Just Throwing it Out There

[Hammer and Rails] Rooting Around the Big Ten

2010-02-02T20:31:00.002-05:00

My new post is up over on Hammer and Rails.

Rooting Around the Big Ten

Hammer and Rails

2010-01-30T11:41:00.002-05:00

I just started contributing to the Purdue sports blog Hammer and Rails. My first article is here:

Allow Myself to Introduce... Myself; Boilermakings 1/29

Check it out. Also, if you happen to be a fan of Purdue sports, check out BoiledSports.

South Park Was Right

2009-12-25T13:15:00.002-05:00

Something is very wrong with the MPAA.

The romantic comedy “It’s Complicated” arrived at the multiplex on Friday complete with an R rating, ranking it in the same category as “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and “Basic Instinct” in the eyes of the Motion Picture Association of America.

But there is no violence in “It’s Complicated,” and the bedroom scenes are decidedly tame by contemporary standards. Instead, the R rating — which experts say could limit the box-office potential of the Universal Pictures film — comes largely from a sequence in which Steve Martin and Meryl Streep smoke marijuana.

Story from The New York Times.

MATLAB vs. GNU Octave

2009-11-26T20:08:00.005-05:00

My ME 352 class provided me with the opportunity to examine the suitability of an open source alternative to MATLAB. For those who don't know, MATLAB is a very powerful tool for data analysis and programming. The purpose of this project was to determine the forces in a machine as it moved through it's operation. I have published my results (which are partially incorrect for the dynamic friction cases) at my Purdue website. The source code for the project is there as well (released under the GNU GPL), if you would like to reproduce these tests or improve upon the code.

There are a few things in my life that I hold to be axioms. Open source is better than proprietary, and free is better than for pay. Purdue, fortunately for me, makes it very easy to be an engineering student. MATLAB usually costs about $100 for a very bare bones version, but Purdue has a license that allows each mechanical engineering student to install the full version of the software on their personal computer for free. However, this still requires the use of Windows, which I hate. I have been wondering if it is possible to go through mechanical engineering at Purdue while using Linux. Some coursework requires LabVIEW and a program called EES, so MATLAB isn't the only obstacle but it is an important first step, since a majority of my work is done in MATLAB. I will note that unlike most software there is a direct Linux port of MATLAB, but again Purdue does not offer that to students.

The open source alternative to MATLAB is GNU Octave. It is a free software package that claims to be mostly compatible with MATLAB. Since I have already written those 1200+ lines of code, I decided to test it out with Octave and see how compatible it was. I tested both the Linux and Windows versions of Octave, though I found both experiences to be similar. Since the program required for the project is pretty simple (just a few loops and some matrix operations) I was fully expecting the results to match, and they did. The plots generated by MATLAB exactly matched the plots generated by Octave. There wasn't even so much as a warning or any errors. I do have a few issues.

First, the user interface of the plots. When you plot something in MATLAB, it looks like this;

As you can see, you get options to zoom, print, save, pan, rotate, etc. MATLAB makes it very easy to manipulate the plot once it has been generated. Further, it is easy to then save this plot in a variety of formats and then put into a report or onto a website. In fact, the entire website where my results are published came from a menu option in the MATLAB Editor. The plots generated by Octave look like this;

As you can see, there are no options. If you right click you can zoom in to a box on the figure, but beyond that the options are seriously limited. In fact, the only way I found to alter the plot or to save it is to code those commands into the script that generates the plot and rerun the script. It shouldn't be that hard to simply save a plot. I believe this has to do with the use of a separate program called gnuplot that takes care of the plot generation. Perhaps in future versions, these programs will be better integrated to allow for more features and a more useful interface for plots generated by Octave.

The next few issues are pretty minor compared to the plotting. Octave runs in a terminal window, whereas MATLAB has a user environment that provides quite a bit of useful information, such as the names of stored variables and the contents of the working directory. Finally, Octave was noticeably slower than MATLAB in executing the code. I suspect that this is largely due to the plotting part of the code, since the plot windows came up at a much slower rate than the MATLAB figures. Again, this may be more of an issue with gnuplot rather than Octave specifically. Finally, Octave would occasionally freeze if I would close all of the figure windows and run the script again. That is an issue that I never had with MATLAB.

