Topic Tuesday #83 2014/02/18 - "Viva La Revolution!"

Topic Tuesday #83 2014/02/18 - "Viva La Revolution!"

Let's see... what was in the news today...?

"Anti-Government Protests In Ukraine Turn Deadly" and here "Ukraine crisis: Police storm main Kiev 'Maidan' protest camp"
"Venezuela expels US diplomats"
"4 Dead In Thai Protests; Prime Minister Faces Charges In Rice Deal"
"U.N. Report Details North Korea's 'Crimes Against Humanity'"
"South Sudan’s Forces Clash With Rebels Near U.N. Base"
"Turkey's President Signs Law Restricting Web Use"

"AT&T says U.S. government sought surveillance on 35,000 users"

OK... Enough... there were some more but between Blogger being slow as molasses and being kinda fed up with the world at large, I'm through with headline hunting. 

What does this say? What does it say about our fellow man around the world that they are, in some cases, taking up sticks, stones, and Molotov cocktails to protest? Something is rotten. I can't put my finger on just what it might be, and rightly so, as it is a convoluted and tangled web filled with selfishness, greed, trickery, and deceit; and those are the good things.

I was watching Blade Runner just this afternoon and the opening places the story in a dystopian Los Angeles, November 2019. That's only 5 years away, and still no spinners (flying cars). When will there be "A new life awaiting us in the Off-World Colonies, your chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure."

Anyway, as broken as this world is, there are certain simple answers for many of the worlds problems. Follow the easy money. Laziness is a valid reason for something not happening. People are mostly selfish, at least enough to be able to predict a level of behavior. No one wants responsibility, unless there is something in it for them.
I'm not trying to be negative; I'm a genuinely hopeful and happy person. I am a realist however. Nearly every major event in world history is simultaneously more complex and simpler than we give it credit, and that is because people are involved. Simple motivations, complex outcomes. A little bit of chaos theory.
As Jim Morrison put it so appropriately in a drug induced writing binge, "People are strange, when you're a stranger."

Today is about awareness, not solutions. Think about the world and how small it is. You can go to your closet and find something made in Thailand. The internet is everywhere at the speed of electrons (provider not withstanding like Turkey). The world is a smaller place. we need to keep in mind the things that are happening all around us and not get too side tracked by bikini babes floating weightless in the vomit comet.
I will however include a picture of that to ensure lots of pageviews, since that is how we internet.

Topic Tuesday #68 2013/11/05 - "Guy Fawkes Night"

Topic Tuesday #68 2013/11/05 - "Guy Fawkes Night"

"Remember, remember, the Fifth of November, the Gunpowder Treason and Plot. I know of no reason why the Gunpowder Treason should ever be forgot..." As the rhyme is most often remembered after V for Vendetta gave us another reason to remember Guy Fawkes. Earlier ditties were all similar enough to leave to your imaginations and a quick search on Google.

So, did we forget what happened on the fifth of November 1605? If you are American, you are likely nodding, while if you are British, you may be setting something on fire right now and reading this after the fact. Bonfire Night, as it is also known, commemorates in better humor than the original night was conceived, the attempt by the Gunpowder Plot to blow up the House of Lords at Winchester Palace on the opening day of Parliment in an attempt to kill King James I (as well as many other high level targets). Also known as the Jesuit Treason, the goal was to install the King's daughter, 9 year old Princess Elizabeth, as the Catholic head of state. Of the list of conspirators, Fawkes had the military background and was given charge of the explosives (pun intended). This would have been quite an effective strike, had it gone off.

The conspirators were ratted out by an anonymous letter to Baron Monteagle William Parker. As the story goes, Guy was caught guarding 36 barrels of gunpowder under the House of Lords around midnight on November 4th. The rest of the Plot  was caught after some battles with the Sheriff of Worchester (not just a sauce you know). The eight survivors were tried January 27th, 1606, convicted and then sentenced to be hung, drawn, and quartered. 

Given the nature of the plot, it was often heralded by many of the Catholic faith and became more than just a treasonous plot. Over the centuries, it has become a celebration known as Bonfire Night, where Fawkes is burned in effigy on a bonfire, commonly accompanied by a firework display.

Rather interesting that a plot to kill the head of state by a bunch of religious extremists would turn into a celebration. Remeber the fifth of November!

I now leave you with my favorite scene from "V for Vendetta."

V: Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.
[carves "V" into poster on wall]
V: The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous.
V: [giggles]
V: Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.

Topic Tuesday #61 2013/09/17 - "Babies Birthday - Or - An Excuse To Eat Sweets"

Topic Tuesday #61 2013/09/17 - "Babies Birthday - Or - An Excuse To Eat Sweets"

Tomorrow is a special occasion. Well it is for my family, and since I'm writing I get to say what's important!
Anyway, tomorrow is my eldest daughters 6th birthday! It's not a big deal but I do get to be a supportive parent and provide sugar to her kindergarten class in the form of cupcakes. Birthdays are only as special as we make them. Inviting friend and family to celebrate with you makes the moment memorable (sometimes in unique and embarrassing ways). As we get older, some birthdays pass by without any notice, save the license and registration renewals (you remembered right?). I know that on more than one occasion I have had to do the math to even remember how old I was turning that year. Some years we are surrounded with only family; other years only friends. On off years you may find a birthday with no one but yourself remembering, or only your electronically prompted Facebook friends (I honestly don't care what reminds you, if you say something, you remember, and that is what matters). Whatever the birthday brings, be it yours or someone else, live it up! Light the candles, sing happy birthday in the loudest most obnoxious way possible, drink, eat, be merry and be the joy of the moment! Don't look for gifts, but look for the memory; the faces, the smells, the lights, the hugs, the kisses, the rainbows, the rain, the cries, the emptiness and the fullness. It all matters and makes the day special.
And eat cake.
Lots. Of. Cake.
Maybe some ice cream too.

So this year for my daughters birthday, I'm going to fill some balloons, inhale some helium, sing happy birthday like a chipmunk and generally live vicariously thought her, making her day awesome.
If today is your birthday, HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!

Love, puffy hearts, googly eyes, and kisses to all.

Topic Tuesday #58 2013/08/27 - "Water Clock Running Dry"

Topic Tuesday #58 2013/08/27 - "Water Clock Running Dry"

To return to the core of the 'Can We Fix It?' mission, we have a problem and we need a solution (no pun intended since it's about water). In the United States there is a vast water reserve that is being depleted at an unsustainable rate. The High Plains Aquifer lies beneath eight states from South Dakota to Texas and supplies 30 percent of the nations irrigated groundwater (it is also a key source of potable drinking water in the region). A new study, out of Kansas State University and published online Monday in the journal 'Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences', has concluded that it will be depleted within 50 years at the current usage rate. David Steward (professor of civil engineering at KSU) said, "It would take an average of 500 to 1,300 years to completely refill the High Plains Aquifer."
This is a complex problem with implications that are stupefying. Bridget Scanlon (Sr. research scientist and lead of 'the Sustainable Water Resources Program' at the University of Texas - Austin) had a few comments about the study.

"We know the aquifer is being depleted, but trying to project long-term is very difficult, because there are climate issues and social aspects that have to be included. Projections are so difficult because I think we're clueless about a lot of things, like extreme weather events. Farmers are trying to make a living, and they're responding to economics," she explained. "Asking them to drastically reduce water might be like asking me to retire now because there are so many unemployed people. This is a very nice study, but we really need to address droughts and socioeconomic issues, and other approaches to figure out the problem, beyond the technical. If we don't know what we're doing, are we just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?"

It's a valid response. It is not dismissive, but urging more inclusion of other factors for strategy, which is a secondary target diverting from the crux of the matter. We are going to run out of water. It's not a matter of 'if'; it's a matter of 'when'.
What can we do? We can continue rationing water supplies. We can improve irrigation methodologies and technologies. At some point, we will need to harvest water from other resources. Desalination and pipelining it to the nation's breadbasket to keep food production going.
What happens when a town runs out of water? The people leave. It's just that simple. If you can't feed the livestock and crops with enough water, they wither and die. Then the farmers leave, and there is a food shortage and then costs rise as demand is shifted. Economies are drastically affected in our global community by a little thing like a drought. It is a fragile situation and deserves attention while there is still a resource to utilize. And... I haven't touched on "Fracking" yet.
Any ideas? Can We Fix It?

