It's simply a fact of life. Look at the Times or Globe or your favorite paper. Rarely does it say, "Mayor Doing Great Job" or "Senator a Swell Guy". Instead it says, "Dog Catcher Caught in Porn Sting" or "Bus Driver Takes Bus to Tryst With Dog Catcher". Why do they concentrate on low level officials doing bad instead of high level officials doing good? Because it sells papers! And, when they can catch high level officials doing bad, well, that sells a LOT of papers. It's simple economics.
Which brings me to my second point. In the '90s these so called 'liberal biased' papers were going after Clinton tooth and nail in an effort to catch him with his hand in the cigar jar. They were a willing enabler of the process of impeaching a president for a blow job. And while there was some cry of 'liberal bias' it would be hard to prove in a point by point analysis. Why did they do this? Because it sells papers, the only reason papers going into (and stay in) business. Exceptions exist on both sides of the political spectrum for very brief times, but no administration or media savvy organization would count on this. Papers don’t exist to find the truth, they exist to sell product. Occasionally finding the truth sells more product, but if not, the truth isn’t run.
My point? While everyone loves to have the coveted 'victim status', and current day conservatives love it every bit as much as their liberal counterparts, it's large a matter of whose particular ox is being gored at the moment, so take these things with a grain of salt. Tomorrow all the rules will change again.
Good news: The numbers were correct and slightly higher, but within the error bands, of the other polls.
Less good news: It doesn't support ABP thesis that the media is ignoring or under-reporting a story. It is, simply a non-story. Nothing much has changed and so, it's not really news. I note, in balance, the media in general a) conduct their own polls with higher error bars that are consistent with Gallup and b) the media are not beating the drum much on their own polls either. It's simply not real news in comparison to other stories. Media Training 101.
The other interesting thing to note is that a lot of right-leaning people are complaining that the media is not reporting "positive news on Iraq", and cite this as liberal bias. I would point out two things (also out of Media Training 101). First, the media almost never reports "positive news" on national stories like that. Simply, they are not interesting and don't sell as many papers as negative/divisive news does. It's simply a fact of life. Look at the Times or Globe or your favorite paper. Rarely does it say, "Mayor Doing Great Job" or "Senator a Swell Guy". Instead it says, "Dog Catcher Caught in Porn Sting" or "Bus Driver Takes Bus to Tryst With Dog Catcher". Why do they concentrate on low level officials doing bad instead of high level officials doing good? Because it sells papers! And, when they can catch high level officials doing bad, well, that sells a LOT of papers. It's simple economics.
Which brings me to my second point. In the '90s these so called 'liberal biased' papers were going after Clinton tooth and nail in an effort to catch him with his hand in the cigar jar. They were a willing enabler of the process of impeaching a president for a blow job. And while there was some cry of 'liberal bias' it would be hard to prove in a point by point analysis. Why did they do this? Because it sells papers, the only reason papers going into (and stay in) business. Exceptions exist on both sides of the political spectrum for very brief times, but no administration or media savvy organization would count on this. Papers don’t exist to find the truth, they exist to sell product. Occasionally finding the truth sells more product, but if not, the truth isn’t run.
My point? While everyone loves to have the coveted 'victim status', and current day conservatives love it every bit as much as their liberal counterparts, it's large a matter of whose particular ox is being gored at the moment, so take these things with a grain of salt. Tomorrow all the rules will change again.
Katrina: The Gathering
True Tales of Customer Service
Wednesday 2pm:
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is Raj, how may I help you.
Mark: Hi Raj, my internet and cable are out.
C: I'm sorry sir, what's your home number.
M:[tells him]
C: I see. And you're at [Address]
M: Yup.
C: hmm... there are no outages in your area. What seems to be the problem?
M: The internet is off and the TV only has the show information, but no show. It's showing the "wait just a minute" sign.
C: So it's all snowy?
M: ... ???... no, it's got all the show info. The picture is steady, just no program.
C: But no snow?
M: no.
C: That's impossible.
M: ...!!!... [po-lite-ly] No, it's obviously NOT impossible Raj, I'm looking at it.
C: Yes, sir, well I'm not showing any outages in your area.
M: [waits]
M:[waits] and...
C: Well we could send someone over, but I suspect it will fix itself.
M: [contemplates this new, obviously smurf-based technology] How about if we go for the "send someone over option"
C: Okay sir, how does [gives a bunch of highly inconvienient times]
M: [pretending to think about it while contemplating exactly how much I actually do or don't need cable...] Well, I don't think1AM tomorrow night is going to work for me, Raj. How about if we go for tomorrow afternoon between 3pm and 5pm?
C: Great. We'll call you 30 minutes before.
M: Please call me on my cell. The phone will be tied up with my dial-up connection.
C: Okay, what's the number?
M: [tells him]
C: Great. Is there anything else I can do for you.
M: [Like what? Is this really a time where you think you can successfully upsell more services? Jesus Fucking Christ! What's wrong with you? You want to do something? Fix my damn cable!]
No, that's it.
C: Thanks.
Thursday, 5:15 pm
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is Raj, how may I help you.
M: Hello Raj, my name is Mark, I called yesterday about getting my service repaired.
C: Great. Can I get your number?
M:[Great?][tells him number]C: I see. And you're at [Address]M: Yup.
C: When was your appointment?
M: Between 3pm and 5pm today. It's 5:15 and I want to make sure he was still coming.
C: Let's see here... Oh! ... yes there is an appointment. I'm sure he'll be along soon.
M: Okay thanks.
C: Great. Is there anything else I can do for you.
M: No.
Thursday 6:45pm
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is David, how may I help you.
Mark: [with a voice in which one can actually hear the sound of nailheads being chewed] Hello David. My name is Mark and I have been waiting for a repairman for 4 hours.
C: oh! Let me get your information.
M: [gives info]
C: Let's see... oh, the appointment's been canceled.
M: [incredulous]WHAT?!!!
C: Let me check the notes
M:[waits] [waits] [waits]Hello?
C: Still here. I'm just trying to track down the repair guy.
M: Why was the appointment cancelled?
C: I don't know sir. Where you there?
M: Yes, for almost 4 hours.
C: Ah, the notes have come up. It says here he called and no one answered.
M:[Pissed] What number did he call?
C:[reads off home number]
M: [calmly] THATS THE WRONG NUMBER!!! I SPECIFICALLY gave Raj my cell so this would not happen!!! Jesus McFuck!
C: ....
C: ... Let me see if I can get the tech to come over right away.
M: Thanks.
M:[waits]
C: [with the care of a man using an old cardboard tube to detect mines in a large wet field]Sir? The tech is off duty now. Can we schedule a time tomorrow?
M: Fine. [ you could actually hear the period at the end]
C: How does 12-4pm tomorrow work?
M: Not well. I've already wasted 2 days with this, I cannot take more time off work!
C:[I found a mine! Quick, get in there!] Does 4 to 7 work for you?
M: That works, thanks.
C: [relief] Let me get you a confirmation number.
C: Sir, while I wait for number, can I make sure I have your cell phone?
M: Sure it's [cell number]
C: Let me read that back, [cell number]
M: That's right.
C:[the voice of a man watching his now wet cardboard tube unravel while simultaneously realizing the field also has wolves in addition to mines] Sir? That time doesn't work now. Can we pick another?
M:[silence] ... [silence] ... fine.
C: How does 7pm-9pm work.
M: [growing impatient, yet beginning to be fascinated about how wrong this is going] That's fine.
C: Let me double check your cell number. Is it [cell number]
M: That's right. Thanks for double checking
C:[the wolves are retreating from the field] No Problem Sir! I just want to make sure...
M: yes?
C:[realizes the wolves were leaving the field because the field is actually infested with Snakes] That time has also been taken.
M: You don't say?
C: [pokes his wilted cardboard tube at the ground, shuts eyes, repents]. Sir, could 9am -11am tomorrow work?
M:[having passed into amusement] As long as it's over by 11am. I'm having lunch with the French Ambassador and he doesn't like tardiness.
C: Yes sir. [steps on the spot ahead of him... foot lower... lower...)Let me get the confirmation number. And your cell phone is [cell number]
M: Yes it is [waiting to see how this goes wrong]
C:[surprise! joy!] And your number is 91516621!
M:[very slightly disappointed] Thanks.
C: Is there anything else I can do for you?
M:[in my best 'you've got to be kidding voice'] I doubt it.
C: Have a great night!
M: Thanks.
Thursday, 9:10pm
Jim: There's a comcast truck outside.
Mark: Really?
Jim: Yes, wait ... there's two now.
Mark: hahahahahahahahhaha
Jim: Why is that funny?
Friday, 5:45 am
Mark: Hey, the internet is working again.
Jim: Good. I guess it did fix itself.
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is Raj, how may I help you.
Mark: Hi Raj, my internet and cable are out.
C: I'm sorry sir, what's your home number.
M:[tells him]
C: I see. And you're at [Address]
M: Yup.
C: hmm... there are no outages in your area. What seems to be the problem?
M: The internet is off and the TV only has the show information, but no show. It's showing the "wait just a minute" sign.
C: So it's all snowy?
M: ... ???... no, it's got all the show info. The picture is steady, just no program.
C: But no snow?
M: no.
C: That's impossible.
M: ...!!!... [po-lite-ly] No, it's obviously NOT impossible Raj, I'm looking at it.
C: Yes, sir, well I'm not showing any outages in your area.
M: [waits]
M:[waits] and...
C: Well we could send someone over, but I suspect it will fix itself.
M: [contemplates this new, obviously smurf-based technology] How about if we go for the "send someone over option"
C: Okay sir, how does [gives a bunch of highly inconvienient times]
M: [pretending to think about it while contemplating exactly how much I actually do or don't need cable...] Well, I don't think1AM tomorrow night is going to work for me, Raj. How about if we go for tomorrow afternoon between 3pm and 5pm?
C: Great. We'll call you 30 minutes before.
M: Please call me on my cell. The phone will be tied up with my dial-up connection.
C: Okay, what's the number?
M: [tells him]
C: Great. Is there anything else I can do for you.
M: [Like what? Is this really a time where you think you can successfully upsell more services? Jesus Fucking Christ! What's wrong with you? You want to do something? Fix my damn cable!]
No, that's it.
C: Thanks.
Thursday, 5:15 pm
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is Raj, how may I help you.
M: Hello Raj, my name is Mark, I called yesterday about getting my service repaired.
C: Great. Can I get your number?
M:[Great?][tells him number]C: I see. And you're at [Address]M: Yup.
C: When was your appointment?
M: Between 3pm and 5pm today. It's 5:15 and I want to make sure he was still coming.
C: Let's see here... Oh! ... yes there is an appointment. I'm sure he'll be along soon.
M: Okay thanks.
C: Great. Is there anything else I can do for you.
M: No.