In the end, I'd say that I absolutely could have accomplished this project using Octave rather than MATLAB. It may have been slightly more difficult to handle the plots at first, but I think with practice it would have become second nature to me as MATLAB has. The problems with Octave were not technical, but rather just usability. I'll definitely be following the Octave project in the future.

Are you saying 9/11 didn't change everything?

2009-11-25T22:43:00.002-05:00

"We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term."

Whoops.

Via Talking Points Memo

Bush vs. Obama; Protest Edition

2009-08-19T00:34:00.005-04:00

I just had a really quick thought. Remember during the Bush years how peaceful protestors were getting arrested for wearing anti-Bush slogans on their clothes, and they were called anti-American? So, why is it now acceptable for a bunch of people to show up where the president is with loaded rifles and handguns, during a time when right wing extremism is rising and our president is receiving more death threats than any in history, that no one is getting arrested? I'd just like the conservatives to keep that in mind the next time they plan to call Obama a freedom hating socialist. To recap; anti-Bush shirts will get you arrested under a conservative administration trying to bring freedom to Iraq, but assault rifles are fine under a "fascist." In fact, it is such a stark contrast that the White House is defending these people who bring guns where the president is speaking. I bet those arrested under Bush didn't get off so easy.

Full Post on Facebook?

2009-08-02T22:12:00.004-04:00

I'm just writing this post to see if I can get the full text of my posts into my Facebook note feed. If anyone else is looking to do something like that, all you need is a blog with an RSS or Atom feed and the instructions from this video. Of course the Facebook feed doesn't include links to my references, videos, or pictures, but in the end it is always good to get more readers for a blog.

In other news, just to get the word count on this post up, Entourage is on and it looks like it is going to be an Ari-centric episode (my favorite kind). I have to say though, it seems like they are making Vince a lot less likable this season. Look at the hubris last week (and during the recap) where Vince is talking about how his shadow is getting bigger. I am thinking that they are setting Vince up for a big fall again. Also, gratuitous boobs have become a more permanent fixture this season and I have to say I am a fan.

Still needing a few more words, I'll just leave this joke;

One day a hippie gets a ride on a public bus and sees a hot young nun. He sits down next to her and promptly asks if she would like to have sex, to which she immediately says no and walks off the bus. The bus driver leans over and says “Hey guy I know how to get that nun to have sex with you…”

Naturally the hippie asks, and the bus driver tells him that every night at midnight the nun goes to an old graveyard to pray for god to forgive her for her past, and that he should dress up like god and tell the nun she will be forgiven if she has sex with you.

The hippie gives his thanks and runs to the nearest costume shop.

Later that evening the hippie gets ready for his big night and drives down to the graveyard and sees the nun praying, on her knees. He says “Behold, I have heard your prayers and you shall be forgiven if you have sex with me!”

The nun agrees but asks if they can have anal sex in order to keep her virginity. The hippie agrees and once they are finished the hippie jumps back and pulls off his mask and says “Surpise, its me the Hippie!”

The nun jumps up and pulls off her mask and says “Surprise, its me the bus driver!"

Why We Need Healthcare Reform

2009-08-02T18:57:00.004-04:00

In 2007 Cigna HealthCare denied coverage to a 17 year old girl for a liver transplant. When she was ours from death and doctor's described her condition as "hopeless," they decided to cover the transplant. She died. [CBS2.com] Really a clever move on Cigna's part, as you can't say they wouldn't cover the transplant, but they don't have to pay for it because they waited until it was too late.

The reason I bring up a 2 year old story is because it so moved a executive at Cigna that he left the company and now works to bring healthcare reform. That former executive is Wendell Potter and this is what he has to say;

"I just didn't want to be the spokesperson for an industry that I felt often was not doing the right thing for the American public," said Potter.

Potter believes the push to reform health care in the U.S. faces an uphill battle and warns the public not to believe a common insurance industry argument that setting up a public health care plan will put a government bureaucrat between patients and their doctors.