Topic Tuesday #54 2013/07/30 - "Cruel Calculus"

Topic Tuesday #54 2013/07/30 - "Cruel Calculus"

"One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin 

Researchers were curious about generosity in the way of donations to charitable causes. 

There would seem to be a correlation to the level of generosity when it has a face; a face reflecting the suffering. You may have heard that sometimes you "have to put a face to name" to make it matter. It turns out to be very true. John and Jane Doe see a plea for a donation to save needy children. The plea wants money to help save children by providing general life saving things: medicine, food, clean water, shelter, maybe even education, if there is enough left over. Save more with a higher donation. It's simple math really, and we have seen it in the big box stores when we stock up on items. Buy bulk, pay less per item.  It works that way with helping people too. The more money is donated, the more people are saved. So it would figure, by that reasoning, that if you are told your generous donation of x will save 1,000 children, you would be inclined to save that number. But that is not how our brains work. That 1,000 is a statistic. The numbers somehow make our brains just say "Nope". 

Do you want to save kids? Of course you do. Do you want to save lots of kids? Sure you do. Do you want to save this particular kid that has a picture and a life story and will write you a gratifying letter saying thank you? OH HELL YEAH!

Face recognition. You put their picture next to a pledge amount. If you leave the donation amount up to the common man (or woman of course) you get this approximate distribution.

The breakdown of average voluntary donations results in a counterintuitive way. Sometimes like a tip at a restaurant...

Example:
Save 1,000 children ≈ $20 donation
Save 100 ≈ $20
Save 10 ≈ $25
Save 1 ≈ $50

Save 1 very specific child  ≈ $75

It's the way we are wired, or so the numbers bear out. 

It's cruel calculus. But given that we can easily be manipulated by pictures and possibly made up tales of strife, some organizations may be inclined to use this against you to benefit the other 999 hungry mouths to feed. In this case, I think that is a good idea. What do you think?

Topic Tuesday #48 2013/06/18 - "The Advocate"

Topic Tuesday #48 2013/06/18 - "The Advocate"

In this world there are uncountable things to be concerned with. Everything from how your laces are tied to what was served at the last White House dinner, that you weren't invited to, could flow across your mind. There are people out there that get really passionate about a few things. These folks raise money, awareness, and a ruckus in the name of their "cause". Sometimes the cause is relatively small, but nonetheless daunting. Other times, the cause is massive. Something so enormous in complexity and nuance you just have to be a little in awe of it. It takes a special person to devote themselves to a cause and rally for its support. Among other things, we call these individuals, Advocates. And we need their voices. When the message is clear and the personality is strong enough, one person can make a difference in anything. They often have stalwart opponents and detractors. Lies and slander are often the tools of the trade. Mudslinging as often as not is used as part and parlance to fundraising and handshaking. Sounds a little like politics doesn't it? It's because it is a lot like politics, and has to be since politicians are just the kinds of people that advocates are up against. Fighting fire with fire and so on.
You know all this already, or at least I hope you do. My point is to raise your awareness to the advocates around the world. take a second look at what they are doing, and why. These people are running full tilt with a plan. Some want to save a small nesting bird, and others want to save the planet. Some want to educate everyone, others just want to make sure no one goes to bed hungry or sick.
Almost universally Advocates for a cause are trying to change something. They see a problem and want to fix it. They advocate to have anyone who will listen help them in their cause.

So, my dear readers; What are you an advocate for? This is where you get to plug your cause and get just a little more exposure. 
Can we fix it?
We can try!

Topic Tuesday #47 2013/06/11 - "Big Brother / Big Data"

Topic Tuesday #47 2013/06/11 - "Big Brother / Big Data"

Orwell would be pointing a malnourished finger at all of us and chanting, "I told you so".
I don't go into the dystopian conspiracy theories, but as they are part of our culture, they still must be examined. Today the magnifying glass is on "Big Data". You may have heard the term, and if you haven't, you will.
Wikipedia summarized it thusly:
Big data is a collection of data sets so large and complex that it becomes difficult to process using on-hand database management tools or traditional data processing applications. The challenges include capture, curation, storage, search, sharing, transfer, analysis, and visualization. The trend to larger data sets is due to the additional information derivable from analysis of a single large set of related data, as compared to separate smaller sets with the same total amount of data, allowing correlations to be found to "spot business trends, determine the quality of research, prevent diseases, link legal citations, combat crime, and determine real-time roadway traffic conditions.

Big Data is just that, BIG. Veritable truckloads of data available on demand and manipulatable to yield a variety of correlations. It's enough to give you the heebie-jeebies, but honestly, it is unavoidable.
Big Data is a side effect of our increasingly technological society. We have devices that generate information that can be captured and logged. Most of it is innocuous. Like temperatures, wind speed, and rainfall.  
We take weather measurements every few seconds (this would be a data set, like a spreadsheet) in thousands of weather stations all over the world (a larger data group, a collection of spreadsheets). Now imagine that you have all this information collected from all the weather stations all over, and now you can see patterns. With patterns you can make predictions. Voila, you have a rudimentary weather model and can start to predict storm patterns.
Now extrapolate that out further. Do you have a credit card? Congratulations you have your own data set of purchasing patterns! This information is stored and used to determine fraud patterns. If suddenly you are outside your normal spending patterns or regions, you may be flagged with a fraud alert, keeping you safe. The dark side of the credit card industry is they have a tendency to sell/share that information with marketers and even law enforcement. In this way your habits become a recognizable pattern. Patterns can be identified, and some are as unique as a finger print.
It is safe to assume that if your have a device that generates a loggable data set, you can be sure someone somewhere is collecting it, and someone else wants it for some reason. Some will want to make life easier for you, others for themselves. Some will profit from it, and others will suffer. And I haven't even got into facial recognition! 

Topic Tuesday #42 2013/05/07 - "Disruptive Tech"

Topic Tuesday #42 2013/05/07 - "Disruptive Tech"

I love technology. I love history. I love science and science fiction (the inspiration for more of the former). The last few days have seen a turn in the direction of what was thought of just at the top of the year as pure science fiction. Well, when I say thought of, I mean all but those with their eyes on a gun manufacturer here in the United States. Defence Distributed, and its front man Cody Wilson, have dreamt up a cottage industry in disruption. Cody, over the last year, has designed and now succeeded in building a fully 3D printed firearm called the Liberator. It's designed as a homage to the single shot weapons that were air dropped over France during WWII. Besides that, the weapon is all plastic save the nail used as a firing pin. The plans have been released to the wild. Anyone can make one of these if they so desired.
And that is outstanding.
Don't think so? Let me explain my stance.
Freedom.
Oh... You probably want more of a platform than that. OK, look at it this way, this is a technology that cannot be stopped. It cannot be regulated to the governments liking and never will be without massive outrage. This is manufacturing in your garage. Dream it one day, make it the next. You don't need permission. You just need the know how, the raw materials and the tools to put them together. Cody made a gun. Will this gun be used to hurt someone? Almost certainly. This is a logical progression to this kind of device (3D printer). Think for a moment as I stroll down technology of years past lane. When Gutenberg and his movable type printing press came on the scene the scribes were out of a job, and it was revolution in the streets (Martin Luther ring a bell?). When the cassette tape was released and you could record onto it easily, the Recording Industry lost their minds. When the VCR came out the Motion Picture Industry went nuts. CD Burners, DVD Burners, BlueRay burners MP3, MP4, JPEG things that can make a copy of something without the originator getting their due, will always be disruptive. I recall that digital copiers were so good at color reproduction that they were used in counterfeiting operations. The Liberator is a statement and a loud extension of this phenomenon. This says, "You can't stop the future. This is the information age, and now we can make use of that information - whatever form it takes."
It is a shake up. It is a wake up call. What that call sounds like changes depending on who hears it, but really it's about freedom.

