Andrew Sullivan does a good job on unpacking Dinesh D'Souza's new book, The Enemy at Home:The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11. It is terrifying, at least to those of us who believe that America is about invidualism and the freedom of the marketplace of ideas.
Read the full review, it seems pretty damning and, unfortunately, consistent with other reviews from the Right I have read on the same book. I was kind of hoping AS was being hysterical, but it seems he's on the money.
What is that path? At its core is a deepening rejection of cultural and philosophical modernity. D'Souza believes that the defining new distinction in American politics is no longer between the economic right and the economic left. The size of government and its role as a guardian of the public welfare are increasingly dead issues, or issues where no vital energy crackles. D'Souza rightly holds that the real divide in the new century is between authority and autonomy, between faith-based politics and individual freedom. And in this struggle at the level of first principles, D'Souza chooses his own side. He is at war with the modern West. If forced to choose between a theocratic order that upheld traditional morality and a secular order that saw such morality marginalized, D'Souza is with the former. He puts it more graphically himself: "Yes, I would rather go to a baseball game or have a drink with Michael Moore than with the grand mufti of Egypt. But when it comes to core beliefs, I'd have to confess that I'm closer to the dignified fellow in the long robe and prayer beads than to the slovenly fellow with the baseball cap."
Micheal Moore is the Right's boogy man in the same way that Ann Coulter is the Left's, so double props to DD for this construction.
Also,
One has to admire at least the frankness with which this secessionist strategy for conservatism is laid out. "How can we use the war on terror to win the culture war?" D'Souza asks in a final chapter called "Battle Plan for the Right." Notice here that defeating the forces of Islamist terror is merely instrumental to the deeper struggle to defeat modern individualism and autonomy. The idea of a common American commitment to the Constitution's guarantees of individual freedom and autonomy is secondary to the global battle for the "external moral order." Loyalty is not to country, but to a worldwide theoconservative ideology. Like the Marxists of old, the theoconservatives see their movement increasingly as global, resting on eternal truths, and not compatible with the "liberal morality" of their autonomous bourgeois fellow Westerners.
No wonder the libertarians on the Right are upset with their party. I certainly am.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
Most Significant SF & Fantasy Books of the Last 50 Years
(via) and News Blog and PZ Meyers
The thing to do here is bold the ones you've read and italicize the one's you started but never finished. Green are, IMHO, extra awesome.
It can't be a very good list though, where's Eragon?
The thing to do here is bold the ones you've read and italicize the one's you started but never finished. Green are, IMHO, extra awesome.
It can't be a very good list though, where's Eragon?
The Most Significant SF & Fantasy Books of the Last 50 Years, 1953-2002
The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien
The Foundation Trilogy, Isaac Asimov
Dune, Frank Herbert
Stranger in a Strange Land, Robert A. Heinlein
A Wizard of Earthsea, Ursula K. Le Guin
Neuromancer, William Gibson
Childhood's End, Arthur C. Clarke
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, Philip K. Dick
The Mists of Avalon, Marion Zimmer Bradley
Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury
The Book of the New Sun, Gene Wolfe
A Canticle for Leibowitz, Walter M. Miller, Jr.
The Caves of Steel, Isaac Asimov
Children of the Atom, Wilmar Shiras
Cities in Flight, James Blish
The Colour of Magic, Terry Pratchett
Dangerous Visions, edited by Harlan Ellison
Deathbird Stories, Harlan Ellison
The Demolished Man, Alfred Bester
Dhalgren, Samuel R. Delany
Dragonflight, Anne McCaffrey
Ender's Game, Orson Scott Card
The First Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever, Stephen R. Donaldson
The Forever War, Joe Haldeman
Gateway, Frederik Pohl
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, J.K. Rowling
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams
I Am Legend, Richard Matheson
Interview with the Vampire, Anne Rice
The Left Hand of Darkness, Ursula K. Le Guin
Little, Big, John Crowley
Lord of Light, Roger Zelazny
The Man in the High Castle, Philip K. Dick
Mission of Gravity, Hal Clement
More Than Human, Theodore Sturgeon
The Rediscovery of Man, Cordwainer Smith
On the Beach, Nevil Shute
Rendezvous with Rama, Arthur C. Clarke
Ringworld, Larry Niven
Rogue Moon, Algis Budrys
The Silmarillion, J.R.R. Tolkien
Slaughterhouse-5, Kurt Vonnegut
Snow Crash, Neal Stephenson
Stand on Zanzibar, John Brunner
The Stars My Destination, Alfred Bester
Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein
Stormbringer, Michael Moorcock
The Sword of Shannara, Terry Brooks
Timescape, Gregory Benford
To Your Scattered Bodies Go, Philip Jose Farmer
Seems I have some reading to do...