"Right now we have a corporate bureaucrat who's calling the shots, who's very much between you and your doctor," Potter said. [CBS5.com]

Potter even went before the Senate, "detailing such industry practices as purging, the dumping of small businesses when their employees make medical claims that exceed expectations, and sending explanation-of-benefits documents that are so incomprehensible that policyholders can't tell what services they're getting." [San Francisco Chronicle] In the end, Potter's statements beg the question; are these companies treating their customers fairly? This is a question that Michael Hiltzik at answers;

The firms take billions of dollars out of the U.S. healthcare wallet as profits, while imposing enormous administrative costs on doctors, hospitals, employers and patients. They've introduced complexity into the system at every level. Your doctor has to fight them to get approval for the treatment he or she thinks is best for you. Your hospital has to fight them for approval for every day you're laid up. Then they have to fight them to get their bills paid, and you do too.

One Wendell Potter reminded a Senate committee in June that health insurance executives had assured Congress in 1993 they would work to secure universal medical coverage and end denials of coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Then they moved heaven and earth to kill reform.

They've made the same promises now, Potter observed. But they're in an even better position to throttle reform. Mergers and acquisitions have turned the industry into a cartel of huge corporations.

"The industry is bigger, richer and stronger, and it has a much tighter grip on our healthcare system," he said. The last thing they want is a government program set up as their competition.

...

Why do we tolerate this? The industry loves to promote surveys indicating that most Americans are "satisfied" with their current health insurance -- 37% are "very satisfied" and 17% "extremely satisfied," according to one such study.

Yet these figures are misleading. Most people are satisfied with their current insurance because most people never have a complex encounter with the health insurance bureaucracy. Medical care generally follows the so-called 80-20 statistical pattern -- 20% of patients consume 80% of care. If your typical encounter is an annual checkup or treatment of the kids' sniffles, or even a serious but routine condition such as a heart attack, your experience is probably satisfactory.

But it's on the margins where the challenges exist. Anyone whose condition is even slightly out of the ordinary knows the sinking feeling of entering health insurance hell -- pre-authorizations, denials, appeals, and days, weeks, even months wasted waiting for resolution. [Los Angeles Times]

Surely, there must be someone out there outside of the insurance industry who is pulling for them. The American public isn't, since a New York Times poll showed that of those polled, "49 percent said they supported fundamental changes, and 33 percent said the health care system needed to be completely rebuilt." Doctors aren't on the insurance industry's side, since the American Medical Association supports reforming healthcare this year. That support is also coming on the heels of a class action lawsuit the AMA filed against the insurance industry. So, aside from the politicians that have been bought by insurance companies (both Democrat and Republican) who is keeping this from happening? Why isn't this getting done? Doctors don't like the system, patients don't like the system, and increasingly it seems like the only people against reform are the people profiting from the current farce that we call healthcare. I just hope that reform can get done before the insurance industry gets to muddy public support with their misleading ads, as they have already begun to do.

Take Back the Beep

2009-07-31T15:34:00.001-04:00

One of my biggest pet peeves is the robot lady voice that comes on when you get someone's voicemail. I've already heard my friend talk, why do I have to waste my minutes listening to some recording tell me to leave a message. I know, I have used a phone in the last 20 years. Everyone knows that the slow talking recording is just a way to screw you out of more minutes. So, David Pogue of the New York Times has started a campaign to "Take Back the Beep," and ask the major cell phone carriers to eliminate the messages.

In 2007, I spoke at an international cellular conference in Italy. The big buzzword was ARPU–Average Revenue Per User. The seminars all had titles like, “Maximizing ARPU In a Digital Age.” And yes, several attendees (cell executives) admitted to me, point-blank, that the voicemail instructions exist primarily to make you use up airtime, thereby maximizing ARPU.

Right now, the carriers continue to enjoy their billion-dollar scam only because we’re not organized enough to do anything about it. But it doesn’t have to be this way. You don’t have to sit there, waiting to leave your message, listening to a speech recorded by a third-grade teacher on Ambien.

Let’s push back, and hard. We want those time-wasting, money-leaking messages eliminated, or at least made optional.

...

And here’s how we’re going to do it.

We’re going to descend, en masse, on our carriers. Send them a complaint, politely but firmly. Together, we’ll send them a LOT of complaints.