Personally, I knew this was coming, and making my own gun if just not my cup of tea. Personally, I would rather be the toy maker or make replacement parts and mockups for my own projects. But that is what most people will do. Again, take the internet as a case in point. When it was started, there was no security, no anti virus, no pictures... It was innocent, with innocent ideals. None of those early engineers considered that it would be used for terrorism, free speech, porn, dating, and social networking, or even voice and video. It proved to be disruptive. In a very short time, look how far it has come! Now, where will 3D printing go as the technology becomes less and less expensive?  In less than 10 years, I can see the personal 3D printer all over. Remember inkjet printers were very expensive when they first came on the scene; now they are practically disposable. The printer they used for the gun, was $10,000 on ebay second hand. You can get a MakerBot for considerably less. http://store.makerbot.com/ And I encourage you to go make something.

What will your imagination make next? Will regulation over these devices stifle creativity and rapid prototyping with red tape? Will it just be impossible to regulate, like desktop printing and copy machines?
What do you think?

Topic Tuesday #41 2013/04/30 - "Teach the Controversy?"

Topic Tuesday #41 2013/04/30 - "Teach the Controversy?" 

Ready to get mad? Ready to get fired up? Ready to take on a big bad taboo subject? Faith and science in schools; here we go.
In the United States, and around the world to varying degrees, there is a movement known as Intelligent Design. For those that are not familiar with what this is: ID, or Intelligent Design is the theory that life, or the universe, cannot have arisen by chance and was designed and created by some intelligent entity. This is largely a Christian Fundamentalist backed position.
ID's asserts that:
It is a scientific field of research
Darwinian evolution by natural selection is wrong
There is an "design agent" working to fine tune the universe.

For the extreme positions asserted, one jumps to a stance known as "Young Earth Creationism" which asserts the following:
The Universe is, at most, 15,000 years old.
The planet Earth is, at most, 10,000 years old.
All of the book of Genesis is fact.
Noah and his ark were real
The flood compressed the plant life into our fossil fuel, covered the world with the observable sedimentary layers, carved out the Grand Canyon, the Norwegian and Icelandic fjords, and even continental separation and plate tectonics.
And lots of other items.

As you can tell this is a very religiously oriented world view.
ID arguments are somewhat acceptable and represent a Deistic view; the same view was held by most of the talked about Founding Fathers of the USA. Here is where we run off the rails and into the schools and "teaching the controversy".

It sounds great, on paper. From http://www.intelligentdesign.org/education.php, "Instead of mandating intelligent design, the major pro-ID organizations seek to increase the coverage of evolution in textbooks by teaching students about both scientific strengths and weaknesses of evolution.  Most school districts today teach only a one-sided version of evolution which presents only the facts which supposedly support the theory.  But most pro-ID organizations think evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned."

The failure with their premise is that the evolution that we have been teaching in school for decades is not at fault, it just doesn't leave room for a designer, as it is the designer. There are no real gaps in the data, certainly less gaps than in an ID discussion that pleads to a supernatural agent for tweaking what we do not fully understand at the moment. The research and understanding are quite complete and there is no controversy except for what they "believe". As has been said before, the nice thing about science is that it doesn't care about your beliefs, it only cares about what is real.

This has come up because a few things have breezed past me to draw my attention to them. 

1) A copy of a test from an ACE (Accelerated Christian Education) school was trotted out on Reddit for all to see. Those involved are waiting to disclose all the details around it until the end of the school year to prevent any adverse reaction to the students, but it is amazingly awful what they were passing for science. check out Snopes for the dirt on it. http://www.snopes.com/photos/signs/sciencetest.asp

2) the Freedom From Religion Foundation and its Central Florida chapter will be distributing secular documentation to 11 area high schools to balance a bible distribution done Wednesday, January 16, 2013. The initial Story - here http://goo.gl/WTxfU and here http://goo.gl/cRXpj - The FFRF response here -  http://goo.gl/2bbVH

The group responsible for the Bible outreach is World Changers of Florida, Inc. http://www.worldchangersfl.com/
I will let them to speak for themselves here:
"We should resist trying to force the Holy Scripture to fit with popular scientific consensus.  What would science tell us about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead?  How about Moses and parting the Red Sea?  What about a virgin conceiving without sexual relations?  How would science explain the resurrection of Jesus and his many appearances afterward?  Science says it can’t happen, but we know that with God, all things are possible, even a 6-day creation.  Do you trust man’s interpretation of events that were not witnessed and that cannot be duplicated in the laboratory?  Flawed suppositions supporting weak theories promoted by scientists who will not accept the possibility of a supernatural explanation for our existence.  I’ll trust God’s explanation because “the thirst for novelty and unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate.”"

What we have is a group, the defines themselves as YEC (Young Earth Creationists) touting the Intelligent Design arguments and trying desperately to get their view alongside hard science in the classroom as a possibility, rather than the science that works, and can be built upon.

That is the "teach the controversy" argument.
Their argument is that science is lacking this side of the debate. It's not up for debate. One is theology and mythology and the other is science, tried and true.
I am up for teaching about theology in school. It is a part of humanity, and part of our culture. Something that pervades our speech and habits. We should learn about it. We have classes for that. Mythology and Humanities and Social Studies. I highly recommend a comparative religions class too. But you see, that would not forward their position. These groups, and there are many more, have their built in proselytizing agenda to contend with. They venture forth with the banner of equality, but that only opens the door so they can sneak inside and start making changes.
I personally find it offensive and insidious. It is a danger to our future. Many students are in for a harsh wake up when they get to college or in the real world and "god did it" is not the answer to the real problem in front of them. To manage in the real world with these ideas, you have to have a dualistic view of reality, and you have to be comfortable with cognitive dissonance. You may believe that the world was created in 6 days, but the math you use to make the rocket fly to the outer reaches says it wasn't and could not have been. You may believe that man was fashioned out of clay, but if you cut one open you see the same organs as our cousins in the animal kingdom and all we become are animals made of meat, bone, and blood. Reality doesn't care about your beliefs.

Science works. If you water it down at all, you cause our future to be watered down too. This is a heated fight, because it damages the view people have of reality. People don't want to think they have been wrong for so many years, and potentially wasted their life in the pursuit of a fallacy. It's hard to swallow. But that doesn't mean that they should be coddled, especially when they adversely affect others. What you do at home, none of my concern. What you bring or force into the schools and the mind of our children, will always be my concern.

Teach the controversy? We would if there was one.

Topic Tuesday #39 2013/04/16 - "Work Life Balance"

Topic Tuesday #39 2013/04/16 - "Work Life Balance"

You may have heard the phrase "work life balance" from the internet, news, or propaganda given out at the top of the fiscal year by human resources. It's a great idea, on paper. In practice, in the real world, it generally falls flat on its face in the United States. There are many fascinating statistics about how Americans work more hours per year and generate less work than some of our peer nations. I won't go into them today, as I'm working towards a little more of that balance this week!
I'm headed on vacation with my spouse, alone, without the kids, for the first time since our honeymoon some 9 years ago. We've never been on a plane together in our 12 years together. It's going to be fun, no matter what we do since we will be together, and it is for nothing more than fun and companionship.
What I wanted to indicate is that although I am going to be a couple thousand miles away from work, I will still be in two places at once. I'll have my smart phone. I'll have my laptop. I'll invariably be called and emailed for work. I will invariably log in to take care of some emergency. This is the way it goes. People take calls on their vacation to chagrin of their partners and family. I know of very few that are capable of leaving work at work. I am in information technology, so my job and my own geek life have intermingled heavily. There's no clean extraction of me from work and vice versa. Sure we make efforts to divide, and normally this is just a poorly masked veil of time management. You can't clock out in your head when a deadline is approaching, or when your imagination pops up some exchange you have been mulling over for weeks. We are what we do. There is very little getting around this.

Can you hear me now?