Friday, March 09, 2007
Get This Message to Obi Wan! Hurry!
Monday, March 05, 2007
Actaully, It Could Be Any One of the Three
| You'll die from a Heart Attack during Sex. | ||||
| Your a lover not a fighter but sadly, in the act of making love your heart will stop. But what a way to go. | ||||
| ||||
| 'How will you die?' at QuizGalaxy.com |
Seems like I am at a Triple Point, but I'll take what I can get.
"The Secret"
The latest in New Age religious scams, the Secret!
When I discovered 'The Secret' I made a decision that I would not watch the news or read newspapers anymore, because it did not make me feel good," and, "How does it work? Nobody knows. Just like nobody knows how electricity works. I don't, do you?"
When I discovered 'The Secret' I made a decision that I would not watch the news or read newspapers anymore, because it did not make me feel good," and, "How does it work? Nobody knows. Just like nobody knows how electricity works. I don't, do you?"
Why Gods Exist for Some, but Not Others
I have, like many folks, often wondered about the evolutionary basis for a belief in gods. Human brains seem to have coded for this rather strongly, overwriting all kinds of higher reasoning and leading to kinds of logic that, while tolerated for god arguments, would never be tolerated for any other kind, e.g. prove god doesn't exist.
Also:
Religion seemed to use up physical and mental resources without an obvious benefit for survival. Why, he wondered, was religion so pervasive, when it was something that seemed so costly from an evolutionary point of view?
In short, are we hard-wired to believe in God? And if we are, how and why did that happen?
Long article in the NYT, worth a read.
Also:
Religion seemed to use up physical and mental resources without an obvious benefit for survival. Why, he wondered, was religion so pervasive, when it was something that seemed so costly from an evolutionary point of view?
In short, are we hard-wired to believe in God? And if we are, how and why did that happen?
Long article in the NYT, worth a read.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Department of If You Keep Making Faces, It Will Stick That Way
From the Wiki entry on Yahoo Serious:
Prior to making "Young Einstein," Yahoo Serious officially changed his name to garner publicity for the film. After the success of the movie, he attempted to change his name back to his given name, however, Australian law only allows one name change in a person's lifetime. As a result, Yahoo Serious is stuck with this name for life.
Prior to making "Young Einstein," Yahoo Serious officially changed his name to garner publicity for the film. After the success of the movie, he attempted to change his name back to his given name, however, Australian law only allows one name change in a person's lifetime. As a result, Yahoo Serious is stuck with this name for life.
Friday, March 02, 2007
Science porn!
I had seen the photo last year, but of course PZ has *all* the salacious details!
Imaging was first done in a 1.5 Tesla Philips magnet system (Gyroscan S15) and later in a 1.5 Tesla magnet system from Siemens Vision. To increase the space in the tube, the table was removed: the internal diameter of the tube is then 50 cm. The participants were asked to lie with pelvises near the marked centre of the tube and not to move during imaging. After a preview, 10 mm thick sagittal images were taken with a half-Fourier acquisition single shot turbo SE T2 weighted pulse sequence (HASTE). The echo time was 64 ms, with a repetition time of 4.4 ms. With this fast acquisition technique, 11 slices of relatively good quality were obtained within 14 seconds.
I.. I may need a moment..