If enough of us make our unhappiness known, I’ll bet they’ll change.

I kicked an e-mail off to AT&T in support of this. Clicking the link to the story above will let you know where to contact your carrier about this campaign.

Gates and the Police

2009-07-30T22:17:00.005-04:00

I'm sure everyone has heard about Henry Gates, the Harvard professor, getting arrested in his own home. He was struggling with the lock and a neighbor called the police. When the police arrived, Gates provided his identification but was summarily arrested after accusing the police officer of being a racist. Since Gates is an African American, there were instantly accusations of racism. President Obama even weighed in on the incident saying, "the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home." [CBS News]

My roommate and I were discussing this incident, and we both began to doubt that this was actually a case of racism. He and I believe that people are a little too quick to call something racist. Just imagine the scenario with a white person being arrested in their own home under the same circumstances. Is it any less outrageous? Perhaps a bit, just because our national racial tension is reduced, but does it seem any less likely? Do you imagine it playing out much differently? I don't. I'm sure it happens all the time, black or white.

The conclusion that we came to was that the more concerning aspect of the case was that a guy was arrested just because he pissed off a cop. All Henry Gates did was speak rudely to a policeman under the roof he paid for. There is nothing illegal about that, and yet he was arrested in front of his neighbors. Fortunately, as a respected academic, that won't be a major detriment to his life. If that had been a person who wasn't such a fixture in the community, or a person less well off financially, it would be a much worse situation.

I was pleasantly surprised to see that so many people shared my opinion. Here are a few examples that I found while I was reading the news;

A police officer who’s proud of his reputation for getting along with black officers, and for teaching cadets to avoid racial profiling, feels maligned to be cast as a racist white Boston cop.

A famous professor who studies identity and summers in Martha’s Vineyard feels maligned to be cast as a black burglar with backpack and crowbar.

Race, class and testosterone will always be a combustible brew. [New York Times]

It is probably not a crime of disorderly conduct for a homeowner, standing in his own kitchen, to speak abusively to a police officer.

According to his police report, Sgt. James Crowley said the professor was "yelling very loud" and "accusing me of being a racist."

...

"You might think that in the United States, you have a right to state an opinion, even an offensive opinion. But prosecutors like to say you don't have a right to mouth off to the police," said Boston defense lawyer Samuel Goldberg.

"Gates was saying, 'You are hassling me because I'm black.' I understand how that's offensive to a police officer.

"It's astounding to me to call it criminal." [Los Angeles Times]

I can easily see how a black neighbor could have called the police when seeing professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. trying to push open the front door of his own house. And I can equally easily visualize a thuggish or oversensitive black cop answering the call. And I can also see how long it might take the misunderstanding to dawn on both parties. But Gates has a limp that partly accounts for his childhood nickname and is slight and modest in demeanor. Moreover, whatever he said to the cop was in the privacy of his own home. It is monstrous in the extreme that he should in that home be handcuffed, and then taken downtown, after it had been plainly established that he was indeed the householder. The president should certainly have kept his mouth closed about the whole business—he is a senior law officer with a duty of impartiality, not the micro-manager of our domestic disputes—but once he had said that the police conduct was "stupid," he ought to have stuck to it, quite regardless of the rainbow of shades that was so pathetically and opportunistically deployed by the Cambridge Police Department. It is the U.S. Constitution, and not some competitive agglomeration of communities or constituencies, that makes a citizen the sovereign of his own home and privacy. There is absolutely no legal requirement to be polite in the defense of this right. And such rights cannot be negotiated away over beer. [Slate]

In the end, the cries of racism are simply serving to distract from the real issue, which is the abuse of authority. Why are police officers able to arrest people seemingly carte blanche? Where does the First Amendment end and "disorderly conduct" begin? I think those issues are a lot more important than the skin color of the person whose rights are being trampled on.

Legendary Straight Face Moment

2009-07-30T16:33:00.002-04:00

The New York Times DealBook has an article up that made me chuckle. I'll do a quick recap before the excellent quote. As we all know, Bernie Madoff orchestrated the largest Ponzi scheme in history and ripped off thousands of people. So, before he turned himself in for wiping out all of these life savings, he moved about $45 million to his wife. He knew he was going away, so you know take care of the family and all of that. A trustee representing the people Madoff scammed found out about the money, and have sued Mrs. Madoff for it.