Thursday 6:45pm
Comcast: Hello, Comcast Cable, my name is David, how may I help you.
Mark: [with a voice in which one can actually hear the sound of nailheads being chewed] Hello David. My name is Mark and I have been waiting for a repairman for 4 hours.
C: oh! Let me get your information.
M: [gives info]
C: Let's see... oh, the appointment's been canceled.
M: [incredulous]WHAT?!!!
C: Let me check the notes
M:[waits] [waits] [waits]Hello?
C: Still here. I'm just trying to track down the repair guy.
M: Why was the appointment cancelled?
C: I don't know sir. Where you there?
M: Yes, for almost 4 hours.
C: Ah, the notes have come up. It says here he called and no one answered.
M:[Pissed] What number did he call?
C:[reads off home number]
M: [calmly] THATS THE WRONG NUMBER!!! I SPECIFICALLY gave Raj my cell so this would not happen!!! Jesus McFuck!
C: ....
C: ... Let me see if I can get the tech to come over right away.
M: Thanks.
M:[waits]
C: [with the care of a man using an old cardboard tube to detect mines in a large wet field]Sir? The tech is off duty now. Can we schedule a time tomorrow?
M: Fine. [ you could actually hear the period at the end]
C: How does 12-4pm tomorrow work?
M: Not well. I've already wasted 2 days with this, I cannot take more time off work!
C:[I found a mine! Quick, get in there!] Does 4 to 7 work for you?
M: That works, thanks.
C: [relief] Let me get you a confirmation number.
C: Sir, while I wait for number, can I make sure I have your cell phone?
M: Sure it's [cell number]
C: Let me read that back, [cell number]
M: That's right.
C:[the voice of a man watching his now wet cardboard tube unravel while simultaneously realizing the field also has wolves in addition to mines] Sir? That time doesn't work now. Can we pick another?
M:[silence] ... [silence] ... fine.
C: How does 7pm-9pm work.
M: [growing impatient, yet beginning to be fascinated about how wrong this is going] That's fine.
C: Let me double check your cell number. Is it [cell number]
M: That's right. Thanks for double checking
C:[the wolves are retreating from the field] No Problem Sir! I just want to make sure...
M: yes?
C:[realizes the wolves were leaving the field because the field is actually infested with Snakes] That time has also been taken.
M: You don't say?
C: [pokes his wilted cardboard tube at the ground, shuts eyes, repents]. Sir, could 9am -11am tomorrow work?
M:[having passed into amusement] As long as it's over by 11am. I'm having lunch with the French Ambassador and he doesn't like tardiness.
C: Yes sir. [steps on the spot ahead of him... foot lower... lower...)Let me get the confirmation number. And your cell phone is [cell number]
M: Yes it is [waiting to see how this goes wrong]
C:[surprise! joy!] And your number is 91516621!
M:[very slightly disappointed] Thanks.
C: Is there anything else I can do for you?
M:[in my best 'you've got to be kidding voice'] I doubt it.
C: Have a great night!
M: Thanks.
Thursday, 9:10pm
Jim: There's a comcast truck outside.
Mark: Really?
Jim: Yes, wait ... there's two now.
Mark: hahahahahahahahhaha
Jim: Why is that funny?
Friday, 5:45 am
Mark: Hey, the internet is working again.
Jim: Good. I guess it did fix itself.
Travis has a fun game
Travis is having a competion over in TJICistan to find, "the absolute worst concept for a crossover movie/novel/comic-book/role-playing-game/etc. you can think of. "
The entries so far are very amusing, so I encourage you to take a look.
I added four and have now thought of four more. I should ask if I can enter twice.
The entries so far are very amusing, so I encourage you to take a look.
I added four and have now thought of four more. I should ask if I can enter twice.
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Why I like Wikipedia
I just finished Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince:
There is a small SPOILER ahead.
Near the end when Harry get the Horcrux open, there is a note signed by R.A.B. [That's it, that's the only spoiler] About an hour later, when I was thinking about something else, it occured to me that R.A.B. was Sirius Black's brother , Regulus who was once a Death Eater then tried to quit and was killed by the other Death Eaters on Volomort's orders. This is not the most subtle leap of logic, although there are other RAB initialed characters in the books and it's possible Rowling will introduce the character later.
I looked up Regulus Black on Wiki and was pleased to see others have fleshed out the theory completely.
That's the great thing about Wiki.
There is a small SPOILER ahead.
Near the end when Harry get the Horcrux open, there is a note signed by R.A.B. [That's it, that's the only spoiler] About an hour later, when I was thinking about something else, it occured to me that R.A.B. was Sirius Black's brother , Regulus who was once a Death Eater then tried to quit and was killed by the other Death Eaters on Volomort's orders. This is not the most subtle leap of logic, although there are other RAB initialed characters in the books and it's possible Rowling will introduce the character later.
I looked up Regulus Black on Wiki and was pleased to see others have fleshed out the theory completely.
That's the great thing about Wiki.
Geoff's New Apartment
Done over in a style known to all as "Junior Year".
Let's ask the critics and see what they say:
Ebert: No risks here, by the book and solid. I'd give it a thumbs up for execution but there isn't a lot of creative range…
Siskel: No... No creative range? Are you insane or has syphilis finally taken your poxy eyes. There’s creativity all over the place. Look at the exposed brick! College students don’t usually have that kind of decorative flair …
E: oh yes, no one has ever thought of bricks before…
S: and the style elements. Why they alone propell this to be an achievement setting him far above the common herd…
E: … of RISD students…
S: .. huumphhh. Look at the clever use of the firearm! Hung over with clothes, it’s obviously an artistic statement about man’s constant struggle against war and violence. The clothes are a metaphor for peace, symbolically beating swords into plowshares…
E: You probably don’t’ want to start talking about beating your sword into anything unless you’ve got a new deal on cable tv there Mr. Lofferlighten. It’s a gun hat rack. … hmmm. And I think it’s loaded.
S: Fine, well what about the photo of Armstrong on the Moon? Strong, purposeful, alone on the vast white wall symbolizing Armstrong’s physical remoteness from the juxtaposed with the emotional bond he shares with the rest of mankind in our greatest moment. So purposeful, so symbolic, so
E: hackneyed. The word you are looking for is hackneyed Roger. I’m surprised you don’t know it better, it’s shouted at you all day. Unless you think that’s your name or something. All it needs is a motivational poster with a cat and a Kandinsky and it could be for sale as a K-Mart Kollege Dorm Kit. Shit, these kids haven’t even done the dishes!
S: from studying so hard and throwing all their effort into their art! The only time you’ve thrown that much into something is when you bumped Oprah at the roast beef station during the daytime emmys last year. Did you really step on her face to grab that ham?
E: That was her foot and it was falling over…
S: …drunk. Or did you mean the ham and not yourself?
E: Me? You’re one to talk. Even your probation officer doesn’t believe you’re drinking all those bottles of vanilla extract for the flavor..
S: You leave Stan out of this …
Let's ask the critics and see what they say:
Ebert: No risks here, by the book and solid. I'd give it a thumbs up for execution but there isn't a lot of creative range…
Siskel: No... No creative range? Are you insane or has syphilis finally taken your poxy eyes. There’s creativity all over the place. Look at the exposed brick! College students don’t usually have that kind of decorative flair …
E: oh yes, no one has ever thought of bricks before…
S: and the style elements. Why they alone propell this to be an achievement setting him far above the common herd…
E: … of RISD students…
S: .. huumphhh. Look at the clever use of the firearm! Hung over with clothes, it’s obviously an artistic statement about man’s constant struggle against war and violence. The clothes are a metaphor for peace, symbolically beating swords into plowshares…
E: You probably don’t’ want to start talking about beating your sword into anything unless you’ve got a new deal on cable tv there Mr. Lofferlighten. It’s a gun hat rack. … hmmm. And I think it’s loaded.
S: Fine, well what about the photo of Armstrong on the Moon? Strong, purposeful, alone on the vast white wall symbolizing Armstrong’s physical remoteness from the juxtaposed with the emotional bond he shares with the rest of mankind in our greatest moment. So purposeful, so symbolic, so
E: hackneyed. The word you are looking for is hackneyed Roger. I’m surprised you don’t know it better, it’s shouted at you all day. Unless you think that’s your name or something. All it needs is a motivational poster with a cat and a Kandinsky and it could be for sale as a K-Mart Kollege Dorm Kit. Shit, these kids haven’t even done the dishes!
S: from studying so hard and throwing all their effort into their art! The only time you’ve thrown that much into something is when you bumped Oprah at the roast beef station during the daytime emmys last year. Did you really step on her face to grab that ham?
E: That was her foot and it was falling over…
S: …drunk. Or did you mean the ham and not yourself?
E: Me? You’re one to talk. Even your probation officer doesn’t believe you’re drinking all those bottles of vanilla extract for the flavor..
S: You leave Stan out of this …
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
A Man with Two Watches
... never knows what time it is.
-Chinese Proverb
NBC/WSJ:
Bush's approval rating has declined to its lowest level in his presidency. So has his handling of the situation in Iraq. Moreover, fewer than half those surveyed approve of the way in which Bush has dealt with the hurricane, and a whopping three-fourths believe the United States is not prepared for a nuclear, biological or chemical attack.
...
Iraq:Approve: 37%Disapprove: 58%
Troop Level:Maintain: 36%Reduce: 55%
Also, 75% say the US is not prepared for a WMD attack, and check out these numbers for how people think the reconstruction after Katrina should be primarily funded:
Reduced Iraq spending: 45% Repeal tax cuts: 27%Cut federal spending: 12% Increase the Deficit: 8%Raise income taxes: 7%
Gallup (un-sourced) via ABP via TJIC
GALLUP POLL RESULTS
Initial Response
(total good) 44%
(good) George W Bush 39%
(good) Residents of New Orleans 38%
(good) State and local officials in Louisiana 36%
(good) FEMA/federal agencies
Recent Response
(total good) 58%
(good) George W Bush 59%
(good) Residents of New Orleans 57%
(good) State and local officials in LA 56%
(good) FEMA/federal agencies
The President's Job Approval: 46% approve [UP from last week's 45% and last month's 40% . . . similar to Rasmussen's 47% approval (50%/likely voters)
Despite the Mediacrats best efforts, Gallup discovered that 60% of repondents still had confidence in the federal government's ability to handle natural disasters and 63% had confidence in the government's ability to handle terrorist attacks.
-Chinese Proverb
NBC/WSJ:
Bush's approval rating has declined to its lowest level in his presidency. So has his handling of the situation in Iraq. Moreover, fewer than half those surveyed approve of the way in which Bush has dealt with the hurricane, and a whopping three-fourths believe the United States is not prepared for a nuclear, biological or chemical attack.
...
