Glenn Greenwald unpacks the myths (and truths) in Dean Bartlett's 9/11 generation. Dean's particular line of reasoning I find unusually offensive. If I became a proponant of a war, I am 100% certain I would find a way to substantively support it financially, and physically. Dean's "logic" and, by proxy the logic of those who have been writing similar agitprop, is basically that of the younger, tag-along brother. It conflates just wars for a purpose with all wars, generalizes issues of freedom and liberty, and, to be honest, takes credit for other people's work. Both pieces are worth a read becuase Dean is so unabashedly dishonest in his arguement.
The question I still have after reading it though is this: who is he writing *for*? The President has a jaw-dropping 71% disapproval rating becuase the american public has finally given up listening to him. Even the right is beginning to suspect that, after 5 years, the plan may be a bit off track. Who is reading this stuff anyway?
Or is it just to annoy people like me, who went against this at the beginning? Is this just sand-in-the-eye stuff?
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
"The Only Newspaper Brave Enough To Tell The Truth" Closes it's Doors
One of my absolutely favorite newspaper, the Weekly World News, is closing it’s doors after almost 30 years. I loved this rag, simply because a) it was so silly and b) I knew one of the guys who wrote Ed Anger.
My all time favorite story was “Moon Is Giant Space Creature’s Skull”, but I can’t find an online reference to it.
My Technical Writing instructor at Penn State had a side job writing the Ed Anger column for awhile in the late 80’s, which was a lot of fun. Tom was actually one of the best teachers I ever had, giving us very clear directions on how to breakdown writing, data presentation and logic very clearly to get to the point, training I still use to this very day. We asked him once how he wrote the Ed Anger column,
“Well, first I start drinking… then I call a friend and start talking. We try to think of 3 unrelated things, then link them together. For example, the other night we came up with Arabs, the Olympics and transsexuals. We then link them together in headline form, hence: Cheating Towelheads Stole Our Gold Medals! The rest just writes itself…”
I, for one, will miss it..
Select articles from the WWN
My all time favorite story was “Moon Is Giant Space Creature’s Skull”, but I can’t find an online reference to it.
My Technical Writing instructor at Penn State had a side job writing the Ed Anger column for awhile in the late 80’s, which was a lot of fun. Tom was actually one of the best teachers I ever had, giving us very clear directions on how to breakdown writing, data presentation and logic very clearly to get to the point, training I still use to this very day. We asked him once how he wrote the Ed Anger column,
“Well, first I start drinking… then I call a friend and start talking. We try to think of 3 unrelated things, then link them together. For example, the other night we came up with Arabs, the Olympics and transsexuals. We then link them together in headline form, hence: Cheating Towelheads Stole Our Gold Medals! The rest just writes itself…”
I, for one, will miss it..
Select articles from the WWN
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
An At Home Fusion Reactor
Summary:
A 4" diameter stainless steel fusor with a 1" stainless steel spherical inner grid
0-30KV 15mA power supply (homemade, variable)
20 micron vacuum pump (modified for more convenient intake)
Hopefully, when the plasma is present the pressure will dip into the ~5 micron (or less) range so that I won't have to waste too much Deuterium.
When the fusor is done, it will be able to perform Deuterium + Deuterium fusion to create 3He + n (50% of the time) and Tritum (3H) + p (50% of the time). It is able to overcome the coloumb barrier with the very large electrostatic field that can be created (in excess of 30KeV) and therefore is explained by physics - this is NOT cold fusion! In fact, it isn't anything new; this system of fusion has been around since the 1960s when Philo Farnsworth, the inventor of electronic television, came up with the idea. It was later improved by Hirsch and Meeks.
here
(via)
I need to have a good long look at the physics behind this. It would be kind of cool to build one of these though.
UPDATE: Sweet Jesus! It's real!
On October 8, 1960, the Mark I produced a steadystate neutron count when deuterium was admitted into the device with very low power application. The central feature during these tests was not the neutron count itself. What was sought in these tests lay in the control of the reaction under increasing power application. Farnsworth established and charted increasing neutron counts with increasing application of electrostatic power. It is suggested that the reader obtain and study copies of the Fusor (patent 3,386,883).
A 4" diameter stainless steel fusor with a 1" stainless steel spherical inner grid
0-30KV 15mA power supply (homemade, variable)
20 micron vacuum pump (modified for more convenient intake)
Hopefully, when the plasma is present the pressure will dip into the ~5 micron (or less) range so that I won't have to waste too much Deuterium.
When the fusor is done, it will be able to perform Deuterium + Deuterium fusion to create 3He + n (50% of the time) and Tritum (3H) + p (50% of the time). It is able to overcome the coloumb barrier with the very large electrostatic field that can be created (in excess of 30KeV) and therefore is explained by physics - this is NOT cold fusion! In fact, it isn't anything new; this system of fusion has been around since the 1960s when Philo Farnsworth, the inventor of electronic television, came up with the idea. It was later improved by Hirsch and Meeks.
here
(via)
I need to have a good long look at the physics behind this. It would be kind of cool to build one of these though.