Now imagine that you are the lawyer representing Mrs. Madoff in this case. You are representing the wife of the world's most successful thief against the people her husband robbed. The New York Times asks for a quote, and you drop this on them;

“We believe the Trustee’s action is wrong as a matter of law and fairness,” Mr. Chavkin said.

That's right, he said fair with a straight face and everything. That is precisely why I can't be a lawyer.

Twitter Lawsuit

2009-07-30T00:32:00.002-04:00

Today while reading the news, I ran across this article about a woman getting sued over a Twitter post;

Horizon Group Management filed a lawsuit that has accused Amanda Bonnen of defaming the company with her tweet.

She sent out a message that said "Who said sleeping in a mouldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it's okay."

"The statements are obviously false, and it's our intention to prove that," said Horizon's Jeffrey Michael.

Mr Michael, whose family has run the company for the last quarter of a century, told the Chicago Sun-Times that while Ms Bonnen recently moved out, he never had a conversation about the post and never asked her to take it down.

...

The company's lawsuit is seeking damages of $50,000 (£30,900) for the tweet that was posted in May.

Ms Bonnen, who had just 20 followers on Twitter at the time, has been unavailable to comment on the lawsuit. [BBC News]

I see this not necessarily as an attack on someone's right to comment on the service of their landlords, but more as another company that doesn't understand how to use new media effectively. Comcast and Southwest Airlines use Twitter to respond to their customer's concerns and give their customers information. This is a tweet that was posted in March, and the lawsuit is filed in May without even a request to delete the tweet. On top of that, she had 20 followers. I had 45 at my peak, and after a recent spam account flush, I have 13. Of the 13 followers that are remaining 4 are tweeting links to porn sites, 2 are hawking get rich quick schemes, and 1 more is telling me about Forex trading. So, if slightly over 50% of followers are spambots, I think we can assume nearly the same for her.

Let's take the worst case scenario though. Let's say that every single one of her followers is a real person. That would mean that 20 people heard her complaint about the company. So, rather than ask her to remove the post or take some rational action, the company decides to sue her and now it is in the news a whole continent away. I guarantee that their decision to sue this woman for a joke heard by nearly no one will result in more loss for the company than even a $50,000 lawsuit can compensate for. I would have never heard of this company if not for the lawsuit, but now I know exactly who to avoid if I am looking for property around Chicago area. I would suspect that many other people now share that same opinion. If your company can't deal with your customers respectfully in any forum, you are doomed to lose those customers.

What is the worst case scenario if that tweet is ignored by Horizon? A few people see it and think, "I guess this woman had some trouble with her apartment." Instead, Horizon is all over the Internet losing goodwill for bullying a person over what amounts to a public SMS message. Horizon was worried that tweet might tarnish their reputation, but why bother with a reputation when they are now world famous litigious pricks? It may be too late for Horizon to save face for this misstep, but maybe they can learn a few things about customer service from Comcast.

That is a phrase I never thought I would see in writing.

Hackey Sack Style

2009-07-29T00:04:00.000-04:00

Follow Up; AT&T Censoring 4chan

2009-07-28T23:53:00.003-04:00

According to Wired;

AT&T responded Monday morning with a press release confirming it had temporarily blackholed img.4chan.org. But it said the ban (which has since been lifted) was a defensive response to denial-of-service traffic hitting an AT&T subscriber, and originating from 4chan’s own network. Reached by Threat Level, AT&T declined to elaborate.

Now 4chan’s founder, Moot, has admitted that his network was sending spurious traffic, but he still faults AT&T for going too far with its response.

“They essentially dropped a nuke instead of using the fly swatter,” Moot said in an e-mail to Threat Level. “I was told by someone within the company that an engineer essentially overreacted and made a mistake in choosing how to deal with a rather trivial issue. That’s how we got to where we’re at now.”

So, looks like there won't be any hilarious AT&T memes. Or will there...