Imaging was first done in a 1.5 Tesla Philips magnet system (Gyroscan S15) and later in a 1.5 Tesla magnet system from Siemens Vision. To increase the space in the tube, the table was removed: the internal diameter of the tube is then 50 cm. The participants were asked to lie with pelvises near the marked centre of the tube and not to move during imaging. After a preview, 10 mm thick sagittal images were taken with a half-Fourier acquisition single shot turbo SE T2 weighted pulse sequence (HASTE). The echo time was 64 ms, with a repetition time of 4.4 ms. With this fast acquisition technique, 11 slices of relatively good quality were obtained within 14 seconds.
I.. I may need a moment..
Something Said Well
There is a kernal of truth in this, and it makes at least one point I tried to make recently in a debate with a reader in my comments section:
(via)
I would suggest that it is not the philosophy of Christ's teachings that is the source of the friction, it is the institutional practices of the religion He never wished to found. One can indeed be a Christian and at the same time not be a Christian in the formal, institutionalized sense (and certainly not a "Christianist", a term I have great fondness for). One can follow the teachings of Christ in the everyday routine and still believe that there was no Resurrection. His teachings are universal. It is far more important to me that I attempt in my own fallible way to follow His (and I capitalize out of respect for others, a most Christian attitude) teachings than it is to believe in His divinity.
I truly believe, and of course I may be completely wrong, wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last, that daily interaction with others, whether they be individuals or nations, in accordance with Christ's teachings, has a more positive and reaching effect. The debate should not be science vs. religion; it should be science vs. philosophy, and in that there should be no discord. Religion as philosophy, science and rational thought can always live comfortably together. One must simply decide whether the teachings or the institutions are more important.
I agree with parts of this, i.e. while I don't believe in god or in the divinity of christ, I do think the philosophical message underpinning the stories about Jesus are generally worthwhile and quite revolutionary. It has always surprised me that his followers are quick to "yeah, yeah" the message and then tear right into rational thought.
Surprise is the wrong word. Disappoint is closer to the mark.
All that said, there was one comment in the Harris/Sullivan debate that rang true and I keep rethinking it. One of them (SH I think) said that the difference between believers and non-believers was that non-believers were more comfortable with uncertainty. This is I think mostly true, or at least embeds a true concept. I'm trying to decide if it's completely true, or if non-believers simply couch their uncertainties in the process of science while believers hedge theirs with the authority of their clerics and holy books. It would explain, for example, while religionists constantly attack folks like Darwin, Copernicus etc. without really coping to the fact that science admits its knowledge is incomplete. Religious knowledge, in this model is complete and handed down through authority or revealed by the gods. it does explain why the extremists get so worried and why their attacks are seemingly so off target (at least to non-believers). I'm comfortable not knowing how the universe and reality got started in part because I know that eventually, if the process of science goes on long enough, the answer will pop out. I may be unfortunate in that I live in a time when the answer is not known, but that's just my bad luck. I throw my little portion of science on the pile and hope it helps.
I need to think about this more, but I think it's essentially correct for a large segment of the religious population. I have to think of a way to test this.
(via)
I would suggest that it is not the philosophy of Christ's teachings that is the source of the friction, it is the institutional practices of the religion He never wished to found. One can indeed be a Christian and at the same time not be a Christian in the formal, institutionalized sense (and certainly not a "Christianist", a term I have great fondness for). One can follow the teachings of Christ in the everyday routine and still believe that there was no Resurrection. His teachings are universal. It is far more important to me that I attempt in my own fallible way to follow His (and I capitalize out of respect for others, a most Christian attitude) teachings than it is to believe in His divinity.
I truly believe, and of course I may be completely wrong, wouldn't be the first time and won't be the last, that daily interaction with others, whether they be individuals or nations, in accordance with Christ's teachings, has a more positive and reaching effect. The debate should not be science vs. religion; it should be science vs. philosophy, and in that there should be no discord. Religion as philosophy, science and rational thought can always live comfortably together. One must simply decide whether the teachings or the institutions are more important.
I agree with parts of this, i.e. while I don't believe in god or in the divinity of christ, I do think the philosophical message underpinning the stories about Jesus are generally worthwhile and quite revolutionary. It has always surprised me that his followers are quick to "yeah, yeah" the message and then tear right into rational thought.
Surprise is the wrong word. Disappoint is closer to the mark.
All that said, there was one comment in the Harris/Sullivan debate that rang true and I keep rethinking it. One of them (SH I think) said that the difference between believers and non-believers was that non-believers were more comfortable with uncertainty. This is I think mostly true, or at least embeds a true concept. I'm trying to decide if it's completely true, or if non-believers simply couch their uncertainties in the process of science while believers hedge theirs with the authority of their clerics and holy books. It would explain, for example, while religionists constantly attack folks like Darwin, Copernicus etc. without really coping to the fact that science admits its knowledge is incomplete. Religious knowledge, in this model is complete and handed down through authority or revealed by the gods. it does explain why the extremists get so worried and why their attacks are seemingly so off target (at least to non-believers). I'm comfortable not knowing how the universe and reality got started in part because I know that eventually, if the process of science goes on long enough, the answer will pop out. I may be unfortunate in that I live in a time when the answer is not known, but that's just my bad luck. I throw my little portion of science on the pile and hope it helps.
I need to think about this more, but I think it's essentially correct for a large segment of the religious population. I have to think of a way to test this.
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Supreme Court Gives Gore’s Oscar to Bush
Stunning Reversal for Former Veep
Just days after former Vice President Al Gore received an Academy Award for his global warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” the United States Supreme Court handed Mr. Gore a stunning reversal, stripping him of his Oscar and awarding it to President George W. Bush instead. For Mr. Gore, who basked in the adulation of his Hollywood audience Sunday night, the high court’s decision to give his Oscar to President Bush was a cruel twist of fate, to say the least. But in a 5-4 decision handed down Tuesday morning, the justices made it clear that they had taken the unprecedented step of stripping Mr. Gore of his Oscar because President Bush deserved it more. “It is true that Al Gore has done a lot of talking about global warming,” wrote Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority. “But President Bush has actually helped create global warming.”
In another setback for the former vice president, a group of scientists meeting in Oslo, Norway today said that Mr. Gore was growing at an unsustainable rate. “The polar ice caps may be shrinking, but Al Gore is clearly expanding,” said Dr. Hiroshi Kyosuke of the University of Tokyo. The scientists concluded that if Mr. Gore continues to expand at his current rate, he could cause the earth to spin off its axis by 2010, sending it hurtling into the sun. “Here’s an inconvenient truth,” Dr. Kyosuke added. “Al’s got to stay away from those carbs.” Elsewhere, after foreigners received a record number of Academy Award nominations, CNN anchor Lou Dobbs proposed building a 12-foot high fence around the Kodak Theater.
via
Just days after former Vice President Al Gore received an Academy Award for his global warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” the United States Supreme Court handed Mr. Gore a stunning reversal, stripping him of his Oscar and awarding it to President George W. Bush instead. For Mr. Gore, who basked in the adulation of his Hollywood audience Sunday night, the high court’s decision to give his Oscar to President Bush was a cruel twist of fate, to say the least. But in a 5-4 decision handed down Tuesday morning, the justices made it clear that they had taken the unprecedented step of stripping Mr. Gore of his Oscar because President Bush deserved it more. “It is true that Al Gore has done a lot of talking about global warming,” wrote Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority. “But President Bush has actually helped create global warming.”
In another setback for the former vice president, a group of scientists meeting in Oslo, Norway today said that Mr. Gore was growing at an unsustainable rate. “The polar ice caps may be shrinking, but Al Gore is clearly expanding,” said Dr. Hiroshi Kyosuke of the University of Tokyo. The scientists concluded that if Mr. Gore continues to expand at his current rate, he could cause the earth to spin off its axis by 2010, sending it hurtling into the sun. “Here’s an inconvenient truth,” Dr. Kyosuke added. “Al’s got to stay away from those carbs.” Elsewhere, after foreigners received a record number of Academy Award nominations, CNN anchor Lou Dobbs proposed building a 12-foot high fence around the Kodak Theater.
via
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
If One Hand is on the Cell Phone...