Iraq:Approve: 37%Disapprove: 58%
Troop Level:Maintain: 36%Reduce: 55%
Also, 75% say the US is not prepared for a WMD attack, and check out these numbers for how people think the reconstruction after Katrina should be primarily funded:
Reduced Iraq spending: 45% Repeal tax cuts: 27%Cut federal spending: 12% Increase the Deficit: 8%Raise income taxes: 7%
Gallup (un-sourced) via ABP via TJIC
GALLUP POLL RESULTS
Initial Response
(total good) 44%
(good) George W Bush 39%
(good) Residents of New Orleans 38%
(good) State and local officials in Louisiana 36%
(good) FEMA/federal agencies
Recent Response
(total good) 58%
(good) George W Bush 59%
(good) Residents of New Orleans 57%
(good) State and local officials in LA 56%
(good) FEMA/federal agencies
The President's Job Approval: 46% approve [UP from last week's 45% and last month's 40% . . . similar to Rasmussen's 47% approval (50%/likely voters)
Despite the Mediacrats best efforts, Gallup discovered that 60% of repondents still had confidence in the federal government's ability to handle natural disasters and 63% had confidence in the government's ability to handle terrorist attacks.
Currently Reading: The Armchair Economist
by Steven E. Landsburg.
I'm through about a third of it so far, enough to form an opinion which is: It's like reading a book on astrology. It presents a lot of mysteries, promotes some novel theories which the author uses to bolster his premise that all people are always make rational economic decisions. He is, however, glazing over a lot (a real lot) of complicated math and often simplifying to the point of incomprehensibility. He also, fairly regularly, undermines his premise by pointing out that some things don't seem to make any sense (he has a good example in 99-cent pricing structures), but takes it as a tenant of faith that they somehow do.
Actually, astrology is a bad analogy. Evolution is a better one. It a complex problem with a complex theory that sometimes makes predictions, sometimes is testable, but often leaves one stumped and saying, "why did nature chose that adaptation" or poses unanswerable questions like, "Why haven't we evolved X since that would make more sense...". Unlike evolutionary theory where detractors can point to god or an "intelligent designer", economics is clearly a man made enterprise. However economics and evolution seem to be governed by similar principles like adaptation to the environment/market, incentive driven outcomes etc, and I suspect are described by the same mathematics.
It's an interesting read and while I agree that his premise is true in the abstract, I tend to disagree that it's always true in the details. Like evolution, I think a lot of mysteries are left over from earlier states when the feature in question was an advantage but is not anymore. Hence, while once a product of rational choice, the memory required for the system to operate occasionally leaves artifacts which later are patently irrational with (for various reasons) little pressure to change.
If nothing else, it's a mildly interesting read.
I'm through about a third of it so far, enough to form an opinion which is: It's like reading a book on astrology. It presents a lot of mysteries, promotes some novel theories which the author uses to bolster his premise that all people are always make rational economic decisions. He is, however, glazing over a lot (a real lot) of complicated math and often simplifying to the point of incomprehensibility. He also, fairly regularly, undermines his premise by pointing out that some things don't seem to make any sense (he has a good example in 99-cent pricing structures), but takes it as a tenant of faith that they somehow do.
Actually, astrology is a bad analogy. Evolution is a better one. It a complex problem with a complex theory that sometimes makes predictions, sometimes is testable, but often leaves one stumped and saying, "why did nature chose that adaptation" or poses unanswerable questions like, "Why haven't we evolved X since that would make more sense...". Unlike evolutionary theory where detractors can point to god or an "intelligent designer", economics is clearly a man made enterprise. However economics and evolution seem to be governed by similar principles like adaptation to the environment/market, incentive driven outcomes etc, and I suspect are described by the same mathematics.
It's an interesting read and while I agree that his premise is true in the abstract, I tend to disagree that it's always true in the details. Like evolution, I think a lot of mysteries are left over from earlier states when the feature in question was an advantage but is not anymore. Hence, while once a product of rational choice, the memory required for the system to operate occasionally leaves artifacts which later are patently irrational with (for various reasons) little pressure to change.
If nothing else, it's a mildly interesting read.
Maureen Dowd says Something That Isn't Stupid
by accident, but if true it puts things into a perspective I didn't have before:
it's frightening to think how it will handle the most demanding act of government domestic investment since the New Deal.
I'm not sure that it's true, but if it is, it's more than a little depressing.
it's frightening to think how it will handle the most demanding act of government domestic investment since the New Deal.
I'm not sure that it's true, but if it is, it's more than a little depressing.
True Tales
TJIC sent this out yesterday and reading it is like watching a train wreck, horrifying yet I dare not look away. True tales from the Piercing Hut:
There was one woman who was maybe in her late thirties who apparently had a thing for much younger men who would come in once a week to have her jewelry changed for a VCH, the entire time making very inappropriate comments. It all came to an end the day she put her hand on the back of my head while I was changing her ring. Another time a pretty frequent client of the shop had just purchased nipple shields that she was so proud of that after I put them on for her she had to walk around the shop showing everyone shaking her tits in their face. This would have been simply just a strange moment had her son, also a frequent client, not been sitting in the waiting room at the time.
I don't know what a VCH is, and I'm avoiding looking it up or listening to the Hermione Granger part of my brain saying, "well V must be..."
He also sent over this, which is part of the Advanced Gross-Out for Adults. Don't say I didn't warn you. Here.
There was one woman who was maybe in her late thirties who apparently had a thing for much younger men who would come in once a week to have her jewelry changed for a VCH, the entire time making very inappropriate comments. It all came to an end the day she put her hand on the back of my head while I was changing her ring. Another time a pretty frequent client of the shop had just purchased nipple shields that she was so proud of that after I put them on for her she had to walk around the shop showing everyone shaking her tits in their face. This would have been simply just a strange moment had her son, also a frequent client, not been sitting in the waiting room at the time.
I don't know what a VCH is, and I'm avoiding looking it up or listening to the Hermione Granger part of my brain saying, "well V must be..."
He also sent over this, which is part of the Advanced Gross-Out for Adults. Don't say I didn't warn you. Here.
Why I can't get worked up about Roberts
Because I gave some money last year to causes I considered to be currently the lesser of two evils, I have gotten a lot of spam urging me to write my Senators (let's see that would be ... oh, Kennedy and Kerry) to oppose Roberts (because the K's are probably undecided about him and need to hear from me to sort it all out). My question is "Why?"
The answer is, "because Bush wants him, therefore he must be evil"
While I admit there is a lot of history behind the logic to suggest it's worth, it still seems ad hominem to me.
Also, early on, it came out that he did some pro bono work in the Lawrence decision, and that seemed to stick in the craw of the conservative-religious folks, which naturally peaks my interest.
So, my concern about nominating a SCJ, especially a CJ, is this: will this person interpret the laws from a neutral standpoint, or will he use the fog of mythology and revealed truth to mask the complicated stuff.
Roberts, so far, seems to pass this test. Suspiciously well given his backers. "ah ha!", cry the 527's, "it's a mask! He's a conservative sneak in reasonable clothing. You need to write us another check to stop him". ...
So today, Volokh had an interesting post which sort of backs my view that, given the universe of offensive choices Bush could have made, Roberts doesn't seem like the worst choice.
As I suggested he might yesterday, Roberts today adopted the second approach, that of a traditional judge in a liberal democratic society, believing in truth but recognizing the difficulty of perceiving it.
Looks like I won't be sending the 527's any of my hard earned pennies this time around.
The answer is, "because Bush wants him, therefore he must be evil"
While I admit there is a lot of history behind the logic to suggest it's worth, it still seems ad hominem to me.
Also, early on, it came out that he did some pro bono work in the Lawrence decision, and that seemed to stick in the craw of the conservative-religious folks, which naturally peaks my interest.
So, my concern about nominating a SCJ, especially a CJ, is this: will this person interpret the laws from a neutral standpoint, or will he use the fog of mythology and revealed truth to mask the complicated stuff.
Roberts, so far, seems to pass this test. Suspiciously well given his backers. "ah ha!", cry the 527's, "it's a mask! He's a conservative sneak in reasonable clothing. You need to write us another check to stop him". ...
So today, Volokh had an interesting post which sort of backs my view that, given the universe of offensive choices Bush could have made, Roberts doesn't seem like the worst choice.
As I suggested he might yesterday, Roberts today adopted the second approach, that of a traditional judge in a liberal democratic society, believing in truth but recognizing the difficulty of perceiving it.
Looks like I won't be sending the 527's any of my hard earned pennies this time around.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Bluff Called
The President took responsibility today for (parts of) the Katrina Clusterfuck.
Shit.
He's called the bluff. Now his critics (and me chief among them) can no longer call him a completely irresponsible fuckup. And, I'm guessing, he's soon going to realize that no one is going to take him to the wood shed, no one is going to humiliate him and, he might just look like a sympathetic, human figure. Hell, he might start taking responsibility for all kinds of things.
Then where would we be????!!!
Shit.
He's called the bluff. Now his critics (and me chief among them) can no longer call him a completely irresponsible fuckup. And, I'm guessing, he's soon going to realize that no one is going to take him to the wood shed, no one is going to humiliate him and, he might just look like a sympathetic, human figure. Hell, he might start taking responsibility for all kinds of things.
Then where would we be????!!!
The Periodic Table of Science Fiction
As a big fan of alternate history, I heartily enjoyed this.
Some Favorites:
Calcium (Ca)
Vandium (V)
Iron (Fe)
Astatine (At)
Gold (Au)
Lead (Pb)
Uranium (U)
Holmium (Ho)
Barium (Ba)
Rutherfordium (Rf)
and others...
Some Favorites:
Calcium (Ca)
Vandium (V)
Iron (Fe)
Astatine (At)
Gold (Au)
Lead (Pb)
Uranium (U)
Holmium (Ho)
Barium (Ba)
Rutherfordium (Rf)
and others...
The Moment of Choice
... but not quite the Moment of Truth. Not yet anyway. The GOP now has the opportunity to truely and fully accept the mantle they tore from the DNC in the '90s, i.e. the big spending, fiscally irresponsible, big governement party.
Yahoo notes:
In closed-door meetings, fiscal conservatives have begged their colleagues not to put the cost of disaster relief on the government credit card for future generations to carry.
Among those who have protested in these private sessions is Rep. Jeff Flake (news, bio, voting record) (R-Ariz.), a fiscal conservative who said his colleagues greeted his suggestion that disaster relief be offset by other cuts with "stone cold silence." He added, "You would have thought I was a Martian."
It is clear that Republican leaders' overwhelming priority at the moment is to project competence and generosity in the aftermath of Katrina. But Rep. Jeb Hensarling (news, bio, voting record) (R-Texas) said Republicans need to have heart-to-heart discussions about adding so much to the nation's debt.