AT&T Censoring 4chan

2009-07-26T22:34:00.002-04:00

Los Angeles Metblogs is reporting that AT&T is blocking 4chan at the ISP level. I like to think of 4chan as the bathroom wall of the Internet. It is good for a couple jokes, and then a bunch of porn. While it may not be a useful or wholesome place, there is no reason to censor a website. If I were an AT&T broadband customer, I would be very upset about their cutting off my access to parts of the Internet. I wonder what Anonymous' reaction will be. Whatever it is, I'm sure it will be hilarious.

40 Years Since the Moon Landing

2009-07-25T00:09:00.002-04:00

This week marked the 40 year anniversary of the moon landing. Obviously, this is one of the greatest achievements in human history. No one has ever gone farther than we went that day. It hits especially close to home for me, as I am a student at Purdue in the very same major as the man who took the first steps on the lunar surface. It was our first steps away from this planet. Our first time going somewhere that wasn't home. We went back a few times, but then we stopped.

As a proud Boilermaker, I read every story that came across my news feed about my university's greatest graduate. I feel a certain undeserved sense of pride, knowing that someone with the same degree I'll have walked on the moon. It is a common thing here at Purdue, where the artifacts in every engineering building remind you that space is Purdue territory. It was then that I came across an essay by Tom Wolfe in the New York Times, reflecting on the anniversary.

I found this passage particularly insightful;

At this point, the mental atmospheres of the rocket-powered space race of the 1960s and the sword-clanking single combat of ancient days became so similar you had to ask: Does the human beast ever really change — or merely his artifacts? The Soviet cosmo-champions beat our astro-champions so handily, gloom spread like a gas. Every time you picked up a newspaper you saw headlines with the phrase, SPACE GAP ... SPACE GAP ... SPACE GAP ... The Soviets had produced a generation of scientific geniuses — while we slept, fat and self-satisfied!

It says a lot about us that our greatest achievement stems from the race to see which superpower could get nuclear weapons onto higher ground. This was, in the end, about peacefully asserting military superiority. I find that especially ironic, since these first steps to leaving our planet will be necessary for our survival as a species should Earth become inhabitable. I mean, the sun is going to burn out one day regardless, we can't be here forever. It is just incredible to me that we went from a flying washing machine to the moon in a shade over 60 years. That says a lot about how far we have come. On the other hand, the reason we got to the Moon was because we were afraid the Russians would be able to use their nukes sooner. The yin and yang of progress as intellectuals and our primitive tribes at war, all in one event.

Really Strange "Small World" Moment

2009-07-23T19:31:00.002-04:00

Read the comments for this website;

http://terminalhumming.blogspot.com/2007/02/today-i-tried-to-spell-fluctuate-as.html

Thanks to my friend JoAnna for the link via Facebook.

Damnit Blogger

2009-07-14T22:20:00.002-04:00

Seriously, what is with the pictures not being formatted like they were once? I haven't figured that out yet.

The Destruction Industry

2009-07-13T23:09:00.002-04:00

I was cruising the web when I found Slouching towards Bethlehem, a photography site. The link is a gallery of the buildings where the bombs that were dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were constructed. I really enjoy these images. This is where the two deadliest weapons ever used were made. A building that is falling apart and rusted, forgotten by time, was where humanity commited our greatest crime against ourselves. These building were responsible for the most terrifyingly violent weapons we are capable of making. I find it very interesting. At the time, these were probably hailed as the greatest achievement of science. The power to split the atom and use it to defeat the enemies of this nation. Yet, we nearly eliminated ourselves with that power. Perhaps it is a hopeful image that they are rusted and derelict, in that we may have moved on and left that in our past. In a way, they stand as the industrial memorial to the bombings much the same way that the blast sites in Hiroshima and Nagasaki do. Ours isn't a memorial to the victims, more of a mournful elegy of our time spent at war with ourselves. Maybe it is a hopeful image, for all the ugliness in it. I hope so, at least.

