« February 2005 | Main | April 2005 »
March 28, 2005
Gitmo
The problem with being at war with an adjective, rather than a people, is that it is possible to never claim that the war is over. Indeed, Terrorism has been around forever, and probably will be around forever. In the strictest sense, a War on Terror cannot be won. What we are really trying to do is cause a certain subset of Fundamentalist Islamic thought to no longer exist. The fact that this subset uses Terror as its chief weapon does not define it, or cause it to be more of a problem than if they were trying to invade Texas, it merely defines our response to it...
One of those responses has been to take thousands of Prisoners and hold them indefinitely. This is of questionable legality at best-- even the bush administration admits that it is only the unique nature of our hold on Guanatamo Bay which makes the whole thing doable. Even putting aside that question, however, leaves a more basic one: how long are we going to hold the people we’ve incarcerated there?
We have claimed for ourselves the right to indefinitely hold anyone, as long as we hold them there. This doesn’t strike me as in keeping with the best practices of what it means to be an American. Holding people forever is wrong, and sends the wrong messages about American respect for rule of law. Being caught on a battlefield is not a crime-- and the Afghan campaign is long over. If we suspect that they are terrorists, we need to try them fairly. If they are guilty, they will be convicted. If they are innocent, we must let them go...
The least thing in the world we can afford is for large amounts of our prisoners to start dieing of old age. The consequences of that would be catastrophic...
Posted by Andrew at 01:58 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
March 26, 2005
New York! New York!
I wonder if this show will ever be in Sacramento. Wait, hm. I wonder if I can fly out to New York to see it!
Posted by Andrew at 10:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 25, 2005
Compromise in Schiavo case?
As I understand it, Schiavo’s parents believe that she is alive, while her husband believes that she is dead. Therefore, perhaps a compromise could be to place her into a persistent vegetative state. In this state, she would be neither alive nor dead, but rather perfectly poised between them...
Posted by Andrew at 02:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 23, 2005
Hot Damn!
VOA News - Astronomers See Light of Distant Planets for First Time
Posted by Andrew at 11:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 21, 2005
Reading better than Typing?
"Holding other family characteristics constant, students perform significantly worse if they have computers at home," the authors conclude. By contrast, children with access to 500 books in their homes performed better. The negative correlation, the researchers explain, is because children with computers neglect their homework more.The Royal Society's quantative approach mirrors concerned raised by qualitative analysis of technology in education. Children are now awash with "facts", but don't know what to do with them.
Schoolchildren are developing a "problem-solving deficit disorder", and losing the ability to analyze. A better way, experts insist, is to encourage creativity. And the best remedy for this is to turn off the computer and stimulate childrens' imaginations.
Well, when you put it that way, duh...
Of course, if we really wanted to get to this, we’d have to significantly change the way we test in this country. Since putting facts together into interesting and useful ways requires a good deal of subjectivity, essays would have to play a more prominent roll, and multiple choice tests a lesser one. This opens up a whole ‘nother can of worms...
Posted by Andrew at 01:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 18, 2005
American Vs. European Liberty:
In the US, we can"t stop children from bringing knives to school-- if they bring those knives for religious reasons.
In arguing against the act, Ringo cited a 1995 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that barred a California school district from enforcing a policy against weapons on school grounds against a group of Sikh children. A central tenet of the group's faith requires adherents to wear at all times symbols of their faith, including a kirpan (a ceremonial knife, which a U.S. District Court has described as dangerous). In Cheema v. Thompson, the 9th Circuit applied RFRA of 1993 and said the school district would have to permit the Sikh children to wear their knives to school, as long as they were dulled and "sewn tightly" to their sheaths.
In France, students cannot wear headscarves to school, when such things are specifically religious in intent.
And then there was a centre-right government under pressure from the far right National Front. The law was passed in March, ahead of regional elections. Polls at the time suggested that between 60-70% of the population supported the ban.
I am not going to say which is better, which worse. I do find it to be an interesting contrast. Something interesting to note: the two rulings are not opposed; the American ruling is designed to keep the menacing arm of the state as far away from students as possible, respecting their rights as human. In France, the ostensible reason for the law is to keep parents from oppressing their children-- thus protecting their human rights...
Posted by Andrew at 10:45 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
March 16, 2005
Studying, studying...
ErisianSolipsist: and I think many understand that markets are man-made
ErisianSolipsist: hence their willingness to modify
Punmeister123: hm
ErisianSolipsist: I think Rawls is saying that we should only agree to rules that include proper safty nets
Punmeister123: *nods*
ErisianSolipsist: we can play cards, but not for fingers
Punmeister123: *snort*
Yeah...
ErisianSolipsist: Hayek seems to be willing to bet a few fingers
Punmeister123: heh.
Probably just your hair.
Punmeister123: nozick is willing to bet your dick, though.
ErisianSolipsist: and doesn't see how you can play cards without doing so
Punmeister123: Right!