UPDATE: Sweet Jesus! It's real!
On October 8, 1960, the Mark I produced a steadystate neutron count when deuterium was admitted into the device with very low power application. The central feature during these tests was not the neutron count itself. What was sought in these tests lay in the control of the reaction under increasing power application. Farnsworth established and charted increasing neutron counts with increasing application of electrostatic power. It is suggested that the reader obtain and study copies of the Fusor (patent 3,386,883).
Someone, I am Confident, We'll Eventually Hear About on the News...
and when it happens, you'll say, "Hey, that was that guy Mark blogged about..."
So Darren asks Joanne out. Joanne accepts. They eat at China Grill. (Nice restaurant. I've been there.) Darren pays, despite Joanne offering to split the check.
At some point after the meal, Darren gets the idea that Joanne didn't like him.Rather than just chalk it up to a bad date (hey, it happens, right?)
Darren... Well, Darren has other plans. DARREN EMAILS JOANNE ASKING HER TO SEND HIM $50 FOR HER PORTION OF DINNER.
Yes.
I paused and re-read that about 30 times, too. I couldn't be serious, could I? He actually didn't email that, did he? Oh, but he did:
Being a jerk-date
(via)
So Darren asks Joanne out. Joanne accepts. They eat at China Grill. (Nice restaurant. I've been there.) Darren pays, despite Joanne offering to split the check.
At some point after the meal, Darren gets the idea that Joanne didn't like him.Rather than just chalk it up to a bad date (hey, it happens, right?)
Darren... Well, Darren has other plans. DARREN EMAILS JOANNE ASKING HER TO SEND HIM $50 FOR HER PORTION OF DINNER.
Yes.
I paused and re-read that about 30 times, too. I couldn't be serious, could I? He actually didn't email that, did he? Oh, but he did:
Being a jerk-date
(via)
Monday, July 23, 2007
Second Life
While I've been recovering at home, I took up the recommendation of one of my colleagues and tried Second Life. It was an interesting experience, and answered a few questions I had always had.
Some observations:
1) It's not quite anarcho-capitalism. It's close though, at least in concept, to what the more utopian anarchocapitalists I know tell me the future could be like without government. There are no (or very, very few) sales regulations. If you can make it, you can sell it at whatever price you can get for it. The market is aggressive and active. For example, land there sells (with or without covenants) for between L$10-L$15/m^2 on average (L$ = Linden dollars, the in game currency). If, you offer land for sale less than that, it goes *immediately*, but if you go above that, it can sit for quite a while. I accidently sold a plot for L$6000 instead of the L$60,000 I meant to type and it sold in a pico-second. I was not happy, but the new owner was thrilled. Many of the benefits/responsibilities of anarchocapitalism are there, including going around armed (there is a good business in both arms sales and security systems to keep people off your property). You can manufacture anything you want to create, and sell unlimited quantities, except for land. You can buy and sell land, create or break land-use covenants and, in general, make a profit off anything you want.
Where it differs from AC is around how the few rules are enforced. Where AC would have no central government, SL has the operating system which, among other things, enforces property rights, i.e. you cannot take land by force. The system also eliminates things like roads, right of ways etc. because you can fly anywhere you want. The system can lock folks out of property (i.e. you can erect an impenetrable force field around your property). Most of the things you’d want a government for, are there as part of the OS. In my view, this is approximately the correct function of government. Oh, and there are taxes in the form of a monthly maintenance fee proportional to the maximum amount of land you owned that month. And, being no fools, you pay that fee in US$ not in L$.
2) Real Estate folks make all the money, but it’s a high volume, low margin business. When you add in the taxes for property ownership, you start to get some inflationary effects. I see how to make it work, but it’s a full-time job.
3) No one needs that many digital t-shirts
4) Absolutely no one needs that many furry foxtails.
5) It has many of the things I enjoyed about The Sims, in it. I can buy some property, construct a house, decorate and furnish it (which for some reason I love to do), and sell it at a modest profit in about a day. There is *LOTS* of interior design stuff there, and some very clever work going on. If I were a designer, that’s where I would go. If I were a teacher, that’s where I would send my students.
6) A lesson I learned: If you don’t have a security system installed, lesbians will come into your house while you are gone, fuck in your bed and, if you catch them at this, not understand why you are ordering them to get dressed and get out.
7) While there is some interesting geography there, much of it gets flattened for use. Almost no one allocates their space for a nature park.
8) Unrestrained capitalism looks pretty seedy for the most part.
9) Zoning regulations are your friends in the real world. I never appreciated that until now.
10) Most people are reasonable, but not terribly imaginative.
11) Virtual Reality, while advanced from the ‘80s, still has a long way to go. SL does not have the quality or character of any decent commercial MMORPG.
12) It is also not as addictive as a MMORPG.
13) While you can exchange US$ or L$ (and vice versa) the exchange rate is terrible and there are a LOT of fees. I don’t recommend doing this, but if you do, one massive transaction is better than many little ones.