"You can't tell me there aren't places to save a penny or two on the dollar and ship it to relief in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi," Hensarling said. "I just don't believe it as I look around."
Conservatives insist that they want to help hurricane victims and are not trying to stop Congress or the president from sending the money that's needed to rebuild. They just say the money should come from cuts in other federal programs.
I linked to Yahoo but similar articles are all over the place. It's a real hand-wringing, dark night of the soul for some, and I encourage it. All the things I've respected about the republicans and all the things I lothe about democrats are, at this moment, in play and the clock is starting to run out. I hope for the sake of the next few generations they manage to resist the easy charm of pocketbook compassion and stick to being the party of fiscal responsibility.
And sometimes that means eating your peas before dessert.
Yahoo notes:
In closed-door meetings, fiscal conservatives have begged their colleagues not to put the cost of disaster relief on the government credit card for future generations to carry.
Among those who have protested in these private sessions is Rep. Jeff Flake (news, bio, voting record) (R-Ariz.), a fiscal conservative who said his colleagues greeted his suggestion that disaster relief be offset by other cuts with "stone cold silence." He added, "You would have thought I was a Martian."
It is clear that Republican leaders' overwhelming priority at the moment is to project competence and generosity in the aftermath of Katrina. But Rep. Jeb Hensarling (news, bio, voting record) (R-Texas) said Republicans need to have heart-to-heart discussions about adding so much to the nation's debt.
"You can't tell me there aren't places to save a penny or two on the dollar and ship it to relief in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi," Hensarling said. "I just don't believe it as I look around."
Conservatives insist that they want to help hurricane victims and are not trying to stop Congress or the president from sending the money that's needed to rebuild. They just say the money should come from cuts in other federal programs.
I linked to Yahoo but similar articles are all over the place. It's a real hand-wringing, dark night of the soul for some, and I encourage it. All the things I've respected about the republicans and all the things I lothe about democrats are, at this moment, in play and the clock is starting to run out. I hope for the sake of the next few generations they manage to resist the easy charm of pocketbook compassion and stick to being the party of fiscal responsibility.
And sometimes that means eating your peas before dessert.
Let Us Quit English
Peter Lynn has a hilarious post on the English language and recommends we remove it from the open-source model and make it pay-to-say:
I’ve been thinking about this. Let’s do it. Let’s quit English. Anyone can pick it up, but few bother to master it, and there’s the problem. The vandals have taken over, so let’s just abandon it and start up a new language. Or if that’s too much trouble 2, let’s at least have a premium, subscribers-only version of English. We’ll reboot the language, lay down new rules, and give it room to grow in the right way. Eventually the two versions of the language will diverge as the people using the free version of English twist and pervert it into an increasingly debased pidgin tongue, and for all purposes, we’ll have a new language of our own. I’ll still have to use regular English at work, of course, but I use Internet Explorer there too, but that doesn’t mean I can’t use Firefox at home.
I’ve been thinking about this. Let’s do it. Let’s quit English. Anyone can pick it up, but few bother to master it, and there’s the problem. The vandals have taken over, so let’s just abandon it and start up a new language. Or if that’s too much trouble 2, let’s at least have a premium, subscribers-only version of English. We’ll reboot the language, lay down new rules, and give it room to grow in the right way. Eventually the two versions of the language will diverge as the people using the free version of English twist and pervert it into an increasingly debased pidgin tongue, and for all purposes, we’ll have a new language of our own. I’ll still have to use regular English at work, of course, but I use Internet Explorer there too, but that doesn’t mean I can’t use Firefox at home.
A Bush Administration First
The resignation of Michael Brown may be the first time a Bush Administration official has resigned as a result of failed performance. I did a quick bit of research (although not comprehensive) and found a slew of folks who quit to make room for someone else (Evans) because they were fed up (O’Neil, Powell) or because they were going to big money jobs (Ashcroft). I cannot find anyone though, as far as I can tell, who left due to mismanagement or even scandal. (and would like to be correct on this if I am wrong)
Every administration since George Washington had political pay-offs, incompetence and scandal, so I don't believe they it's a statistical anomaly based on the really good job they're doing over there.
No, this one has a whiff of ... accountability to it. Just a whiff, but it's definitely there.
In every two term administration, at about year 6, all the dirty laundry comes out and hearings, resignations and shock(!) are expressed that politicians can behave badly and not always in the public good. This is normal and healthy in our democracy. My only concern is that, except for some brief periods during Carter and Johnson, we've had the delightful gridlock of two party government. I'm hoping that we return to that sooner, rather than later, before the corruption metastasizes and we have something bigger and vastly more expensive to clean up than New Orleans and Iraq.
Every administration since George Washington had political pay-offs, incompetence and scandal, so I don't believe they it's a statistical anomaly based on the really good job they're doing over there.
No, this one has a whiff of ... accountability to it. Just a whiff, but it's definitely there.
In every two term administration, at about year 6, all the dirty laundry comes out and hearings, resignations and shock(!) are expressed that politicians can behave badly and not always in the public good. This is normal and healthy in our democracy. My only concern is that, except for some brief periods during Carter and Johnson, we've had the delightful gridlock of two party government. I'm hoping that we return to that sooner, rather than later, before the corruption metastasizes and we have something bigger and vastly more expensive to clean up than New Orleans and Iraq.
Monday, September 12, 2005
F vs. S
Dad: Do you think they should rebuild New Orleans?
Son: No, let it fester as a testament to the sins of Man
Dad: ...uuuhhhh huh. Which sins exactly?
Son: ummm.... video piracy!
Dad: I see.
Son: No, let it fester as a testament to the sins of Man
Dad: ...uuuhhhh huh. Which sins exactly?
Son: ummm.... video piracy!
Dad: I see.
A Golden Rule
An amazing quote today
"I can't comment on something that you may know more about than I do."
-President G.W. Bush
I... I... ... .... I... well, what else needs to be said?
"I can't comment on something that you may know more about than I do."
-President G.W. Bush
I... I... ... .... I... well, what else needs to be said?
We're from FEMA and we're here to help!
Wow. A fairly damning list of Federal Fuck-Ups.
FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations
FEMA turns away experienced firefighters
FEMA turns back Wal-Mart supply trucks
FEMA prevents Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel
FEMA won't let Red Cross deliver food
FEMA bars morticians from entering New Orleans
FEMA blocks 500-boat citizen flotilla from delivering aid
FEMA fails to utilize Navy ship with 600-bed hospital on board
FEMA to Chicago: Send just one truck
FEMA turns away generators
FEMA: "First Responders Urged Not To Respond"
The last one is straight from their website. This is a very broken system.
FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations
FEMA turns away experienced firefighters
FEMA turns back Wal-Mart supply trucks
FEMA prevents Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel
FEMA won't let Red Cross deliver food
FEMA bars morticians from entering New Orleans
FEMA blocks 500-boat citizen flotilla from delivering aid
FEMA fails to utilize Navy ship with 600-bed hospital on board
FEMA to Chicago: Send just one truck
FEMA turns away generators
FEMA: "First Responders Urged Not To Respond"
The last one is straight from their website. This is a very broken system.
The Very Poor, No Good, Lousy, Very Bad Status of Science Writing
I posted a comment to Travis' blog today on climate change, but missed his point that science reporting is, basically, a farce. Coincidently, I stumbled across this piece in the Guardian a little later.
[Reporters oversimplify science] Why? Because papers think you won't understand the "science bit", all stories involving science must be dumbed down, leaving pieces without enough content to stimulate the only people who are actually going to read them - that is, the people who know a bit about science. Compare this with the book review section, in any newspaper. The more obscure references to Russian novelists and French philosophers you can bang in, the better writer everyone thinks you are. Nobody dumbs down the finance pages. Imagine the fuss if I tried to stick the word "biophoton" on a science page without explaining what it meant. I can tell you, it would never get past the subs or the section editor. But use it on a complementary medicine page, incorrectly, and it sails through.
Statistics are what causes the most fear for reporters, and so they are usually just edited out, with interesting consequences. Because science isn't about something being true or not true: that's a humanities graduate parody. It's about the error bar, statistical significance, it's about how reliable and valid the experiment was, it's about coming to a verdict, about a hypothesis, on the back of lots of bits of evidence.
A good, if depressing note
[Reporters oversimplify science] Why? Because papers think you won't understand the "science bit", all stories involving science must be dumbed down, leaving pieces without enough content to stimulate the only people who are actually going to read them - that is, the people who know a bit about science. Compare this with the book review section, in any newspaper. The more obscure references to Russian novelists and French philosophers you can bang in, the better writer everyone thinks you are. Nobody dumbs down the finance pages. Imagine the fuss if I tried to stick the word "biophoton" on a science page without explaining what it meant. I can tell you, it would never get past the subs or the section editor. But use it on a complementary medicine page, incorrectly, and it sails through.
Statistics are what causes the most fear for reporters, and so they are usually just edited out, with interesting consequences. Because science isn't about something being true or not true: that's a humanities graduate parody. It's about the error bar, statistical significance, it's about how reliable and valid the experiment was, it's about coming to a verdict, about a hypothesis, on the back of lots of bits of evidence.
A good, if depressing note
Katrina Donations
I've been thinking about how to contribute to the Katrina Relief Effort and decided that, in addition to some hard dollars, I'd contribute some Frequent Flyer miles. If you want to donate your miles to the Red Cross follow the link below and it will give you complete directions based on which airlines.
http://www.redcross.org/donate/donatemiles.html
http://www.redcross.org/donate/donatemiles.html
The Sunk Cost Fallacy
Slate has an unusually good, non-technical article dealing with the SCF.
You have good tickets to a basketball game an hour drive away. There's a blizzard raging outside, and the game is being televised. You can sit warm and safe at home by a roaring fire and watch it on TV, or you can bundle up, dig out your car, and go to the game. What do you do?
You've ordered too much food at the restaurant and there you are, completely stuffed, with a pile of pasta sitting on your plate. Do you clean your plate or not?
In each of these cases, the money is gone. Do you "waste" it, or do you go to the game, and finish your pasta? It is claimed by economists and psychologists that the right way to approach questions like these is only by looking to the future. Since the money is spent no matter what you do, the only real question you should be asking is what will give you more satisfaction—watching the game by a roaring fire or sliding to it in a blizzard; leaving the restaurant feeling content or leaving it feeling stuffed. The "sunk costs" are sunk whatever your decision; only the future matters. The fallacy in thinking about sunk costs is precisely that people feel compelled to get their "money's worth," even if it makes them suffer.
There are fewer things more politically charged than the SCF, and it's very common on both the left and right to use it to, on one hand, validate their flavor of the day and, on the other, villify their opponents. This article applies it to Iraq, but it's pretty easy to find articles using the same flawed logic around welfare, social security and affermative action.
Not that there aren't VALID arguements for all these points, it just that valid arguements are so... hard to think about and all. Sunk Cost is easier.