Refuse to Sign

2009-07-10T14:42:00.004-04:00

I just heard about a campaign among clergy who are refusing to perform any marriages, or sign marriage licenses, until states will recognize the rights of homosexual couples to get married as well. [Salon.com] I have to say, I was a little surprised to hear that there was an equal marriage rights movement among clergy. Generally speaking, the people who are against gay marriage are usually Christian conservatives or some other religious group. Really, I haven't heard any arguments against gay marriage that aren't related to religion in some way. You hear a little bit of bullshit about "traditional family unit" and "family values" but, until there is some hard science behind it, that is just bullshit code for "Jesus doesn't want gays to marry."

I'm so glad to have heard about this movement, and I applaud the clergy who are taking part. The article mentions that people who aren't clergy are encouraged to support the Refuse to Sign campaign by having their marriage license signed by a judge or a court clerk. I would suggest going even farther, and simply forgoing marriage altogether until there is equality. It would be the modern day equivalent of the bus boycotts during the civil rights era. Unfortunately, gay couples aren't allowed to marry, so the boycott has to be heterosexual couples. Morally, it is a simple argument, if you believe people are being unfairly excluded from marriage rights then you simply do not use the same unfair system. Of course, that is easy for me to say, as a young single person with no serious girlfriend to have me thinking about marriage in any significant way. Still, I would like to think I'd have the same resolve if I had a serious girlfriend. This is a fundamental issue of equality, and I would go so far as to say an issue of love as well. So, for what it's worth, I'll be boycotting marriage until there is equality.

Michael Jackson Memorial

2009-07-07T23:22:00.004-04:00

I caught a bit of the Michael Jackson memorial service today. It was very well done, and all of the performers did a fantastic job. The most devastating part of the service was the end, where Michael's daughter spoke. It was heart-wrenching to watch this little girl have to say goodbye to her father. In the end, that's what really affected me. Say what you want about Michael Jackson's legal problems, or his strange behavior, whether you loved him or hated him, none of that matters. At the end of the day, there are 3 children who lost a daddy and that is terrible.

Picture Issues

2009-07-07T01:17:00.002-04:00

Sorry about the pictures being clipped in posts recently. I'm going to look into it. I never had a problem with posting pictures until recently, so I hope it is something that can be fixed.

Confidence

2009-07-07T01:09:00.002-04:00

Shouting Fire

2009-07-05T21:15:00.005-04:00

I just saw Shouting Fire on HBO, and you need to see it. It is an examination of the freedom of speech in this country. Specifically, it examines free speech in this country during times of war. It is one of those films that will make you righteously indignant, liberal or conservative. You here the expected stories, protesters being arrested at anti-Bush rallies and the like. You also hear about a boy who was wrongfully disciplined for wearing an anti-gay shirt during a LGBT "Day of Silence" demonstration at a high school. The point of the documentary is that if you want free speech, you have defend it even for speech you are against. You can't protest the right of someone else to protest, and I think that is something that everyone, left, right, and center needs to remember. If you like being able to protest war, then you have to let the Neo-Nazis march too. If you want a pro-life rally, then you have to tolerate the gay pride parade. It is a documentary that will make you proud to live here, and incredibly embarassed at the same time. Most importantly, it will make you think about what freedom means in this country, and we all need to have some new thoughts about that after the last 8 years.

Programming

2009-07-04T13:51:00.002-04:00

In general, I have been very happy with my coursework at Purdue. I find that it has prepared me to meet most of the technical challenges that I have been presented with, which is all that one can ask for. Yesterday I wrote about what I thought was a shortcoming of my education, the lack of biology coursework. Today, I would like to address the other shortcoming that I perceive; programming knowledge. Thus far I have been required to study C programming for one semester in my freshman year. Beyond that, I have taken 3 classes that required serious MATLAB knowledge. That is the extent of my ability to program.

In the traditional sense, one wouldn't expect a mechanical engineer to need much programming. Any project that I would be involved in that required a significant amount of programming would have a computer scientist or an electrical engineer on the design team. I'm not saying that mechanical engineers need to be able to audit an operating system's source, or need to know how to write a compiler, but we need to be able to interact with computers. We need to be able to know what they are capable of, and how they work. The best way to learn that, in my opinion, is to learn how to program. The same way they teach us the tools we need to engineer with CNC machining, we need to know how to use computers effectively. We need to have those computational tools at our disposal in almost every industry.