14) People will form communities around anything. The Island of Scottish-only, diaper wearing adults taught me that much.
15) SL sims dance far better than the people behind them.
16) The Swedes have excellent taste in design.
17) If you ask a priest in game where he thinks the soul of a SL avatar goes when it dies, you’d better pack a lunch.
18) You can camp out in front of the Hare Krishna Church in SL and offer to give them flowers, but they generally wont take them.
19) “age play” is creepy and vaguely evil. It is also, seemingly very popular and makes me think humanity is not a great thing.
20) There are “fat avatars”, which people enjoy playing. Good for them I guess.
21) Land prices are fairly high, L$12,000 for 1024 m^2, but houses are really, really cheap, ~$250->$1500 (for a top of the line castle). This seems vaugely non-intuitive.
22) if you buy a big assed house boat and drop it in the water infront of your beach house, your neighbors will think you have a small dick.
I'll probably continue for a little while until I run out of money or get tired of designing things. I have a really good idea for a house I want to build, but that will invilve some time.
Some observations:
1) It's not quite anarcho-capitalism. It's close though, at least in concept, to what the more utopian anarchocapitalists I know tell me the future could be like without government. There are no (or very, very few) sales regulations. If you can make it, you can sell it at whatever price you can get for it. The market is aggressive and active. For example, land there sells (with or without covenants) for between L$10-L$15/m^2 on average (L$ = Linden dollars, the in game currency). If, you offer land for sale less than that, it goes *immediately*, but if you go above that, it can sit for quite a while. I accidently sold a plot for L$6000 instead of the L$60,000 I meant to type and it sold in a pico-second. I was not happy, but the new owner was thrilled. Many of the benefits/responsibilities of anarchocapitalism are there, including going around armed (there is a good business in both arms sales and security systems to keep people off your property). You can manufacture anything you want to create, and sell unlimited quantities, except for land. You can buy and sell land, create or break land-use covenants and, in general, make a profit off anything you want.
Where it differs from AC is around how the few rules are enforced. Where AC would have no central government, SL has the operating system which, among other things, enforces property rights, i.e. you cannot take land by force. The system also eliminates things like roads, right of ways etc. because you can fly anywhere you want. The system can lock folks out of property (i.e. you can erect an impenetrable force field around your property). Most of the things you’d want a government for, are there as part of the OS. In my view, this is approximately the correct function of government. Oh, and there are taxes in the form of a monthly maintenance fee proportional to the maximum amount of land you owned that month. And, being no fools, you pay that fee in US$ not in L$.
2) Real Estate folks make all the money, but it’s a high volume, low margin business. When you add in the taxes for property ownership, you start to get some inflationary effects. I see how to make it work, but it’s a full-time job.
3) No one needs that many digital t-shirts
4) Absolutely no one needs that many furry foxtails.
5) It has many of the things I enjoyed about The Sims, in it. I can buy some property, construct a house, decorate and furnish it (which for some reason I love to do), and sell it at a modest profit in about a day. There is *LOTS* of interior design stuff there, and some very clever work going on. If I were a designer, that’s where I would go. If I were a teacher, that’s where I would send my students.
6) A lesson I learned: If you don’t have a security system installed, lesbians will come into your house while you are gone, fuck in your bed and, if you catch them at this, not understand why you are ordering them to get dressed and get out.
7) While there is some interesting geography there, much of it gets flattened for use. Almost no one allocates their space for a nature park.
8) Unrestrained capitalism looks pretty seedy for the most part.
9) Zoning regulations are your friends in the real world. I never appreciated that until now.
10) Most people are reasonable, but not terribly imaginative.
11) Virtual Reality, while advanced from the ‘80s, still has a long way to go. SL does not have the quality or character of any decent commercial MMORPG.
12) It is also not as addictive as a MMORPG.
13) While you can exchange US$ or L$ (and vice versa) the exchange rate is terrible and there are a LOT of fees. I don’t recommend doing this, but if you do, one massive transaction is better than many little ones.
14) People will form communities around anything. The Island of Scottish-only, diaper wearing adults taught me that much.
15) SL sims dance far better than the people behind them.
16) The Swedes have excellent taste in design.
17) If you ask a priest in game where he thinks the soul of a SL avatar goes when it dies, you’d better pack a lunch.
18) You can camp out in front of the Hare Krishna Church in SL and offer to give them flowers, but they generally wont take them.
19) “age play” is creepy and vaguely evil. It is also, seemingly very popular and makes me think humanity is not a great thing.
20) There are “fat avatars”, which people enjoy playing. Good for them I guess.
21) Land prices are fairly high, L$12,000 for 1024 m^2, but houses are really, really cheap, ~$250->$1500 (for a top of the line castle). This seems vaugely non-intuitive.
22) if you buy a big assed house boat and drop it in the water infront of your beach house, your neighbors will think you have a small dick.
I'll probably continue for a little while until I run out of money or get tired of designing things. I have a really good idea for a house I want to build, but that will invilve some time.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Neo-Con Jokes
AS has been collecting them and, why not? My favorite so far:
Q. How many neocons does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A. Neocons don't bother with light bulbs. They declare a War on Darkness and set the house on fire.
Q. How many neocons does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A. Neocons don't bother with light bulbs. They declare a War on Darkness and set the house on fire.
Phenegan, begin again.
When I was in the hospital earlier, I was prescribed Phenegan in fairly generous does for nausea. It became obvious to me within a few moments of the first does that the stuff has neurological properties, I started shaking uncontrollably and recognizably started to hallucinate, although very lightly. Pleasant, vivid colors and a few interesting closed-eye patterns (mostly like complex Chinese brocades). I’m not sure most people would have noticed. It absolutely made me sleepy.
Interesting though that this is the third or fourth time I’ve seen a connection between CNS impacting meds and the stomach. I’m not sure what it means, but it seems to be true. When I was in the emergency, they kept checking on me and one of the nurses mentioned that Phenegan sometimes "makes folks go a little loopy", and made the universal crazy sign with her hand. Given it's origin as an anti-psychotic, I'm not terribly surprirsed that sometimes happens. Human brains are complicated and no two are really the same, a flexibility I find quite amazing really given that we have 95% of the same cognitive functionality.
I have 5 pills left which they shipped home with me. Hopefully I can save them for "later".
Interesting though that this is the third or fourth time I’ve seen a connection between CNS impacting meds and the stomach. I’m not sure what it means, but it seems to be true. When I was in the emergency, they kept checking on me and one of the nurses mentioned that Phenegan sometimes "makes folks go a little loopy", and made the universal crazy sign with her hand. Given it's origin as an anti-psychotic, I'm not terribly surprirsed that sometimes happens. Human brains are complicated and no two are really the same, a flexibility I find quite amazing really given that we have 95% of the same cognitive functionality.
I have 5 pills left which they shipped home with me. Hopefully I can save them for "later".
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Coming Home Early
This week is our big annual meeting in Florida, for which my team and I have been planning for 8 weeks.
I got extremely sick on the plane down. Extremely sick. My stomach has been bothering me for a while now, so much so that's it's not uncommon for me to throw up after dinner. I've been meaning to see a doctor about it, but there hasnt been much time (see above). I also commonly drink red wine with supper, so the dark, reddish/black fluid I had been barfing up with a coffee-grounds texture was not immediately alarming.
Except Monday when I landed, was throwing up every ten minutes, and realized it was the same substance, but I had not had any wine. The I realized, "Hey, maybe that's blood!"
It was.
I've been in the hospital in Orlando for the last 2 days, getting stablized. I'm flying home to seattle tonight via Delta (who, quite generously updated me to First Class for free when they heard why I was coming home), and then I'll get treated in Seattle.
There is a condition diabetics get where the little flap in your stomach that prevents food from going back up, breaks, causing exactly the type of problem I have. The blood was coming from my esophagus which has been damaged over the last few months by the breakdown of this part. The debate at this point is whether or not I'll need surgery to correct it, and I expect an answer when I see my doctor at home.
Not great.
BTW, I missed my speech today which involved giving away that ounce of gold I purchashed last month. One of my co-workers gave the speech (and presumably the gold) today, but I'm very dissapointed I didn't get to pull my coup d'grace myself.
ugh.
I got extremely sick on the plane down. Extremely sick. My stomach has been bothering me for a while now, so much so that's it's not uncommon for me to throw up after dinner. I've been meaning to see a doctor about it, but there hasnt been much time (see above). I also commonly drink red wine with supper, so the dark, reddish/black fluid I had been barfing up with a coffee-grounds texture was not immediately alarming.
Except Monday when I landed, was throwing up every ten minutes, and realized it was the same substance, but I had not had any wine. The I realized, "Hey, maybe that's blood!"
It was.
I've been in the hospital in Orlando for the last 2 days, getting stablized. I'm flying home to seattle tonight via Delta (who, quite generously updated me to First Class for free when they heard why I was coming home), and then I'll get treated in Seattle.
There is a condition diabetics get where the little flap in your stomach that prevents food from going back up, breaks, causing exactly the type of problem I have. The blood was coming from my esophagus which has been damaged over the last few months by the breakdown of this part. The debate at this point is whether or not I'll need surgery to correct it, and I expect an answer when I see my doctor at home.
Not great.
BTW, I missed my speech today which involved giving away that ounce of gold I purchashed last month. One of my co-workers gave the speech (and presumably the gold) today, but I'm very dissapointed I didn't get to pull my coup d'grace myself.
ugh.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Not Even Wrong
Disingenuous doesn't even been to describe this.
That doesn't even remotely resemble a best fit curve. They've drawn the line straight-through an outlier. And look how steep it is at the right hand side. They're asking us to believe that the marginal impact of increasing corporate income tax rates above the Norwegian level is not only negative, but massively negative in a way that none of the non-Norway data bears out. It's an insult to everyone's intelligence. At this point, one needs to think that letting Rupert Murdoch destroy the WSJ news pages might be better for the world than letting the WSJ news pages' credibility continue to provide a "halo effect" to the editorial page.
The Death of Homo Economicus
The final nail in the coffin of the myth of the rational economic decision maker:
In “The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making under Risk,” in the January 26 Science, Poldrack, Fox and their colleagues Sabrina M. Tom and Christopher Trepel presented the results of their fMRI study, in which they offered subjects a prospect of accepting or rejecting a gamble that offered a 50–50 chance of gaining or losing money. As the potential for gains rose, they found increased activity in the mesolimbic and mesocortical dopamine systems (dopamine is a neurotransmitter substance associated with motivation and reward). As the potential for losses increased, they found decreasing activity in these same reward-sensitive areas. Interestingly, it appears that losses and gains are coded by the same brain structures—the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, associated with decision making and learning in the context of reward and punishment, and the ventral striatum, associated with learning, motivation and reward. Individual differences in loss aversion were predicted by how much more the brain was turned off by losses than it was turned on by gains.
(here)
In “The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making under Risk,” in the January 26 Science, Poldrack, Fox and their colleagues Sabrina M. Tom and Christopher Trepel presented the results of their fMRI study, in which they offered subjects a prospect of accepting or rejecting a gamble that offered a 50–50 chance of gaining or losing money. As the potential for gains rose, they found increased activity in the mesolimbic and mesocortical dopamine systems (dopamine is a neurotransmitter substance associated with motivation and reward). As the potential for losses increased, they found decreasing activity in these same reward-sensitive areas. Interestingly, it appears that losses and gains are coded by the same brain structures—the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, associated with decision making and learning in the context of reward and punishment, and the ventral striatum, associated with learning, motivation and reward. Individual differences in loss aversion were predicted by how much more the brain was turned off by losses than it was turned on by gains.
(here)
Capitalism Meets Communism
Google is offering a rare public glimpse of China's new ballistic-missile submarine, according to a researcher at the Federation of American Scientists.
The new submarine was photographed by the commercial Quickbird satellite in late 2006, and the image is freely available on the Google Earth Web site," wrote Hans Kristensen on the Strategic Security Blog.
Kristensen identified the submarine, pictured alongside a naval pier, as a Jin-class vessel, one of five that China is expected to build.
Comparing the Google Earth image with a picture of China's existing Xia-class submarine, Kristensen was able to discern some of the features of the new submarine.
"The Jin-class appears to be approximately 35 feet longer than the Xia-class [submarine], primarily due to an extended mid-section of approximately 115 feet that houses the missile launch tubes and part of the reactor compartment," Kristensen wrote.
But the picture was not clear enough to resolve a debate over whether the Jin-class submarine has tubes for 12 or 16 nuclear-tipped missiles.
Discovery of the submarine image is likely to cause consternation within China's military, which generally keeps as low a profile as possible. If so, it wouldn't be the first time that Google Earth has caused worry inside China's government. In 2006, government officials reportedly expressed concerns over Google Earth imagery of the Zhongnanhai leadership compound in Beijing, an area normally off-limits to prying public eyes.
The new submarine was photographed by the commercial Quickbird satellite in late 2006, and the image is freely available on the Google Earth Web site," wrote Hans Kristensen on the Strategic Security Blog.
Kristensen identified the submarine, pictured alongside a naval pier, as a Jin-class vessel, one of five that China is expected to build.
Comparing the Google Earth image with a picture of China's existing Xia-class submarine, Kristensen was able to discern some of the features of the new submarine.
"The Jin-class appears to be approximately 35 feet longer than the Xia-class [submarine], primarily due to an extended mid-section of approximately 115 feet that houses the missile launch tubes and part of the reactor compartment," Kristensen wrote.
But the picture was not clear enough to resolve a debate over whether the Jin-class submarine has tubes for 12 or 16 nuclear-tipped missiles.
Discovery of the submarine image is likely to cause consternation within China's military, which generally keeps as low a profile as possible. If so, it wouldn't be the first time that Google Earth has caused worry inside China's government. In 2006, government officials reportedly expressed concerns over Google Earth imagery of the Zhongnanhai leadership compound in Beijing, an area normally off-limits to prying public eyes.
On the Road Again
Getting ready this week for next week's annual company meeting. Unlike most years before this we are not in full blown panic mode getting ready, with most of the presentations done, reviewed and even rehearsed. We've been working on this for 8 weeks now (yes, 8 weeks of wasted time). For my part, I've got a 75 minute presentation I'm responsible for and I believe at this point we'll be okay. I have one gimmick I am going to use which should ensure that people talk about the session for a few days afterward*.
All that said, I heard yesterday that my grand-boss (by boss' boss), has no keynote presentation. None. for the last 2 months teams of folks have been working away, meeting, talking, rehearsing and checking little boxes so that we are all in lockstep and all follow the exact same format**. Now we find our uberleader hasn't been marching with us at all, but is instead going to have people throw something together for him Sunday night***.