ErisianSolipsist: I like this analogy
Punmeister123: I'm blogging it...
Posted by Andrew at 12:03 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 15, 2005
Annoyingly accurate...
| Rh...Rhodium You scored 43 Mass, 56 Electronegativity, 65 Metal, and 10 Radioactivity! |
You know exactly how the world should be, and you don't well-tolerate deviations from your ideals. You have spheres of friends arranged in decreasing importance to you with decreasing proximity... your core group of which almost never changes. You can be described as imperious, and you demand without words that people fit into their prescribed place in your universe... and it is YOUR universe. You are intransigent in beliefs, but you still will just as likely exclude the misguided from your grace as destroy them. Granted it is a very well-ordered universe, and were everyone to just do what you said it would all work very well.... |
 |
My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
|
| Link: The Which Chemical Element Am I Test written by effataigus on Ok Cupid |
Posted by Andrew at 01:49 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
March 12, 2005
book meme
As seen on Mercurial
1. Grab the nearest book. 2. Open the book to page 123. 3. Find the fifth sentence. 4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal along with these instructions. 5. Don't search around and look for the "coolest" book you can find. Do what's actually next to you.
I got:
"Living space norms per person in Moscow fell by one third between 1929 and 1931."
From Dark Continent: Europe’s twentieth century by Mark Mazower...
I am reading it as background material to a paper I am writing about World War Two. For point of reference, there are at least 13 books within easy reach of my hand. I really need to clean up a bit...
Posted by Andrew at 12:10 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 11, 2005
Want
Lego Death Star II Coming Soon : Gizmodo
Posted by Andrew at 12:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 10, 2005
Thunderbird and Gmail
Gmail got a lot of press when it was announced because it has a Gigabyte of storage. At the time it was a huge number, but since then just about everyone else in the free Email biz has caught up. The one place where Gmail excels is it User Interface design...
If you’ve not used Gmail (I’ve got a lot of invites, so Email me), you don’t know how easy Email sorting can be. Instead of dropping everything into folders, Gmail allows the user to stick a label-- or several labels-- on it, and drop the message into an archive. If you want to find it later, simply run a search for the message and Gmail will pull it up for you. In this manner, only Email you still want to see stick around in your inbox. The rest can be safely pushed into the archive...
One other feature which Gmail has is the conversation view. Conversation view groups Email to/from the same people with the same topics together into a series of tabs. No more need for ">". ">>", etc!
Together, these features represent a revolution in Email GUI design. It sounds like the design team for Mozilla Thunderbird have Caught on...
Posted by Andrew at 03:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 09, 2005
Eris calls home one of her own.
So yesterday we got a call from my brother (he lives in the same co-op) telling us that Matt had been in a really bad motorcycle accident and was in the hospital. For most of today I was trying and failing to maintain an air of hope, which shattered when I received word this evening that he had died from his wounds. It hurts.
Blankety blankety blank.
Posted by Andrew at 02:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 08, 2005
Awha Fuck
China disclosed the first details of a new law on secession yesterday that authorizes an attack on Taiwan if it formally declares independence, as the Bush administration said the measure will raise tensions and increase the risk of war.
Posted by Andrew at 11:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 07, 2005
Pretty new toys.
If you are a user of Firefox or Thunderbird, I highly recommend you take a look at this site. Mr Spuler has done a wonderful job creating toys, tools, and themes for both programs...
Also, Google has released its 1.0 version of Google Desktop Search No word yet on how well it works (I found previous version’s insistence on exact spelling to be an unforgivable problem), but after it indexes my system, we’ll find out...
Posted by Andrew at 11:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 05, 2005
Workin’ for the Man Every Night and Day
Given that a "living wage" is roughly around US$10/hour, and the minimum wage is (rougly) half that, it is fairly safe to say that our current Minimum Wage scale is far too low. Something to keep in mind: even jobs that pay more than minimum wage (such as my own) peg their wage scale to the minimum. And it isn’t often very much higher than minimum itself. My first job, for instance, was set at around US$.50 above minimum, and my current job starts at the same rate. It isn’t just kids doing this-- I work with people who are trying to raise a family on what we pay them, it isn’t pretty...
The question is: do we as a society believe that if someone works 40 hours per week, that should be enough to live on? If we do believe that, we need to set our minimum wage laws in such a manner that this is reflected. I don't want to get all Marxian "dignity of labor" on everyone, but I find supermarkets (pay well) have better service than Wal*Mart/Target (pay poorly)...
Congress seems to agree. At least, the Senate has a bill right now which seems to recognize the inherent strangeness of our employee compensation system. Good ol’ Rick Santorum, though. He has an amendment to really kill things:
WEAKENING FLSA COVERAGE: Employees of businesses with revenues of more than $500,000 and all workers who engage in interstate commerce now have important protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act, such as the right to be paid a minimum wage and to receive overtime pay when they work more than 40 hours a week. The Santorum amendment eliminates FLSA protections for all workers at businesses with revenues up to $1,000,000. In 1997, 6.8 million employees worked at firms with revenues of between $500,000 and $1 million.