FTR, I often leave food on my plates at restaurants. I didn't size the portions and feel no responsibility to finish them.
You have good tickets to a basketball game an hour drive away. There's a blizzard raging outside, and the game is being televised. You can sit warm and safe at home by a roaring fire and watch it on TV, or you can bundle up, dig out your car, and go to the game. What do you do?
You've ordered too much food at the restaurant and there you are, completely stuffed, with a pile of pasta sitting on your plate. Do you clean your plate or not?
In each of these cases, the money is gone. Do you "waste" it, or do you go to the game, and finish your pasta? It is claimed by economists and psychologists that the right way to approach questions like these is only by looking to the future. Since the money is spent no matter what you do, the only real question you should be asking is what will give you more satisfaction—watching the game by a roaring fire or sliding to it in a blizzard; leaving the restaurant feeling content or leaving it feeling stuffed. The "sunk costs" are sunk whatever your decision; only the future matters. The fallacy in thinking about sunk costs is precisely that people feel compelled to get their "money's worth," even if it makes them suffer.
There are fewer things more politically charged than the SCF, and it's very common on both the left and right to use it to, on one hand, validate their flavor of the day and, on the other, villify their opponents. This article applies it to Iraq, but it's pretty easy to find articles using the same flawed logic around welfare, social security and affermative action.
Not that there aren't VALID arguements for all these points, it just that valid arguements are so... hard to think about and all. Sunk Cost is easier.
FTR, I often leave food on my plates at restaurants. I didn't size the portions and feel no responsibility to finish them.
Phun with Photoshop
Also from Volokh, I thought it was funny (in a strictly non-partisan way, i.e. you could have photoshopped Hillary or Bill in and I would have laughed as well).
To D. or not to D., That is the question...
An interesting thread over at Volokh on the usefulness of a Ph.D. in working in law and economics.
Honestly, (and not surprisingly) I tend to agree with this idea. I have a lot of smart friends who, unfortunately, get most of their knowledge of science from reading a lot of science fiction. While this makes them familiar with the concepts of science, it tends to also lead them to poor logical skills, reasoning by analogy and simplifications that simply don't work in real science. The science in science fiction exists to move the plot forward, not to educate or show the process of how science works. I can see the analogy here applying to law to the extent that law is also complex, subtle, and requires training to understand. I once helped an ex study for the bar (after he failed 4 times). By the end I knew the answers to a lot of questions that he did not, and thought I'd have a non-zero chance at passing the bar, but I also knew why it took real years to understand the law and I was very well aware of what I didn't know.
Exceptions exist, certainly. But I have found them to be rare and most people I know need to work through the discipline of a Ph.D. before they really know how to talk about a subject.
Honestly, (and not surprisingly) I tend to agree with this idea. I have a lot of smart friends who, unfortunately, get most of their knowledge of science from reading a lot of science fiction. While this makes them familiar with the concepts of science, it tends to also lead them to poor logical skills, reasoning by analogy and simplifications that simply don't work in real science. The science in science fiction exists to move the plot forward, not to educate or show the process of how science works. I can see the analogy here applying to law to the extent that law is also complex, subtle, and requires training to understand. I once helped an ex study for the bar (after he failed 4 times). By the end I knew the answers to a lot of questions that he did not, and thought I'd have a non-zero chance at passing the bar, but I also knew why it took real years to understand the law and I was very well aware of what I didn't know.
Exceptions exist, certainly. But I have found them to be rare and most people I know need to work through the discipline of a Ph.D. before they really know how to talk about a subject.
Sunday, September 11, 2005
1461
It's been 1461 days since several of my friends, my company, and my job were wiped from the face of the Earth. That is more time than the entirety of World War II from Pearl Harbor to VJ day, yet OBL is still free.
Every 9/11 I remember the strange set of events on 9/10 which resulted in me flying the last flight out of NY that night and sparing my life (having blown off a meeting scheduled there with HP the next day). At Sibos last week I met with Joe Lott, the head of that particular HP team who's life was also spared by a similarly weird set of coincidences (he ripped his shirt at 8:00 and was downstairs in the 21st Century store buying a new one when the plane hit wiping out his entire team). Neither of us understands why OBL is still enjoying his freedom. If you can rationalize the failure of the president and his cabinet to find and destroy this man, and you are not reading from GOP talking points, I invite you to comment below. I reserve the right to delete any comments that have their origin in the ass-covering offices of Mr. Rove.
Every 9/11 I remember the strange set of events on 9/10 which resulted in me flying the last flight out of NY that night and sparing my life (having blown off a meeting scheduled there with HP the next day). At Sibos last week I met with Joe Lott, the head of that particular HP team who's life was also spared by a similarly weird set of coincidences (he ripped his shirt at 8:00 and was downstairs in the 21st Century store buying a new one when the plane hit wiping out his entire team). Neither of us understands why OBL is still enjoying his freedom. If you can rationalize the failure of the president and his cabinet to find and destroy this man, and you are not reading from GOP talking points, I invite you to comment below. I reserve the right to delete any comments that have their origin in the ass-covering offices of Mr. Rove.
Mystery, Solved!
Mark: I still can't figure out this picture. It's very weird, but it came from somewhere.
Jim: Oh, that's how they test deorderants.
Mark: really??????
Jim: Yes.
Mark: and you know this how...????
Jim: Oh, that's how they test deorderants.
Mark: really??????
Jim: Yes.
Mark: and you know this how...????
MainStream Religion Explained
The most concise summary of mainstream religion, especialy christianity, I've ever seen.
Although I still beleive most people beleive in god becuase they are afraid of death.
Although I still beleive most people beleive in god becuase they are afraid of death.
Funny if it were not so Sad
and predictable.
Firms with White House ties get Katrina contracts
FEMA taps Halliburton subsidiary, Shaw Group, Bechtel for cleanup
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Companies with ties to the Bush White House and the former head of FEMA are clinching some of the administration's first disaster relief and reconstruction contracts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
At least two major corporate clients of lobbyist Joe Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and a former head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, have already been tapped to start recovery work along the battered Gulf Coast.
One is Shaw Group Inc. and the other is Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root. Vice President Dick Cheney is a former head of Halliburton.
I can't wait for the 2006 elections and a return to 2 party government.
Firms with White House ties get Katrina contracts
FEMA taps Halliburton subsidiary, Shaw Group, Bechtel for cleanup
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Companies with ties to the Bush White House and the former head of FEMA are clinching some of the administration's first disaster relief and reconstruction contracts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
At least two major corporate clients of lobbyist Joe Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and a former head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, have already been tapped to start recovery work along the battered Gulf Coast.
One is Shaw Group Inc. and the other is Halliburton Co. subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root. Vice President Dick Cheney is a former head of Halliburton.
I can't wait for the 2006 elections and a return to 2 party government.
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Father vs. Son
I played Geoff in Doom some number of years ago and this was exactly my experience:
I liked how, when we finally started, I was killed within eight seconds. Then I came back to life in another part of the game … and was again killed within eight seconds. I don't think I ever survived longer than 20 seconds. At one point I accidentally detonated something (maybe a plasma grenade) right next to myself. In that instance, I committed suicide before other players had a chance to kill me.
...
...
Seth: Yup, Xbox Live is definitely lacking in feminine energy. Though I think I managed to bring a bit of womanliness to the battlefield.
I am old.
I liked how, when we finally started, I was killed within eight seconds. Then I came back to life in another part of the game … and was again killed within eight seconds. I don't think I ever survived longer than 20 seconds. At one point I accidentally detonated something (maybe a plasma grenade) right next to myself. In that instance, I committed suicide before other players had a chance to kill me.
...
...
Seth: Yup, Xbox Live is definitely lacking in feminine energy. Though I think I managed to bring a bit of womanliness to the battlefield.
I am old.
Copen'Haten
Ihave a little tiny bit of connectivity/time and thought I'd try a quick update and render a judgment:
Copenhagen sucks.
Rather, Copenhagen is beautiful, the people are, I am sure, good to their children, kind to animals, go to church regularly and are in all respects good citizens.
They just hate tourists. And, they hate them with a purity of passion that any Buzzard's Bay resident locked into a 60 minute cycle on the Sagamore rotary would both understand and *envy*. This is a passion would borders on a religion as far as I can tell for it permeates all levels of their society, and extends into their restaurant and service industry, their hoteliers and cab drivers. I've traveled all over the planet at this point and the only place that compares is, maybe Bangkok. Maybe. The buses so far are, on average, 45-60 minutes late, often go to the wrong locations and, in one case, the driver laughed at us when we expressed some thought that perhaps we would take a cab instead of the bus. And these aren't public buses, these are private ones leased exclusively for this event! They are being paid to cart our pasty asses back and foth to and from the hotel and they are failing miserably at it!
And, as time would show, the driver was right to laugh. Copenhagen only has 2 cabs that stop for tourists and both of them are run by recent émigrés from Turkey would have only a passing command of Flemish and the English skills they learned on MTV. They get lost, ask for directions and, eventually, drop you somewhere within a 4 block radius of your hotel. Ask them where to go, they smile, shrug as if to say, “who knows? it all looks the same to us too” and drives off.
Ugh. Columbia was better in many ways than this.
OTOH, the pickled fish is nice.
Copenhagen sucks.
Rather, Copenhagen is beautiful, the people are, I am sure, good to their children, kind to animals, go to church regularly and are in all respects good citizens.
They just hate tourists. And, they hate them with a purity of passion that any Buzzard's Bay resident locked into a 60 minute cycle on the Sagamore rotary would both understand and *envy*. This is a passion would borders on a religion as far as I can tell for it permeates all levels of their society, and extends into their restaurant and service industry, their hoteliers and cab drivers. I've traveled all over the planet at this point and the only place that compares is, maybe Bangkok. Maybe. The buses so far are, on average, 45-60 minutes late, often go to the wrong locations and, in one case, the driver laughed at us when we expressed some thought that perhaps we would take a cab instead of the bus. And these aren't public buses, these are private ones leased exclusively for this event! They are being paid to cart our pasty asses back and foth to and from the hotel and they are failing miserably at it!
And, as time would show, the driver was right to laugh. Copenhagen only has 2 cabs that stop for tourists and both of them are run by recent émigrés from Turkey would have only a passing command of Flemish and the English skills they learned on MTV. They get lost, ask for directions and, eventually, drop you somewhere within a 4 block radius of your hotel. Ask them where to go, they smile, shrug as if to say, “who knows? it all looks the same to us too” and drives off.
Ugh. Columbia was better in many ways than this.
OTOH, the pickled fish is nice.