I can't decide if I think he's an irresponsible jerk or a hilarious non-conformist. :)
*I'll blog about this later, it's something of a "secret" at work because my boss is notorious for stealing other peoples ideas and claiming them as his own. I have been heard to say within his earshot, "I need to see the room floor plans so I know how to position the lasers without blinding anyone" and "The Orlando Fire Chief is a fascist jerk for making me get a permit to turn off the smoke detectors"
** after a lecture from my boss about how we are supposed to "win" by coming up with clever, creative, memorable gimmicks, he then launched into an hour long lecture about all the formatting rules for presentations and how we all had to look *exactly* alike prompting me to remark, "Wait. You mean we're supposed to beat the competition by doing *exactly the same thing they are doing*? Can we out-mediocre them?"
*** this looks like a brown-nose festival to me, so I have politely declined participation.
All that said, I heard yesterday that my grand-boss (by boss' boss), has no keynote presentation. None. for the last 2 months teams of folks have been working away, meeting, talking, rehearsing and checking little boxes so that we are all in lockstep and all follow the exact same format**. Now we find our uberleader hasn't been marching with us at all, but is instead going to have people throw something together for him Sunday night***.
I can't decide if I think he's an irresponsible jerk or a hilarious non-conformist. :)
*I'll blog about this later, it's something of a "secret" at work because my boss is notorious for stealing other peoples ideas and claiming them as his own. I have been heard to say within his earshot, "I need to see the room floor plans so I know how to position the lasers without blinding anyone" and "The Orlando Fire Chief is a fascist jerk for making me get a permit to turn off the smoke detectors"
** after a lecture from my boss about how we are supposed to "win" by coming up with clever, creative, memorable gimmicks, he then launched into an hour long lecture about all the formatting rules for presentations and how we all had to look *exactly* alike prompting me to remark, "Wait. You mean we're supposed to beat the competition by doing *exactly the same thing they are doing*? Can we out-mediocre them?"
*** this looks like a brown-nose festival to me, so I have politely declined participation.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Avatars
I found this over at Andrew Sullivan's blog, it's a NYT photo piece on people and their on-line avatars.
I was a little surprised how many were from the game I play, City of Heroes.
For those of you who are curious, my avatars can be found on my SG site, in the the changing card window on the right. I run BluShield and Captain Physics (the later named for a comic book I wrote in college) and have lead the Vangaurds for about a year. It's fun and I have set a surprising number of sane adults there, although there have been the usual problems with the less-than-well-socially-adjusted.
FTR, between 15-20 hours a week, mostly weekends and late evenings.
I was a little surprised how many were from the game I play, City of Heroes.
For those of you who are curious, my avatars can be found on my SG site, in the the changing card window on the right. I run BluShield and Captain Physics (the later named for a comic book I wrote in college) and have lead the Vangaurds for about a year. It's fun and I have set a surprising number of sane adults there, although there have been the usual problems with the less-than-well-socially-adjusted.
FTR, between 15-20 hours a week, mostly weekends and late evenings.
Well Said
This is primarily for my son, who wont be able to get to it for another 28 days, but I have to say it seems reasonable.
(all of it here)
Ultimately, all of these scandals and revelations force us to confront the basic issues of why the Iraq War was launched in the first place. What do we know now or suspect to be largely true?
1. The WMD intelligence was flimsy, and there is a good deal of circumstantial evidence suggesting the inner core surrounding Bush all knew this and went to war anyway. This has as much been admitted both in the infamous Downing Street Memo and by Paul Wolfowitz.
2. Democratization and humanitarian relief only became an issue once WMDs fizzled. The president's lack of movement on Darfur also suggests 'human rights' and democracy aren't a motivating force with this administration.
3. 'Terror' - as with WMDs, there is a strong possibility this reason was knowingly overplayed by the inner core. They refused to move on Zarqawi and Iraqi Islamists, who were irregardless a minor force in Saddam's Iraq and lurking in areas of the country that Saddam could not reach them. We also know the president pulled away reinforcements from Afghanistan in order to put them in the deployment pipeline for Iraq as the now infamous as Tora Bora took place.
So, what was the reason? Consider this possibility...
The Bush/Cheney axis came to power in 2000 with an idée fixe that the primary threat to US security were traditional 'hard power' issues of national security. Thus, the pulling out of the anti-ballistic treaty and the early scuffle with China over a US reconnaissance flight in the South China Sea. (remember way back then?) There was also, importantly, a preexisting belief, especially among the neocons but really, as seen by your willingness to buy it, throughout the conservative establishment, that Iraq, but especially Iran and its offshoots were dire threats to US interests in the region.
Ultimately, those interests are two - Israel and oil. While this is not the place to discuss the influence of what some call the 'Israel lobby' in the United States, the fact remains, however, that the dominance of the religious right in the Republican party made pleasing them an important factor in any political calculation...and Israel plays an important part in the elaborate 'End Times' mythology popular among the christianist religious right.
As for oil, it is too crass to say oil profits is what motivated the invasion, but it is disingenuous to argue against the role that security of oil supplies and access to them played in the Bush/Cheney decision-making process. Indeed, access to oil and oil security has been a large part of the reason we are involved in the Middle East and stretches back to World War II when Roosevelt met with and forged a relationship with the reigning king of Saudi Arabia on an American warship off the coast of Egypt in 1945. It was the reason why we overthrew Mossadeq and backed the Shah of Iran in 1953. It’s why we intervened against Iraq in 1991. Oil and oil security have ALWAYS been at the forefront of US Middle-East policy.
This being the case, consider the geopolitics of oil supply after 9/11. We had been, first of all, been literally run out of Iran in 1979 and, after 9/11, the fact stands that the majority of the hijackers were Saudis and the man ultimately behind the operation, Bin Laden, was a rich Saudi. Saudi Arabia represents the pinnacle of Islamist autocracy and stands 100% opposed to American values – and yet we were dependent upon them for military bases to protect the Gulf’s oil assets. Couple this also with these facts:
1. World, but especially Chinese, demand for oil had been growing and continues to grow exponentially. 2. Western and western-friendly oil assets are either all in sustained decline or approaching the point of decline from peak oil production. 3. The last time world oil discovery outpaced world oil consumption was twenty years ago. 4. The remaining massive, potentially politically accessible deposits of oil left remaining available to the industrialized West were all contained in the Middle East.
Under these conditions the Iraq War makes sense geo-strategically, politically, in fact in almost every way. Regime change creates a secure client state in the middle of the world’s last remaining great oil patch at time of dwindling supplies. It protects Israel, and so satisfies the pro-Israel part of the party. Insofar as it uses the rhetoric of ‘freedom versus terrorism’ it can be spun ideologically in a way that garners support and splits the opposition – thus creating the political el dorado of Rove’s ‘permanent majority’. It provided lucrative contracts to the military-industrial complex. It gave the pro-Republican officer corps a prestige boost and something to put on their resumes. It appealed to liberal interventionists like Thomas Friedman, nauseating moralists like you, and salivating imperialists like Bill Kristol. Throw in an arrogant, ignorant president with a messianic complex and a chip on his shoulder, a subservient, politicized mass media, an incompetent opposition, and a supremely ignorant, panicked, and fearful citizenry and the question inverts itself. Under these conditions, how could we NOT go to war against Iraq in 2003?
The rest, as they say, is history.
(all of it here)
Ultimately, all of these scandals and revelations force us to confront the basic issues of why the Iraq War was launched in the first place. What do we know now or suspect to be largely true?
1. The WMD intelligence was flimsy, and there is a good deal of circumstantial evidence suggesting the inner core surrounding Bush all knew this and went to war anyway. This has as much been admitted both in the infamous Downing Street Memo and by Paul Wolfowitz.
2. Democratization and humanitarian relief only became an issue once WMDs fizzled. The president's lack of movement on Darfur also suggests 'human rights' and democracy aren't a motivating force with this administration.
3. 'Terror' - as with WMDs, there is a strong possibility this reason was knowingly overplayed by the inner core. They refused to move on Zarqawi and Iraqi Islamists, who were irregardless a minor force in Saddam's Iraq and lurking in areas of the country that Saddam could not reach them. We also know the president pulled away reinforcements from Afghanistan in order to put them in the deployment pipeline for Iraq as the now infamous as Tora Bora took place.
So, what was the reason? Consider this possibility...
The Bush/Cheney axis came to power in 2000 with an idée fixe that the primary threat to US security were traditional 'hard power' issues of national security. Thus, the pulling out of the anti-ballistic treaty and the early scuffle with China over a US reconnaissance flight in the South China Sea. (remember way back then?) There was also, importantly, a preexisting belief, especially among the neocons but really, as seen by your willingness to buy it, throughout the conservative establishment, that Iraq, but especially Iran and its offshoots were dire threats to US interests in the region.
Ultimately, those interests are two - Israel and oil. While this is not the place to discuss the influence of what some call the 'Israel lobby' in the United States, the fact remains, however, that the dominance of the religious right in the Republican party made pleasing them an important factor in any political calculation...and Israel plays an important part in the elaborate 'End Times' mythology popular among the christianist religious right.
As for oil, it is too crass to say oil profits is what motivated the invasion, but it is disingenuous to argue against the role that security of oil supplies and access to them played in the Bush/Cheney decision-making process. Indeed, access to oil and oil security has been a large part of the reason we are involved in the Middle East and stretches back to World War II when Roosevelt met with and forged a relationship with the reigning king of Saudi Arabia on an American warship off the coast of Egypt in 1945. It was the reason why we overthrew Mossadeq and backed the Shah of Iran in 1953. It’s why we intervened against Iraq in 1991. Oil and oil security have ALWAYS been at the forefront of US Middle-East policy.
This being the case, consider the geopolitics of oil supply after 9/11. We had been, first of all, been literally run out of Iran in 1979 and, after 9/11, the fact stands that the majority of the hijackers were Saudis and the man ultimately behind the operation, Bin Laden, was a rich Saudi. Saudi Arabia represents the pinnacle of Islamist autocracy and stands 100% opposed to American values – and yet we were dependent upon them for military bases to protect the Gulf’s oil assets. Couple this also with these facts:
1. World, but especially Chinese, demand for oil had been growing and continues to grow exponentially. 2. Western and western-friendly oil assets are either all in sustained decline or approaching the point of decline from peak oil production. 3. The last time world oil discovery outpaced world oil consumption was twenty years ago. 4. The remaining massive, potentially politically accessible deposits of oil left remaining available to the industrialized West were all contained in the Middle East.
Under these conditions the Iraq War makes sense geo-strategically, politically, in fact in almost every way. Regime change creates a secure client state in the middle of the world’s last remaining great oil patch at time of dwindling supplies. It protects Israel, and so satisfies the pro-Israel part of the party. Insofar as it uses the rhetoric of ‘freedom versus terrorism’ it can be spun ideologically in a way that garners support and splits the opposition – thus creating the political el dorado of Rove’s ‘permanent majority’. It provided lucrative contracts to the military-industrial complex. It gave the pro-Republican officer corps a prestige boost and something to put on their resumes. It appealed to liberal interventionists like Thomas Friedman, nauseating moralists like you, and salivating imperialists like Bill Kristol. Throw in an arrogant, ignorant president with a messianic complex and a chip on his shoulder, a subservient, politicized mass media, an incompetent opposition, and a supremely ignorant, panicked, and fearful citizenry and the question inverts itself. Under these conditions, how could we NOT go to war against Iraq in 2003?
The rest, as they say, is history.
Way too Charming...
On the possible evolutionary underpinnings of the persistence of gays in the general population.
Homosexuality survives, not because gay men, per se, are adaptive, but because the gay gene makes straight men more successfully heterosexual. McKnight hypothesises that this homosexual genetic loading endows some straight men with two crucial characteristics - enhanced sexual drive and charm
...
We have the occasional gay man (3% of the population according to McKnight) merely as an effect of too much of this libidinal and charming genetic loading in one individual. In McKnight’s terms, exclusively homosexual outcomes are a by-product of an enhanced heterosexuality.
As they say in the Orbit gum commercial, "Fabulous!"
Personally, I think #5 is the most like explaination.
(via)
Homosexuality survives, not because gay men, per se, are adaptive, but because the gay gene makes straight men more successfully heterosexual. McKnight hypothesises that this homosexual genetic loading endows some straight men with two crucial characteristics - enhanced sexual drive and charm
...
We have the occasional gay man (3% of the population according to McKnight) merely as an effect of too much of this libidinal and charming genetic loading in one individual. In McKnight’s terms, exclusively homosexual outcomes are a by-product of an enhanced heterosexuality.
As they say in the Orbit gum commercial, "Fabulous!"
Personally, I think #5 is the most like explaination.
(via)
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Tridentine
No, it's not an ad for gum.
The Holy Roman Catholic Church throws another sign it's losing it's battle with the 21st century by... wait for it... regressing to an earlier state (when presumably it was more powerful and popular).
I'm guessing we'll soon see the Church pull out it's old yearbook photos, reminise about about it's time as quaterback and suck in it's gut in the mirror while promising to "lose that extra 20 lbs".
The Holy Roman Catholic Church throws another sign it's losing it's battle with the 21st century by... wait for it... regressing to an earlier state (when presumably it was more powerful and popular).
I'm guessing we'll soon see the Church pull out it's old yearbook photos, reminise about about it's time as quaterback and suck in it's gut in the mirror while promising to "lose that extra 20 lbs".
Best Headline this Week
The Harry Potter review from Slate. The subtitle is, Harry Potter hits Puberty.
The Great God Lardicus
How to create your own god in 10 easy steps!
My favorite:
9) You need to confuse everybody. This will make sure that nobody can be really certain WHAT they believe, because it is all so non-sensical to begin with. And when you don't spell it out exactly (or even if you do) you know how those funny humans will all magically just get along, right!
I wonder if it follows the L. Ron model or the Smith variations.
My favorite:
9) You need to confuse everybody. This will make sure that nobody can be really certain WHAT they believe, because it is all so non-sensical to begin with. And when you don't spell it out exactly (or even if you do) you know how those funny humans will all magically just get along, right!
I wonder if it follows the L. Ron model or the Smith variations.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Eyeball Tattoo
The procedures themselves were effectively painless because there aren’t nerve endings in the surface of the eye, and we did additional control with lidocaine drops which numbed the lids. After pain is fairly minor, although we all have bruising and some discomfort. I have what appears to almost be blistering between the sclera and conjunctiva which is worrying me a little but so far I don’t have reason to believe this is abnormal. Aftercare, at least in my case, is antibiotic drops and a patch.
here
via
My comment: "yyyyaaarrrrrrgggggggg!!!!!!!" followed by a reflexive crotch protection move.
If it's physically possible, humans will find a way to do it.
here
via
My comment: "yyyyaaarrrrrrgggggggg!!!!!!!" followed by a reflexive crotch protection move.
If it's physically possible, humans will find a way to do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)