http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/08/11/invisibility.cloak.ap/index.html
It's funny how Star Trek/Wars have inspired some technological developments. If they work.
11 August 2008
After a Georgian offensive
I find it interesting that now that Georgia started something and couldn't handle the result they're screaming for international condemnation of Russia. There are several possibilities which don't bode well for Georgia.
1) Russia orchestrated a 'demonstration' of Georgian aggression to justify further action. This would be hard to pull off with international media. Georgia more or less admitted to invading Ossetia anyway. The end game is Russian autonomy over Georgia (rather than it being more or less a US satellite as it is now).
2) Russia orchestrated Ossetian separatists into provoking a war of aggression by Georgia which they could respond to (and further cement the ties between Ossetia and Russia). This is similar to what Bismarck did with France in order to unite the remaining Germanic principalities into Prussian Germany..then proceeded to crush the French army in a few weeks. I use this sort of trick in CIV all the time..get someone to declare war on me and then unleash hell. They look like the international bad guy while you take over their territory (which it sounds like Russia is sort of doing).
In any case, it is sort of fun to have a geo-political war to comment on (other than Iraq)..except for the fact that there is a war.
1) Russia orchestrated a 'demonstration' of Georgian aggression to justify further action. This would be hard to pull off with international media. Georgia more or less admitted to invading Ossetia anyway. The end game is Russian autonomy over Georgia (rather than it being more or less a US satellite as it is now).
2) Russia orchestrated Ossetian separatists into provoking a war of aggression by Georgia which they could respond to (and further cement the ties between Ossetia and Russia). This is similar to what Bismarck did with France in order to unite the remaining Germanic principalities into Prussian Germany..then proceeded to crush the French army in a few weeks. I use this sort of trick in CIV all the time..get someone to declare war on me and then unleash hell. They look like the international bad guy while you take over their territory (which it sounds like Russia is sort of doing).
In any case, it is sort of fun to have a geo-political war to comment on (other than Iraq)..except for the fact that there is a war.
10 August 2008
Alliterating the obvious
In conversation today it occurred to me that a school is no place for an intellectual in this country. An intellectual without compatriots, people for communication and commiseration of ideas (and selves), is alone in a crowded room. That person is either beaten down by conformity or themselves beaten by the weighty measures they carry on about. There is no room for triumph where there is no distinction between the wheat and the chaff.
A familiar face in the familiar places
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080810/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_south_ossetia
It's good to be reminded that Russia was once the demon country everyone else in the Northern Hemisphere was scared of. I'm just not sure the media knows how to cover them any other way.
It's good to be reminded that Russia was once the demon country everyone else in the Northern Hemisphere was scared of. I'm just not sure the media knows how to cover them any other way.
09 August 2008
subsidize the bad
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/no-cash-for-clunkers/
This comparison is amusing. Of all the remarks however the most basic is the last paragraph. If we want less of something, "punish" it through taxes or fees, don't subsidize it by paying extra for something of little value. We've done the same thing with food prices (sugar at 3x market price, yes please). What a strange country.
This comparison is amusing. Of all the remarks however the most basic is the last paragraph. If we want less of something, "punish" it through taxes or fees, don't subsidize it by paying extra for something of little value. We've done the same thing with food prices (sugar at 3x market price, yes please). What a strange country.
04 August 2008
educational reform plan
I suppose the argument on education works best like this: people should choose where their tax dollars for education go and thus where their children go. We can do this in part for college education where in-state tuition for public universities are subsidized by state residents. Why the tax pool for lower education cannot be similarly utilized in the same competitive manner is positively strange.
It does make some sense that the amount of federal involvement has been extreme. Possibly because of teacher's unions, but also as a temporary positive consequence of civil rights movements which flamed out once the bigots figured out they could privatize their schools in order to keep out everyone else.
With a globalizing and specializing economy, it makes some sense to have some basic overriding guidance on primary school curriculum in terms of what basic exposures to knowledge and practice skills are imparted. I would argue strongly that several skills, such as critical thinking, basic finance, and basic ability for self-directed learning are in considerable demand. None of these are currently encouraged or "required". In this current environment, any work done by the individual is the about only thing I would construe as contributing to their education. That's a problem which constitutes a net drain (not to mention being exceeding tiresome in explaining basic financial concepts to supposedly educated people like doctors or engineers)
It does make some sense that the amount of federal involvement has been extreme. Possibly because of teacher's unions, but also as a temporary positive consequence of civil rights movements which flamed out once the bigots figured out they could privatize their schools in order to keep out everyone else.