Catholics taking the fun out of everything(via Slate):
North America's first cell-phone porn service surrendered to a Catholic boycott. Last month, Canada's second-biggest telecom firm, Telus, began offering downloadable nude photos and videos. A week ago, the archbishop of Vancouver urged Catholics to boycott the company; three days later, Telus gave up and said it would offer porn only through cable TV. Company's spins: 1) The porn was only soft-core. 2) We imposed an age limit. 3) We offered it as a public service, to help porn seekers avoid malware. Archbishop's spin: The spread of porn technology preys on addicts and their victims. Cynical view: Thank God we're keeping porn off 1-inch screens so people will have to keep watching it on 30-inch screens. Twist: The archbishop issued his boycott call through a podcast ($). (For a previous update on pay-per-view porn, click here. For porn HDTV, click here. For virtual-sex technology, click here. For live, on-demand sex, click here. For Human Nature's take on prosecuting cybersex, click here.)
And the Jews are into it as well
North America's first cell-phone porn service surrendered to a Catholic boycott. Last month, Canada's second-biggest telecom firm, Telus, began offering downloadable nude photos and videos. A week ago, the archbishop of Vancouver urged Catholics to boycott the company; three days later, Telus gave up and said it would offer porn only through cable TV. Company's spins: 1) The porn was only soft-core. 2) We imposed an age limit. 3) We offered it as a public service, to help porn seekers avoid malware. Archbishop's spin: The spread of porn technology preys on addicts and their victims. Cynical view: Thank God we're keeping porn off 1-inch screens so people will have to keep watching it on 30-inch screens. Twist: The archbishop issued his boycott call through a podcast ($). (For a previous update on pay-per-view porn, click here. For porn HDTV, click here. For virtual-sex technology, click here. For live, on-demand sex, click here. For Human Nature's take on prosecuting cybersex, click here.)
And the Jews are into it as well
Almost Made it Past the First Sentence
before I burst out laughing at the "scare quotes"
What strikes you as being some thoughts that people would have if--in the short space of a few weeks--the universally held conviction that the Earth rotates on an "axis" daily and orbits the sun annually was exposed as an unscientific deception?
These folks are totally serious. Damn Copernicus for the money-grubbing, anti-religious corporate shill he is!
Actually, there are a few gems in here:
That bottom line is that the negative results of the Michelson-Morley interferometer experiments conducted in Europe and the U.S. in the 1880’s consistently showed no orbital motion of the Earth around the sun. No motion. Period
Moreover, by threatening the Copernican Paradigm, i.e., the very foundation--the raison d' etre--of this successful transmutation, these experiments contained the deadly potential of thwarting the rooting process of Darwinism, Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, and (later) Saganism.
"Saganism" Oh Uncle Carl! How could you!
Let's see...
Scare quotes? Check!
Quotes bible passages as facts? Check!
Claims Grand Conspiracy(tm) to hide the truth? Check!
Colorful fonts and psuedo-random size changes? Check!
Geocentrism could spring from the same fertile imagination as ... Time Cube!
Edit: This was also pretty good:
As physicist Wal Thornhill (et al) agree: “Electromagnetic forces are infinitely more powerful than gravity…” (HERE, p. 4). As we know, a child can test this statement with a plain magnet or an electromagnet and a coin on the ground. Gravity holds the coin on the ground, but pass the magnet over it at some appropriate height and….
nothing happens! Coins are non-magnetic. Well, technically, the ones with silver in them are slightly paramagnetic.
I shouldn't do this, i.e. make fun of a person with sincerely held beliefs and deeply embedded emotional problems. I shouldn't but, as my friends will tell you, I am evil and it comes with the territory. And it's interesting!
What strikes you as being some thoughts that people would have if--in the short space of a few weeks--the universally held conviction that the Earth rotates on an "axis" daily and orbits the sun annually was exposed as an unscientific deception?
These folks are totally serious. Damn Copernicus for the money-grubbing, anti-religious corporate shill he is!
Actually, there are a few gems in here:
That bottom line is that the negative results of the Michelson-Morley interferometer experiments conducted in Europe and the U.S. in the 1880’s consistently showed no orbital motion of the Earth around the sun. No motion. Period
Moreover, by threatening the Copernican Paradigm, i.e., the very foundation--the raison d' etre--of this successful transmutation, these experiments contained the deadly potential of thwarting the rooting process of Darwinism, Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, and (later) Saganism.