Saturday, September 03, 2005
A Voice on the Right Defines Freedom
The 3rd most powerful GOP voice in the Senate, Rick Santorum, defines freedom:
In Santorum's view, freedom is not the same as liberty. Or, to put it differently, there are two kinds of freedom. One is "no-fault freedom," individual autonomy uncoupled from any larger purpose: "freedom to choose, irrespective of the choice." This, he says, is "the liberal definition of freedom," and it is the one that has taken over in the culture and been imposed on the country by the courts. Quite different is "the conservative view of freedom," "the liberty our Founders understood." This is "freedom coupled with the responsibility to something bigger or higher than the self." True liberty is freedom in the service of virtue -- not "the freedom to be as selfish as I want to be," or "the freedom to be left alone," but "the freedom to attend to one's duties -- duties to God, to family, and to neighbors."
contrasted to Goldwater's view
...Goldwater wrote, "Every man, for his individual good and for the good of his society, is responsible for his own development." Note that first "and": Individual and social welfare go together -- they're not in conflict. All the government needs to do, Goldwater said, is get out of the way. "The conservative's first concern will always be: Are we maximizing freedom?" Reagan spoke in the same tradition when he declared that government was the problem, not the solution to our problems.
It was Goldwater that got me to think about this and to realize that I ought to ve voting republican instead of democrat. Unfortunately, the GOP has cut the ropes to those anchors and charted a course back toward authoritarianism and big government.
It remains to be seen if the Democrats have the balls to pick up Goldwater's discarded mantle.
Hat tip to Sully
In Santorum's view, freedom is not the same as liberty. Or, to put it differently, there are two kinds of freedom. One is "no-fault freedom," individual autonomy uncoupled from any larger purpose: "freedom to choose, irrespective of the choice." This, he says, is "the liberal definition of freedom," and it is the one that has taken over in the culture and been imposed on the country by the courts. Quite different is "the conservative view of freedom," "the liberty our Founders understood." This is "freedom coupled with the responsibility to something bigger or higher than the self." True liberty is freedom in the service of virtue -- not "the freedom to be as selfish as I want to be," or "the freedom to be left alone," but "the freedom to attend to one's duties -- duties to God, to family, and to neighbors."
contrasted to Goldwater's view
...Goldwater wrote, "Every man, for his individual good and for the good of his society, is responsible for his own development." Note that first "and": Individual and social welfare go together -- they're not in conflict. All the government needs to do, Goldwater said, is get out of the way. "The conservative's first concern will always be: Are we maximizing freedom?" Reagan spoke in the same tradition when he declared that government was the problem, not the solution to our problems.
It was Goldwater that got me to think about this and to realize that I ought to ve voting republican instead of democrat. Unfortunately, the GOP has cut the ropes to those anchors and charted a course back toward authoritarianism and big government.
It remains to be seen if the Democrats have the balls to pick up Goldwater's discarded mantle.
Hat tip to Sully
Trump Level Self-Absorption
Full text with comments here
Pentagon: Too much sympathy for the victims
We heard this on CNN (on satellite radio) last night while we were driving home and almost ran off the road. It was an exchange between anchor Aaron Brown and Jamie McIntyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent, about the military seeking to explain it's slow response to Katrina:
MCINTYRE: And as to your question about political, I talked to a lot of people at the Pentagon today who were very frustrated about the fact that the perception was being created that the military didn't move fast enough. And they did it somewhat as political. They thought that part of the motivation was the critics of the administration to make the president look bad.
And they seemed to question the motives of some of our reporters who were out there and hearing these stories from the victims about why they had so much sympathy for the victims, and not as much sympathy for the challenges that the government met in meeting this challenge.
And I have to say thinking about that, it doesn't really seem all that unusual that you would tend to understand the plight of the victims a little more than the bureaucrats in Washington.
BROWN: Yes, I mean, I'm glad you told us that. And they have every right to believe they believe and think the way they think. I mean, and I mean that. But you've got people who have been living as refugees. It is not hard to understand why our first heart beat goes in their direction. We'll worry about the bureaucrats later.
Pentagon: Too much sympathy for the victims
We heard this on CNN (on satellite radio) last night while we were driving home and almost ran off the road. It was an exchange between anchor Aaron Brown and Jamie McIntyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent, about the military seeking to explain it's slow response to Katrina:
MCINTYRE: And as to your question about political, I talked to a lot of people at the Pentagon today who were very frustrated about the fact that the perception was being created that the military didn't move fast enough. And they did it somewhat as political. They thought that part of the motivation was the critics of the administration to make the president look bad.
And they seemed to question the motives of some of our reporters who were out there and hearing these stories from the victims about why they had so much sympathy for the victims, and not as much sympathy for the challenges that the government met in meeting this challenge.
And I have to say thinking about that, it doesn't really seem all that unusual that you would tend to understand the plight of the victims a little more than the bureaucrats in Washington.
BROWN: Yes, I mean, I'm glad you told us that. And they have every right to believe they believe and think the way they think. I mean, and I mean that. But you've got people who have been living as refugees. It is not hard to understand why our first heart beat goes in their direction. We'll worry about the bureaucrats later.
Off to Copenhagan
I'm heading to Denmark this afternoon so bloggin will be light for the next week or so. I've never been there before so if anyone has suggestions as to where to go, what to see, where to eat etc. fell free to post them here or send me an email. I'd be grateful.
Not 9/11, but not in the good way
I criticized both Kos and the POTUS last week about comparing New Orleans and 9/11 and, to a large degree I stand by that. 9/11 was something about which we had little credible warning, changed the way we perceived the world, was a tragic cost of thousands of lives and was a unique turning point in American history (and later histrionics). I don't think New Orleans is anything like that, although I think the body count will be higher and damage to the economy will be longer term and more serious.
Why mention this? Well, here's the link with 9/11 in my mind. It's now obvious we were wildly under prepared for this. This is bad for three reasons:
1) This shouldn't have been a surprise. I've been to NOLA and pretty much the first thing that occurs to you is "Jesus Christ, I below sea level. This doesn't seem wise". And yes, I know all about the Dutch and their country, in fact I'm a huge fan (and I'm heading there this afternoon). The Dutch are one thing we are not. Competent about water. When they build, they build for centuries. When we build we build for decades. Big difference. The problem here, after 9/11 we still can't handle disasters for which we should already be prepared.
2) The were no operant plans for emergency. Assume this was, in fact a surprise. Ignore the *should* statement above and assume for whatever reason, the levees broke. If you're a democrat, imagine a terrorist blew it up, if your a republican, blame protesting liberals trying to save the wetlands prevented the government from doing proper maintenance. And, if you're TJIC, well... imagine the incompetence of government stayed the just hand of the markets and it's the fault of collectivism. Whatever you chose. Before 9/11 this type of surprise was squarely in the charter of FEMA and I could lay the fault there, find the problem, correct it and do better next time. While I am for a very limited government, disasters natural and otherwise, are one of the few things I think are actually part of the government's duty to the electors. If it fails at that, there isn't much justification for it's existence in peacetime. But in this case we have not only FEMA but Homeland Security as well. We have 2 agencies with huge resources and DHS has been planning for responses to terrorist actions for 4 years! And they were clueless! Despite more resources, we are less prepared for a surprise or terrorist attack than we were 4 years ago. It's the only conclusion the data supports.
3)You read this far? Thanks! I am, btw, about to say something insensitive The third point is, if terrorists are planning another attack on US soil, they are watching the NOLA circus and cumming in their collective pants. They can't help but see a country full of soft targets. Easy, cheap ways of not only causing a panic, but extending the ensuing chaos. If I were a terrorist (or when they are on our side we call them CIA Field Agents), I'd be figuring how to take advantage of the chaos to really cause some damage. Make the post disaster a real horror. Set off bombs, shoot people etc. That way, next time there is a disaster, people will panic easier causing even more problems. It becomes a sort of terrorist, self-fulfilling prophecy. Natural disaster, assume terrorist response, panic, chaos! The response to NOLA has highlighted to people planning to do us harm that we haven't learned anything since 9/11 despite spending more money.
That's the harm I see here and that's why I am beginning to think that the NOLA Disaster is in fact in the 9/11 bin after all.
Why mention this? Well, here's the link with 9/11 in my mind. It's now obvious we were wildly under prepared for this. This is bad for three reasons:
1) This shouldn't have been a surprise. I've been to NOLA and pretty much the first thing that occurs to you is "Jesus Christ, I below sea level. This doesn't seem wise". And yes, I know all about the Dutch and their country, in fact I'm a huge fan (and I'm heading there this afternoon). The Dutch are one thing we are not. Competent about water. When they build, they build for centuries. When we build we build for decades. Big difference. The problem here, after 9/11 we still can't handle disasters for which we should already be prepared.
2) The were no operant plans for emergency. Assume this was, in fact a surprise. Ignore the *should* statement above and assume for whatever reason, the levees broke. If you're a democrat, imagine a terrorist blew it up, if your a republican, blame protesting liberals trying to save the wetlands prevented the government from doing proper maintenance. And, if you're TJIC, well... imagine the incompetence of government stayed the just hand of the markets and it's the fault of collectivism. Whatever you chose. Before 9/11 this type of surprise was squarely in the charter of FEMA and I could lay the fault there, find the problem, correct it and do better next time. While I am for a very limited government, disasters natural and otherwise, are one of the few things I think are actually part of the government's duty to the electors. If it fails at that, there isn't much justification for it's existence in peacetime. But in this case we have not only FEMA but Homeland Security as well. We have 2 agencies with huge resources and DHS has been planning for responses to terrorist actions for 4 years! And they were clueless! Despite more resources, we are less prepared for a surprise or terrorist attack than we were 4 years ago. It's the only conclusion the data supports.
3)You read this far? Thanks! I am, btw, about to say something insensitive The third point is, if terrorists are planning another attack on US soil, they are watching the NOLA circus and cumming in their collective pants. They can't help but see a country full of soft targets. Easy, cheap ways of not only causing a panic, but extending the ensuing chaos. If I were a terrorist (or when they are on our side we call them CIA Field Agents), I'd be figuring how to take advantage of the chaos to really cause some damage. Make the post disaster a real horror. Set off bombs, shoot people etc. That way, next time there is a disaster, people will panic easier causing even more problems. It becomes a sort of terrorist, self-fulfilling prophecy. Natural disaster, assume terrorist response, panic, chaos! The response to NOLA has highlighted to people planning to do us harm that we haven't learned anything since 9/11 despite spending more money.
That's the harm I see here and that's why I am beginning to think that the NOLA Disaster is in fact in the 9/11 bin after all.
Friday, September 02, 2005
Progress on Looking Backwards
I've shown the outline to 4 or 5 folks now, all of who have had a lot of constructive criticism, much of which I've incorporated. I've got the major plot points through 2030 and some threads up through 2150. Lots of progress in a short period of time.
After I get back form Sibos next weekend, I'm going to shell out for the web help I need. I'm expecting the first pages to appear before the equinox.