With a globalizing and specializing economy, it makes some sense to have some basic overriding guidance on primary school curriculum in terms of what basic exposures to knowledge and practice skills are imparted. I would argue strongly that several skills, such as critical thinking, basic finance, and basic ability for self-directed learning are in considerable demand. None of these are currently encouraged or "required". In this current environment, any work done by the individual is the about only thing I would construe as contributing to their education. That's a problem which constitutes a net drain (not to mention being exceeding tiresome in explaining basic financial concepts to supposedly educated people like doctors or engineers)
summary of religion vs atheism battles
I'm fairly sure different forms of Eastern mediatation have less to do with "talking to god" and more to do with focusing on relaxation, problem resolution, etc. "Western" prayer could be comparable in its effects (I wouldn't know personally).
It would appear from this (thread) that the primary focus of attacks on religion are of two prongs: 1) the abuse of religious (or pseudo religious) authority for more nefarious political goals (either directly or indirectly). In the view of history, this has by far been one of religion's principle contributions to world events and it is undoubtedly a nasty side effect worth understanding and being on guard for (even in a more secularized world). Religious people should be able to acknowledge this as a problem without having to point out the obvious benefits that religious motivated individuals or movements have created in contrast (such as abolitionism...although slavery was itself defended by religious context).
2) the denigration of individual religious practices by people who don't need or practice them personally (myself included). This is misinterpreted by those religious believers on here to state that we are in some way finding their own personal beliefs misguided or even horrific. I don't personally care what individual people believe and, within reasonable limits, practice as a result of those beliefs. I think what is being said is that these practices and beliefs are largely unnecessary and often incomplete applications of religion as opposed to individual self-worth/reliance. I see it as a inhibitor to personal development. It is possible that others see religious ritual or worship as a necessary balancing factor, either because their individual faculty for reason is incomplete or because they find purpose and safety in attributing larger uncontrollable issues to some controlled and recognizable entity (or some other reason that remains beyond my ability to interpret and describe).
In no case should religion/religious faith be seen as a moral authority or as establishing a position of moral supremacy; that agent is still only worth blaming on mankind (not god). Even where a religion claims the word of god, it is still the dominion of mankind to interpret and enforce these words. So far removed from their inception, some of these interpretations become more and more mystical, less and less useful or convertible to the existence of modern humans. Or worse, have in many cases completely lost their original premises and been contorted into some misguided attempts to control the behavior of others (such as school prayer, FCC regulations on 'swearing', or political marriage laws with certain religious restrictions)
The issue, as I see it, is still limited to the amount of public influence that those beliefs have or (more importantly) the amount of influence available to public figures to manipulate people who function on belief rather than reason. There are a number of modern secular (or pseudo-secular) political movements which can be likewise attributed to the same type of behavior through the manipulation of the public by media, government, marketing, incomplete scientific findings, etc. The simplest to define of these are things like nationalism or previous versions of racial theory. These in some respects could be seen as a new form of religion worth finding skeptical flaws within just as theological study by an atheist does and as potentially harmful as the Crusades, the Inquisition or any other side quest of religious intolerance and indifference.
In other words, I am concluding that religion is not necessarily the problem. It is usually either the people in charge of it or the people following it with total blindness that are (as would be the case with any other authority). The vast majority of its practices or followers are more or less unaccompanied by some sort of stigma of religious inflicted pain on the rest of the world. They are unfortunately less prevalent in effect upon history and world events as their more vigorous fundamentalist brethren.
It would appear from this (thread) that the primary focus of attacks on religion are of two prongs: 1) the abuse of religious (or pseudo religious) authority for more nefarious political goals (either directly or indirectly). In the view of history, this has by far been one of religion's principle contributions to world events and it is undoubtedly a nasty side effect worth understanding and being on guard for (even in a more secularized world). Religious people should be able to acknowledge this as a problem without having to point out the obvious benefits that religious motivated individuals or movements have created in contrast (such as abolitionism...although slavery was itself defended by religious context).
2) the denigration of individual religious practices by people who don't need or practice them personally (myself included). This is misinterpreted by those religious believers on here to state that we are in some way finding their own personal beliefs misguided or even horrific. I don't personally care what individual people believe and, within reasonable limits, practice as a result of those beliefs. I think what is being said is that these practices and beliefs are largely unnecessary and often incomplete applications of religion as opposed to individual self-worth/reliance. I see it as a inhibitor to personal development. It is possible that others see religious ritual or worship as a necessary balancing factor, either because their individual faculty for reason is incomplete or because they find purpose and safety in attributing larger uncontrollable issues to some controlled and recognizable entity (or some other reason that remains beyond my ability to interpret and describe).