"Saganism" Oh Uncle Carl! How could you!
Let's see...
Scare quotes? Check!
Quotes bible passages as facts? Check!
Claims Grand Conspiracy(tm) to hide the truth? Check!
Colorful fonts and psuedo-random size changes? Check!
Geocentrism could spring from the same fertile imagination as ... Time Cube!
Edit: This was also pretty good:
As physicist Wal Thornhill (et al) agree: “Electromagnetic forces are infinitely more powerful than gravity…” (HERE, p. 4). As we know, a child can test this statement with a plain magnet or an electromagnet and a coin on the ground. Gravity holds the coin on the ground, but pass the magnet over it at some appropriate height and….
nothing happens! Coins are non-magnetic. Well, technically, the ones with silver in them are slightly paramagnetic.
I shouldn't do this, i.e. make fun of a person with sincerely held beliefs and deeply embedded emotional problems. I shouldn't but, as my friends will tell you, I am evil and it comes with the territory. And it's interesting!
Monday, February 26, 2007
Conservapedia: I Still Cant Tell!
I was drifting into the camp that Conservapedia was a parody site until I read this entry:
Some have criticized gravity, reminding us that it is only a theory, and that no scientist has ever seen a graviton or a space curve. Furthermore, experiments done by NASA prove that the Moon is receding (moving further away) from the Earth at a rate of 3.8cm per year, directly contradicting the theory that masses attract one another[1]. Indeed, astronomers can observe that all stars in the universe are moving away from one another. The considerable disagreement between scientists about the theory of gravity suggests that, like evolution, the theory will eventually be replaced with a model which acknowledges God as the source of all things, the Prime Mover, and the only real fundamental force in the universe.
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html
The moon is, in fact, moving away from the earth, but it's entirely due to the redistribution of angular momentum in the earth-moon system due to tidal fricition. Quite provable from first principles.
This is a sad entry, it makes baby Newton cry.
Some have criticized gravity, reminding us that it is only a theory, and that no scientist has ever seen a graviton or a space curve. Furthermore, experiments done by NASA prove that the Moon is receding (moving further away) from the Earth at a rate of 3.8cm per year, directly contradicting the theory that masses attract one another[1]. Indeed, astronomers can observe that all stars in the universe are moving away from one another. The considerable disagreement between scientists about the theory of gravity suggests that, like evolution, the theory will eventually be replaced with a model which acknowledges God as the source of all things, the Prime Mover, and the only real fundamental force in the universe.
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html
The moon is, in fact, moving away from the earth, but it's entirely due to the redistribution of angular momentum in the earth-moon system due to tidal fricition. Quite provable from first principles.
This is a sad entry, it makes baby Newton cry.
Friday, February 23, 2007
With a Name Like Conservapedia...
... it's got to be fair and balanced, right? Mucho gusto! (here)
Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian "C.E." instead of "A.D.", which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance. Read a list of many Examples of Bias in Wikipedia
Bias?? In Wiki? Like what?
For example, even though most Americans (and probably most of the world) reject the theory of evolution, Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution.
Wikipedia often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English speaking users are American.
Wikipedia claims about 1.5 million articles, but what it does not say is that a large number of those articles have zero educational value.
Wikipedia has many entries on mathematical concepts, but lacks any entry on the basic concept of an elementary proof. Elementary proofs require a rigor lacking in many mathematical claims promoted on Wikipedia.
So it's un-American, un-educational and contains math.
Egad!
(via)
Conservapedia is a much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American. On Wikipedia, many of the dates are provided in the anti-Christian "C.E." instead of "A.D.", which Conservapedia uses. Christianity receives no credit for the great advances and discoveries it inspired, such as those of the Renaissance. Read a list of many Examples of Bias in Wikipedia
Bias?? In Wiki? Like what?
For example, even though most Americans (and probably most of the world) reject the theory of evolution, Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution.
Wikipedia often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English speaking users are American.
Wikipedia claims about 1.5 million articles, but what it does not say is that a large number of those articles have zero educational value.
Wikipedia has many entries on mathematical concepts, but lacks any entry on the basic concept of an elementary proof. Elementary proofs require a rigor lacking in many mathematical claims promoted on Wikipedia.
So it's un-American, un-educational and contains math.
Egad!
(via)
Thursday, February 22, 2007
"You Could Shoot Things From Orbit WIth This Thing!"
In defeat, I am making good on my promise to buy my son a gun. Given the nature of the transaction, he can kind of get any gun he wants. Today, he showed me his choice.
Misread
I thought it said "It's me and Jay Pinkerton on Bloggingheads.TV! "
cool!
but it's really "It's me and Jim Pinkerton on Bloggingheads.TV! "
FTL. I think my version would have been more interesting.
cool!
but it's really "It's me and Jim Pinkerton on Bloggingheads.TV! "
FTL. I think my version would have been more interesting.
The Circle of Life is Complete
Red Hat Linux has finally completed the slow transformation into Windows 98.
Here
After thirteen years as a loyal Red Hat and Fedora user, I reached my limit today, when an attempt to upgrade one (1) package pitched me into a four-hour marathon of dependency chasing, at the end of which an attempt to get around a trivial file conflict rendered my system unusable.
The proximate causes of this failure were (1) incompetent repository maintenance, making any nontrivial upgrade certain to founder on a failed dependency, and (2) the fact that rpm is not statically linked -- so it's possible to inadvertently remove a shared library it depends on and be unrecoverably screwed. But the underlying problems run much deeper.
Over the last five years, I've watched Red Hat/Fedora throw away what was at one time a near-unassailable lead in technical prowess, market share and community prestige. The blunders have been legion on both technical and political levels. They have included, but were not limited to:
Chronic governance problems.
Persistent failure to maintain key repositories in a sane, consistent state from which upgrades might actually be possible.
A murky, poorly-documented, over-complex submission process.
Allowing RPM development to drift and stagnate -- then adding another layer of complexity, bugs, and wretched performance with yum.
Effectively abandoning the struggle for desktop market share.
Failure to address the problem of proprietary multimedia formats with any attitude other than blank denial.
There are all the problems that linux adherents criticize about Windows (and they are, for the most part, true when they say them). All complex projects eventually grind to stagnation unless interjected with competition and market forces (space shuttle anyone?) Linux has been in this phase for awhile. I expect the ad hominem attacks on Eric to begin forthwith.
Here
After thirteen years as a loyal Red Hat and Fedora user, I reached my limit today, when an attempt to upgrade one (1) package pitched me into a four-hour marathon of dependency chasing, at the end of which an attempt to get around a trivial file conflict rendered my system unusable.
The proximate causes of this failure were (1) incompetent repository maintenance, making any nontrivial upgrade certain to founder on a failed dependency, and (2) the fact that rpm is not statically linked -- so it's possible to inadvertently remove a shared library it depends on and be unrecoverably screwed. But the underlying problems run much deeper.
Over the last five years, I've watched Red Hat/Fedora throw away what was at one time a near-unassailable lead in technical prowess, market share and community prestige. The blunders have been legion on both technical and political levels. They have included, but were not limited to:
Chronic governance problems.
Persistent failure to maintain key repositories in a sane, consistent state from which upgrades might actually be possible.
A murky, poorly-documented, over-complex submission process.
Allowing RPM development to drift and stagnate -- then adding another layer of complexity, bugs, and wretched performance with yum.
Effectively abandoning the struggle for desktop market share.
Failure to address the problem of proprietary multimedia formats with any attitude other than blank denial.
There are all the problems that linux adherents criticize about Windows (and they are, for the most part, true when they say them). All complex projects eventually grind to stagnation unless interjected with competition and market forces (space shuttle anyone?) Linux has been in this phase for awhile. I expect the ad hominem attacks on Eric to begin forthwith.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
The Vanguard League Poster
My SG had our avatars done up in Alex Ross comic book style. We're pretty thrilled with the whole thing.
This is mostly done in Bryce and Poser, btw, with a great deal of Photoshop post rendering skill. The artist, Doug Shuler, is fantastic and a player on our server.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)