BTW, I had actually destroyed New Orleans in 2009 by this same method. I was there in 2003, looked at the leveys, looked at the sea, shook my head and thought the obvious.
I've since excised the New Orleans bit. The details weren't critical to the story, and I think now it would come off badly.
After I get back form Sibos next weekend, I'm going to shell out for the web help I need. I'm expecting the first pages to appear before the equinox.
BTW, I had actually destroyed New Orleans in 2009 by this same method. I was there in 2003, looked at the leveys, looked at the sea, shook my head and thought the obvious.
I've since excised the New Orleans bit. The details weren't critical to the story, and I think now it would come off badly.
The Deist Creed
TJIC, over in TJICistan seems to be on the threshold of becoming a functioning Deist. This is a good thing all in all and, in my opinion, the more deists, the better.
Pretty much the only thing that separates atheists and deists is the need to account for where the universe came from. Deists tend to believe god made the universe for some purpose, wound it up, then let it go to see what happens. I've played enough SimCity to understand the appeal to both the god and the deist. Atheists, OTOH, tend not to worry about the purpose of the universe and either don't care about it or are comfortable not knowing. I'm in that last category. I don't think the universe has a purpose, and I can live with that knowledge. I may be wrong but, frankly, the rules have been set up in such a way that I'll never know the purpose if there is one because it's not discoverable from the inside (there's a whole, very cool branch of set theory to deal with math like this). Instead of worrying or lamenting this, I just use the time I would have wasted on something constructive. Or I waste it blogging.
And, I always keep in mind the Deist's Creed (by the philosopher Homer),
“Alone! I’m alone! I’m a lonely insignificant speck on a has-been planet, orbited by a cold indifferent sun!”
Pretty much the only thing that separates atheists and deists is the need to account for where the universe came from. Deists tend to believe god made the universe for some purpose, wound it up, then let it go to see what happens. I've played enough SimCity to understand the appeal to both the god and the deist. Atheists, OTOH, tend not to worry about the purpose of the universe and either don't care about it or are comfortable not knowing. I'm in that last category. I don't think the universe has a purpose, and I can live with that knowledge. I may be wrong but, frankly, the rules have been set up in such a way that I'll never know the purpose if there is one because it's not discoverable from the inside (there's a whole, very cool branch of set theory to deal with math like this). Instead of worrying or lamenting this, I just use the time I would have wasted on something constructive. Or I waste it blogging.
And, I always keep in mind the Deist's Creed (by the philosopher Homer),
“Alone! I’m alone! I’m a lonely insignificant speck on a has-been planet, orbited by a cold indifferent sun!”
Is It Legal to Shoot a Looter?
Which is a good question. The answer appears to be, "No". If you shoot a looter who is not threatening you, i.e. if you take the law into your own hands and go defend the nearby Piggly Wiggly and manage to kill someone, you could be prosecuted if caught. The following citation is from Louisiana Law. Other states may have different rules, but in LA at least they have thought this through and made a decision against vigilantism.
Note, it is perfectly legal to defend yourself and your property, just not legal to deputize yourself and go on a hunting party.
Thanks to volokh.
Perhaps you'd care to provide a cite?
yes, perhaps I spoke to loosely, just citing the common law rule. Obviously, different states have different rules with different nuances about when deadly force is justifiable. Louisiana's law is La. Rev. Stat. 14:20.
A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person does not retreat from the encounter.
(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person committing the homicide does not retreat from the encounter.
my quick read of that suggest that defense of property, by itself, does not justify deadly force in Louisiana. A quick glance at the case annotations on Westlaw suggest that the touchstone is a "reasonable belief in danger."
Note, it is perfectly legal to defend yourself and your property, just not legal to deputize yourself and go on a hunting party.
Thanks to volokh.
Perhaps you'd care to provide a cite?
yes, perhaps I spoke to loosely, just citing the common law rule. Obviously, different states have different rules with different nuances about when deadly force is justifiable. Louisiana's law is La. Rev. Stat. 14:20.
A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person does not retreat from the encounter.
(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person committing the homicide does not retreat from the encounter.
my quick read of that suggest that defense of property, by itself, does not justify deadly force in Louisiana. A quick glance at the case annotations on Westlaw suggest that the touchstone is a "reasonable belief in danger."
A Good Start
I was reading some conflicting opinions on shooting looters over at Volokh and ran across this statement which, while perfectly valid, seemed a little self-absorbed given the scale of what is going on down there:
5,000 - 6,000 lawyers (1/3 of the lawyers in Louisiana) have lost their offices, their libraries, their computers with all information thereon, their client files - possibly their clients, as one attorney who e-mailed me noted. [T]hey are scattered from Florida to Arizona and have nothing to return to.
in related news, both astronomers in New Orlenas have lost their Sun Sparc workstations and several exobyte tapes of infrared data from NGC-2264. Updates as news trickles in...
5,000 - 6,000 lawyers (1/3 of the lawyers in Louisiana) have lost their offices, their libraries, their computers with all information thereon, their client files - possibly their clients, as one attorney who e-mailed me noted. [T]hey are scattered from Florida to Arizona and have nothing to return to.
in related news, both astronomers in New Orlenas have lost their Sun Sparc workstations and several exobyte tapes of infrared data from NGC-2264. Updates as news trickles in...
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Word Verification On
The War begins....
I received a bunch of ad-bot generated comments today, so I turned word verification on. It might slow the bo's down, and I appologize for the inconvienence.
I received a bunch of ad-bot generated comments today, so I turned word verification on. It might slow the bo's down, and I appologize for the inconvienence.
Sigh. Fair is Fair (or A is A,take your pick)
In this case A is for Ass.
Yesterday I picked at Kos for his hyperbolic, over the top assessment of the Katrina damage. Today, the President made the same stupid hyperbole:
"this is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before ... New Orleans is more devastated than New York was" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.”
It’s not that I enjoy poking at the President, I passed that phase a long time ago. It’s that I’m so … deeply disappointed in him.
Yesterday I picked at Kos for his hyperbolic, over the top assessment of the Katrina damage. Today, the President made the same stupid hyperbole:
"this is a natural disaster the likes of which our country has never seen before ... New Orleans is more devastated than New York was" after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.”
It’s not that I enjoy poking at the President, I passed that phase a long time ago. It’s that I’m so … deeply disappointed in him.
An Instance of the Fingerpost
"And after you have put Aristotle to your proof? And, no doubt, found him wanting. Then what? Will you submit the monarchy to your investigations? The church, perhaps? Will you presume to put Our Savior himself to your proofs? There lies the danger, sir? Your quest leads to atheism, as it must unless science is held firmly in the hands of those who wish to strengthen the word of God, rather than challenge it."
"Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?" Isaiah 45:9
Iain Pears, A Question of Precedence, pg. 75
"Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?" Isaiah 45:9
Iain Pears, A Question of Precedence, pg. 75
Father of Supply Side Economics, Dead at 69
After coining the phrase "supply-side economics" in 1976 as an editor of The Wall Street Journal editorial pages, Wanniski wrote his seminal book The Way The World Works. Named one of the 100 most influential books of the 20th century by the editors of the National Review, the book revealed Wanniski's discovery of the cause of the Crash of 1929. His lucid reporting that the U.S. Senate's floor votes on the Smoot-Hawley tariff legislation coincided day-to-day with the October 1929 financial market collapse was the first persuasive explanation of that pivotal event, and began the rehabilitation of classical economics that Wanniski dubbed "supply-side" to distinguish from the "demand-side" Keynesian and monetarist theories.
I'm not endorsing him, but he did have a strong effect on the economic policy of the country.
I'm not endorsing him, but he did have a strong effect on the economic policy of the country.
Apache Rant
Sorry folks, I said something unkind about Apache the other day.
I meant to add this link.
People ask me if I worry about open source code displacing code made by professionals for hire.
I answer, "no".
The markets value the experiste of professional coders and, by proxy, qa testing, development, source code management in a way I don't see the open source folks every emulating in a robust, long-term sustainable way. We have to pay software engineers well because 95% of software engineering is boring, tedoius and not fun. It's also the reason it works well.
Also, this came out today. I'm not generally a fan of either "bug statistics" or "TCO studies". I liken them to Astrology, Tarot Reading and anything from Accenture becuase they can mean whatever you think they mean. Still, it's nice to see the other side get their head in the can for a long, cool swirly once in a while.
I meant to add this link.
People ask me if I worry about open source code displacing code made by professionals for hire.
I answer, "no".
The markets value the experiste of professional coders and, by proxy, qa testing, development, source code management in a way I don't see the open source folks every emulating in a robust, long-term sustainable way. We have to pay software engineers well because 95% of software engineering is boring, tedoius and not fun. It's also the reason it works well.
Also, this came out today. I'm not generally a fan of either "bug statistics" or "TCO studies". I liken them to Astrology, Tarot Reading and anything from Accenture becuase they can mean whatever you think they mean. Still, it's nice to see the other side get their head in the can for a long, cool swirly once in a while.
Jury Duty Today
I missed Jury Duty last January and now I'm compelled to show up today lest I have problems with my driver's license, fines etc.
Ugh.
I hope at least I get something interesting like the Trial of the Monarch.
Ugh.
I hope at least I get something interesting like the Trial of the Monarch.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Moving, Shaking
I'm having lunch on September 13th with Mary Matalin and James Carville. Not really interesting in their overall politics, I think they are probably both interesting people and I'm sure there is a lesson here in "learning to live with the other sides obviously flaws in logic and reason".
Should be fun!
Should be fun!
President Surveys Damage
Cheap, but I did laugh out loud:
“It’s devastating,” POTUS said as he watched, according to Scott McClellan. “It’s got to be doubly devastating on the ground.”
Care of Wonkette
“It’s devastating,” POTUS said as he watched, according to Scott McClellan. “It’s got to be doubly devastating on the ground.”
Care of Wonkette
Kos Goes Hyperbolic
Kos goes more than a little overboard today:
This is the greatest disaster to hit our nation in most of our lifetimes. Worse than 9-11. New Orleans is underwater. Biloxi is 90 percent destroyed. Who knows how many dead. Who knows how many homeless. Who knows how many jobless. We have a bona fide refugee crisis on our hands.
Worse than 9/11?? Sorry Kos, you need to get a grip.
He also makes an excellent point about who does and does not have anything to gain here. I might be overly cynical but I don' t think the point he makes is the one he's intending to make.
This is the greatest disaster to hit our nation in most of our lifetimes. Worse than 9-11. New Orleans is underwater. Biloxi is 90 percent destroyed. Who knows how many dead. Who knows how many homeless. Who knows how many jobless. We have a bona fide refugee crisis on our hands.
Worse than 9/11?? Sorry Kos, you need to get a grip.
He also makes an excellent point about who does and does not have anything to gain here. I might be overly cynical but I don' t think the point he makes is the one he's intending to make.
Help with the book
Thanks everyone! I've had more than a couple of offers of help with the page and at least one volunteer to edit. I'm surprised and humbled by the response! Thanks again!
Experimental Evolution
Interesting article on the comparison of recently mapped chimp DNA vs. Human DNA.
Another experimental triumph of evolution.
Creationists continuously push god into the unexplained gaps of the evolutionary sequences, and it is getting to be increasingly tighter fit.
Maybe in a few years, we can the mythology out of the science class room.
Another experimental triumph of evolution.
Creationists continuously push god into the unexplained gaps of the evolutionary sequences, and it is getting to be increasingly tighter fit.
Maybe in a few years, we can the mythology out of the science class room.
Relativity
A Great Paper on the Science Behind Economic Choice
Thanks to Dr. Lori Allen. I've posted it here. Ignore the math.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
No, but I wish I had
From Geoff:
Are you writing the Windows ads now?
in summation: its a guy talking about how he uses his computer to draw underground comics, and his character is a mild-mannered businessman by day, but at night he’s a crime solving mathematician called “The Actuary”, who doesn’t always get his man, but always gets the girl.
Here’s the video
mms://library.soa.org/SOA001003.wmv
No, I didn't write this, but I really wish I had. I love this ad. This might be the first MSFT ad I like since the "I saved a nickel" one we made for Capital Markets.
Are you writing the Windows ads now?
in summation: its a guy talking about how he uses his computer to draw underground comics, and his character is a mild-mannered businessman by day, but at night he’s a crime solving mathematician called “The Actuary”, who doesn’t always get his man, but always gets the girl.
Here’s the video
mms://library.soa.org/SOA001003.wmv
No, I didn't write this, but I really wish I had. I love this ad. This might be the first MSFT ad I like since the "I saved a nickel" one we made for Capital Markets.
Help!
One thing at which I think I'm fairly decent is calling in a professional when I'm in over my head. I spent some time last night working on the first few pages of my "Looking Backwards" project and managed to bang out text for the first 4 or 5 pages (2006-2007). That's all fine.
However, as most of you know, I *stink* at website design. When I tried to get all the text into a web page that looked decent, I *sort of* succeeded. Example here. Not great. It's okay, but when I try to do the next issue, I basically have to do it again from scratch. What I need is a style-sheet or template or something and, frankly, I don't have the time or interst to sit down and dig through a 500 page manual on templates. Fortunately for me, the market has an answer.
Anyone know a good web designer I could rent to put together a template for me?
However, as most of you know, I *stink* at website design. When I tried to get all the text into a web page that looked decent, I *sort of* succeeded. Example here. Not great. It's okay, but when I try to do the next issue, I basically have to do it again from scratch. What I need is a style-sheet or template or something and, frankly, I don't have the time or interst to sit down and dig through a 500 page manual on templates. Fortunately for me, the market has an answer.
Anyone know a good web designer I could rent to put together a template for me?
Setting New Standards in Corrupt Behavior
Wow. Even Clinton didn't go this far and he's been my model for the most corrupt use of the pardon, ever.
Ernie Fletcher (R) Governor of Kentucky, has pardoned everyone except himself in a wide spanning corruption scandal in Frankfort, KY. The state apparently has merit laws which require some level of measured competence for state jobs, which the governor and his staff ignored. Here is a good background/analysis piece.
What's interesting is how this backfires, unless it's the Governor’s intent to get impeached. By removing the threat of prosecution, the defendants can no longer claim the 5th Amendment if they were to be recalled by the AG (since the 5th only applies if the defendant might go to jail if he/she testifies). If the witnesses refuse to testify or lie, the AG can hit them with contempt or perjury charges. It seems likely they will talk in such a circumstance, which cannot be good for the Governor.
Ernie Fletcher (R) Governor of Kentucky, has pardoned everyone except himself in a wide spanning corruption scandal in Frankfort, KY. The state apparently has merit laws which require some level of measured competence for state jobs, which the governor and his staff ignored. Here is a good background/analysis piece.
What's interesting is how this backfires, unless it's the Governor’s intent to get impeached. By removing the threat of prosecution, the defendants can no longer claim the 5th Amendment if they were to be recalled by the AG (since the 5th only applies if the defendant might go to jail if he/she testifies). If the witnesses refuse to testify or lie, the AG can hit them with contempt or perjury charges. It seems likely they will talk in such a circumstance, which cannot be good for the Governor.
Monday, August 29, 2005
Finally working on writing a book
I've always wanted to write a book and I've made a couple of stabs at it over the years. My current, aborted effort is called "10 Rude Things I Learned to Do with my Mouth", which lies 1/3 completed on my hard drive.
Coming back from Columbia on Friday, I had an idea I liked so much, I flipped open the laptop and started writing an outline. I mentally worked out the major plot lines, then started writing a timeline to fill in a few of the missing events. This triggered a period of Focus for me, a time when the entire world vanishes and I'm fully concentrating on whatever I'm doing. When I came out of it, it was 6 hours later, I was at JFK and hadn't slept a wink on my red eye.
At dinner Saturday night with Jim I went over some of the basic story elements, detailed part of the timeline and asked for feedback. He was surprised at how it hung together and encouraged me to write more of it down. Yesterday morning I got up around 8, started writing, looked up a few minutes later and it was 2pm. Drove home from the cape and started writing again last night. I sent a copy of the draft to Geoff and reviewed it with him over the phone. The plot is such that it contains many elements I thought would upset his political sensibilities and figured he'd be a harsh critic. Instead he said he thought the offensive elements were handled in a sensitive way which were required for later events in the plot. This surprised me. I've since sent a copy to one or two trusted friends for review.
So what's the book about? Well, the Future. One of my favorite books in the 90s was a collection of NYT front pages for important dates in history. It was cool for several reasons. One the page where the headline reads "Lindbergh cross Atlantic!" it was a bunch of smaller stories where you can see the economic problems of the 20's and 30's shaping up. Hints if you will about what's coming. Obvious in retrospect, but not at the time. I always thought this would be a great way to study history.
So, that's the form of my book. It's a retrospective of the period from 2006-2156, as seen by the further future. Given my travel schedule and work, I figured I could commit to a page a week in this style and I'll be able to publish each page (or two or three) on my website each week. Each page will be the front page of the New York News, and will document America's history through 150 years of development. I have thought a lot about the future, the rate of change of technology, the course of science, politics, religion and entertainment, and I think this is a good way to express some of those ideas from a higher level than is usually involved in a narrative plot. There are some basic rules:
1) No magical technological breakthroughs. All the science is as real as I can make/understand it. Any scientific or medical advance must flow logically from what has come before.
2) No Deus Ex Machina plot devices. You may not always agree with how I resolve some crises, but it's done through the usual organs of power the state has (or will have as I think there will be some new organs which get developed).
3) Not every article on the front page is Important. In fact, most are not, just like a real paper.
Okay, so what will the plot involve?
Some hints (not in chronological order):
The political world though 2020 involves many of the usual suspects.
At some point, a major world power which is not the US, lands on the Moon.
Life extension technology is developed, but has some surprising consequences
Congress becomes a tri-cameral legislative body with the addition of the Corporate Senate.
Climate change becomes an important topic
America fights another Civil War.
The Fatima Prophecy happens.
A method of cheap access to orbit is developed
A major country manages to send and return a probe to several nearby stars.
Several major churches split off new, different churches
The US loses a major city to a nuclear terrorist
A kind of "digital telepathy" is invented and allows people to see what others are thinking.
A man wins the lottery and claims he sent the winning numbers to himself from the future
The Russians die off
A president is assassinated.
Clarence Thomas becomes the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
An asteroid is due to hit the Earth in October of 2028...
and a lot, lot more.
Coming back from Columbia on Friday, I had an idea I liked so much, I flipped open the laptop and started writing an outline. I mentally worked out the major plot lines, then started writing a timeline to fill in a few of the missing events. This triggered a period of Focus for me, a time when the entire world vanishes and I'm fully concentrating on whatever I'm doing. When I came out of it, it was 6 hours later, I was at JFK and hadn't slept a wink on my red eye.
At dinner Saturday night with Jim I went over some of the basic story elements, detailed part of the timeline and asked for feedback. He was surprised at how it hung together and encouraged me to write more of it down. Yesterday morning I got up around 8, started writing, looked up a few minutes later and it was 2pm. Drove home from the cape and started writing again last night. I sent a copy of the draft to Geoff and reviewed it with him over the phone. The plot is such that it contains many elements I thought would upset his political sensibilities and figured he'd be a harsh critic. Instead he said he thought the offensive elements were handled in a sensitive way which were required for later events in the plot. This surprised me. I've since sent a copy to one or two trusted friends for review.
So what's the book about? Well, the Future. One of my favorite books in the 90s was a collection of NYT front pages for important dates in history. It was cool for several reasons. One the page where the headline reads "Lindbergh cross Atlantic!" it was a bunch of smaller stories where you can see the economic problems of the 20's and 30's shaping up. Hints if you will about what's coming. Obvious in retrospect, but not at the time. I always thought this would be a great way to study history.
So, that's the form of my book. It's a retrospective of the period from 2006-2156, as seen by the further future. Given my travel schedule and work, I figured I could commit to a page a week in this style and I'll be able to publish each page (or two or three) on my website each week. Each page will be the front page of the New York News, and will document America's history through 150 years of development. I have thought a lot about the future, the rate of change of technology, the course of science, politics, religion and entertainment, and I think this is a good way to express some of those ideas from a higher level than is usually involved in a narrative plot. There are some basic rules:
1) No magical technological breakthroughs. All the science is as real as I can make/understand it. Any scientific or medical advance must flow logically from what has come before.
2) No Deus Ex Machina plot devices. You may not always agree with how I resolve some crises, but it's done through the usual organs of power the state has (or will have as I think there will be some new organs which get developed).
3) Not every article on the front page is Important. In fact, most are not, just like a real paper.
Okay, so what will the plot involve?
Some hints (not in chronological order):
The political world though 2020 involves many of the usual suspects.
At some point, a major world power which is not the US, lands on the Moon.
Life extension technology is developed, but has some surprising consequences
Congress becomes a tri-cameral legislative body with the addition of the Corporate Senate.
Climate change becomes an important topic
America fights another Civil War.
The Fatima Prophecy happens.
A method of cheap access to orbit is developed
A major country manages to send and return a probe to several nearby stars.
Several major churches split off new, different churches
The US loses a major city to a nuclear terrorist
A kind of "digital telepathy" is invented and allows people to see what others are thinking.
A man wins the lottery and claims he sent the winning numbers to himself from the future
The Russians die off
A president is assassinated.
Clarence Thomas becomes the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
An asteroid is due to hit the Earth in October of 2028...
and a lot, lot more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)