In no case should religion/religious faith be seen as a moral authority or as establishing a position of moral supremacy; that agent is still only worth blaming on mankind (not god). Even where a religion claims the word of god, it is still the dominion of mankind to interpret and enforce these words. So far removed from their inception, some of these interpretations become more and more mystical, less and less useful or convertible to the existence of modern humans. Or worse, have in many cases completely lost their original premises and been contorted into some misguided attempts to control the behavior of others (such as school prayer, FCC regulations on 'swearing', or political marriage laws with certain religious restrictions)
The issue, as I see it, is still limited to the amount of public influence that those beliefs have or (more importantly) the amount of influence available to public figures to manipulate people who function on belief rather than reason. There are a number of modern secular (or pseudo-secular) political movements which can be likewise attributed to the same type of behavior through the manipulation of the public by media, government, marketing, incomplete scientific findings, etc. The simplest to define of these are things like nationalism or previous versions of racial theory. These in some respects could be seen as a new form of religion worth finding skeptical flaws within just as theological study by an atheist does and as potentially harmful as the Crusades, the Inquisition or any other side quest of religious intolerance and indifference.
In other words, I am concluding that religion is not necessarily the problem. It is usually either the people in charge of it or the people following it with total blindness that are (as would be the case with any other authority). The vast majority of its practices or followers are more or less unaccompanied by some sort of stigma of religious inflicted pain on the rest of the world. They are unfortunately less prevalent in effect upon history and world events as their more vigorous fundamentalist brethren.
playing cards
Daily Show did a nice segment of the media referring to a series of political cards: the race card, the Europe card, etc. It sounds like an even more annoying game of Magic the gathering personally.
02 August 2008
various issues.
Since I've been distracted by a small online political community I figured I'd briefly elaborate my political views on a variety of so-called hot-button issues. The Drug War has been covered at length already (I think it is pointless, at least the way we're going about it).
Taxes I am indifferent to, but government size and spending I am not. If the second is reduced, the first can be likewise. I don't think it is the government or the President's responsibility to control the economy or prevent recessions (which actually are healthy from time to time to shake things up). Nor do I assign the blame or credit for the economy to the government and its agents unless there is a specific policy which relates deliberate effects (such as many regulatory processes favoring big businesses over small). The various unintended consequences I also don't blame unless it was pretty obvious that this would have been a consequence. These are frequently involved in government policy. Well-intended policies are not the same as functional policies that produce those well-intended results.
Abortion I am indifferent to personally. Aside from religious scruples, I can find no justification that this is in fact a murder. There are a variety of natural causes that could occur to prevent a live birth during a pregnancy. I don't see a difference if people wish to exercise their choice and plans in the matter. However, I can see that this is a failsafe choice that is best left in the deck, so to speak. The current opposition to abortion is based more around either the 'murder' or our puritanical sexuality viewpoints. For the second it is completely insane to use government policies to attempt to control the sex lives of other people. For the first, it would seem that there needs to be a successful inclusion of 'other options' rather than a full ban. It is more intelligible to understand abortion as the tail end of a series of individual choices which probably were not wise. If we provide both the understanding and information to try to make those preceding options with more wisdom, then I suspect the appeal and necessity of abortions would drop considerably.
The coverage of this campaign has been pretty boring (hence the lack of commentary). There's virtually nothing on the minor candidates and their issues. And there's really not much on the major candidates issues either. I plan to throw my vote away (for Prez) and fully expect as of now Obama to win.
Education needs to be completely rebuilt. It hasn't usually come up because as usual, wars or money precede the decisive element in creating both: eager young minds. NCLB is idiotic. And our education system in general needs to be much more flexible to account for the various ways people learn and the various subjects in which their minds invest themselves.
The War: I'm not a fan. I haven't quite elaborated on my original oppositions, but these were mostly limited to the lack of accountable planning involved in the post-invasion portion of the show. They totally botched that element and in capitulating a government and leaving no administrative functional force (other than military force), it was totally unsurprising what happened next. Duh. If we can't use military forces that can create a functional strategic plan for suppressing the will of people to resist or rise up against our occupation, what's the point of having an occupation?
From the perspective of "preemptive aggression", I'm also not a big fan. It can be useful, from time to time to shake up people's perspectives and bolster diplomatic approaches. I'm not convinced that Iraq was a situation that justified it. Maybe Afghanistan. But even here, it would have been better had we done anything 20 years ago after helping kick out the Russians.
Taxes I am indifferent to, but government size and spending I am not. If the second is reduced, the first can be likewise. I don't think it is the government or the President's responsibility to control the economy or prevent recessions (which actually are healthy from time to time to shake things up). Nor do I assign the blame or credit for the economy to the government and its agents unless there is a specific policy which relates deliberate effects (such as many regulatory processes favoring big businesses over small). The various unintended consequences I also don't blame unless it was pretty obvious that this would have been a consequence. These are frequently involved in government policy. Well-intended policies are not the same as functional policies that produce those well-intended results.
Abortion I am indifferent to personally. Aside from religious scruples, I can find no justification that this is in fact a murder. There are a variety of natural causes that could occur to prevent a live birth during a pregnancy. I don't see a difference if people wish to exercise their choice and plans in the matter. However, I can see that this is a failsafe choice that is best left in the deck, so to speak. The current opposition to abortion is based more around either the 'murder' or our puritanical sexuality viewpoints. For the second it is completely insane to use government policies to attempt to control the sex lives of other people. For the first, it would seem that there needs to be a successful inclusion of 'other options' rather than a full ban. It is more intelligible to understand abortion as the tail end of a series of individual choices which probably were not wise. If we provide both the understanding and information to try to make those preceding options with more wisdom, then I suspect the appeal and necessity of abortions would drop considerably.
The coverage of this campaign has been pretty boring (hence the lack of commentary). There's virtually nothing on the minor candidates and their issues. And there's really not much on the major candidates issues either. I plan to throw my vote away (for Prez) and fully expect as of now Obama to win.
Education needs to be completely rebuilt. It hasn't usually come up because as usual, wars or money precede the decisive element in creating both: eager young minds. NCLB is idiotic. And our education system in general needs to be much more flexible to account for the various ways people learn and the various subjects in which their minds invest themselves.
The War: I'm not a fan. I haven't quite elaborated on my original oppositions, but these were mostly limited to the lack of accountable planning involved in the post-invasion portion of the show. They totally botched that element and in capitulating a government and leaving no administrative functional force (other than military force), it was totally unsurprising what happened next. Duh. If we can't use military forces that can create a functional strategic plan for suppressing the will of people to resist or rise up against our occupation, what's the point of having an occupation?
From the perspective of "preemptive aggression", I'm also not a big fan. It can be useful, from time to time to shake up people's perspectives and bolster diplomatic approaches. I'm not convinced that Iraq was a situation that justified it. Maybe Afghanistan. But even here, it would have been better had we done anything 20 years ago after helping kick out the Russians.
01 August 2008
weird or normal
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/31/canada.bus/index.html
Don't see stuff like this very often. I recall being in high school when some crazy Australian mate took his machete and assault rifle to the mall and started swinging away. That's about the last one I remember.
Aside from the trying to decapitate people, it sounds pretty much like bus travel in some parts of America. I'm not quite sure what he had to do that for. The random assault on a stranger, sure okay fine he's testing himself to see if he can knife people at random whilst they sleep...but what's with the head? It's not like he was going anywhere.
These are the sorts of acts that occur, everyone should be horrified for about a week...and I wonder why. Because it really is pretty much unrelated to the way the rest of us live, almost like a random coincidence of insanity and purposelessness created an incident involving another human being's death. The school shootings we get in America every couple years are a different matter..there's purpose involved along with the insanity. I don't get these bits of attacks at all.
Don't see stuff like this very often. I recall being in high school when some crazy Australian mate took his machete and assault rifle to the mall and started swinging away. That's about the last one I remember.
Aside from the trying to decapitate people, it sounds pretty much like bus travel in some parts of America. I'm not quite sure what he had to do that for. The random assault on a stranger, sure okay fine he's testing himself to see if he can knife people at random whilst they sleep...but what's with the head? It's not like he was going anywhere.
These are the sorts of acts that occur, everyone should be horrified for about a week...and I wonder why. Because it really is pretty much unrelated to the way the rest of us live, almost like a random coincidence of insanity and purposelessness created an incident involving another human being's death. The school shootings we get in America every couple years are a different matter..there's purpose involved along with the insanity. I don't get these bits of attacks at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