Is this a problem? I would say more for some than others. Certain personality types thrive in this always connected environment with nothing but hustle and bustle. Others need to lead a more sedate existence filled with soothing sounds and incense.
Can there be a balance? Certainly, but it's not what you may think. I am not like my spouse. I can seemingly go on forever in the pattern of the hustle. They need to have a relaxation period that is much larger and more frequent than I. This does cause some stress all on its own. Let me straighten one thing out, I can't go flat out forever. I have brief spurts of "Me Time" where I do only what I want to do, and that is enough. I have a long commute that provides time for me to think, listen, and occasionally concoct notions for posts like this. I stay up later than anyone else in the house, and I am alone left to my own devices. This is all I need to renew myself. I liken it to using the cell phone while it's plugged in. It's doing its job while recharging.
I'm not alone in this and I see many people doing the same thing. Some are not as adapted to this always on existence and need longer periods of R&R to recharge the batteries. And that's ok, as long as they can get it!
Balance is not universal, so do what's right for you, and try not to drive your partner and family crazy in the process.

What are your plans for keeping sane? I'll check back next week. :-)

Topic Tuesday #29 2013/02/05 - "Meme Machine"

Topic Tuesday #29 2013/02/05 - "Meme Machine"

MEME (pron.: /ˈmiːm/ /mēm/ MEEM) Noun

1.) An element of a culture or behavior that may be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, esp. imitation.
2.) An image, video, etc. that is passed electronically from one Internet user to another.

Culturally we have been inundated with memes in our information age. We should all have a general concept of what a meme looks like, but do you know what a meme actually is? What it stands for? What it's great purpose is? Perhaps, or perhaps not. Let's jump into some abbreviated back story.
In 1976 the book "The Selfish Gene" was published by author Richard Dawkins, a British evolutionary biologist. Dawkins was set about explaining how the genes in all living organisms could be analogous to a replicator. The gene has a simplistic purpose, to replicate itself as successfully as possible. That is the essential take away from the book on the topic of genes, however he coined a term to expand on the notion. When an idea or concept is replicated through a culture, he dubbed it a "meme". The Ancient Greek words; mimeme ("something imitated"), mimeisthai ("to imitate"), and mimos ("mime"). These Greek terms, combined with the concept of the 'gene' being a replicator, served as foundations for the concept. Thus modifying the word 'gene', become 'meme'.

We have seen many of these memes through our lives and mostly we just look over them. We are blissfully ignorant over their (memes) innate power to program us as a host to pass along the memes knowledge and concepts. You might think that a maddening prospect. That an inanimate, no... worse than inanimate, a figment, a concept at best - could be something that could do something like force you to know something and even to pass it along unwittingly. But it's true. Our brains are good at one thing in particular: Pattern Recognition.
Have you heard of a "mnemonic device"? Mnemonic devices are techniques to help remember something. It’s a memory technique to help your brain better encode and recall important information. It’s a simple shortcut that helps us associate the information we want to remember with an image, a sentence, or a word, etc, etc..
Mnemonic devices are very old, and virtually everybody uses them, even if they don’t know they are. It’s simply a way of memorizing information so that it “sticks” within our brain longer and can be recalled more easily in the future. This is the nature of a meme.

Have you ever been someplace and smelled something that reminded you of something from your childhood? Have you ever heard a word said in a particular way that caused you to have a melody or entire song to populate in your head, so strongly it was there the rest of the day? Perhaps an image that caused you to cry, for no apparent reason. These are all indicators of memory programming. You can call it "learning" if you like.  The result is the same.

So what can you do with this knowledge? Perhaps you can do something great. Program little life lessons into your own memes. A funny little picture, a few well phrased words, inserted in a simple shape (usually squarish), and presented in a way that gets lots of eyes to look at it. Memes spread like a virus. This is one reason for the term, "going viral", on the internet. The meme is so popular, so easy to remember, so catchy, that it spreads like wildfire and soon everyone knows it. Just don't take every meme you see on the internet as gospel. Just because somethings catchy, doesn't make it true or useful.
Propaganda spreads this way.
Misinformation spreads this way.
Songs, pop culture, politics, news, old wives tales, lies, truths, rumors, gossip, and occasionally educationally useful things are all apt to be replicated in the meme machine that is our own brains.

Soon I will be putting out some memes for CanWeFixIt.org. Let's put that 3lbs of pattern recognition meme machine to good use!

Topic Tuesday #25 2013/01/08 - "The Right To Privacy"

Topic Tuesday #25 2013/01/08 - "The Right To Privacy"

In the last quarter of 2012 web browser vendors took on the topic of "DNT" (Do Not Track) as a feature to be added in their various browsers. What is DNT? You may have heard to empty your cookies now and then and delete your cache. That is where tracking lives (for the most part). Cookies are used as a kind of passport from one website (or within a websites various pages). They carry authentication tokens, information about your browser, your computer, you, how long the credential is valid for, and permissions therein. There are "Third Party" cookies that are generated typically from advertising vendors for various web pages and they can quite literally follow you around the internet. Ever notice the ads being targeted to you? Like you just bought something on one site and a completely different site then tries to sell you a competing or complimentary item? I bet you have but you may not have connected the dots. These can all be equated to being stamps in your passport and when handing it to the next "agent", they get to see where you've been and add their own "stamp". 
Where am I going with this? Simple, do we not have the right to be left alone? The DNT engineering specifications provide for meta data to be added to browser queries to "opt out" of being tracked. Sounds great, then they won't be spying on me all the time. There are a few catches to this. 1) The DNT Spec indicated it should be off by default. 2) Websites are under no mandate to comply, rendering it exceptionally weak. 3) Microsoft decided to break the spec by turning it on by default in the latest IE versions, causing a big stir. 4) Vendors have varying levels, from obnoxious to that wasn't too bad, of ease to enable the DNT header, continuing to make it obtuse to user adoption.

Number three is the big game changer here. Microsoft is in the consumers court on this one. The rest of the industry (the other 46% of the browser market) and the Apache Software Foundation (provider of back end web hosting software) are not happy with Microsoft's choice in the matter. There are a few reasons. Apache is mad because it breaks the specification, so they are retaliating by having their servers ignore the request from IE clients. Other providers, like Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Opera, have decided to implement the spec and are capable of it, but turned off by default.  Why are we being tracked at all? Money. Money. Money. Oh and some data metrics too - that leads to more money. Did you ever consider how the web works? It works predominately on advertising revenue. Google, the ginormous search engine company, is primarily an advertising company. That is where their revenue comes from. Why do they give so many services away? Because those services make you see more ads. The companies that provide ads want to know their money is being well spent, so they demand metrics. Perfectly reasonable. Those metrics are collected by tracking cookies. There is an old adage, "if you're getting something for free, you're likely the product being sold". They give you the service in exchange for your participation in giving them information about your spending habits, browsing habits and sometimes, habits in general. 

Recently there was even a researcher that used the vast data stores (known by the buzz words "Big Data") was able to correlate drug interactions between two popular drugs, a cholesterol medication and an antidepressant. The two interacted to bring on diabetes if left unchecked, and this interaction would not have been so easily found if it had not been for the aggregated (anonymized) big data from search engines. 

So what we have here is a conundrum of what is ours. When does our search become the property of a search engine? What will they do with that information once they have it? Can "the Feds" come in and take it all and use it against you? What is a reasonable expectation of privacy? 

This is where it gets complicated. The Fourth Amendment is our guarantor of privacy, as long as you expand it to it's reasonable extents: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." You are protected by the Fourth Amendment when people have "a reasonable expectation of privacy in a particular situation". The litmus test for this has been the following statement for the last century or so: "there is a reasonable expectation of privacy only if there is a reasonable expectation that certain information may be kept secret.". Over the last 50 years or so, lawyers have taken to this expectation if you can swap "privacy" with "secret" in a sentence or paragraph and not have the meaning changed.

Is secrecy still a prerequisite for privacy? In out modern times it's debatable...

For clarification purposes, the dictionary definitions are as follows:

Secret: a: kept from knowledge or view b: marked by the habit of discretion c: working with hidden aims or methods d: not acknowledged e: conducted in secret
Private: a: intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group, or class b: belonging to or concerning an individual person, company, or interest c(1): restricted to the individual or arising independently of others c(2): carried on by the individual independently of the usual institutions d: not general in effect

Of these definition, A seems to suit out needs well enough in both cases. 

For example: A social security number is not a secret as many people have access to that information. A social security number is private and is only shared with a restricted set of people or companies that have authorization to have that information. 

Justice Louis Brandeis

The world is ever changing and the law is struggling to keep up. Thanks to many of our forward thinking supreme court justices through the years, we have been able to keep a decent pace with privacy concerns. Justice Louis Brandeis, in his dissenting opinion on Olmstead v. United States (1928) attempted to make privacy concerns kin to constitutional law. I'll leave you with this infamous sentiment from that opinion and a few more quotes:  

"The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred against the government, the right to be let alone—the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men." - Justice Louis Brandeis in Olmstead v. US, 1928.

"Specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy. . . . The Third Amendment, in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers 'in any house' in time of peace without the consent of the owner, is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the 'right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.' The Fifth Amendment, in its Self-Incrimination Clause, enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment. The Ninth Amendment provides: 'The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.'" - United States Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965.

"As the Court's opinion states, 'the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.' The question, however, is what protection it affords to those people. Generally, as here, the answer to that question requires reference to a 'place.' My understanding of the rule that has emerged from prior decisions is that there is a twofold requirement, first that a person have exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and, second, that the expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as 'reasonable.'" - Justice John Marshall Harlan, on Katz v. United States, 1967.

"This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." - United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, 1973.

What do you consider private?

Topic Tuesday #23 2012/12/25 - "Happy Holidays!"

Topic Tuesday #23 2012/12/25 - "Happy Holidays!"

Clarification of the term 'Happy Holidays' seems to be needed nearly every year. Given that I reside in the United States of America where we are graced with the Constitution and its amendments, there is plenty of reason to call attention to this. Certain media outlets insist that there is a war on Christmas every time someone says something other than, "Merry Christmas". The origins of celebrations during this time of year date back to when man realized that the longest night/shortest day of the year occurred, the Winter Solstice. Since the axial tilt of the Earth is considerable (approximately 23 degrees 27 minutes) the sun does not rise high at high latitudes in (local) winter. Those that found themselves in more northern latitudes, would experience significantly longer nights to the extent of a twilight lasting 20 hours to 179 days at the poles. This was a big deal to early agrarian and hunter gatherer cultures in the northern hemisphere. Additionally humans are not designed for this kind of environment. The period of polar night can trigger depression in some people. Cases of SAD or seasonal affective disorder are generally exacerbated by these conditions. The polar night may also be implicated in some instances of solipsism syndrome. It's easy to see why traditions would get setup around such a pivotal time of year. The harvest was in, the snow lay thick, and travel was ill advised. Best to just stick with your family and close neighbors and as we say in the south, hunker down. The combination of events fostered traditions of feasts and reverie. Myths and fairy tales of ghosts, and vampires and werewolves are also said to have their origins in the longest nights.
December 25th was a pretty popular day! The following list celebrate the day as a festival or birth or both.

• Zoroaster - Persia - c 6000 - 10,000 BC
• Osiris - Egypt - Father of Horus Pre- 5th Dyanasty C3000 BC|
• Horus - Egypt - c.3000 BC
• Mithra - Persia - c.1200 BC AKA "deus sol invictus" (Unconquered sun god)" 
• Festival of natalis Invicti [Birth of the Unconquerable (Sun)] c.1200 BC
• Attis - Greece - c.1200 BC
• Krishna - India - c.900 BC
• Dionysus - Greece - c.500 BC
• Saturnalia (December 17-25) The day marked the dedication of the Temple to Saturn in the Roman Forum in c.497 BC
• Marduk Sumerian sun god of Babylon
• Wittoba Of The Bilingonese
• Gentaut
• Tammuz
• Quexalcote Of Mexico
• Thor Son Of Odin
• Xamolxis Of Thrace
• Apollo
• Winter Solstice (Julian calendar Dec 25th from 45 BC until it was superseded by the Gregorian calendar commencing in 1582)
• Jesus** - Roughly 1 AD
• Boxing Day - Current calendar - December 26th

**December 25th was specifically chosen to be the day to celebrate the birth of Jesus in the 4th century by Pope Julius I. An arbitrary day had to be set as there was none given within the scriptures (births were not celebrated 2000 years ago, only the dates of deaths were observed). It served another purpose, that of conversion. Stephen Nissenbaum, professor history at the University of Massachusetts  Amherst, wrote in reference to Saturnalia (December 17-25), “In return for ensuring massive observance of the anniversary of the Savior’s birth by assigning it to this resonant date, the Church for its part tacitly agreed to allow the holiday to be celebrated more or less the way it had always been.”

Iconography:
Yule Log: English historian Henry Bourne, who, writing in the 1720s, described the practice occurring in the Tyne valley. Bourne theorized that the practice derives from customs in 6th to 7th century Anglo-Saxon paganism.

Ginger Breadmen: Saturnalia, local custom primarily in the more Germanic regions. Biscuits shaped like humans, dating back to some of the more colorful human sacrifice rites that were often performed.
Caroling: As part of Saturnalia, there was often drunken and naked singing though the streets. This was "adjusted" by the church when Saturnalia was co-opted into singing hymns.
Mistletoe: Norse mythology recounts how the god Balder was killed using a mistletoe arrow by his rival god Hoder while fighting for the female Nanna. At some point it gets twisted into kissing under the mistletoe from a combination of the debauchery of Saturnalia and the traditions of some druidic sects. 

Christmas Tree: The Asheira cult, worshiped trees. At the time of the Winter Solstice, they would decorate the very trees they worshiped. In another attempt to win the pagans over to Christianity, the practice of bringing a tree into your home and decorating it was incorporated into the newly formed celebration of Christ’s birth. 

Gift Giving: The emperors of pre-Christian Rome compelled their citizens to bring offerings and gifts during the Saturnalia (in December) and Kalends (in January). This ritual/tradition expanded to include gift-giving among the populace. Christian flavor was added by re-rooting it in the gift-giving of Saint Nicholas. Boxing Day is also a gift giving celebration.
Santa Claus: Nicholas was born in Parara, Turkey in 270 CE and later became Bishop of Myra. He died in 345 CE on December 6th. He was named a saint in the 19th century.
Nicholas was among the senior bishops who convened the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE and created the New Testament.
In 1087, Nicholas remains were moved Turkey to a sanctuary in Bari, Italy. In Bari, Nicholas supplanted a female boon-giving deity called The Grandmother, or Pasqua Epiphania, who used to fill the children's stockings with her gifts.
The adopted Nicholas gift giving spread north. It was adopted by groups who worshiped a pantheon led by Woden –their chief god and the father of Thor, Balder, and Tiw. Woden had a long, white beard and rode a horse through the heavens one evening each Autumn. When Nicholas legend merged with Woden, he shed his Mediterranean appearance, grew a beard, mounted a flying horse, rescheduled his flight for December, and donned heavy winter clothing.
The Catholic Church adopted the Nicholas legends and traditions and taught that he distributed gifts on December 25th instead of December 6th.
In 1809, Washington Irving wrote a satire of Dutch culture entitled Knickerbocker History. The work refers several times to the white bearded, flying-horse riding Saint Nicholas using his Dutch name, Santa Claus.
Dr. Clement Moore, a professor at Union Seminary, read the book and in 1822 he published a poem based on the character Santa Claus: “Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house, not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse. The stockings were hung by the chimney with care, in the hope that Saint Nicholas soon would be there…” Moore innovated by portraying a Santa with eight reindeer who descended through chimneys.
The Bavarian illustrator Thomas Nast elaborated the imagery of Santa Claus with more than 2,200 illustrations appearing in Harper's Weekly from 1862 through 1886. Nast gave Santa a home at the North Pole, his workshop filled with elves, and his list of the good and bad children.
In 1931, the Coca Cola Corporation contracted the Swedish commercial artist Haddon Sundblom to create a coke-drinking Santa. Sundblom modeled his Santa on his friend Lou Prentice, chosen for his cheerful, chubby face. The corporation insisted that Santa’s fur-trimmed suit be bright and Coca Cola red. The Modern Santa was born – a blend of Christian crusader, pagan god, and commercial idol.

Happy Holidays to everyone! I hope your day was as enjoyable as mine, no matter what you believe or celebrate.

Topic Tuesday #21 2012/12/11 - "The Shopping Apocalypse"

Topic Tuesday #21 2012/12/11 - "The Shopping Apocalypse"

It's that time of year. The scent of artificial pine is in the air and random Santa's in the park give away candy canes. (they were safe and individually wrapped, not creepy, and quite nice.)
It has occurred to me, and many others, that the Christmas Season is starting to cannibalize other holidays!
Once upon a time, the church only advocated celebrating the day of death. Easter is still more important to Christianity than Christmas because of the death and rebirth of the Christ. Time marched on and birthdays became special anniversaries. The obvious thing that was needed was a birthday for Jesus. It's not in any of the 4 gospels about Jesus's life. The various ecumenical councils came up with borrowing, or consolidating, holidays from the pagans they were bent on converting. They took on the winter solstice, Saturnalia, Yule, and many others that were all celebrated in mid to late December and declared it was Jesus's birthday. 

Centuries pass and the celebrating could not be contained; it expanded to Christmas Eve to have more time to share the love and giving. Then the 12 days of Christmas, which starts on the 25th and runs through January, in some strange competition with Hanukkah, I suspect. Then the real commercialism started in. Decorations started going up earlier and earlier. Now we have ended up with Black Friday and Cyber Monday. And now... there are stores open on Thanksgiving! This year I was able to shop for Christmas decorations at the same time I could buy candy corn and slasher masks on Halloween. 

What's my point? Stop bashing Christmas? I'm not bashing anything except blatant commercialism. I should not have a mix station with the "Monster Mash" and "Away in a Manger" or "Tubular Bells" and the "Little Drummer Boy"... Shouldn't we give proper respect to our holiday traditions? What's the point in having them if all they do is blend? Christmas now contains, itself, New Years, Thanksgiving and now Halloween. It's the unstoppable juggernaut holiday. 

But there is some solace to be found in the shopping apocalypse that has befallen us. Eggnog is available earlier. That make me very happy. 

Happy Holiday Season(s)!

Topic Tuesday #20 2012/12/04 - "Are we alone?"

Topic Tuesday #20 2012/12/04 - "Are we alone?"

One of the pages I follow posted a graphic of the radio signal bubble from Earth. This struck me as a moment of possible revelation. "The first AM broadcast was on Christmas Eve, 1906, and Hitler’s broadcasting of the 1936 Olympics is regarded as the first signal powerful enough to be carried into space - which is a rather disturbing thought." Since 1936, Hitler's voice has been traversing space. At the speed of light, the 1936 Olympic introduction speech has only traveled, 76 light years. Proxima Centauri, our closest celestial neighbor star, is located only 4.243 light-years from the Sun. Light travels at 186,000 miles per second. Therefore 60x60x24x365=seconds in a year 31,536,000 x 186,000 =
5,865,696,000,000 miles in a lightyear. x4.243 = 24,888,148,128,000 miles to the Alpha Centauri Cluster. We have not detected life there. So the old axiom, 'If a tree falls in the woods, and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?" comes to mind, though more importantly, does it matter if it did?

The trouble with the cosmos is that it is so very large and we... are not. Everything is scaled up. The most precious of these scalings, is that of time. We have discovered EXO-Planets, worlds of other stars. We detect them crossing in front of their stars. But I digress which is easy to do with this topic. To think that no other life has formed in a universe large enough to have more stars (with planets) than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of our pale blue dot, is either terribly egotistical or simply short sighted. I know nothing for sure, but I have plenty of reasons to believe we are not alone. So what's the real question? The question is does it matter. Then the complex answer, yes and no. It matters because we don't like to be alone. It matters because so much of our own sensibilities are shrouded in the arrogance that it was all made for us. Statistics lean towards there being other life in the galaxy, and in the universe at large. Why it doesn't matter: because that alien species might not be there anymore. Consider our own infancy as a species. We are a very young species; when we talk of geological ages, humanities recorded history is less than a 1,000th of a percent of the age of just the Earth. In less time than Hitlers voice has been traveling outward, we have been on the verge of destruction of our entire species and most of the other inhabitants of this world, countless times. It's easy to look at the Cuban Missile Crisis and see that we were close to annihilation This distinction is important. We look to the heavens and ask if we are alone. A young boy sits and reads of Superman coming from Krypton, while global super powers glower over a table perched on mutually assured destruction. If there is other life out there, would it survive long enough to ask the same questions as the boy? Will be have a planet to visit when the Grexian's that live 300 light years away start listening to Elvis Presley decide we are worth a closer investigation? At the speed of light, it will take them 300 years to come pay us a visit. The question is, will we humanity exist long enough to not walk alone in the universe? Or will we become nothing more than a disembodied voice traveling out forever?
At any rate, the answer is not as important as the question: "Are we alone?".
What do you think?

Thanks to https://www.facebook.com/IFeakingLoveScience & http://zidbits.com/2011/07/how-far-have-radio-signals-traveled-from-earth/

Topic Tuesday #19 2012/11/27 - "Grab a Snickers"

Topic Tuesday #19 2012/11/27 - "Grab a Snickers"

Last night I was confronted by the past. Not my past but an event that took place in Spokane, Washington on March 18, 2006. Otto Zehm, 36, a mentally disabled janitor, was mistaken for another man stealing money from an ATM at the convenience store that Zehm visited every day to get a soda and a Snickers. I will sum it up as briefly as I can, and you can see the full report here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/16/otto-zehm-beating-death-karl-thompson-mental-disabilities_n_2143920.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false

Otto Zehm

• Report: ATM Theft
• Respondent: Officer Karl F. Thompson Jr. ( a Vietnam veteran and a decorated 40-year veteran of law enforcement in Los Angeles, northern Idaho and Spokane)
• On Scene: Officer assaults suspect (Zehm) with baton, striking him 7 times in 8 seconds and used his stun device.
• Reinforcements: More officers arrive, gag and hogtie Zehm and sat on him.
• Results: It was determined sometime later that he was not at fault however was beaten unconscious and expired 2 days later. His last words were "All I wanted was a Snickers bar."
• Aftermath: Cover-up of the excessive force and violations of Zehm's civil rights. Officer Thompson was sentenced November 15th 2012 to 4 years and 3 months for his roll in Zehm's untimely death.

My take is this and I will end and open to comments:

I love and respect any member of law enforcement and our soldiers that are willing to put their own lives at risk every minute of the day to keep the majority safe. I am only concerned with the outliers. The ones that make grievous errors. Keep an eye on those that are there to serve and protect. Don't be afraid, but don't be dumb either. Bad things happen. This was/is a tragic tale that echos all over.
How do we go about fixing something as pervasive as power corruption? Did the officer have a bad day? Not eat his Wheaties? Just make a mistake? We won't know. These black marks, like all such, are swept under the rug as quietly as possible. The authorities can't have tarnished reputations as it just causes more unrest. Like a wild animal seeking weakness .. Then they get hurt, and they will always protect their own. I wouldn't expect anything less. They are few. The criminals are many. It's a hard dirty job. This does not excuse anyone or make them less accountable for their actions-EVER...
The bad apple does spoil the bunch, especially when all you wanted was a snickers bar, and were beaten to death over mistaken identity...

Topic Tuesday #18 2012/11/20 - "Perception is Reality"

Topic Tuesday #18 2012/11/20 - "Perception is Reality"

"Tell me where is fancy bred,

Or in the heart or in the head?"

-Merchant of Venice, Act 3, Scene 2

Where is reality? What is reality? How is reality different than a dream? Do you know? Have you ever thought about it? The school of thought is called "Proprioception"

We have Sight, Sound, Smell, Touch, and Taste. Those are the standard 5 senses, but there are a few more: Vestibular [Inner Ear: Gravity and Acceleration], Kinesthesia [Body Muscles / Joints: Bio-feedback for Movement and Position of appendages], and Nociception [Thalamus: Perception of Physiological Pain].

 These senses can be easily fooled. Here are some examples where you have been fooled, and will be fooled time and time again - In referenced order above.

[Sight] 3D technology takes advantage of our stereoscopic vision to make 2D object leap or sink away from their flat origin. 

[Sound] What's the sound of a lightsaber? This make believe movie icon, which you will instantly recognize is the hum of idling interlock motors in old movie projectors and interference caused by a television set on an unshielded microphone. But we hear the sound of battle! We think of cutting metal and severing limbs and deflecting blaster bolts (the sound of a hammer striking a guide wire to a communication tower).

[Smell] We use chemicals to make smells go away, but sometimes they are still there and just masked. This is just over powering a sense. The reality hasn't changed, but it doesn't matter, since the bad smell is gone. You accept that it's gone.

Male Senses Scaled by Sensitivity.

[Touch] A clever magician can fool us with clever deceptions. The "Hey! Look At The Monkey" distraction while a gentle touch of one hand confuses you to the removal (or addition) of an item from your hand (or pocket). It's an art form, based on deceiving you. More direct stimulation with topical analgesics or chemicals that can cause a burning or cooling sensation are also blatant sense tampering.

[Taste] "Lick the wallpaper, the snozberries taste like snozberries!" Though Wonka was fictional, the technology is sound.  It's just another chemical combination giving false impressions. Additives that go into your chewing gum, soda, and countless other consumables fool your taste buds into thinking that thing you are devouring, tastes good. Ever thought what it might taste like without the additives? 

[Vestibular] If you ever played the game where you took a bat, and kneeled over it and spun around in a circle to make yourself dizzy and then tried to run in a straight line, you have actively fooled your inner ear and made yourself look foolish in the process. But at least that's all in good fun!

[Kinesthesia] This is a hardest one to replicate, but an example would be the phantom twitches reported by amputees. The limb is gone, but the brain still thinks it is there because kinesthetic senses are still being triggered.

[Nociception/Pain] If you have ever had anesthesia, you know that pain receptors can be fooled. Whatever was causing your pain, it is still there. You just don't notice, or in some cases, care. On an interesting note, your brain lacks nociceptive tissue. This might be due to the fact that any injury of sufficient magnitude to cause pain in the brain will incapacitate the organism and prevent it from taking appropriate action, which is the actual purpose of pain.

We can learn much from the experience of being tricked and having our reality altered before our senses. It all comes down not to our senses, but our perception of what is "real". Our minds are the key. We are enormously complex in our methods of interpretations. Smell and Taste go together. Our Vision tends to track the Sound in our environment. Eye-Hand coordination is another example of linking these attributes  These senses gather the information of our physical existence and deliver them to our brain to determine actions, reactions, and (most importantly) meaning.

What does this mean? It means reality is a very individual experience, since reality is your interpretation of the world around you through your senses. What we understand is unique since no one has your perspective on your senses. Something that smells good to you, may be repugnant to me, and the adage of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", tell the tale clearly. 

Then to twist you all up, go watch the Matrix. 

"Do you think that's air you're breathing?"

Topic Tuesday #16 2012/11/06 - "Getting Accepted to the Electoral College"

Topic Tuesday #16 2012/11/06 - "Getting Accepted to the Electoral College"

Here in the United States, we utilize the Electoral College to elect the President. It's kind of a funny system, and after this, you may really hate it. It made sense to the founding fathers when it emerged from the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It was a hybrid of the Virginia Plan, the Connecticut Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise. It was chosen, in equal measures for it's "fairness" to smaller, less population dense states and due to legal slavery which was prevalent at the time but political suicide to rebuke at the time. Essentially a popular vote would just have been overly biased towards the most populated states. James Madison and James Wilson both argued for the popular vote. The original plan was to have the representatives of the Congress to elect a president. this was deemed too "intrigue" provoking, feeling that then a small group of men would have too much collusion and influence. The design of the Electoral College was based upon several assumptions and anticipations of the Framers of the Constitution:

• Each state would employ the district system of allocating electors.
• Each presidential elector would exercise independent judgment when voting.
• Candidates would not pair together on the same ticket with assumed placements toward each office of President and Vice President.

The system as designed would rarely produce a winner, thus sending the election to Congress. So it was amended and changed to what we have now, as a "winner take all" state by state model. Now into the nuts and bolts... Some definitions:

• Voter: You and Me - proud citizens of the republic.
• Candidate: The person that wants to run the country for the next 4 years.
• Elector: The people that have been chosen by the Candidate's Party to do the actual vote in December. Electors are generally chosen by the candidate’s political party. These Electors can be anybody but Senators or Congressmen. They are usually very politically active and well connected. What the Electors are supposed to do, is cast their votes based off the Popular Vote, which is what "We the People" do with that ballot. They are, in most cases, not strictly obligated to do so, but have 99% of the time. 
• Elector Slate: The full list of the chosen Electors for a given Candidate.
• Popular Vote: The actual voter ballot tabulation that is greater than all others.
• Electoral Vote: How many points your state has to give the Candidate. Each state gets one Elector per member of House & Senate that the state is allotted, or a minimum of 3, in the case of Washington D.C.. There are presently 538 Electors. To win this horse race, you have to hit 270+. 

Here's what happens:

1. You cast a vote for, say the Purple Teams Candidate.
2. The vote you cast for the Purple Candidate is assigned to Purple's Elector for your district (or some nomenclature to that effect)
3. The popular vote is tabulated and the Elector for the leading candidate of the Popular Vote in the District is awarded the District wholesale. Majority rules, winner take all. 
4. At the State level, the districts are tabulated, majority rules again, and the State's number of Electoral Votes goes to the Candidate. Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of “proportional representation".
5. The above continues until all the ballots are counted. Once someone has 270 Electoral votes, it's all over.
6. We all assume that whoever won. We are almost always right, and it is the popular vote - by proxy through proportional representation.
7. Paperwork - After the presidential election, your governor prepares a “Certificate of Ascertainment” listing all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The Certificate of Ascertainment also declares the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of the electors in December of the election year. The electors meet in their respective states, where they cast their votes for President and Vice President on separate ballots. Your state’s electors’ votes are recorded on a “Certificate of Vote,” which is prepared at the meeting by the electors. Your state’s Certificates of Votes are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election. 
8. Each state’s electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress on the 6th of January in the year following the meeting of the electors. Members of the House and Senate meet in the House chamber to conduct the official tally of electoral votes. The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.
9. The President-Elect takes the oath of office and is sworn in as President of the United States on January 20th in the year following the Presidential election.

So as you can perhaps tell, this is a convoluted process that simultaneously make it easier to calculate with the use of the Proportional Representation model, and ludicrous as it subjugates the power of your own vote to  to someone else, who we then trust will vote according to the vox populi (voice of the people).

So what do you think? Should the electoral college be mothballed and go with a true popular vote?

For more information on the Electoral College and it's methods, visit http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.html

2008 Election Results

Topic Tuesday #14 2012/10/23 "The Signal and the Noise"

Tuesday #14 2012/10/23 "The Signal and the Noise"

Last night was the final debate of this presidential election season. (I am going to refrain from partisan support in this post, but those that have read my work before will inherently know where I lean.) The talk was heated, but fluffy through most of the debates. All of the debates were far less about facts than they were puffed chests, interrupting the moderator, going over on time, and the ever so important last word. They were quite entertaining, and even sickening at times. Overall, I would give them 2.5 stars out of 5 for a you should have seen them, but didn't need to since it wasn't anything new, AT ALL. 

This leads into today's topic. 

We are getting a lot of noise through the media outlets and mailings and signs in years, and graffiti on said signs, and stump speeches and rolling roadblocks when they come to our cities etc... How do we filter the noise to get the right signal? I have been talking to several colleagues about the polls and who is doing well where and it never fails that when I bring up a website or media outlet, it is immediately disparaged and dismissed because of their slant. I bring up another, and another, and another; then dig deeper to find where they get their data and show how they arrive at their conclusions. This is to little avail other than showing that I am actually fact checking and not talking out of my arse. Overall, the chat has been civil, if not mind-numbing. And that's the problem-There is too much noise and not enough substance for the signal. The most bi-partisan organizations still seem to lean one way or the other, or at least someone will tell you they do and dismiss them as biased. It seems the only way to know what you need to make a rational decision is to do your own digging and sifting. It takes time. It takes patience. It takes booze in many cases...

I have said it a few times, but I would encourage you all to read the platforms of the main parties, since until campaign reform happens, there is little point in casting a vote for another candidate (sad but true). Keep in mind that an evolution of ideals has happened and these ARE NOT the same political groups we grew up with. They certainly are not the ones your family has supported for generations. 

Some further advice: 

• Read the platforms - But do it alone, but aloud, first. If the language is difficult to get through, you are not supposed to get through it and it is deceitful by intent. Your challenge is to... 
• Critically Compare - Take a highlighter and red pen to the platforms and mark the heck out of them. Compare which side believes what. You may need to translate the legalese doublespeak into plain english. This usually makes the paragraph a sentence. 
• Look to the future -  The one that is elected will be setting policy for decades to come. Not only that, but the likelihood that they will pick Supreme Court Justices (2 are most likely this time) will weigh heavily on law going forward for a long time. Laws can be overturned and our lives directly affected by this decision. 
• Science & Education - As the song said, I believe the children are our future. If we do not educate them correctly, we lose as a nation. What is being taught is as important as how it is taught. Examine the tail tail markings of where the education is going and ask yourselves if that will hurt the next generation. The best technology that we have came out of the furnace of scientific exploration of space. This is a cold and rational endeavour that is filled with wonder. There is no place for superstition in science. Tossing salt over your shoulder or whispering an enchantment will not replace an antibiotic to make your ear infection abate. Act accordingly in this regard. It's your grandchildren's futures you will be deciding.
• ASK - If you are still left asking questions, then do not keep them to yourself. ASK EVERYONE. Communication is key. You may get some rather interesting answers but you may do a service by prompting others to ask the same or other questions. Remember back to your days in school how a single question in class could derail a lecture and make everyone engaged. It's exactly the same in real life, just you are both teacher and student. This principle is for everyday, not just politics.

In conclusion: 

Educate yourselves and Vote. If you do not vote, I don't want to hear a single complaint about the next 4 years; beyond, "Man, I should have voted!"

How do you sift through the noise to get the signal?

On the Separation of Church and State...

Setting the Scene: May 25th, 1787, Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia. Gathered in the same room where the Declaration of Independence was signed (11 years earlier) are 55 criminals of Britain of whom a few names ring out quite loudly. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and the chief architect of the Constitution - James Madison, Jr. This document, though not very long, was the culmination of several plans - neatly compromised into the document that was signed September 17th, 1787 - Full ratification was not until June 12, 1792. 40 of 55 signed it (not everyone could stay or wanted what was written) and 12 of the 13 states were represented (Rhode Island sent no representative) Ages of these men ranged from Franklin at 81 to Jonathan Dalton at age 26. 23 were Revolutionary War veterans. Roger Sherman of Connecticut was the only one present to have signed the Articles of Association, the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. These men were well aware of the reason they were present and the stakes that lay before them and their new country. Of the signers the following were not Christians (some only interned in Christian institutions): James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Gunning Bedford, Jr., Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Richard Dobbs Spaight, George Clymer, Gouverneur Morris, John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman, Nathaniel Gorham, Roger Sherman, Rufus King, William Blount, Jared Ingersoll. That's 15 out of 40. While searching through the memoirs and writings of the founding fathers, there were key themes that drove them at this conference, in no particular order:

Freedom of religious practice.

Not having religious practice be as a mandate for government service.

Fair representation by the people in the new government. 

Purposely having no religion in the document whatsoever. 

Madison and Washington, were both classified as Diests. These two Presidents of the Enlightenment were staunchly opposed to religious involvement in government. That is what they were escaping when they came to this land. Washington would not go on record, even to his dying day, for what faith he trusted. He mentioned it would only serve to divide the people. When confronted by clergy that there lacked mention of Jesus Christ in the Constitution, Washington said, "...the path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction", and in a letter "Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause."
Madison, as president, was so staunch in the separation of church and state that even the issuance of sanction, where no money would ever be involved, was too much and denied.
The Enlightenment, the age from which our founding fathers pulled this nation together, was an age of science and reason. Benjamin Franklin as a scientist invented the lightning rod. The church frowned upon this fantastic invention at the time as it prevented the almighty from smiting people with lighting - I kid you not.
The church, ANY church, while teaching from a stagnant book of allegorical tales spun from tribe to tribe in the deserts of the "promised land" has no business influencing policy for a nation of people that don't agree with the passages of their teachings. This is true from religion to religion where they even share the same texts or same story but interpret them differently. What are laws? Laws are merely the moral structure of a people, converted into enforceable rules of conduct. As soon as you legislate a belief and not a fact, then you have done the entire culture a disservice and made it that much easier for the infringement to be done again, and again. Faith Based Initiatives, National Day Of Prayer, Congress being opened by a Priest with a prayer, Governors having church sponsored lunches, having religious iconography on public (taxpayer supported) property, anything that provides favoritism to belief... These are the things that erode, in completely natural ways, the fundamental division that keeps this nation thriving. Religion has served to obstruct progress at every turn, as progress usually means the loss of control for their dogma. Contraception means that the church can no longer mandate sexual practices. Did you know that sodomy is often considered any position other than "missionary"? Did you know that until 2003 (Lawrence v. Texas), sodomy was illegal in nearly every state? Religion is as much about its control as it is good works. I argue that religion is not required to do good works, and you certainly can control yourselves. If you think you require morals from the church to guide yourself or your government, then you are fooling yourselves. "Morals" existed long before there was a chosen people wandering the desert, or the Sumerians invented glue 7,000 years ago, or when the Japanese invented pottery over 10,000 years ago. The Golden Rule existed as a concept, since it is such a simple one, (expressed neatly by Wil Wheaton as "Don't Be A Dick") long before the ancients figured out writing. The case is made clearer by the plain fact that if we had been so unruly, then we would have never figured out how to write down rules in the first place.
Back to the rules, simply put, there is nothing that religion can offer law or science that these fields would be unable to figure out on their own through generalized good behavior and diligence... To allow the two to mix is to return steadily to the dark ages where the church was law and people were burned at the stake for speaking the truth.
"I believe that God wants me to be President" - George W. Bush
W. A. Criswell (Reagan's choice for the 1984 Benediction of the RNC) said, "The separation of church and state is the figment of some infidels imagination." Criswell introduced Reagan to a large group of fundamentalist Christians in 1980 and Reagan said to them "I know you can't endorse me but I want you to know that I endorse you." Reagan continued to erode the separation when he said, "When our Founding Fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself."
Reagan was heavily supported by Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, to get into the Whitehouse. It was at that time that the "Religious Right" was born. Since then, every endeavour has been made to twist the purposely secular founding of the nation into a Christian Fundamentalist Ruled empire, where nationalism is measured by Bible verse.
Thomas Jefferson penned the words "Separation of Church and State".
James Madison penned Government and Religion are served by: "the total separation of Church and State."
In 1817 Madison publicly stated that "a national day of prayer would imply and certainly nourish the erroneous idea of a national religion."
Also Madison - "Establishment of a chaplainship to congress is a violation of equal rights as well as constitutional principles."
Given that I am quoting the principal author of the Constitution, I would say his words deliver the purest intent of those documents to separate fully the religious from the government. Don't let anyone try and insinuate different, when you can cite the source.