There’s more more (PDF), an ugly, ugly more.
Thanks to Heather atExra Klein...
Posted by Andrew at 04:47 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
March 04, 2005
Outrage:
From this LA times story:
A stream of court cases involving credit card companies has produced public outrage in various parts of the country.In Cleveland, a municipal court judge tossed out a case that Discover Bank brought against one of its cardholders after examining the woman's credit card bill.
According to court papers, Ruth M. Owens, a 53-year-old disabled woman, paid the company $3,492 over six years on a $1,963 debt only to find that late fees and finance charges had more than doubled the size of her remaining balance to $5,564.
When the firm took her to court to collect, she wrote the judge a note saying, "I would like to inform you that I have no money to make payments. I am on Social Security Disability…. If my situation was different I would pay. I just don't have it. I'm sorry."
Judge Robert Triozzi ruled that Owens didn't have to pay, saying she had "clearly been the victim of [Discover's] unreasonable, unconscionable and unjust business practices."
Obviously this case is picked to tug at the heartstrings. A little pathos never hurt an argument. Nonetheless...
Usury laws are some of the oldest in Western legal tradition. Indeed, Judeo-Christian tradition dictates that every 50 years (during the jubilee) debt be forgiven. There are simple reasons for this: when an honest person is in debt, that person will do anything to repay the debt. Combine this good faith with bad-faith on the part of the debt-issuer, and what is left is never-ending debt bondage. Indeed, as Kevin Bales argues in his bookDisposable People such a cycle is a recurring theme in how people are held in modern slavery. Granted, I don’t believe that Discover card wants to own people, but the potential for abuse is so massive that it has been outlawed from nearly the beginning of jurisprudence...
Posted by Andrew at 04:25 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
March 03, 2005
The Holocaust
Today in my European History (1900-1945) class, we did our lecture on the Holocaust. Strange as it sounds (and as it seems to me) I had never seen the pictures from that ugly bit of history. I found myself having to force myself to watch; to sear into my brain the lesson: never again. Under other circumstances, I might have snickered that a professor who laughs at the concept of "god" would use the term "evil". But what else can you call the mind of modern man, the pinnacle of then-current human science turned to the murder of humanity?
The thought that keeps me up at night, the one that haunts me in Three AM darkness is the realization that the NAZIs were human. The men and women who were complicit-- who knew and did nothing-- were otherwise good and decent people. The Hitler Youth, aside from being fervent supporters of the Final Solution, were decent, moral children: paragons of child-like virtue! Never again! Yes. But how?
Because if anyone, anywhere, under the right conditions can become a Nazi-- can turn on the neighbors of long time friends-- what keeps the friends of my neighbors from rounding me up? Gods! (and this is the part I find most creepy) what keeps me out of the mob which rounds up my friends’ neighbors?
The only answer which I can come up with is to simply never let things get to that point. Constitutional protections for human rights and civic freedoms are the A#1 thing we can do. We must also as individuals make the commitment to human rights and civic freedoms. This means listening toassholes speak. It means actively seeking out ways to let them have their say. And it also means demolishing them.
One last thing-- if we erase from our society the pernicious idea that humanity can be divided into separate "races", we’ll never again see evil of the NAZI kind.
Posted by Andrew at 09:17 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
March 01, 2005
Murder most Legal
My own feelings on capital punishment are mixed: on the one hand, I don't think that the state should have the right to put anyone to death. On the other hand, I do believe that there are some crimes that are so heinous* as to merit only the ultimate punishment. My own feelings, however, are not the basis for the legality of state sanction death. The US constitution is...
The Constitution is, for good reason, shy about stating what crimes are. It does declare that the state may not pass “Cruel and Unusual” sentences. This is something of a broad, ill-defined mandate, and it can thus difficult to determine when the line has been crossed. Complicating the mater is the fact that what is perfectly permissible in one era (involuntary servitude by others) may well be utterly unconscionable in another (slavery). Ms. Lithwick takes a look at the issue, and gives a bit of history...
Should we be executing children? What do our prisons exist for, anyway? If we as a society believe that human beings have the power to better themselves, then our prisons should at least make the attempt to turn otherwise useless dregs of our civilization into productive citizens. In the case of children who murder, it seems obvious that we will have a long time to act on our redemptive instincts, to awaken within those children the idea that others exist as more than mere extensions of their own will to power...
The Supreme Court today seems to recognize that children have underdeveloped minds. In doing so, they give us a chance to save a child’s soul...
*Those crimes are:
1) Genocide
2) Slavery
3) Treason
4) Rape. Rape covers so much ground that I am not usually willing to see death imposed for it...
Posted by Andrew at 11:24 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack