Second Glance

No, Thanks (in Advance)!

2011-10-29T15:52:00.004-04:00

You've all seen it in an e-mail: "Blahbiddy-Blah. Please do X for me. Thanks in Advance!" How did it make you feel when you read that? Likely, you took it to mean that the person really appreciates you for helping them out. But is that really what they are saying?

Taken literally, they are saying, "I'm thanking you right now for something that you haven't done yet. I don't know how well you will do it, so you may end up not helping me at all, but thanks anyway." That kind of 'thanks' doesn't strike me as very meaningful. Instead, it seems a lazy way of checking a social norm box.

When someone does something exceptional for you, thank them at the point of delivery. If they tried their best but didn't end up being that helpful, you can still thank them (for their efforts, at least). Yeah, it might be one more e-mail clogging up somebody's inbox, but that is a small price for preserving a sense of value in the work that we do well.

Pursuit of Science

2011-10-23T18:13:00.004-04:00

Science is under attack by the ever masquerading, often lazy, sometimes malignant activity known as pseudo-science, but more often just called science. You don't just "do" science, you attainment it. Science is a goal. Just because you have charts and use data, does not mean you are using science. "The data don't lie" is the biggest lie of them all. The data could be wrong, not to mention being presented in a misleading fashion. Truly pursuing science means reaching to attain science. It is not cheap and it is not easy. . Pursue science, my friends. It is a worthy undertaking.

Waterman

2011-09-11T22:17:00.005-04:00

Vidasu Valley & Moses's Path to the Sacred Gate

Aaron stared out of the hut’s window as the rain began to patter down on his hatch roof. It started lightly, but was quickly gathering force, both of wind and water. He looked over at his wife, Sarah, standing next to him and leaning out the window. As the thunderstorm intensified, so did her gaze. She was looking west toward the encroaching darkness.

All across the lower Vidasu Valley it was the same—men and women staring out of their windows at the drops pelting the wide, dry riverbed on either side of a paltry stream that ran through Vidasunha Village. Those with children held them close, whispering the ancient stories of the Lightening Prince in their little ears as they stared in awe at the mighty force of the wind bending the trees that dared grow on the ridge tops.

But Aaron was not looking west toward the impending storm or at the riverbed or at the trees on the ridge. He looked east toward the distant plateau that stretched across the horizon, rising abruptly from the river valley like an enormous wall. Aaron feared that this storm would not be like the others. He feared that the admonition he had been given by his half-starved friend was not just a delusional rambling. But most of all he feared that his wife would find out what he had done. He wrapped his arms around her and gave her a squeeze. Her mouth curled up into a half smile, unconsciously it seemed, since all her conscious attention was on the storm.

The sky brightened slightly, indicating the first visible lightning strike over the horizon. Aaron began to mouth the prayer. His heart was not in it, but he made an extra effort to appear cheerful. Sarah was on the Rain Council after all, and it would not do for the husband of a councilwoman to abstain from the most important prayer. At first, as always, he could only hear himself say it. However, at the first visible bolt in the sky, he began to speak louder, and he could hear Sarah beside him, though still softly:

Light in the sky, chase the Rain,

Prick it here above my home

That it may bleed into my well,

Light in the sky, chase the Rain,

Vanquish it among the mountain tops,

That its lifeblood may flow from the East

Over the cliffs and into my fields.

As the rain fell, the riverbed quickly muddied. Small puddles spilled out of their little depressions and joined up with others to form large puddles. The stream in the middle of it all seemed to run a little faster, and a little higher. But this was just the teaser. The main event would come when a slight depression in the middle of the plateau overflowed, becoming a waterfall. It was amazing how quickly the riverbed would fill after that, rising right up to the banks, but never spilling over. It was Aaron’s favorite part of a storm, but today he anticipated it with dread.

In the pauses between flashes of lighting, Aaron offered up a prayer of another sort. This one was silent—and blasphemous—that the Cloud Demons would escape the Lightening Prince, just this once, and the rain would pass on.

***

Several miles east of the village, Moses hurried along the southern ridge of the valley, heading toward the plateau. With the wind at his back, he should have felt light. But he was weak. He had not eaten in three days. He was sore and cramped from kneeling on the cold stone floor of a repentance cell for the past week. The tendons in his knees felt like they might snap with each step.

Luckily, the trail was still dry, though he felt a rain drop on his hand, and then another on his cheek. Even after everything that had happened, and with everything that he now knew, the rain on his face still gave him a little jolt energy. It could not be helped, it was wired into a part of him no cynicism or anger could efface. But the storm would soon make this trail his enemy. It would become a mix of mud and puddles hiding roots and rocks. His stomach tightened and he had to bend over to heave, but there was nothing to come up. He needed rest and water. He would likely get neither until it was too late.

The uncertainty sapped his strength further. Was it already too late? He had no way of knowing. He staggered on, willing his legs forward with the knowledge that to rest now would be to fail and, whether they knew it or not, everyone in the village was depending on him.

***

Moses had spoken so quickly when Aaron visited him in his cell less than an hour before—something about a water gateway, whatever that was, and the river rising higher than ever before and everyone being swept down the valley and into the sea. Aaron could not make his mind understand what his friend was saying. It just sounded like a string of cryptic and impossible statements.

The village being swept away? The Priests had to beg for water from the Lightening Prince. Presumably, they were up on the plateau among the Oestalta Mountains at this very moment, shattering clay vases in honor of the Lightening Prince, as an offering that he might slay the clouds and let their water flow down to the village. But Moses had said the Priests were not in the mountains. Without the Priest’s prayers, wouldn’t that only make it more likely that the falls would not spill forth any water at all?

No, no, Moses had practically screamed, but he had not had time to explain. He just needed to be let out of the cell and he would explain everything later. Aaron would be a real hero; he just had to trust Moses.

The thing was, Aaron did trust Moses. Throughout their childhood, Moses had always been more faithful and honest than Aaron. Still he did not see how any of what Moses was saying was possible. And it had taken all his courage to lie to Sarah, saying that he was going to check on the irrigation channels one last time before the storm, when really he was sneaking away to see his imprisoned friend.

While the fear of being found out ate away his courage, his only regret was not thinking to bring any food to give to Moses. Perhaps that pang of guilt was what had given him the strength he needed to risk his life, pry the cell door open with a nearby steel rod, and free Moses from his captivity. Moses had shown this gratitude with a weak smile and dashed off toward the plateau along the valley's southern ridge. Aaron dropped the steel rod and ran home.

What Aaron did not have the strength for was to let on that he knew anything about the supposed peril they were all in, not even to his wife. They would never believe him anyway. He hardly believed it himself. The river had never crested the banks in Aaron’s entire life. The Priests knew exactly how many Cloud Demons to beg the Lightening Prince to slay among the mountains. Even if Moses was right and against all odds, he somehow succeeded in reaching the secret gate and stopping the supposed flood, Aaron would be hanged for faith-crime and maybe a bit of blasphemy for good measure.

***

Moses reached the base of the plateau. To the north, high above the river bed, he could see that a faint trickle had appeared over the edge of the plateau—the waterfall was just beginning. It misted away on the long descent to the valley floor below. He wanted to take a moment to muster some energy in his legs, but instead he just plowed on, starting the steep ascent up the now slick switchback trail carved into the side of the nearly sheer face of the plateau.

The rain was falling heavier now, but Moses was still ahead of the worst of the storm. This one would be bad; as a Waterman in the Preisthood he had been trained in what to look for, what to listen for, and how to sense the storm’s personality.

He had taken the trail up to the Sacred Gate once before, but that was years ago, and he had been heavily drugged on the Priests’ incense and a carefully cultivated sense of mysterious grandeur at what he had been about to witness. And what a sight it had been! After the grueling hike to the top of the cliff, the sight of the enormous curved wall holding back a vast reservoir of fresh water had been a revelatory experience for Moses. How important he had felt to be the keeper of such a precious resource. He remembered how much he yearned to share the experience with his friends and family in the village below.

But the Priests had him sworn to secrecy. And now that revelation was just another bitter burden for Moses to bear. The Priests had become too carried up in all their lore. In their delusions of grandeur, they had lost a sense of the practical. They had not established any contingency plans. There were only two Gate Stewards overseeing the Sacred Gates at any given time. No reliable way had been established to quickly communicate between the Gate Stewards and the Priests in the valley, miles away and thousands of feet below. Moses could not help but imagine all the possible tragic mishaps that could befall the village under such neglect.

Surely, the village had a right to know that their trust was misplaced. By bringing these risks to light, Moses would be protecting the whole Vidasu Valley. After all was that not the oath he had taken when he was anointed a Waterman in the Priesthood?

The Priests did not see it that way. They saw his call for transparency as a challenge to their mandate to protect the village. The traditions had been kept, unchanged for many generations, because they worked, the Priests had said. Who was he to upset the delicate balance of the already difficult life that villagers lived in the dry river valley?

***

Aaron saw a flash and heard an enormous CRACK. Sarah shrieked with a cry of pure ecstasy. Within seconds the whole valley was awash in the shouts of the faithful, cheering the Lightening Prince as He corralled the Cloud Demons east, over the plateau and toward the mountains of the Oestalta Range. Aaron screamed along with his wife. But his was a scream of fear.

***

The switchback trail was at river. Moses struggled to retain his footing as his legs burned and his stomach wretched. With every other switchback in the trail Moses faced the waterfall. The trickle had turned into a steady flow. The storm had caught up to him as he climbed the side of the plateau. He had no idea if he was already too late. Moses knew that the Sacred Gate was usually regulated by the Gate Stewards long before the first rains fell. But he had no idea if that was necessary or just another tradition with a long forgotten origin. He was not trained in Sacred Gate operation. Only Priests were. And if Moses’s suspicions were correct, all the Priests were dead.

First Writing Course Complete

2011-09-07T16:08:00.008-04:00

I just finished up my Arlington Adult Ed writing course. Perhaps not surprisingly, I was the only guy in the class. But even in a room full of women there were a lot of different writing styles on display each week. It was a lot of fun having to come up with a new scene or story each week and then sharing the stories with my classmates. I definitely felt a sense of community with them long before the 8-week course ended.

So now I have a stock pile of 3 or 4 super-short stories that I prepared for the course. Because I often threw them together in a few hours, they are still very "drafty", but I've been working on cleaning up one of them, titled: "Moses". It should be ready to post in a few days. As a teaser of sorts, I'm posting an early version of a map of Vidasunha and its surroundings.

Map of the Vidasu Valley

My First Foray into Short Fiction: "Temptress of Fate"

2011-07-21T08:40:00.010-04:00

Temptress of Fate

Jeff Shepley

The elevator was empty when she entered on the 7^th floor. Five floors to pass through on the descent to the lobby—five opportunities for a stranger to enter and judge her with a quick glance and an awkward silence. Mercifully, the elevator reached the lobby without delay.

As she passed through the elevator doors and into the lobby she pulled her skirt down as far she could. It still just reached mid-thigh, but you can only cover so much with so little. Descending the apartment complex’s front steps and feeling the cool Sunday morning air wash over her gave her goose bumps. The sun cast an angelic glow on each shiny surface as she blinked the hazy sleep from her eyes. On any other day, she would have stopped to savor the cleansing tingle produced by the faint struggle waged on her skin between the cool air and the subtle warmth of the sun’s rays.

But today she just bent her head, letting her hair fall over her eyes and began to walk away from the apartment building steps at the quickest pace her three inch stilettos would allow. The first order of business was to put some distance between her and the possibility, however slight, that she’d hear her name called out from a certain 7^th floor balcony. The thought alone was cringe-worthy,

God, I hope he doesn’t even remember my name.

Two blocks later, and with that risk out of the way, she looked up at the city skyline for guidance. “My lucky day,” She whispered under her breath with a faint smile that no one would see. Recognizing that she was already headed in the right direction was a small victory along the morning’s path to recovery. As she plowed ahead with renewed vigor, she felt betrayed by the duplicity of a city whose landmarks served as a beacon guiding her to the privacy and comfort of her apartment, but whose streets paved the way, quite literally, for this agonizingly public and uncomfortable morning excursion in the first place.

The ‘walk of shame’ is obviously a byproduct of urban culture. It’s not like girls in Nowheresville, USA don’t end up in strange beds on Saturday nights. They have tequila, even there. Only there is no way in hell you’re walking home from wherever you end up. And who can tell how short your skirt is or how high your heels are when you’re riding shotgun in a Ford F150?

As she let her mind wander through the logistical mine field that must be the one-night stand in rural America, she found her physical progress halted momentarily by the orange glowing hand on the other side of the crosswalk. She looked up and down the busy street, weighing the risk of dashing between each opening against the risk, increasing with every moment, that she might run into someone she knew.

She wasn’t the only one eyeing potential gaps in the flow of traffic. Just then a tall man jogged up alongside her. He was sweating lightly and his dark skin glistened as he bounced in place, panting softly as he waited for his opportunity to tempt fate. As she looked left and he looked right, their eyes met, and their gaze held. Perhaps in defiance of this stupid situation she had gotten herself into, or perhaps because she was startled by just how piercingly blue his eyes were—she held her side of the gaze. And he held his. A shiver ran up her spine. She had a sense that in that moment he saw through her own eyes and into her soul. She couldn’t help thinking that even if she had been wrapped up in a parka, she’d be just as exposed to his penetrating gaze as if she were wearing even less than she was now.

See searched his eyes for meaning,

Is he judging me? He must know that I’m wondering whether he is or isn’t. Surely, now that we’ve made eye contact for this long he has to say something. ‘Good morning’ would be the worst, but it’s inevitable. I can almost hear him saying it even with his mouth closed—so much sarcasm and condescension in his voice. God, just like my parents used to do when I slept in past noon after staying out too late.

He smiled and held out his hand. “I’m John.”

This cannot be happening to me right now.

She smiled noncommittally and willed him to just give up and jog away. Even so, he stood there unfazed, hand still outstretched, still bouncing in place, still smiling. She envisioned the scene as it would surely play out two years from now:

Me and John, engaged to be married in two weeks, yet finding time to attend his ten year high school reunion. John’s high school girlfriend walks up to us right as we enter the banquet hall, like she has been waiting for this all night. The ex’s name turns out to be Chastity. No ring on her finger—how terribly convenient. The two of them had split up after senior year because she got into Stanford and he was staying in-state. The split had been on friendly terms but they had lost touch through college. Chastity gives John a hug that lasts too long, takes an exaggerated deep breath, sighs heavily and says, “It’s so nice to see you, John.” There is no way I am going to let Chastity and John get into a big memory fest about summers up at “Lake Skinny-Dip” and winters skiing on “Remember-When Mountain”. But Chastity seems content to leave the distant past behind, somehow knowing the dark secret that will cut the deepest is tied up in a more recent memory.

“So how did you all meet?” Chastity asks with superficially veiled malice.

A simple question but I don’t dare let John respond. “I met her on the street during her walk of shame,” he would say. That was the only think he could possibly say, right?

So I step in, “It’s not that exciting of a story, really.” That little preamble was essential. I’m laying the ground work for ensuring that no awkward questions get asked later. If you expect the story to be boring you tune it out. I go on, “We first met one day at a crosswalk. Then we ran into each other a week later at the grocery store, in the ice cream aisle no less. Hahah,” I am laughing now, but I know it sounds forced. No matter—really the whole point is to put conversational distance between us and that god forsaken morning. I press on, “John loves ice cream of course. Anyway, we remember each other and he asked me if I’d like to go to this frozen yogurt place on...” I am about to say on 10^th street when I realize with horror that maybe John used to take Chastity there. God, why is this so difficult? “…on a Tuesday. And I’m like, who goes on a date on Tuesday? Anyway, I said yes, of course, and obviously I so glad I did. We talked for hours. We had to get two frozen yogurts so the owners would stop looking at us like we were taking up too much valuable table space. Hahah, you know how it is?” The worst part of it is that through it all, I am staring right into Chastity’s eyes, trying to hold them as tightly as John’s is doing to my eyes right now. When Chastity looks over at John during the story, the hairs on my neck stand up. Is he following the story or is his mind stuck in that moment when we just met, thinking about who I had shared a bed with just moments before. Was he somehow communicating these salacious details to Chastity with that hot blue stare?

She snapped back to the present, John was still holding out his hand, with only the slightest hint of rejection beginning to furrow up on his brow, perhaps inspired by the confused look she was giving him,

This was not part of the atonement for last night’s sins. You aren’t allowed to meet your future husband while on a walk of shame. If I had had time to get home, take a shower, put on a cute summer dress and then walk down to the street to pick up some milk from the corner store, then you could meet your husband, your neighbor, your pastor, whomever, it didn’t matter. But on a walk of shame—it just wasn’t right. It could never work out.

But those eyes!

Somehow John’s eyes had wrapped all around her and through her and knew all these things that she was thinking, even now, and told her to take a chance anyway.

She tucked her hair behind her ears, reached out and grasped his sweaty hand. “Hi, John, I’m Megan.”

Fictionalization of Second Glance

2011-07-15T11:35:00.008-04:00

This past week I started an 8-week fiction writing class through Arlington County's Adult Education programs. The course is VERY basic, but my motivation is more than just educational--I'm taking the course primarily to motivate myself to write. So far, I'm about halfway done with the draft of my first assignment--a short scene (which I think could double as a very short story).

My 2 or 3 blog readers may have noticed that I have not blogged nearly as often in recent years. I ascribed this not to a lack of ideas so much as a diminished enthusiasm for writing in the blog medium. So I hope to express some of my new "bloggable" ideas through the medium of short fiction (stories anywhere from 500-2,000+ words). By "fictionalizing" my ideas--I'm sure there is a more accurate term--I hope to bring more life to the idea.

So why not a novel? I think my recent increased interest in writing short fiction has stemmed from a thoroughly practical matter. Weaving many ideas into a novel-length piece would take a lot of time and much effort, and frankly, I'm not up to the challenge right now. I came to a similar conclusion 6 years ago. But also, I've recently started reading short fiction and was inspired by what Paulo Bacigalupi was able to do with the medium in Pump Six and Other Stories.

Writing fiction, even short pieces, will take me a lot longer than writing a blog post, so I would not expect my contributions to this site to increase. In fact, I'm considering migrating to a more reader-friendly format for longer pieces. Suggestions welcome.

Quick tips to increase productivity: Part I

2010-12-07T19:26:00.004-05:00

Here are some quick and easy tips to increase your productivity:

1. Use the restroom to plan ahead. In a busy schedule, there are few natural breaks. But everyone has to submit to the call of nature. I find that taking just a minute or two to assess your current activity, whether you are being productive, and what you should do to make progress in the next 15-30 minutes after your break, can be an extremely productive activity. Use this time to reboot a stalled out work day.

2. Floss your teeth while sitting down. I find that one reason I hate to floss is that it is annoying to just stand there in front of the mirror wasting what seems like 2 minutes threading string between my teeth. Instead, grab your floss and then grab a seat. Sitting down in a relaxed position makes flossing seem less like a chore and more like a reflective moment of treating yourself to personal grooming. How is this more productive? Well, if that alternative is not flossing and flossing is a priority for you, then getting yourself to do it is quite the production increase!

"Going to Mars with Peter"

2010-08-16T22:51:00.008-04:00

Our brains have a propensity toward seeing patterns and making connections. We also have hardwired within us a desire not just to understand things, but to do so quickly (likely a useful trait when we needed to understand that a boulder rolling down the hill was probably going to keep on doing so, and we better get out of the way!). I think the combination of these two aspects of our physiology attribute a great deal toward our belief in the supernatural. Specifically, we see patterns in the events and world around us that we don't understand and the easiest explanation is that, of course, these patterns were made by someone, just like every car and every chair has a maker. Since we don't see the maker around us, we attribute the patterns to an unseen, "godly" maker. That doesn't mean that this is the correct explanation, but it is certainly one that has been satisfactory for most of us for most of our history.

I may not ascribe to that view of the origin of patterns around us, but that doesn't stop my brain from searching for them. And this week, circumstances aligned in such a way that I found a pleasant pattern in my own life.

I am embarking over the next few months on the final chapter in my System Engineering master's degree program at Johns Hopkins. The capstone project, which will consume my extracurricular hours until December, is the development of an aerial robot to survey the Valles Marineris on Mars. I find it fitting that 8 years ago, during the summer after my senior year in high school, it was a space settlement design competition that I participated in, in Cape Canaveral, Florida, that first got me interested in engineering. The goal then was to design a Martian outpost that could support hundreds or thousands of settlers. Our project leader was a devoted and enthusiastic classmate named Peter (the type of kid who wore a star trek outfit to school, though for his sake, it was during Halloween season). My friend, Robert Yao, and I, being somewhat more interested in going to Florida than staying up all night writing requirements for an imaginary extraterrestrial apartment complex, endearingly joked that we were "Going to Mars with Peter."

In preparation for that trip all those years ago, I read Robert Zubrin's "The Case for Mars" and was at once fascinated at the idea of a manned mission to the Red Planet. Ever since, I've found the plans to return to the moon about as exciting as a road trip to Cleveland. As I bone up on Mars facts now, I'll be much more concerned with the impact of eroding dust and the low atmospheric pressure on a flying robot than on methods for terraforming the planet so that the 3014 World Cup could be played on the (no longer) red planet.

Something about coming full circle in my education fills me with a sense of completeness and pleasant, mild satisfaction. Now, if I wasn't human, I would probably say something more logical, like "well, really it would only be 'full circle' if the settlement competition had occurred during my first semester at school." But I am human and this seems a pretty innocuous occasion to indulge myself, so, yeah, I'll say it, isn't it amazing how so often life just happens to work out like this?!

Why you should believe in God -- Part III

2010-05-30T16:02:00.005-04:00

In Part I and II, I gave you reasons why you should believe in God. In Part III, we'll explore why believing in God is important.

Reason #1: God tells us what is right and wrong. If we didn't have God to tell us, how would we know that murder, theft, and rape are wrong? Imagine how much of these evils there would be in the world if God hadn't given us these important rules to live by. Think about yourself; imagine if God never told you not to murder or steal. If you saw a skinny child shivering in the street begging for food--and a stranger came up and gave the kid a piece of bread--what would stop you from walking up to the child, ripping the bread out of her little hands, and pushing her in front of the next bus to stop her from annoying you with her whines that her tummy hurts. Don't worry, that would never happen, because without God, no stranger would ever give a hungry little kid any bread anyway. Oh, but if God tells you to murder and steal then it is okay. Also, if He tells you to marry little girls to old men, or to cut off pieces of babies' genitals, then that is okay too!

Reason #2: God gives us life after we die. What luck! After your body dies, your spirit will go to heaven where you will have a mansion and will be with God all the time for an infinite amount of time. Because of this fact, nothing that happens on Earth is really that bad. Even if something terrible happens, its okay because the innocent people go to heaven and the bad people go to hell. So don't worry too much about the world getting blown up by nuclear bombs at the hands of terrorists--it just means you'll get to heaven sooner! If it wasn't for heaven, what would be the point of this whole life? Why would you care about anything if it was all just going to end after you die. Why get up in the morning? Why learn about nature and science and the world around us? There'd be no point; the world would be worthless. Just a bunch of cells dividing then dying.

So now when somebody asks you why it is important to believe in God, you can reply:

"Isn't it obvious?"

Why you should believe in God -- Part II

2010-05-22T07:54:00.006-04:00

In Part I, I gave several scientific reasons for why one should believe in God. As it turns out, Part I was just a red herring--written as a mere aside to the main event. In Part II, I will explain why scientific and rational inquiry is highly overrated when it comes to the subject of God. True theists (and I hope you count yourself among them when I'm through), have a better reason for believing.

Reason #2: Have a little Faith. There is a lot of debate about faith and reason and whether the two are compatible. First, let's explain the difference between the two. Faith is belief in the absence of reproducible evidence (a true virtue!). Reason is belief based on the presence of verifiable evidence or based on logic. Think about a court case--an eye witness can put someone away for life, even death row; that is how solid first hand experience is. Yet data, on the other hand, can be used to argue either side of the case (it's easy to manipulate and misdirect with numbers). "Science" spends a lot of time trying to convince us that God does not exist. Fortunately, with faith, you can believe in God without having to study science or think things through logically. God made both science and logic, so obviously these cannot be used as evidence against the existence of God.

I know there is probably still one smug doubter out there reading this, asking, "If God made science and logic, why doesn't He use these to prove to us that He exists?" I'll tell you why! God is not big on science. God is big on faith. He wants you to believe in Him because people tell you to--they are his witnesses, just like in a court case. Just make sure you don't listen to the people who tell you his name is Yahweh or Allah. As long as you remember His name is spelled G-O-D, you'll be okay!

Sometimes God sends little shivers up your spine to tell you that He loves you or approves of what you are doing; this is to help reaffirm your faith and make you a witness of God. When the people who say Yahweh and Allah sends them shivers too, you'll know that actually those are just neurons firing in their spines.

Isn't it obvious?!

Why you should believe in God -- Part I

2010-05-18T22:27:00.011-04:00

This is a first post in a series in which I explore one of the least controversial issues in America. Believing in God. According to numerous polls (just Google it), nearly everyone in America believes in God. Okay maybe there are a few pockets of unbelief in the Northeast and the Northwest, but those are just a bunch of liberals, so they don't really count.

But let's say you count yourself with those latte sipping, bleeding hearts on the fringes of America. I am taking it upon myself to convince you to believe in God. Why am I taking on this task? Well, I could try to convince you to believe in intelligent design, but not as many Americans believe in that--since believing in God is a prerequisite--so I'm taking on the easier job first.

But what is my motivation? Well, contrarian opinions sow disunity and I'm trying to unify our country in the name of peace. I don't want Armageddon to come before I have kids and get a chance to teach them all the Bible stories after all!

If you are like most Americans and already believe in God, you can stop reading now since you already know the Truth!

For all the rest of you schlups who never bothered to attend Sunday school, here is the first reason to believe in God:

Reason #1: Take a quick glance around you. The natural world is full of amazing and diverse beauty; it is too amazing to have just happened. In a random world you'd expect just as much ugly and useless stuff as beautiful and useful wonders for us to enjoy. That's probability; you may have learned about it in school. The fact that there are so many things for us to enjoy like every kind of food from corn to broccoli, and even a wide variety of dogs to be our companions, everything from huge saint bernards to little chihuahuas. This couldn't be chance, someone (or something) had to organize all the little atoms into molecules and molecules into cells and cells into life!

But why would God create any bad things, like tornadoes and poison berries? Well, have you ever had a cool glass of water after running in hot weather? How much better is the water after running than if you were just sitting around watching TV? You see, God creates bad things so that we appreciate good things (note: The Devil and his demons also tempt people to do bad things, but that's for another time, this is about God!). But what if the tornado crushes your house and kills your brother and your little sister ate some poison berries and passed away. Don't worry; they are with God now in Heaven (if they were baptized), so they are happier than you, you sad schmuck.

Sorry, I digressed a bit. Just because it is improbable that the world just happened to be the way it is doesn't mean it is impossible, right? There is still a chance that maybe God didn't make the Earth and all life that is on it...

Wrong.

You may have heard a so called scientist, maybe even a teacher at your public school, claim that life can "evolve" through this process called "evolution." The main problem with evolution is that it's just a theory. These self-proclaimed scientists (or maybe some backward school like Oxford gave them a degree) will say that evolution is a testable hypothesis with a lot of evidence to back it up. Well, if that were true they wouldn't still call it a theory. Don't believe those cheap peddlers of nonsense.

Besides, even if they were right, which they aren't, you should still believe in God. How did the universe begin if there was no God? Who caused the Big Bang (if that even happened...it's just a theory)? What was around before the Big Bang created all the space in the universe? You guessed it--God was around!

Some silly people might ask, "but who created God?"

Isn't it obvious?

This Label is Nuts

2010-05-03T10:22:00.006-04:00

I'm a fan of Emerald Nuts because they are cheap. I find that they are typically cheaper than Planters and on par with the store brand, at least at Safeway where I typically purchase them. As we well know, nuts are not a low fat/low calorie food. As such, I find it helpful to check the label and ensure that I have an idea of the appropriate portion to consume given my desired caloric intake.

The clever folks at Emerald Nuts have found a clever way to both comply with federal nutrition labeling guidelines and obscure this nutritional information while I'm consuming their delicious product. In the image below you can see that the "serving size" and "servings per container" information are conveniently lost when the perforated shrink-wrapping is removed from around the screw top. The rest of the information is essentially useless if you don't know the serving size that it is referencing. You might expect that I, as the consumer, would be more cautious in my consumption of the product due to an aversion to accidentally consuming vastly more calories than I had intended; however, I've found that quite to the contrary, in my blissful ignorance I can unconsciously consume what I later learned to be several servings without so much as a dent in my appetite.

Anyhow, kudos to Emerald for clever packaging. By the way, a serving size of almonds is 1/4 cup or 1 oz (about 20 almonds).

Sorry for the poor image quality

PowerPoint Animation -- Selection Window Time Saver

2010-02-15T16:13:00.006-05:00

As a "PowerPoint" engineer (aka UVa Systems grad), I am ashamed to not have known about the "Selection and Visibility" feature in PP2007.

Basically, this shows you a list of all the objects on your slide, for which you can proceed to give meaningful names. This is helpful in keeping things straight when making a slide with a lot of graphics and animations. Instead of working with a bunch of objects (some of which are hidden by others) with names like "Picture 9" and "Picture 13", you can use meaningful names like"PHL in 2007" and "PHL in 2012".

To do this click on "Home", then "Select->Selection Window..." (button in the Editing window on the far right-hand side of the screen). This produces a pane which lists all the objects on the screen. You can even hide some object so that it is easier to select and manipulate the underlying ones.

I know this is my lamest post ever, but this feature made me happy for a few minutes.

Trolling the Seas of Idiocy

2009-09-28T23:13:00.006-04:00

Blogs with far more commenters (and by extension, readership) than mine sometimes find their comment section has degraded into a what is called a "flame war." A flame war typically begins when either an ignorant or careless commenters submits a comment which other readers find beneath the quality of the blog's accepted, though often unwritten, standard. The flamers, engaging in flaming, often quickly degrade into personal attacks on the victim's intelligence, or that of the victim's mother. Flamers often build off of each other, with little regard for the content of previous comments, frequently resulting in duplicative criticism of the victim. The flame war technically begins after the victim responds and is subsequently inundated with additional criticism, often involving a reference to the flamer's certitude that the victim's IQ is below a certain nominal level (typically 10-20). Ironically, it appears that the flamers maintain a cognitive image of themselves as the victims (citing themselves as victims of their subject's mental ineptitude).

More clever, less depressing, and altogether vastly more entertaining is the "troll." A troll may have many motives, but a common one is to start a "pitched" or "reverse" flame war in which the initial flamer, out of ignorance of the subject, becomes the subject of the flaming. The ideal blog for such a troll is one in which the subject matter requires a degree of knowledge/fluency in order to comment intelligently and for which readers generally have strong opinions. A concise example of the beginnings of a troll-trap induced reverse flame war on a grammar blog is captured perfectly by the following xkcd.com comic:

A world full of muggles

2009-04-27T22:38:00.004-04:00

Dictionary.com has three definitions for muggle. One is "a marijuana joint" that hearkens back to the 1920's. The next is a common person, especially one who is ignorant or without skills. Certainly, it was this latter definition that inspired J.K. Rowling to use the word to denote persons without magical powers in Harry Potter, which is the third definition dictionary.com provides.

For this post, I'd like to focus on the second definition, in the context of the third. I have no problem with a dictionary adding the Rowling definition of muggle to the dictionary. Language is a medium of communicating meaning, and in today's world muggle is widely understood to convey the meaning Rowling invented in 1996.

Certainly, today we don't use the word muggle to juxtapose a non-magical person with a magical one, since no magical people exist. If someone even dared to use the word in professional or formal conversation, they'd elicit either a hearty laugh acknowledging the allusion to one of the most popular series every written, or an uneasy laugh sympathizing with an ignoramous.

We say ignoramous because no rational and informed person believes in magical people. Keep that in mind.

Interview with Daniella Brodsky

2009-03-27T18:54:00.008-04:00

I've called it an interview because the conversation was decidedly uni-directional. I arrived a little late to The Front Page in Washington, DC, and Daniella had already finished her daily writing and was enjoying a glass of sauvignon blanc. Daniella, perhaps most famous for her novel Diary of a Working Girl, was seated at the bar with a well worn copy of White Oleander. She admits to having read it more than once, but more on that later. Now if that isn't a toxic signal to any man, I'm not sure what qualifies, yet Daniella turned out to be anything but.

(Note, I didn't have my tape recorder on me so the following is not verbatim. Daniella, feel free to call me out if I've misrepresented any of your statements.)

Me: Daniella, do you often write at bars?
D: I like to get there early before all the hustle and bustle. Seeing as I don't have a "day job" it's not that difficult.

Me: In a few words, what would you say is the genre of your novels?
D: Women's fiction. About women, for women.

Me: Perhaps I'll be your first male reader. So, I see you're reading White Oleander (it's the movie edition and we spend a minute or two identifying all the actresses on the cover).
D: I've read it several times. In fact, one time I accidently left it in an airport bathroom. I had to get my friends on the next flight out to pick it up for me. It was probably sitting there for 2 or 3 hours. I was worried somebody would have gotten water all over it. But when I got it back it had all these little passages written inside the cover (she shows me the writing). It's 3 or 4 different people and the funny part is, none of the messages really make any sense, they are very stream of conscience, you know? I mean I'm not sure what makes sense to write in a copy of White Oleander left in an airport bathroom...

Me: I've actually been trying to write for some time. My biggest problem, I think, is that I can't visualize the plot at the beginning. I'm afraid to start because I worry that I might write my way into a corner such that I can't make the plot work.
D: You shouldn't let that deter you. I never know what is going to happen when I start a novel. In fact, I once had one of my characters steal my story for about 10 pages. It was a real struggle. It took me 10 pages to wrestle the story back from this character. Some people say they know how the story will develop, but no one does. Not at the start. If you want to write, you have to write. Try to do it everyday. Even if it is just for 20 minutes.

At this point, several beverages deep, I excuse myself to the restroom. As I squeeze by Daniella's chair and the wall, I'm impeded by a pair of crutches.

D: You want them?
Me: The crutches?
D: Yes. They're mine. Take them.
Me: But clearly you must need them, right? I mean you don't just bring crutches to a bar if you don't need them. (As an aside, it may not be a bad way to get some pity. But Daniella did not strike me as some one looking for any of that.)
D: (Shrugs) All I'm saying is you can have them.

I carefully steady the crutches as I squeeze through. A very strange and seemingly random bit of conversation. In any event, nature called and then I returned.

Me: So your books are written for women. What would you say to your male fanbase?
D: (Laughs) Oh, him. I'd tell him to get a girlfriend.

Me: Alright, just one more question. How is the author life treating you?
D: Emotionally, it's treating me well. I love it. Financially, quite a different story.
Me: So you'd like it if I went out and bought some of your books.
D: Actually, I'm indifferent. I get $0 for each book sold.

(Clearly, Daniella forgets that the publishers get money for each book sold and if they make money from her books they are more likely to purchase her work in the future. But after a few adult beverages, I'm in no mood to spoil the atmosphere with economics talk.)

At this point, the interview winds down. I thank Daniella and promise to read at least one of her books. If you interested, check out her website, daniellabrodsky.com

Willful Ignorance

2009-02-25T16:56:00.005-05:00

Religion and politics don't typically make good workplace discussion topics. Especially religion. Why not? A major reason is that our religious beliefs are tightly bound up with our individual identities. Therefore, when our beliefs differ from others, we tend to think of the situation as "I'm right and you're wrong." Even if no one says that explicitly, there is an implicit challenge to your beliefs when someone expresses their own.

This causes tension.

In fact, I think this tension is a big reason why we don't talk about religion with friends that don't share our beliefs. We think it will get in the way of our friendship by offending one or both of us. Yet if knowing someone believes differently than you causes offense, it must be because you care about what they think about your religion (and in some way you). And if you care about what they think, then shouldn't you try to find out what they think? And yet that requires you to talk about religion, the very thing we are avoiding by choice.

If this is the case, it may be that we actually don't care much what our friends think about our religion. But if we don't care, then we wouldn't bother purposely avoiding it. I think it is more likely that we hit a psychological snag when these things are discussed openly. We no longer have plausible deniability. Before it is discussed openly, we hold convenient assumptions about their beliefs so we can think about how much fun we have otherwise. After, we can think of little else.

Obama or McCain?

2008-11-02T10:33:00.004-05:00

My general attitude toward government is that it is, in most cases, part of the problem not the solution. In 2004 I voted for Bush. I did it because I was ill-informed on his policy positions and I saw the Republican party as the party of fiscal restraint. I had just taken 2 economics courses and everything in the world seemed to start making sense.

Bush betrayed me. His administration has led to huge deficits in non-military spending. He has led a horrendously planned and executed war in Iraq. The signs and decisions were already in place in 2004, I just hadn't taken the time to find out the facts. But still, I felt betrayed that the Republican brand had led me so far astray with respect to Bush.

In 2006, I voted for Jim Webb, a Democrat, for Senator of Virginia. To punish the Republicans for misleading me 2 years prior? Yes, a little. But more so because if government is part of the problem, then a divided government can do less harm than one that is run by a supermajority party (see years 2002-2006).

So this brings me to the 2008 Presidential election. However, unlike 2006, my residual feelings of betrayal and my less government philosophy are pulling me in opposite directions this time. A vote for Obama would give me the psychological satisfaction of voting against the Republicans. However, now that the Democrats have and will likely expand upon a large Congressional majority, I am nudged toward McCain to avoid disasterous over expansion of government that is likely to ensue (since McCain can veto all that wasteful spending legislation).

So, since my single vote does not count in any practical way, I plan to vote on principle. It seems the "golden years" of prosperity came during the last Democratic presidency and a Republican congress, so I'll vote that way this election. Obama for President, and Republicans for Congress (i.e., Jim Gilmore for Senate).

What if my vote were desicive, would I vote differently? Perhaps. But even then, I am very socially tolerant and I don't think I could bring myself to vote another George Bush a heartbeat from the presidency (in the guise of Sarah Palin).

In the end Obama will win, I'm guessing he'll probably pick-up around 320 electoral votes, and the Democrats will pick up a decent majority in Congress. In the next four years we'll see a continued large deficit as spending is slightly increased but as taxes are also slightly increased. The Republicans will concede that they've lost their touch with mainstream American and get back to their roots of small government and individual responsibility. And by 2012, we'll have a Democratic president and a Republican Congress, our standing in the world will be much improved, and we'll be moving back toward a more free-trade, less protectionist economy that Obama and the Democrats will likely usher in in the next few years. I guess that is more of a hope than a prediction.

Boston Legal

2008-10-16T23:43:00.000-04:00

I have been on a spate of online TV watching. Heroes, 30rock, Chuck. And now I've come to Boston Legal.

Let me start by saying this is not a show I ever thought I would watch before last week. If the only way available to watch BL was with commercials on TV (alt. univ. w/ no DVR), I'd just go without watching it at all.

Yes BL is absurd. Yes BL is funny. But it is also at least a little bit, about law. And that's where it runs into problems. You see, the juries in BL land are suckers for an emotional hook. I find myself sympathizing with the opponents of the Boston Legal team. The opposing arguments are often very compelling. In fact, if you were to decide the case based on the proceedings up to --but excluding-- the closing arguments, you'd think the show wanted you to go with the opposing side. The BL case is often not supported by the evidence!

But then the star BL lawyer saunters up to the jury and delivers an impassioned closing argument. I can't help but find the moment anti-climatic. It is clear that the audience is supposed to be swayed by this final twist, having appreciated the "human-side" or "spirit" of the law the BL lawyer has to remind the jury of (and us of). I'm sorry, but my verdict would be for the other guy in 4 out of the 4 episodes I've seen (season 5, episodes 1-4).

Are you feeling well?

2008-09-18T09:13:00.002-04:00

I think I have a case of the whichPoliticianIsTellingMoreLies-itis. I assume that politics has always been a race to the bottom, with politicians stretching the truth tighter than a pair of Usain Bolt's spandex on Rosie O'Donnell, but the only reason they get away with it is because we must like seeing Rosie O'Donnell in nasty-tight spandex. Seriously, if anybody says they are proud of how McCain or Obama is running their campaign, I'm going to laugh. Then I going to treat you like a elementary school student, because apparently that is when your mind stopped developing.

A Balanced Regulatory Meal

2008-09-17T20:55:00.007-04:00

A frequent Second Glance commenter has asked for my views on the financial market mess. More specifically he'd like me to reconcile my general disdain for regulation with this disaster which appears to have been caused by a lack of regulation.

I would love to opine at length on the topic, but like many of the shell shocked investment firms out there sitting up to their eyeballs in worthless securitized debt instruments, I don't really know what the heck is going on.

So, as any good libertarian would, I will avoid the direct question by stating a hypothetical that no one can disagree with. Then I will claim that the hypothetical is relevant to the current question, even if the relationship is tenuous. Then I will claim that there was never any paradox to reconcile in the first place. Here it goes:

As we all know, hindsight is 20/20. So my question is "what would we have done differently, if given the chance?" If your answer is, "we should have had the gov't cracked down on predatory lending and the proliferation of high exposure investment instruments," I would just laugh. I'd laugh somewhat nervously, partially because I don't know what the hell that really means. But I'd also laugh because the Monday morning quarterbacking only works until next Sunday.

It seems the golden phrase these days is not more or less regulation but "good regulation." Good regulation is just another way of saying let's make rules which constrain the choices of corporations with the intent to limit harm or provide benefit to some individuals. Unless you have a vendetta against the word "regulation," good regulation doesn't sound so bad, right? Who cares about corporations when the individual is at stake?!

To which I must reply with a platitude because it is so fitting yet never gets considered seriously during the "solution" or regulation proposal phase, that is, "actions often have unintended consequences." Let us say that we enact all the regulation that is supposedly needed to "keep this from ever happening again." My question would be, in the process have we created an even bigger monster, requiring even more regulations to defeat? And where does it end? And if its so good now, why didn't we think so before, and will it be good later?

This is not to say that regulation is never needed, or that it was not needed in this case. It is only to say, that we shouldn't use the fact that voluntary exchange has gone south as a sufficient rationale for enacting regulation. Especially since once in place regulations have a tricky way of making themselves permanent residents. Regulations change the rules of the game. In the new game, maybe we limit the upside by limiting the downside. Maybe it is better to sustain transitory losses, however painfully, to remove the ceiling on growth in the future.

These are a lot of tough questions, and the easy answer is to just enact smart or good regulation. The hard part is figuring out if we are doing less harm than good.

Kinetic Productivity -- Part II -- Pockets of Productive

2008-06-28T10:35:00.002-04:00

Conventional wisdom on productivity lists several reasons for productivity decline, including:

1. Distractions
2. Motivational issues
3. Lack of engery (including mental energy)
4. Lack of tools (spilt coffee on your laptop)

The kinetic productivity analogy goes a long way to unifying these reasons. Unification is valuable because it gives the worker the most leeway in choosing a productivity enhancement plan. For some, motivation is always an issue because they hate their job, for others they get easily distracted by RIF (RSS, IM, Facebook).

So back to the analogy. When in a productivity slump, the analogy suggests that we must do enough work to generate the potential energy to crest the productivity hill. Fine, but how?

There are two ways to get over the hill. One is to build up potential energy by pushing the productivity ball up the hill. The other is to pick a different small hill to climb.

Question: But what energy is used to convert into potential energy (through work). Energy is conserved after all, right?
Answer: Yes, energy is conserved. But energy is constantly flowing back into you when you don't even know it. The problem is having an efficient tool to convert that energy into potential energy (the source of future productivity).

Basically what my theory suggests, is you just have to get out of the slump (whatever way you can) and then you can coast for a while at a high level of productivity. If this sounds like a bunch of hogwash, let me give you an example from my own experience.

One of my biggest productivity drains at night is sleepiness. Big surprise! What I didn't realize is that sleepiness wears off WITHOUT sleep. So the hill I have to climb is sleepiness. If I can get over the sleepiness, I can roll down the hill and be productive for another few hours. I've found that the best way to overcome sleepiness is to wait until your body wants to go to sleep and then and only then start working. Your body will fight you momentarily as you boot up your computer and bring up your spreadsheets, but what your body doesn't realize is that you are breaking down the sleep cycle barrier. You've essentially tricked you mind and body into think it is a new day and it resets a lot of stuff in your brain. Try to think what you did this morning... it will be hard to do!

Okay, so maybe it still sounds like hogwash. And maybe it is. My point is just that you have small burst of productivity and if you can figure out when they usually happen, you can trigger them.

Another example before I leave this pseudo-scientific post. Interestingly enough, I find I get flashes off mental acuity while going to the bathroom. Often this is where I plan much of my day. Don't waste time in the restroom, be productive!

Kinetic Productivity: Part I -- The Analogy

2008-06-26T23:37:00.007-04:00

I learned today that my former co-worker has created a website called PickTheBrain.com. I was browsing some of the articles and came about one on productivity. He suggests utilizing "surges of mental activity" as opposed to forcing our mental activity into a continuous 8 hour block.

This reminded me of an interesting passage by tech whiz Aaron Swartz:

"With all the time you spend watching TV," he tells me, "you could have written a novel by now." It's hard to disagree with the sentiment -- writing a novel is undoubtedly a better use of time than watching TV -- but what about the hidden assumption? Such comments imply that time is "fungible" -- that time spent watching TV can just as easily be spent writing a novel. And sadly, that's just not the case.

In addition to what these gentleman say, I believe I've discovered a little known productivity limiter; bear with me as I coin the phrase "kinetic productivity" with respect to working life. Think back to high school physics when you were working out how much work it would take to get a ball resting at the bottom of a hill up to the top. Once at the top, you can simply roll it down the other side; converting all its potential energy into kinetic energy.

Now think of the kinetic energy as productivity. As long as the ball has kinetic energy (productivty), it can move (get work done). As it rolls along, the forces of friction (work) eventually dissapate the kinetic energy and you are left at the bottom of another hill (low mental activity).

Stay tuned for Part II in which I decode analogy further--defining the hill and methods for climbing it.

Win a new hard drive... or at least more space

2008-06-16T22:57:00.007-04:00

What is the difference between getting a bigger hard drive and creating more space on the one you have. Creating space is cheaper, faster, easier, and more fun!

Windirstat is a free program I ran across today at work when the IT guy told me I should probably free up some space on my hard drive.

I've known for some time that I'd need to do some HD spring cleaning, but I didn't want to take hours searching through folders to find big files that I don't need. So I turned to Google. I Googled something to the effect of, "hard drive space management," and was presented with a most awesome tool (in the process I discovered a totally rad website chock full of other nifty Windows [and mac] utilities, Lifehacker.com).

Basically, windirstat produces a visualization of you hard drive which makes it easy to see what's eating up all that extra space. For me, at home it was a couple video files, duplicated music, and some video games. The easy-to-use interface let's you quickly delete old, dusty files by quickly drilling down into your biggest folders to find the biggest files each contains. So many of these files are unnecessary. With a fast Internet connection you could re-download in no time if you ever needed the file again.

Take a look at the visualization of my HD below:

Chicken, the Other Green Meat

2008-06-08T09:48:00.006-04:00

As human-induced global warming gains more sway on the moral conscience of consumers, you might expect vested interests to come up with sales pitches promising to stretch our greenbacks to their green limit. The "buy local" fad is just one of the "solutions" that help us feel like we are doing our part. Sure it is a little more expensive, but think about the external effects on the planet of the CO2 emissions from shipping strawberries from China -- the other side of the world!

The fact that buying local also supports local agriculture industry also soothes our irrational tribal-biased aversion to foreign competition, perhaps bruised by a recent Hi-Def TV purchase, only serves to raise the issue to the media forefront.

However, by its nature, not its distance to market, is the carbon footprint of food made. According to a recent study,

"A relatively small dietary shift can accomplish about the same greenhouse gas reduction as eating locally, Weber adds. Replacing red meat and dairy with chicken, fish, or eggs for one day per week reduces emissions equal to 760 miles per year of driving. And switching to vegetables one day per week cuts the equivalent of driving 1160 miles per year."

But red meat tastes so good! Of course, that is why we can expect green house gas emissions to continue to rise. As China grows richer, their demand for delicious red meat can be expected to rise (Indians, who are also getting richer, generally don't eat beef, though I'm not sure about other red meats).

Thanks to MR and Ezra Klein for the pointer.

I'll give you 4 Reasons why Cannabis should be Illegal

2008-05-29T19:38:00.007-04:00

This is the post where I finally start to give you the reasons that Cannabis should be illegal. I debunked a lot of the standard arguments in previous posts. Weak. If you really want to keep Marijuana illegal use the following 4 arguments:

1. By keeping marijuana illegal you maintain the stigma which surrounds it. For a teenager to smoke it, he must be breaking the law, i.e., disrespecting authority, and that is attractive to teenagers. By legalizing marijuana you reduce the stigma, which then may transfer to a more dangerous drug.
2. If you make marijuana legal, more people will use it. Classic Law of Demand. Lower the price (consequences), and the quantity demanded will increase, including use by some who were priced out of the market before. If we claim people smoking marijuana is a bad thing, this means more of a bad thing.
3. People smoking marijuana makes other people uncomfortable. It smells weird. People who smoke it act funny. It just makes non-smokers uncomfortable. More smokers means more interaction with non-smokers, leading to more uncomfortable non-smokers.
4. It is hard to prove you are not high. Since the THC is stored in your fat cells, it may be difficult to prove you were not impaired by the substance (even after the 2-3 hour effects had worn off). For example, if you are in a car accident the day after smoking up and weed was found in your car, that may be grounds to test you. If it is found in your system, you could face additional criminal and civil penalties. This assumes that there isn't a BAC-impairment equivalent for marijuana testing (I haven't heard of any). The legislation and litigation that would result from these disputes would further tax the judicial system. This may be partially offset by fewer marijuana possession cases, but the net cost is uncertain.

Could I poke holes in each these arguments? Sure. Can I think of any others? Not at the moment. Feel free to add yours in the comments.

The Gateway to Hell?

2008-05-28T23:20:00.001-04:00

In a previous post we discovered that our position for keeping marijuana illegal is not well supported by the self harm argument.

But what about marijuana being a "gateway" drug to harder drug which cause more deaths or emergency hospital visits? Unfortunately, these statistics don't generally support the Cannibis as a gateway drug theory (see wikipedia's article):

"The people who are predisposed to use drugs and have the opportunity to use drugs are more likely than others to use both marijuana and harder drugs," Morral said. "Marijuana typically comes first because it is more available. Once we incorporated these facts into our mathematical model of adolescent drug use, we could explain all of the drug use associations that have been cited as evidence of marijuana's gateway effect."

In fact, if you want to use the Marijuana gateway drug argument, you have to admit that the ultimate gateway drug is alcohol. So there are a lot of numbers and they seem to favor marijuana as a substitute to alcohol and tobacco. The question is whether the numbers matter.

We can take several perspectives. The libertarian perspective says that the numbers be damned, it's none of the government's business what individual risks one chooses to take. A utilitarian perspective would say the numbers are everything and would attempt to weigh the benefits to the user against the risks. A liberal would probably attempt to devise government intervention to minimize the pertinent numbers (often neglecting secondary effects). A conservative would probably be interesting in a different set of numbers than the liberal, relying tradition and morality to justify the current prohibition.

Considering the relatively low risk of self harm, little correlation with external harm, the high cost of enforcement, and the claimed pleasurable benefits, we'll need to delve deeper into the conservative perspective in order to find arguments against legalizing marijuana.

Stay tuned as we don our bow ties and smoking caps and determine why marijuana should be illegal!

The deadliest dope is legal

2008-05-08T20:42:00.005-04:00

I think it is widely known that tobacco and alcohol cause more deaths than any other substance. In fact, tobacco causes about 440,000 deaths a year and alcohol about 80,000. This complicates our search for why marijuana should be illegal, considering marijuana, depending on your definition of "directly causes," causes between 0 and 21 deaths per year (search cannabis). But let's give it a go anyhow.

21 deaths isn't 0. So technically it is possible to overdose on cannabis (then again, maybe not, 2nd source). And there are other forms of harm other than outright death due to overdose. Behavior alteration can increase the likelihood of dangerous activity. One source claims marijuana users have a 30% greater risk of injury. Again, unfortunately, this risk is even greater for alcohol and tobacco, according to the source. So we must search elsewhere.

What about emergency department (ED) visits? This is a good proxy for harm (real or perceived) of non-fatal exposure to marijuana. According to the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), in 2003, marijuana was involved in 79,663, or nearly 13 percent, of all drug-related ED visits. That sounds significant, except that with 25,231,000 admitted users of marijuana in 2003, 99.7% did not go have an emergency hospital visit (and this assumes each visit was a different person). This is comparable to the 99.9% for alcohol, especially considering that you have to be breaking the law to use marijuana, and are thus probably more risk-tolerant.

So physical danger to one's self is a weak crutch to use in our quest for justifying keeping marijuana illegal.

But what if it is a gateway drug? Tune if for the next episode.

Obamathematics

2008-05-08T19:59:00.003-04:00

The media's love for Obama's causes CNN to disregard one of the 4 arithmetic operations which has served mankind for millennia; that is, subtraction.

In classical mathematics: 267-250=17
In Obamathematics: 267-250=7

See it here:

21st Century Faith-Healing

2008-04-14T20:35:00.004-04:00

By now, many of you may have heard that Airborne doesn't work... unless you believe.

This morning I found myself in a paradoxical situation. I had both "the first signs of a cold" namely, a mild sore throat, and half a container of the useless vitamin effervescent, Airborne. I say "useless" because I don't believe in it. I wish I did!

I don't believe because I read the article which exposes Airborne's "double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study" as a shame 2-man operation by an Airborne subsidiary created for the sole purpose of conducting the study. Before I learned of its baseless science, I believed Airborne might just work based on some cloudy notion that things like high doses of Vitamin C and Zinc reduce the duration and severity of colds (probably a rumor started by the supplement companies themselves).

In any event, I had half a container of what might as well have been drink flavoring. So did I take it? Darn right I did. Why? Because I wanted to see if I could will myself to believe in the health benefits of a placebo.

Did it work?

Um... all I can say is I'm feeling pretty good. Of course that isn't saying much. Isn't it convenient that they say it is "most effective" if taken at the first signs of a cold. They are the "first signs" because you don't know if it will turn into a cold or not. If it was a false alarm, but you took Airborne, you may be inclined to believe the magic little pill made you all better. If you get sick, you might be inclined to ponder how sick YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN if you hadn't taken the little guys.

Why Should Marijuana be Illegal?

2008-04-10T23:02:00.006-04:00

Type the title into Google and prepare to be underwhelmed.

In fact, there was so few search results with content on why marijuana should be illegal, I half expected Google to come back with Did you mean: why marijuana should be legal?

I intend to start a mini-series of posts on why marijuana should be illegal. I'll get into the statistics and explore hypotheticals, but first let me lay down a foundation for my analysis and commentary. In my mind, the most obvious question which must be addressed is "why should any activity be illegal?"

Nearly every law is justified by claiming that the activity either causes (or risks) harm to the participant or to others (non-participants). This harm can be physical, monetary, or emotional. I'll address all three in subsequent posts. As we'll see, drug legislation is full of contradictions, so how do we find out what is dank and what is swag? Stay tuned!

The Perfect Temperature for Disaster

2008-04-03T09:18:00.006-04:00

I just realized how we drink from a mug (or cup) without looking at the liquid it contains. We use the temperature differential of the liquid and our mouth to feel when it has reached our mouth and thus, when we should cease tilting the mug upward.

This all came to me as I found myself with a nice splash of green tea on my pants after taking a sip while reading an e-mail. Having let the tea cool, it had reached the temperature of my mouth and thus I just kept tilting upward until... disaster.

FAQ: Didn't I feel the pressure of the liquid as it entered my mouth?
A: No, I was distracted.

CNN -- Not my source for math

2008-04-02T23:56:00.009-04:00

I found what I think is an error in this CNN article on jet fuel prices. The article makes the following two claims:

1. "Jet fuel, which the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration tracked at $3.17 per gallon in New York on Tuesday, has doubled since the beginning of 2007."
2. "Jet fuel is at $3.17 per gallon, according to the Energy Department, up 200 percent from 2007."

My complaint is that "doubled" is not the same as "up 200 percent," because the latter sounds like "200% more than." If you said that jet fuel is up 100 percent from 2007, would you think that the price had stayed the same!!!

I'm operating under the following assumptions:

Given X is Fuel Prices in 2007
"Double X" = 2X
"Up 200 percent" = X + 2.00*X = 3X
"200 percent of X" = 2.00*X = 2X

Accordingly, I think CNN should have said, "Jet fuel is at... 200 percent of its 2007 level," or alternatively, "up 100 percent from 2007."

What do you think?! By the way I did check the underlying numbers and verified that the fuel levels today are 2X. Also, I have a little evidence from the site (taken 31 Mar 08):

Check for the neck!

2008-03-20T22:21:00.007-04:00

After a weekend party and a week of carry-out, I have trash bags full of recyclable and non-recyclable materials. The question is, which is which?

To the rescue is the Fairfax County website. It even has a catchy slogan ("Check for the Neck") complete with the recycling logo done up in what appears to be giraffe fur (is that legal?). According to the website, if they get too much "trash" in the recycling, they have to throw out the whole lot. My roommate, Mike*, made a good point - why not put this information on the bin itself?

Oh, and for my Arlington County readers, see this. Though, if you don't have curbside pick-up (for example, you live in an apartment complex) you should check with your apartment management.

*Also my step-dad

Don't Leave Out Carry-out

2008-03-16T22:57:00.005-04:00

I'm fending for myself meal-wise this week. This has meant frequent visits to Pho Reston 75 and Yoko Sushi.

To avoid eating alone in public (a deeply rooted socially unacceptable way to eat), I opt for carry-out. As such, I was left wondering if I should tip, and how much.

When I dine-in at these restaurants, I tip. When I dine-in at McDonald's, I don't. So perhaps it is the wait-staff coming to the table that I am tipping when I dine-in (the analogy extends to the pizza delivery guy as well). Under this paradigm I shouldn't when I carry-out.

Well, I wouldn't necessarily be correct, according to Ask Yahoo:

Phyllis Richman, a restaurant critic for the Washington Post, says that she doesn't usually tip at a carryout establishment, although she may add something to the jar on the counter. But if she is getting a meal to go from a sit-down restaurant, she will tip up to 10%.

Tipping culture is so arbitrary!!! The 15-20% tip is so ingrained in me, that even for carry-out I feel bad tipping less, especially when paying by credit card because then you get that receipt with the "tip" line with the 10,15,20, and 25% tip calculations printed on it. That line is ingenious... it guilts me into tipping more than the "measly 10%" almost every time.

A notable exception: If the kitchen is right behind the counter, as at McDonald's (and at Plaka Grill), I find it easier not to tip on carry-out than I do when the kitchen is hidden from view.

Out of Focus

2008-03-07T01:06:00.008-05:00

To me this Ford Focus commercial misses the mark.

It shows two guys about to embark on a long trip to Los Angeles. The owner of the Ford Focus offers to split the costs of the trip, "Ill buy the gas, you buy the food?" The passenger happily agrees.

The driver then goes on to take full advantage of this deal by clearing the shelves at a roadside convenience store and ordering a tall stack of pancakes at a roadside diner.

I thought the point of the commercial was to say that the Focus gets such good gas mileage that you don't pay much for gas (hence the split working in favor of the driver in the commercial). Unfortunately, the driver bought so much food that it is almost as if he needed to be sure he got the better end of the deal, because, one could be led to believe, he is spending most of his paycheck on the gas guzzling Focus. I'd understand if this was a commercial for the F150, but not the company's most fuel efficient vehicle!

MS Paint does Subprime Mortgage Primer

2008-03-03T23:10:00.005-05:00

This PowerPoint cartoon summarizes everything you need to know about how the subprime mortgage crisis went down. Beware, the language is as poor as the companies that bought those subprime mortgage-backed securities!

HT: EconLog

Why Chris Craighill should not start a blog!

2008-03-01T13:48:00.003-05:00

Comments on my blog may decrease by 100%...

“Tengo una remera del Che y no sé por qué,”

2008-02-29T15:06:00.006-05:00

An Argentine expression, meaning, "I have a Che T-shirt and I don’t know why." That's from an excellent article by Alvaro Llosa called The Killing Machine: Che Guevara, from Communist Firebrand to Capitalist Brand.

No man is without some redeeming qualities. In the case of Che Guevara, those qualities may help us to measure the gulf that separates reality from myth. His honesty (well, partial honesty) meant that he left written testimony of his cruelties, including the really ugly, though not the ugliest, stuff...
...
In April 1967, speaking from experience, he summed up his homicidal idea of justice in his “Message to the Tricontinental”: “hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine.”

---
See also: A list of people Che had executed
---
Just to keep things linked up, see also, a past blog on Communism and Che

Now do you believe? -Morpheus

2008-02-26T21:57:00.007-05:00

He's the One. And by he, I mean 0.999...

When I first encountered the seeming paradox, in 9th grade, that 0.999...=1, my mind was "blown." I kept wanting to say, "Yeah, it is close to one... but it is not identical." I mean, if it were true, my whole world view would be shaken. On Judgement Day, I could justify zoning out during a looong Sunday School class on Isiah with the argument... "I really wanted to pay attention. Really really wanted to. So technically I was paying attention... 0.999...=1, as you well know Mr. God."

Of course, I really just didn't understand infinity... or Isiah for that matter. For lost souls, like me, Wikipedia comes to the rescue. I like the simplest definitions best:

An even easier version of the same proof is based on the following equations:

But, behold, Wikipedia lists many others as well that range from infinite series (something that I know something about) to Cauchy sequences (of which I know nothing).

Note: The Wikipedia article also has a good section on why students often reject the equality of 0.999... and 1. My favorite:

Some students interpret "0.999…" (or similar notation) as a large but finite string of 9s, possibly with a variable, unspecified length. If they accept an infinite string of nines, they may still expect a last 9 "at infinity".

The Power of Obama Compels YOU!!!!

2008-02-26T18:31:00.004-05:00

I mean this is bound to happen, but seriously... Obama should get EMT training. Heck, I'd say he is on pace for an honorary certificate by the time the general election comes around.

See also: Why having a cult following isn't a problem. Basically, it worked for Bush.

Color Illusions

2008-02-08T23:45:00.000-05:00

Seeing is NOT believing.

If you don't believe the masks provided by the artist... you can always use a photo editor.

World War III will be Humans vs. Zombies (guess which side you're on)

2008-02-05T23:25:00.000-05:00

I've recently taken interest in the apocalyptic genre of movies/books. Whether it be by cosmic forces (Deep Impact), climate change (The Day After Tomorrow), a deadly virus (I am Legend, 28 Days Later, etc.), or aliens (Cloverfield, Hitchhiker's Guide 2tU), the idea of being among the few remaining is intriguing, even if the movies rarely live up to their potential. If any of these outlandish scenarios came to pass, more than likely you and I would be one of the zombies, or the guys that got crushed by the Statue of Liberty's head, rather than one of the heroes.

World War Z is an entertaining look at what a zombified world might look like. It is a collection of stories about the wars beginnings, its terrible carnage, and its final resolution, as recounted by those who survived. Max Brooks writes in a incredibly engaging style that gives an old B-movie genre fresh legs (or rotten ones). It is utterly believable, if you can get over the whole zombie thing, which many of the books characters find difficult themselves (a deadly mistake). Highly recommended as an intelligent and fresh bit of sci fi!

Okay, am I done with book reviews yet?

Why is chicken meat white and beef red?

2008-02-04T12:56:00.004-05:00

The quick n' dirty here. Basically, it comes down to myoglobin,

Red, or dark meat is made up of slow-twitch [muscles]. These muscles are used for extended periods of activity, such as standing or walking, and need a consistent energy source. The protein myoglobin stores oxygen in muscle cells, which use oxygen to extract the energy needed for constant activity.
White meat is made up of fast-twitch [muscles]. These muscles are used for quick bursts of activity, such as fleeing from danger. These muscles get energy from glycogen, which is also stored in the muscles.

In dark meat, myoglobin helps us determine when cooked meat is done

When dark meat is cooked, myoglobin's color changes depending on what the meat's interior temperature is. Rare beef is cooked to 140° F, and myoglobin's red color remains unchanged. Above 140° F, myoglobin loses its ability to bind oxygen, and the iron atom at the center of its molecular structure loses an electron. This process forms a tan-colored compound called hemichrome, which gives medium-done meat its color. When the interior of the meat reaches 170° F, hemichrome levels rise, and the myoglobin becomes metmyoglobin, which gives well-done meat its brown-gray shade.

In white meat, again it is protein that helps us tell if it is done, but since there is little myoglobin, we use another mechanism to tell if it's done

White meat has a translucent "glassy" quality when it is raw. When it's cooked, the proteins denature and recombine, or coagulate, and the meat becomes opaque and whitish.

Follet is Back for Foreal

2008-01-29T22:45:00.000-05:00

I'm usually wary of the sequel. It is so often a let down. The essence of the original is... well, original and it is that originality which makes it such a joy.

It is a rarity that I find a book that I enjoyed as much as The Pillars of the Earth. I suffered mixed emotions as I came to the end of the 1000 page masterpiece. On the one hand I wanted the thrills to go on. On the other hand I realized that reading an average of 150 pages/night left me feeling a little consumed (read: addicted).

I read Code to Zero, another Ken Follet novel, right after Pillars and I was left underwhelmed.

So I was inclined to chalk up Pillars to a fluke. Never-the-less, I approached the sequel, World without End, with an open mind. Another 1000 pager, it certainly had a little bit of a formulaic feel after Pillars, but it is much more than an attempt to ride the coattails of the first. It hit the spot like a fix just after rehab. Thanks, Ken... let's just not wait another 18 years for the next one, okay?

State of the Anachronism

2008-01-29T00:06:00.000-05:00

The State of the Union address is a peculiar American tradition. Or, more aptly, a peculiar American law? After all it is required by Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution.

It is not quite a ceremony and not quite a speech. It is... an address. It is also really awkward, if you haven't noticed:

1. There are no, or very few surprises. The gist of the address is passed to the press beforehand. But unlike traditional ceremonies the verbatim script isn't available beforehand. As such...
2. The opposing party never quite knows when to applaud and when to moan. This is one of those events where you get judged not just on whether you clap or not but whether you stood to clap or yawned while clapping. You have to be on your toes, because...
3. The President uses turns of phrase to try to trick you into clapping, or by your not clapping, make you look insensitive. Since there is no rebuttal until after the entire speech is over and the President has signed 100 or more of those little pamphlets that don't close all the way, the attention depraved public sees only your immediate response to the Presidents remarks. You're either with him or against him.

So I've come up with a couple suggestions, especially if you are one of those important people that the camera pans to while the President talks about your issue:

1. Don't read the pamphlet. You look like you are either bored or sleeping.
2. Be prepared to clap. If you wait until everyone else on your side of the aisle starts, you look like a reactionary.
3. After the address, have your pamphlet ready and push your way to the ailse as the President leaves. Then go straight home to Ebay... wait there are already 100 of those things for sale. Darn it!

Be specific, General general

2008-01-15T23:46:00.000-05:00

I don't learn something new everyday. Today I did.

If you have 50 states, each with an Attorney General, you have 50 Attorneys General, not 50 Attorney Generals. I didn't realize until I heard "Attorneys General" on the radio today, that 'general' in this instance means the opposite of 'specific', not a military commander. I did know it was not a military post, but I always thought that it just had an antiquated name, perhaps because it was established back when the attorney was a general in the military or something. And that fact that we often talk about the Attorney General or the Surgeon General of the United States, there is no need to use the plural.

By the way, I saw someone smoking today... I wonder what past Surgeons General would have to say about that!

Why I am uneasy about giving gift cards

2007-12-09T22:13:00.000-05:00

In a previous post I mentioned some of the benefits of gift cards. So as a gift receiver, I don't mind getting one especially if I've had input into the location for which it is valid.

Of course, I am aware of the inefficiencies of gift cards vs. cash (gift cards may not be redeemed, they constrain the choices of the recipient, they may expire). But in one way gift cards are very much like cash -- and that's why I'm uneasy about them. Just like money, the value is printed on the gift.

I think part of the "sentimental value" gets lost when you know the exact monetary value of the gift. That's why we peel price stickers before giving gifts! Even when we give a gift that we don't know if the recipient will like, at most we add a gift receipt. Sure, the person will find out the value of the item when he returns it to the store, but that is for another day, after all the festivities and insecurities of Christmas day are long past.

With cash and gift cards you know exactly how much was spent on you. Inevitably, this will be compared with how much you spent on the other person, which, depending on whether the balance sheet comes out in the red or the black may make you, or I, uncomfortable. And that is the last thing anybody wants on Christmas.

My buddy Tim Harford and I go waaay back....

2007-11-14T09:26:00.001-05:00

I sent the following e-mail to my Econ Idol, Mr. Tim Harford, regarding this blog post:

I think if I were a barista I might spend more time making a female's drink so as to impress her... not to spite her. I can't explain the increased wait for blacks though? By the way I think your book is the best in its genre and that you should be writing reviews for Freakonomics and the such, not the other way around! Anyway, write another book... though if your sales did well enough I won't have to entice you with my pitiful admiration.

Peace out,
Jeff Shepley
2ndglance.blogspot.com

I know, I know, it has a very starry eyed tone... but he replied!

Hi Jeff,
You may be right, and you're very kind to write. Thank you.
There is (much) more here from the paper's author:
http://blogs.ft.com/undercover/2007/11/coffee-shop-d-1.html

There is another book coming soon - timharford.com/logicoflife/

Cheers,
Tim

Yay, a new book! Booo, not in time for Christmas...

Monkeys popping balloons = Formula for Addiction

2007-11-08T09:23:00.000-05:00

The tower defense genre ranks among the more addicting gaming options for the casual gamer. Unlike PC and Console games, all you need is an Internet connection to play, yet it has many of those qualities that make more complicated games addicting:

1. Short levels that give instant gratification. You get a little rush of glee every 3-5 minutes.
2. Something to protect. If an enemy gets past your defenses you gasp as your life force (or balloon quota) is depleted.
3. Steadily progressing difficultly. Causing a little stress ("Will I be able to hold the balloons off next round?") but making each victory that much more sweet ("Yay, my monkeys popped all the balloons!").
4. Simple Rules; Less simple strategy. To play you just need to drag and drop some monkeys; to win, you need to think ahead and save your money for more effective defenses and upgrades (monkeys with boomerangs!).

Domino deals deftly delivered ding.

2007-11-05T21:14:00.000-05:00

On Saturday Domino Sugar slapped me in the face. You heard me right. It happened while I was sitting in the Jiffy Lube lounge waiting to get my oil changed. I was just sitting, minding my own business, when I glanced over at the stale coffee sitting under the TV. Right beside the little Styrofoam cups was a container of Domino Sugar.

The slogan on the container read: "We'll always be your sugar."

EXCUSE ME!!! The audacity of the claim shocked and appalled me. To help you understand why, perhaps I should spell out the events that led up to this simple carbo-bitchslap:

1. I happily purchase my refined sugar at the global (and efficient) price of 13 cents/pound. A Brazilian sugar farmer and a Brazilian refiner got some portion of that 13 cents/pound, and I got some delicious sugar. Note that this sugar includes the sugar in my soft drinks, the packet I put in my coffee, candy, as well as, ice cream, danishes and fudge. Yum!

2. The US sugar concern can't make sugar at 13 cents/pound, so they lobby Congress to subsidize their product and protect it with import quotas. Congress listens and all told I end up paying 52 cents/pound for refined sugar. Sure the American sugar farmer and refiner get a good wage. Heck, its only 52 cents/pound after all, its not like that's going to bankrupt me!

3. On second glance I realize the true injustice of the government support of Domino Sugar. (a) 52 cent/pound adds up to $1.9 billion/year in wealth transfer from me and you to relatively rich American Sugar farmers. (b) Since sugar is so expensive, high frutose corn syrup has replaced sugar in many sweets, especially soda. (c) Sugar is easier to grow in Brazil than in the U.S., which is why it costs less, but is also why it takes more pesticides and fertilizers to grow it here, at the expense of the environment --especially the Florida Everglades. (d) There are fewer opportunities in Brazil than in the U.S., yet our quotas keep them from selling me sugar and keeps U.S. worker who could be more productive at something else, being unproductive and making sugar at inflated prices.

So when Domino says, "We'll always be your sugar," forgive me if I say, "F@#$# off!" By which, of course, I mean "fudge" off, and that with a heaping cup of global sugar!

Papa Bear says: "Don't come near my family."

2007-11-05T20:40:00.000-05:00

Sullum vs. Papa Bear on drugs -- use and abuse. But don't worry, I'm sure ol' Papa Bear doesn't mean it, after all, he admits it is "just an act."

Why is Ron Paul a Republican...

2007-11-01T16:16:00.000-04:00

... and not a Democrat?

No. I didn't say, "...and not an independent?" I know why Ron Paul is a Republican. It all comes down to practicality. You get elected in this country by being a member of one of the two parties. That is not the question though.

Looking beyond Ron Paul, more generally, the questions is why are libertarians often seen in the main stream as conservatives and not liberals? A libertarian is some one who believes in self-reliance and freedom to do what one chooses so long as it doesn't harm others. They often find it convenient to label themselves fiscally conservative and socially liberal. But if so, why are they typically labeled as "wacky conservatives" and not "wacky liberals"? I have three partial theories that may sum up to explain the phenomena...

1. Libertarians are just conservatives that don't let religious and nationalistic beliefs sway them into enforcing their morality on others.
2. Liberals have an urge to "do something" to fix our unfair world. They can't just sit idly by while people are homeless or without health care... "if we just spend a little more, it will help so much!" A libertarian believes that the best way to help more people fiscally is not to throw more money and government at the problem but to take more harmful government out of the equation. Liberals see libertarians sitting "idly by" and take that to mean they don't care about the poor, which fits in nicely with the stereotype of the greedy, rich conservative.
3. I should note that the libertarian is often more passionate about personal freedoms than the liberal, so why do liberals overlook this passion? Perhaps liberals, contrary to popular belief, do care more about "loyalty to the cause" than conservatives. You are either with the program or against it... everything is an ideal from welfare to free speech, we cannot sacrifice any of it! Whereas conservatives can tolerate some quirks. Heck conservatives probably would rather that the government were not as harsh on social issues such as drug prohibition and personal privacy, because that would let people make decisions for themselves, which in religion, is the only way to be righteous (you must be able to choose), but their overwhelming urge is to have safe neighborhoods and dead terrorists, ideals be damned.

Rev-erse psycarlogy

2007-10-30T23:47:00.000-04:00

As a general rule manuals get better gas mileage than automatics (just slightly and only if you know when to shift). But when I bought my Honda Civic in 2006 the manual model had an estimated MPG of 38 while the automatic had a 40. People, in general, prefer automatics but price sensitive buyers may be willing to go for the manual if the price is right and they get better gas mileage. But if they don't get better gas mileage more people will now choose the automatic.

So does Honda just make better automatic transmissions than manuals? Or do they purposely lower the fuel economy of manual transmissions to entice buyers to purchase the higher priced automatics?

My bet is that they just make better automatics. If they purposefully try to switch price sensitive consumers over to the more expensive product, they may lose the consumer entirely to a different product (like a Toyota Corolla). Maybe Honda has done the market research and figured it all out, but most likely, they just make good automatics for Civics.

Ron Paul?

2007-10-29T23:34:00.001-04:00

Halloween Culture: Mass Murderer: Okay! Nazi: Taboo!

2007-10-24T20:12:00.001-04:00

Aside from the iPod and Sponge Bob costumes, and oh yeah, the skimpy french maid costumes, Halloween costumes are supposed to be scary! Right...?

Not so fast! I'm sure you all remember the stink over Prince Harry's Nazi Costume. Or perhaps you heard about those unclassy UVA students that showed up to a party in black face. So what exactly is okay to wear and what isn't? First glance tells us to shy away from anything racially insensitive or that is reminiscent of historical tragedies.

But there are clearly exceptions... although not everyone will find these costumes tasteful, they are readily available on the internet and in costume stores (a costume store would be unlikely to stock a costume that most people found objectionable).

1. Indian - May be considered different than black face, because you are simply wearing the costume not usually coloring your skin. But otherwise, wearing this costume is tantamount to claiming Indians were savages. That mind set caused the U.S. to steal their lands and kill them and generally disrespect them.
2. Pimp - Often seen in society as taking advantage of and oppressing women, yet it is classic on Halloween.
3. Convict (especially in chains) - Ostensibly for committing an egregious crime, likely armed robbery, rape, or murder.
4. Jack the Ripper - Probably the closest you'll come to a real historically identifiable murderer on Halloween that is still considered acceptable.
5. Pirates, Gangsters - Both involved in stealing from and killing real people.
6. Devil - Okay, so this one is only offensive if you believe in the devil. But if you do, then this should really be the worst of all of them, right? He will destroy your soul, which is infinitely more important than your life. Yet this is probably the most common costume, even among Christians that celebrate Halloween.

Where is your mind at?

2007-10-15T18:40:00.000-04:00

Click here to be love stoned by a black Kate Moss with a little more boob. Which way does the dancer spin for you at first glance?

For me it was clockwise. But with a little investigation you can get the dancer to change direction at will.

This blog entry is proven to reduce your gullability by 75%!!!

2007-10-08T19:20:00.000-04:00

I have had a lot of "almost posts" in the past few weeks. Most have had to do with how statistics are used to win arguments, scare people, and generally hide the reality. I know it's cliché to mention the book How to Lie with Statistics, so I won't. I just want to vent on 2 things I hate about how people use statistics and one thing I like about statistics that is often glossed over.

Hate #1: "They have proven that X causes/prevents/is better than Y." X can be smoking weed and Y can be lung cancer/Alzheimer's/cigarettes, or whatever. I hate it when people cite papers they have not read in order to claim outright victory in an argument that is by NO MEANS closed. I will cite but not discuss the proposition that most published research is wrong, or at least some is by definition.

Hate #2: "X reduces the risk of Y by 50%." X can be drinking red wine and Y can be dying of heart disease, or whatever. Whenever you hear something like that, your first thought should probably be "so what?!" The relevant statistic is what your risk was and what your risk would be if you do X. Overlooking the possibility that the statement is probably wrong (see Hate #1), if your current risk is 1 in 5,000, your new risk is 1 in 10,000. But if your current risk is 1 in 5, your new risk is 1 in 10. The later is much bigger news to you.

Hate #2 brings me to what I think is glossed over in statistics, especially as reported by the media. Statistics look at a population, but you and I are both individuals. A population statistic, say the risk of dying in a car crash this year, is about 0.013% (40,000 Americans/year/300 million Americans). If you live to 100, the lifetime risk is 1.3% or 1 in 75. But population statistics are meaningless if the population is diverse.

Do you think that your risk is 1.3% if you drink and drive? Nope, higher.

What if you always obey the speed limit? Nope, lower.

The Internet abounds with risk calculators for health problems, presumably because there is so much data in this field. They typically ask you to answer a number of questions and then use some multiplier for each answer to determine your overall risk. Often the calculator will tell you by what % you can reduce your risk by changing your behavior. (Life Expectancy Calculator)

I would like to see a compendium of risk calculators, but for everyday stuff, not just medical conditions. Like, by what percentage can I reduce my risk of choking if I don't eat hard candy or mow my own lawn?!

Herbal Essences, 1; NYT Magazine, 0

2007-10-01T21:24:00.000-04:00

What do 15% of women do on Valentine's Day?

That's what I read on the back of my sister's Herbal Essences Hello Hydration Conditioner bottle... what can I say, I like to read stuff, even in the shower...

Anyway, it goes on to say,

For the answer, see Hello Hydration Shampoo bottle.

Now I thought that was pretty clever marketing. I was hoping (frantically) that my sister had the shampoo bottle! I found it at the other corner of the shower and the answer was, "send themselves flowers."

That got me to thinking about crossword puzzles and how they don't have the answers in the same issue as the puzzle. I always thought that was to prevent cheating. But, honestly, why would NYT care if you cheat or not. Maybe readers have come to demand that answers do not appear in the same issue; a sort of demand for imposed restriction. A more logical reason is that it gives the crossword puzzler an incentive to purchase the next issue. Another clever idea, though I'm giving this round to Herbal Essences because I've never cared to check my crossword answers from a previous week.

How to make a million dollars: Screw your morals

2007-09-24T21:50:00.000-04:00

How much would I have to pay you to stick a pin into the hand of a child you don't know? $100? $100,000? No amount of money would suffice?

Want to know how much it would cost to buy yourself off? YourMorals calculates the amount it would take to violate your morals in several categories (harm, loyalty, purity, etc.).

According to YourMorals, if you paid me $242,020 you could get me to overcome my moral aversion to harming others. Of course the amount would vary greatly with the harm involved, since I have considerable utilitarian propensities.

(Hat tip to Bloggingheads.tv for the pointer)

Don't wait idly by. Rev up for the environment.

2007-09-17T20:31:00.000-04:00

When you pull up to a stop light, should you cut the engine? Should you warm up your car before pulling out of the driveway? According to anti-idling advocates, and contrary to conventional wisdom (i.e., what I was taught), the answers are yes and no.

Myth 3: Repeatedly restarting your car is hard on the engine and quickly drains the battery.
Wrong. Frequently restarting your engine does negligible damage to the engine and does not drain modern batteries excessively. In fact, the opposite is true; idling an engine forces it to operate in a very inefficient and gasoline-rich mode that, over time, can degrade the engine’s performance and reduce mileage.

According to the site, and a quick scan of the google results, if you are idling for more than 10 seconds, it is best to turn off the engine. It is better for your engine, the environment, and your wallet. They also say the best way to warm up your car is by driving it (that you should start driving within 30 seconds of starting the car, even on really cold days).

Profit-maximizing with a jagged little pill

2007-09-12T21:40:00.000-04:00

If you have waited in line at a pharmacy or had to pay full price for prescription meds, you have probably thought about pill splitting. Pill splitting is an attractive decision because drugs of various strengths often cost about the same per pill (compare prices here).

But why do drug companies charge the same amount for 10 mg of Allegra as they do for 20 mg? Regardless of why they charge the same amount, the company is certainly looking to make a profit. Therefore if you are cutting their 20 mg pill to make twice as many 10 mg pills, you are cutting into their profits. For some drugs, drug companies actually help the consumer cut pills by manufacturing the pill with a groove where it can be cut more easily be cut in two. Most likely these are drugs that face fierce competition and the added groove is a much needed selling point to stay competitive. I would predict more grooves in medicines that are no long under patent protection.

But, not surprisingly, drug companies have also devised ways to overcome pill cutting. One is to have a special coating or capsule around the drug to render it less effective when split (pehaps the gel capsule or a time release capsule). The other is to increase the difficulty in splitting the pill by not grooving it or by making it an awkward shape with a slippery coating. I would suggest an unsymmetrical shape that is difficult to divide in half. I would predict more of these types of pills when the drug faces little competition.

With Pretzels, let the Gold lie

2007-08-28T19:32:00.000-04:00

Of late, I've been snacking quite regularly on mini-pretzels. Finding myself at the bottom of a bag of Snyder's of Hanover, and thus in the market for more minis, I made my way to the local Safeway. Now I have been relatively pleased with Snyder's of Hanover pretzels but it had been some time since I last patronized Rold Gold's, and I remember them being the very best.

With their distinctive yellow, blue, and clear bags, you'd think I would have quickly secured my Rold Gold's and been on my way. Not so! I must have overlooked them thrice before finding them in a foreign bag of all blue (like common potato chips!). It was only my disbelief that such a popular brand would not be stocked at the Safeway that I engaged in said second and third glances.

Well then you can imagine my disappointment when I popped the bag only to find the pretzels much too salty. It is back to Hanover for me!

Top 10 things you need when playing parent to a 13 and 9 year old for a week.

2007-08-12T11:10:00.000-04:00

10. Lots of batteries (It's funny how many things still take AA batteries. Carbon Monoxide detectors and wireless mice come to mind).
9. A fully functional kitchen preferred. Especially a dishwasher. If not, then at least a sink. If nothing else, a variety of paper plates and bowls and plastic utensils. Microwave is a must.
8. A job with flexible hours.
7. Internet access. For 9 y/o, Webkinz (trust me).
6. Video rental membership (netflix plus a brick and mortar).
5. A car that gets good gas mileage.
4. At least two food delivery services available to your house (pizza and Chinese suggested).
3. A cell phone service with an "in network" and unlimited text messaging.
2. Sleep overs AT THE FRIEND'S house.
1. Love. Or a severe lack of personal neediness. At the very least, patience. Some wisdom helps, but may not be crucial for just one week.

Not all new is bad news.

2007-08-02T22:51:00.000-04:00

I was talking with my parents the other day about their upcoming trip to Crete. I had just heard a news segment on the island. Our exchange went like so:

Me: "So I heard about Crete in the news today."
Mom: "Uh oh, not a bombing, I hope!"
Me: "Oh my... hahahhaha, no no. It was about how nice the people are there. But it's interesting that that was the first thing that came to mind."

And so it is that some news is good news, even if you have to listen to NPR to hear it.

The digital lauging problem: Part II

2007-07-30T18:01:00.000-04:00

Part I identifies the disconnect between written laughter and oral laughter during instant messaging conversation. My distinguished colleague, Alexandra Vu, in true Second Glance fashion, identifies an unexpected (and pitiful) reality that results from this disparity:

It has become a habit to write 'haha' all over the place, no wonder people who aren't really funny think they're hilarious. We are the reason why they assume they're funny, and yet we complain that they're not.

Ms. Vu goes on to refer to these pleasantly deluded individuals as "poor souls." So the next time you're rolling your eyes at that guy who just told a horrible "soooo a guy walked into a bar..." joke, remember he can't help it, he is getting rave reviews on-line (and hopefully not from you)!

Bill of Non-Rights: A quasi-hoax

2007-07-22T00:47:00.000-04:00

I recently read a facebook friend's posted note extolling the "Bill of Non-Rights," falsely attributed to Georgia State Rep, Mitchell Kaye. According to snopes.com, it was actually written by an amateur philosopher from Mississippi.

Since the note was prefaced with, "This was too good not to share with others...To my liberal friends...don't be offended by the truth," I feel I must respond. Not because I consider myself a liberal (or liberaltarian), but because I am skeptical of any statement claiming to be "the truth" with respect to political matters. Here it goes:

"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."

It starts off well enough. I take some offense to the term "liberal bed-wetter" in a paragraph that claims to want "to help everyone get along." But let's get into the substance:

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is
guaranteeing anything.

Does anyone claim the right to "a new car, big screen TV"? No. People claim the right to welfare checks and farm subsidies and the such, so why not say that rather than things people don't claim a right to? Oh, and by the way, it is the law that is providing the welfare and subsidies, so I think we could come up with a higher standard than, "if you can legally acquire them."

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

Agreed!

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

There are plenty of frivolous lawsuits with plantiffs of dubious character. Then there are those who have been duped by manufacturers of dubious character. The problem is it is hard to defend against one without allowing the other free reign. I opt for the market solution in most cases (e.g., screwdriver to eye).

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

As a general rule people should not have government supplied food or housing. There are people who are unable to obtain work due to disability. We live in a society that believes in a safety net for these people. Let's provide that, but be vigilant against breeding a generation of "disabled" people by keeping the definition of disabled suitably narrow.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

As above, as a general rule people should pay for the services they consume and not for services they don't.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest
of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

Is this alluding to capital punishment? The problem is "the rest of us want to see you fry" claims to much; there is not unanimity among non-criminals for the death penalty. We want to see just punishment to be sure, but that is a far cry from saying you have the right to harm others. Again, another non-right that should be more direct to avoid misinterpretation.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

Um, obviously. Is this a cry for no TVs in prison? Really is that a big enough deal to have its own article?

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to
take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

I think the Bush administration combed through this before forwarding it along. The original Article VIII refers to the absurdity of foreign wars, with which I largely agree. This replacement is basically a rehash of Article I and IV. I generally agree, you don't have a right to a job. One the other hand, if you have a service someone else is willing to pay for, you should have the right to make the transaction. So you have a right not to be kept from doing a job.

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

Agreed. We have too many laws. This is a direct result of the large number of lawyers and polly sci majors. Hahah, just kidding. But not about the laws. Too many.

ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (lastly....)

I'm glad they didn't say this to me when I was in Brazil. I would have considered them a bunch of snobby, uncharitable, isolationist bigots. If you can get by without English here, be my guest. I don't think the government should go way out of the way to provide multilingual services.

ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!

This one is hard to argue with. It isn't really saying anything other than, you don't have the right to re-write history or take IN GOD WE TRUST off the money. I can live with that. If it is claiming more, be more specific.

Potter Mania

2007-07-20T20:32:00.000-04:00

Question: Does the world need another Harry Potter blog post?
Answer: No.

China in the year 2020: A sausage fest

2007-07-19T23:17:00.000-04:00

The human mind has an unlimited capacity for rationalizing convienent behavior. In many situations this prevents us from going bezerk in reaction to mundane annoyances...

You're sitting in traffic for an hour trying to get home after a mind-numbingly exhausting day at work when some bozo pins you in a thru lane so you can't get to your exit ramp. Do you (a) run him off the road then pull him out of his car and beat him until his face resembles raw meatloaf 0r (b) curse under your breath and suck it up; besides karma says the jerk will get what's coming to him someday?

If we always picked (a) one could imagine there'd be a lot less of us living on this planet. On the other hand, the very fact that we pick (b) so frequently has meant that there are a lot less of us living on this planet. China's one child policy is the epitome of this phenomena. Women in China are being taxed, forced to have abortions, or are even sterilized for having more than one child. The first glance result; fewer kids. The second glance result; by 2020 there will be 40 million more Chinese men than women. They'll have to come up with some killer pick-up lines.

We should be outraged enough that women and families are having their right to procreate stolen. But this policy also engenders a perverse culture of gender discrimination leading to the infaticide of millions of unborn females. Where is the outrage?

If you're like me, I can tell you where it is. It's in the same place it is when you get cut off on the highway; under your breath, in the privacy of your car. It's in any of a thousand places, but none that will make a difference.

4th of July heads up!

2007-07-04T23:02:00.000-04:00

I just got back from a fairly traumatic experience. While some are worried about terrorism on this 4th of July, those attending the fireworks display in the town of Vienna need have worried more about errant, if colorful, explosives. My dad and I parked our little camping seats about as close to the fireworks as you could get; literally just yards from the yellow police tape that kept the viewers at a "safe" distance.

As the show began, Dad remarked that they would probably tell us to move back farther as debris from the exploding rockets rained down from above, some still on fire. These proved ominous words indeed. During the finale, several of the fireworks shot off into the crowd about 50 yards to our left and 30 yards to our right. At this point we knew something was wrong but we too shocked to move. Looking back I probably would have ducked for cover.

After the last of the finale, there did not seem to be any panic, even near the sites of the explosions. As my Dad and I walked by the closer of the two explosion sites, on our way home, a few men, including police were clearing people away from the site. We stuck around for a bit as ambulances, fire trucks, police vehicles, and a helicopter swarmed the area.

Again, there was no panic and it did not appear that there were widespread injuries. Hope everyone is okay!

Addendum: According to ABC 7 news, 9 people where hospitalized in the event, two apparently quite seriously.

Addendum II: Video of the explosive finale here.

No less than 4 fewer dying traditions

2007-07-03T13:24:00.000-04:00

According to Barry Leiba, of "Staring At Empty Pages," there are "exactly four" situations where it is proper to correct someone's grammar:

(1) when you're an English teacher correcting a student
(2) when you're coaching a nonnative speaker who's asked for help
(3) when someone else has asked for coaching
(4) when someone puts the equivalent of a "kick me" sign on her back.

My latest favorite is the distinction between less and fewer. From the Dictionary.com entry for fewer:

Usage Note: The traditional rule holds that fewer should be used for things that can be counted (fewer than four players), while less should be used with mass terms for things of measurable extent (less paper; less than a gallon of paint). However, less is used in some constructions where fewer would occur if the traditional rule were being followed. Less than can be used before a plural noun that denotes a measure of time, amount, or distance: less than three weeks; less than $400; less than 50 miles. Less is sometimes used with plural nouns in the expressions no less than (as in No less than 30 of his colleagues signed the letter) and or less (as in Give your reasons in 25 words or less).

Bad Directions?

2007-06-26T19:11:00.000-04:00

Billy Currington's song, "Good Directions" is probably currently my favorite song. It tells one of those cutesie stories that Country songs are known for,

I was sittin’ there sellin’ turnips on a flatbed truck
Crunchin’ on a pork rind when she pulled up
She had to be thinkin’ “This is where the rednecks come from”

Currington has a masterful voice and funny, casual lyrics. And you can't help but smile when you hear

I told her way up yonder past the caution light
There’s a little country store with an old Coke sign
You gotta stop in and ask Miss Bell for some of her sweet tea

However, about the 20th time I listened to the song, I was struck by how quickly Currington falls in love with the girl. The only evidence that we have supporting his line 'Kickin’ myself for not catchin’ her name. I threw my hat and thought, “You fool, that coulda been love”', is

She had Hollywood written on her license plate
She was lost and lookin’ for the interstate
Needin’ directions and I was the man for the job

So Currington is this small town boy selling turnip greens when a girl from Hollywood strolls by looking for directions because she's lost in Georgia, probably scared out of her mind. In reality, Miss Bell probably gave Ms. Hollywood Bad Directions and now the poor rich girl is heading back for the redneck who considers her his dream girl after a short conversation about the quickest way to get out of this backwater town where the best landmark is the "caution light" up the street, surely cautioning drivers that they are approaching the downtown of no town.

I guess it's just funny that my favorite song is about a daydream occurrence with such a low probability of ending in "love" that its almost comical. I think I like it just for the way Currington says "turnip greens" in the last line of the song.

As nature intends

2007-06-18T21:41:00.000-04:00

On the island nation of Libertee Fornone newborns are openly mutilated. A few days after birth their tongues are stripped of taste buds in a procedure called rapalingua. The procedure is relatively quick, though quite painful, so doctors usually use anesthesia. Far less than 1% of newborns die as a result of complications from the procedure.

The island's doctors and religious leaders generally recommend the surgery. In fact, for years it has been the most common surgery on the island! The doctors recommend rapalingua mainly for its health benefits. Dr. Sise Sircome, a prominent doctor on the island explains it this way,

"If all food tastes the same, then there is no incentive to eat unhealthy food. Therefore, the surgery produces healthier, longer living kids."

But it's not just the doctors who advice parents to have the surgery performed. Rev. Verita Evita of the island's Order of the Bländ speaks of the spiritual aspect of the decision,

"We celebrate the child's rapalingua within our community of faith. It symbolizes the love the parents have for the child and the preparation and experience they will pass on to the child as he grows and develops."

It should be mentioned that rapalingua is only performed on males on the island. When asked why, both doctor and reverend alike were shocked, indeed almost offended at the question. Off the record, the doctor claimed women were not as susceptible to overeating. The reverend said, in soft tones, that women's tongues are "next-to-holy" and must be respected.

We caught up with Dablen Mikidselife and wife to be, Takinaway Mikiddisision, who are planning on having many children on Libertee Fornone. Asked if they would consider rapalingua for their kids, their response was automatic, "Of course! How could you say no to that?! Besides everybody does it; we wouldn't want our kids to feel different."

Flight of the Conchord

2007-05-29T18:24:00.000-04:00

As far as I recall, I've only met one Kiwi. He was hilarious. These guys are too. See them here too.

It takes two baby. Toyota comparison advertisement

2007-05-20T17:09:00.000-04:00

I just watched a 0-60-0 test for the Toyota Tundra. If you don't want to watch the 30 second spot, my description follows:

5 trucks are lined up. They all race off at the same time. The Toyota Tundra pulls ahead as the voice track talks of its best-in-class acceleration. Then the Tundra falls back suddenly as the voice track talks of its best-in-class braking. The final shot is an overhead of the Tundra 31 feet back from the competition.

The problem with the 0-60-0 test is that it doesn't tell you what you want to know. If your truck reaches 0-60 incredibly fast, the 60-0 braking part could be incredibly bad and you'd still fair well among the competition of relatively fast and relatively good braking trucks. Seems to me, these tests should be kept separate.

AISI/DCeive

2007-05-02T22:25:00.000-04:00

Listening to NPR the other day, I heard an ad from one of the sponsors, steel.org. I wish I had it verbatim, but the spot went something like

"Each job in the steel industry creates 4 more jobs in other sectors. Each year American steel workers spend over $40 million on computers and high tech products. New Steel; feel the strength."

Now maybe I have the numbers 4 and $40 million off, but you get the gist. My initial reaction was probably the one steel.org wanted -- wow, the steel industry is creating jobs and supporting growth in the high tech sector. Upon reflection, though, neither of those statistics struck me as reasons to support the American Iron and Steel Institute.

"Each job in steel creates 4 jobs in other sectors" -- This would appear to suggest that more jobs in steel is beneficial to the economy as a whole. More accurately, that is, the steel produced by one steel worker provides material support for four jobs in other sectors. All the more reason to have it made most cheaply, thereby increasing the amount other sectors can purchase and hence the number of other jobs those sectors support. If more steel means more jobs, let's get the most steel possible (which means buying it as cheaply as possible). In fact, there is a point at which more steel may create more jobs, but not more efficient jobs. At that point more jobs in steel is bad for the economy because it means fewer in industries with higher need.

"Each year American steel workers spend over $40 million on computers and high tech products." -- Bill Gates probably spends a similar amount on various products, many of which are high tech in nature. The truth is he consumes much of their value, just like the steel workers consume much of the value of the products they buy. Ostensibly, the AISI wants us to believe this is somehow good for the US because it stimulates the high tech sector. In fact, we'd be better off if the steel workers socked away their money instead. As it is, we have $40 million fewer high tech products from which to choose, meaning that the ones that remain are $40 million more expensive (supply and demand). If the workers save their money, we have $40 million extra worth of products on the market, which puts downward pressure on the cost. In addition, investors have $40 million extra from which to borrow and advance the technology that drives the high tech sector.

Nice try, AISI.

Be the life of the party and save BIG...

2007-04-18T23:38:00.000-04:00

...Unfortunately, you do have to be willing to dupe your friends. Luckily for you (and them), there is little chance they'll figure out your scheme. And if you don't get caught, everybody will carry on and have a grand ol' time!

The whole scheme is premised on the fact that most of your friends can't tell the difference between an expensive and a cheap liquor. Clearly, if you pour a shot out of an Aristocrat bottle and another out of a Grey Goose bottle, your friends' biases will favor the Grey Goose and they'll claim that it is much better. In a blind taste test it would be much easier to trick your friends.

Oh, but you have sophisticated friends, you say. Well let's do one better; let's put the cheap stuff in the expensive bottle! Even your more discerning friends will probably fall for this ol' switch-a-roo, especially if you only break out the bottle after they've all downed a couple already.

Of course with any scheme, preparation and presentation are crucial. First, ensure the substitute liquor has the same color as its top-shelf counterpart. I find, for example, that a Patrón -- Reposado can be cloned with 3 parts silver, 1 part gold of almost any cheaper tequila. A $50 dollar bottle of Patrón can be cloned for about $12. Then, of course, there is the presentation. Clearly its not a great idea to present a cloned liquor next to (geographically or temporally) the real deal itself or even the same liquor family. Ideally, a tequila would be presented against a vodka or rum as opposed to another tequila.

Also, to pull this off with the maximum effect, be sure to add a little hype when you initially introduce your beverage. Half the fun of drinking expensive liquors is the "aura" surrounding the various brands (think Hennessy and the such). So be sure to throw in a couple deep-voiced "Pah-trown"s like out of a rap song, perhaps preceded by an appropriate expletive for good measure. Have fun with it... it's a party after all.

Why it's so hard to be happy.

2007-04-18T23:02:00.000-04:00

I just finished reading Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert. Despite the title, it isn't about how to be a happier person. Instead, Gilbert explores why so many things that we think will make us happy end up be rather disappointing. It is very well documented for a book intended for a popular audience (a la Blink by Malcom Gladwell).

When I read an author for the first time, I generally don't want to know anything about him or her. Nor do I want to read negative reviews about the book. If the author is some "nobody" or the negative reviews seem logical, I find it difficult to give the book an objective reading (I feel the same way about low budget movies and movie critics' reviews). I really enjoy being a few (or a few hundred) pages into the book and thinking, "Geez, this is really good, I wonder who wrote it!" and then looking at the about the author section. In fact, I enjoy this "fresh mind" so much that it is worth it to me to start reading a couple crummy books once in a while just to hold out for that refreshing "aaaaahhhhh" moment.

This book gave me one of those moments.

Where's the scandal? It's a scandalous world

2007-04-03T22:54:00.000-04:00

The US attorney "scandal" has really got me scratching my head? I agree with a lot of stuff said here. Here are a few reasons why this is NOT a scandal (or just part of a larger one):

- Clinton fired ALL the US attorney when he entered the Presidential office. Some say, well Bush's firings were discriminate based on politics, which is not how the office of US attorney's should be rated. Well, Clinton's firings were indiscriminate, meaning he discriminated against all the attorneys by not giving any a chance. Who is to say Clinton didn't bag them all as a cover to get rid of just one or two specific attorneys he disagreed with politically?
- Maybe we should be mad at Bush/Gonzalez for the firings. But, if that angers us, we sure as hell better be angered at Clinton's firings.
- Some say, "well, Gonzalez lied about his involvement." News Flash: The Bush administration lies all the time. I don't have the numbers, but I suspect it is once a week or more. The fact that Gonzalez lied doesn't mean this particular issue is scandalous. They lie about stuff that isn't that scandalous all the time. The whole administration is a scandal.

Metro Etiquette

2007-04-01T22:30:00.000-04:00

You're on the subway and it's really crowded. You take the only seat available -- next to a stranger -- who for the sake of argument is an overweight minority. You are comfortable enough in the seat, though the size of the stranger means you two are more snug than usual.

Eventually you get near the end of the line and the train car clears out. There is an empty bench right across the way. You're sitting on the outside, so it would be easy to slide over. Do you move?

Everybody enjoys some personal space and, let's face it, you'd both have way more if you moved to the empty row. But will the move be construed as disgust or bigotry.

What is the proper thing to do in this situation?

My first instinct is to stay in the chair. That way no one's feelings get hurt, even if it makes for an awkward situation. But is that just being over-sensitive?

Here's an urban etiquette primer, but I didn't find what I was looking for there.

Why US is sliding toward statism. In 3 sentences.

2007-03-23T23:06:00.000-04:00

Democrats could be more libertarian if they weren't beholden to special interest groups. Republicans could be more libertarian if they weren't beholden to the religious right. Libertarians could be more mainstream if they weren't beholden to the allure of a free society.

From worst to best to so-so

2007-03-20T23:22:00.000-04:00

This article, "What's Good about Atheism" has been sitting in my virtual archive for several months. Initially, I was going to title it "The worst article ever."

But then I read it again. And a third time. I'm not ready to claim that it is the best article I've read, but it is a very interesting look at what atheists can learn from theists and vice versa.

Some excerpts:

...Rationality cannot prove itself. The fundamental validity of reason therefore must be taken on faith; the only difference from a purely logical point of view between an atheist who believes in reason and a religious person who makes a primary act of faith is that the religious person recognizes the pre-logical basis of his beliefs, while the atheist does not.

...Virtuous atheists actually have a stronger claim to real goodness than virtuous Christians, Jews, or Muslims, because there can be no taint of cupboard love in their obedience to the moral law. They do not believe in a reward for goodness, and thus must love goodness for its own sake.

...We have seen what atheism looks like on the large scale, and it is not pretty: the Holocaust, the Gulag, the Cultural Revolution, the Killing Fields. Religion has indeed been a cause of appalling slaughter during the course of human history; but it must take fifth place behind atheist ideology, nation-state aggression, mercantile colonialist expansion, and tribal war in the carnage sweepstakes.

...one of Dawkins' favorite arguments against the rather feeble theist objection that you can't prove that God doesn't exist—you can't prove a negative. Dawkins triumphantly retorts that

"There's an infinite number of things that we can't disprove, You might say that because science can explain just about everything but not quite, it's wrong to say therefore we don't need God. It is also, I suppose, wrong to say we don't need the Flying Spaghetti Monster, unicorns, Thor, Wotan, Jupiter, or fairies at the bottom of the garden. There's an infinite number of things that some people at one time or another have believed in, and an infinite number of things that nobody has believed in. If there's not the slightest reason to believe in any of those things, why bother? The onus is on somebody who says, I want to believe in God, Flying Spaghetti Monster, fairies, or whatever it is. It is not up to us to disprove it."

Blogging from Salvador: Parte dois

2007-02-17T14:47:00.000-05:00

This morning I went to Plaze Aeroclube to pick up my abadás (t-shirts) that privelege me to walk for hours on end behind a truck blaring music. Everybody, including the taxi driver that took me out there warned that ladrões would try to steal my t-shirts. At $70+ a pop, this isn´t too surprising as this is about how much a lot of the people here make in a month. My solution was to stuff them down my pants. Let me tell you, three t-shirts down your pants is hard to hide. I got several looks; I´m not sure if they knew what I was doing or if there were just impressed...

Blogging from Salvador: Parte Um

2007-02-17T14:34:00.000-05:00

My Hostel is one historic city block from an internet café and instead of taking a nap (difficult when a 20 drums and brass ensemble is banging/tooting away right outside the window), I decided to blog :).

Last night I walked about 2 miles down this main road just to get out and see the city. There were locals selling soda, beer, meat on a stick, and of course, water every two feet. It seems the whole facade of the city along this road has been adapted for the purpose of providing a cold beverage to a festival goer no matter which precise step he wishes to have one (on step 10,304 or 10,307).

I partcipated in last nights festivities as "pipoca" or popcorn. That what they call the people that view the parade from the side of the street because they didn´t shell out 100 bucks or more to buy a t-shirt that allows them to walk behind the music trucks. I did shell out but not for last night . Besides, being pipoca was fun because you get to see all the bands drive by instead of just the one you are following. The other way to watch all the bands is to get a ticket to a "camarote" which is basically a roadside stand/night club, which also costs loads of money.

So as pipoca you are chilling with the poor people, the cheapskates, and the commitment-shy. Some of these would like more than anything to have your money, though I haven´t experienced the hands in my pocket that everyone had been telling me will happen. You can make a lot of friends with $20 by buying people beer or soda for their kids, so you got to bring the money.

Re: No Subject

2007-01-29T22:56:00.000-05:00

No subject is the subject of this post. Or in other words, the subject is "no subject." This is in reference to the vast percentage (though meager quantities) of messages I receive from friends on facebook and myspace with said title.

The subject line is a relic from the days of memos. You never went through the trouble of writing a memo without a subject in mind. Nowadays, in the age of e-mail, text messaging and pretty much just all around constant messaging, sending a message is no trouble at all. So if you just have a short thing or half a thing to say, do you really want to spend the time to think of a witty title?

No, you don't. And you also don't want to write some cheesy ("hey man!") or borderline sketchy ("just thinking of you...") title that sends the wrong message. So you type out a couple cheap lines and hit send. And on the other end the recipient gets that wonderful line

No Subject

The best is when you reply back and forth to this and it becomes

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: No Subject

About this time you stop hitting reply and craft a new message with -- you guessed it -- no subject.

You, the Oracle

2007-01-23T22:56:00.000-05:00

Bryan Caplan presents the following hypothetical dialog:

"I'm sure that a Democrat will win in 2008."

"Sure? OK, let's bet at 100:1."

"Umm, no thanks. But I'll do it for even odds."

Basically the question is why, if we are so sure of ourselves and our opinions, do we act as if we are something less than certain. Bryan has 4 reasons, but his and my favorite is,

A bet instantly raises the marginal private cost of error, which leads to a sharp increase in rationality. Faced with financial consequences, people suddenly - if temporarily - admit to themselves that they know a lot less than they like to believe - and bet accordingly.

methods of visualization

2007-01-22T22:21:00.000-05:00

You've gathered some data. Let's say you're a private detective and have dug up some dirt on your client's lover. What is the best way to represent that data. You could give them all the documents and photographs that contain interesting information. You could create a bulleted list of things you suspect the lover of having done. You could create a time line of mischievous behavior. The possibilities are endless, but here is a fairly comprehensive list of ways to visualize data.

You are very small

2007-01-22T19:06:00.000-05:00

In the grand scheme of things (say compared to W Cephi) you are small. If you don't believe me, then watch this video. If a red blood cell was scaled up to its size on W Cephi, that one cell could hold enough blood to fill three human bodies.

W Cephi = 288,194 X Earth
Red Blood Cell = 1/100,000,000 meters
Size of red blood cell on W Cephi = about 1/4 meter
Volume of RBC on W Cephi = 1/64 meters cubed = about 15 liters
Blood in human body = about 5 litres

Of course size is relative, and you are relatively big compared to the stuff around you. That is probably easy to believe, but for completeness, here is a link of really small things.

The gentlemanly motive.

2007-01-22T18:21:00.000-05:00

What is the motive for chivalrous behavior? No, not Chivalry. Just your standard, modern, run of the mill gentlemanly behavior. We are always hearing that "chivalry is dead." Is it dead? Why did it die? In fact, why did it exist in the first place? Here is a theory:

In the past men treated women with respect and courteousness out of pity and guilt for the oppression that women were living in. An oppression caused by the male dominated world.

Today men treat women with respect and courteousness out of desperation due to the progress that women have achieved over the past 50 years. Women are now in direct competition with men. Men have less reason to pity women. The main purpose of chivalry today is to court a woman. Since men generally are trying to impress a small number of women at a time, they show less respect overall.

So confusedly...

2006-12-21T23:26:00.000-05:00

Weed = biggest cash crop in USA. I don't not have a lot intelligent say to this subject on. I will say that pot takes the prize even though we pay people to stop people from making money off of it by stopping them from growing it. We also pay people to not make money off of corn and many other crops, but in that case by growing more of it.

The worth of a dollar

2006-12-13T21:33:00.000-05:00

I was talking to a Brazilian friend of mine the other day and we got on the subject of traveling abroad. I mentioned that living abroad in Brazil is fairly easy on my American wallet. My friend said, "Well, that's because the Dollar is worth twice as much as Brazil's dollar [the Real]." In the context, I took my friend to be stating that the Dollar is "worth twice as much in Brazil."

I think that statement betrays a misunderstanding of worth. To be fair, both the Dollar and the Real have a "1" written all over them. And when you exchange the Dollar in Brazil you receive about 2 Reals. The problem with this logic is that for the Dollar to be worth twice as much in Brazil, it must give you twice the purchasing power. The problem is that it does not! The reason is that you are purchasing different products.

For an internationally available product such as a song from iTunes, the cost difference in Brazil will exactly equal the exchange rate between Dollars and Reais. Regardless of your currency you can buy the same number of iTunes. But for local goods that are subject to different marginal production cost, transportation costs and regulation structures, you are buying a different product. The fact is that in some cases these different products are more or less expensive than similar products in the U.S. Fruits, for example, are much cheaper while electronics are much more expensive in Brazil. So why don't we import Fruit from Brazil. We do. The main price difference is the extra transportation and taxation costs of importing it (even so it still cheaper than trying to grow it in the U.S.).

The results of an unstructured day...

2006-12-10T04:29:00.000-05:00

These days it seems that everyone has a curriculum vita, whereas, I have only a sparse resume. What's up with that? I need to pack more activity into my waking hours. Today I did. Some of the results, however unproductive, can be seen here (a unicycling video).

Trade. Free.

2006-12-10T04:27:00.000-05:00

I sell my laptop to my friend down the street. Nobody cares. I sell it to my friend in Brazil. Hell raised. Sense. Makes. None.

The cost of one lecture: $40?

2006-12-08T20:49:00.000-05:00

I remember as a first year college student, there seemed to be a craze about how much we were paying for each lecture. The math worked out something like...

Tuition: $3000.
Hours of Class per week: 15.
Number of weeks: 14.

Therefore, cost per hour of class: $3000/15/14 = $14. Out of state is more like $40-50/hour. Now there were very few classes I attended that I felt I would have paid $14/hour for, and maybe one or two I'd have paid $40 for. So do I feel my tuition was too high?

Not necessarily. There are tons of benefits to a college degree AS A WHOLE, that go beyond any knowledge gained from one class.

Getting recruited to higher paying jobs even though you spent a good portion of the last 4 years goofing off and partying... priceless.

ih rock

2006-12-07T17:56:00.000-05:00

This has been bothering me for some time... How do you pronounce Iraq? Listening to NPR today two speakers used the word, one pronounced it IH-RACK, and the other, IH-ROCK. Various other pronounciations I have heard are

EYE-RACK
UH-ROCK
UH-RACK

From Wikipedia's Iraq entry you can hear what appears to be an authentic pronounciation. Although the sounds needed to say Iraq don't seem to be found in English, I would say it is somewhere between IH-ROCK and UH-ROCK, and nowhere near UH-RACK (or EYE-RACK for that matter).

Blizzard Entertainment captures a soul

2006-12-05T20:29:00.002-05:00

The screenshot below comes from the xfire.com gaming profile of someone I know well. Note the drop off after the two Blizzard games. Valve's Counter Strike also gets an (dis)honorable mention. This covers roughly a one year time period, therefore this individual spent roughly 20% of his/her waking hours playing the top three games.

For reference, I've racked up 120 hours on Counter Strike and 20 hours on Civ IV. 80% of these hours were recorded before I started working 6 months ago.

Will you change the world for the better?

2006-11-19T19:45:00.000-05:00

I created this quiz, The How Will You Change The World Test, in order to test one ability to change the world for the better. No empirical evidence was used in the creation of this test. Instead, I used my world view such that the test-taker results bin him/her into one of my eight categories of world citizens. I won't tell you what the bins are just yet; take the test!

Keeping in mind that I created the test, I scored as an "Average Citizen." Take that for what it is worth.

Milton Friedman passes away

2006-11-16T19:11:00.000-05:00

I heard it on the radio today on my way home from work. He was a champion for liberty. My hero has died, but his memory lives on.

Donate organ or gain

2006-11-01T22:50:00.000-05:00

A tragedy:

In the United States, less than one half of potential organs donors became actual organ donors.

We are talking about dead people here of course. Less than half of living people are willing to sign-up to donate their organs when they no longer need them. Alex Tabbarok asks, well then why not pay?! With over 80,000 people on the waiting list and about 10% of these dying per year, it'd be nice if we could convince people to check the organ donor box when they go to the DMV. One obstacle is the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) of 1984 which states

"It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation."

Ostensibly, this is to reduce the traffic in live human organs. To a lesser degree it aims to keep the rich from cornering the organ market. However, there are ways to avoid these undesirable outcomes. First, only allow payment for organs from dead people, with the funds going to the family, the estate, or some charity of the donor's choosing. Second, don't sell organs on the free market. Instead, use the current national registry system but allow the donors to be paid for their contribution!

In the absence of legal payment options, a group called the LifeSharers has banded together, promising to donate their organs upon death to other members of the group before opening up to the national registry. At first I didn't know what to think about LifeSharers. But then I read their FAQs and found this quote on their website...

...Dr. Friedman has spoken. Think about it, if you could join a club that gave you first dibs on organs, wouldn't you join. You never incur a cost to join because you fulfill you obligation upon death. No, I haven't joined yet, but I'm seriously considering it.

Veil of Ignorance

2006-10-29T15:42:00.000-05:00

The veil issue has been a HOT topic lately. The issue is driven by a lack of understanding, not only by westerners in terms of the meaning of the veil but of veil wearers as well. In this video a Muslim woman who refused to remove her veil in front of a male co-worker is interviewed. The newsman pulls no punches.

(Hat tip: TCS Daily)