Of course, like biology, it is entirely possible to learn how to program on your own. I have decided to learn Python. I am honing my skills by solving the problems at Project Euler. Even then, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers agrees with me.

Even though basic parallel programming is becoming more common, especially in scientific communities, the skills required to get performance—e.g., scalability—are still highly specialized. [Mechanical Engineering]

In order to understand these tools that we use for finite element analysis, or any of the other numerous computer tools engineers use, we must understand how computers see math and data. It isn't essential at this point, but I am sure that advanced programming skills will be in the very near future. My statics teacher told us something that I have kept in mind whenever I schedule courses or think about my future college career. He said, "You can never know too much math, it is the language of the universe." Well, programming is the way computers understand math. If we want to use those mathematical tools in any meaningful way we need to know how to program. Of course, I'm no expert on engineering education, but this is where I see the world headed from my spot in the trenches.

Biomimicry

2009-07-03T20:34:00.006-04:00

I have been thinking a lot about biology lately, mostly as a symptom of engineering. One of my good friends is a double major in biology and mechanical engineering, and lately I've been thinking that may have been the way for me to go as well. The reason for this is something I have been researching in my free time called biomimicry. It is the practice of incorporating ideas from biology into design, much like the concept of SONAR is informed by echolocation in bats and dolphins.

It seems that almost every design I read about lately has some sort of biomimicry tie in, and a lot of fascinating research is happening in tissue engineering and manufacturing nanomachines that have applications in biology. A lot of exciting research is happening in biotechnology, and it has been so great to explore. I saw a TED Talk about genomics recently, and after watching the video I thought, "This is the future." If we can make cells that eat carbon dioxide and poop oil, what can't we do with biological processing and engineering? Life is incredible in this way. It is a design that has been refined with nature's genetic algorithm for billions of years. Even a single cell is incredible with what it does to survive, let alone macroorganisms like animals and us. We just found out that bacteria can learn, and we haven't even begun to understand the complexity of things like the brain. Imagine what else might be out there in the biosphere.

Unfortunately, I have been able to go this far in my engineering education without the requirement of any undergraduate level biology coursework. Biology is the only hard science that I am not required to study for at least one year. I think that needs to change. Too much of design and nanotechnology is informed by biology, not to mention medical devices and other areas of biologically related applications for products that are made. I would guess that in the very near future, not having some biology knowledge will put mechanical engineering graduates at a huge competitive disadvantage in the job market. Maybe it is time to throw a year of biology into engineering education, just to lay the fundamentals for future study. So, if you are looking at going into mechanical engineering I would recommend taking at least one semester of biology. If nothing else, it will give you another approach to think about when you consider engineering problems.

Louis CK on Being White

2009-07-02T01:58:00.004-04:00

I just re-watched Louis CK's most recent special. I felt driven to share this.

Fancy Internet Talk

2009-07-01T03:42:00.000-04:00

I hooked up the blog to Facebook and my Twitter feeds. I also added my Twitter feed to the sidebar there. Neat.

The Wall Street IRS

2009-06-30T19:25:00.003-04:00

I just read a fantastic piece in this week's Rolling Stone. The article, "The Great American Bubble Machine" by Matt Taibbi, isn't posted online yet, but some blogger has posted a copy. The article is mainly about how Goldman Sachs is an evil company for doing what it is that every company on Wall Street does. I suppose that the point is that Goldman Sachs does it better than anyone else, and that's why they are still around.

The real takeaway from the article, for me, is where Taibbi compares the proposed cap and trade legislation in congress with the gasoline bubble of last year. In essence, that the cap and trade market will quickly become a place where speculative investment will drive prices past the level of sanity. Since the cap for carbon emissions decreases every year, and the technology to reduce emissions will take many more years to develop and implement, we can pretty much guarantee that the price of carbon emission allowances is going to increase. Supply will decrease, whereas demand will remain largely unchanged in the short term. We are gift wrapping a market for Wall Street that they don't even need to game, it's already rigged.

The real problem here is that all of the financial market regulators are themselves in the financial industry. Name after name in the article is a Goldman Sachs alum in a regulatory position. The head of the New York Federal, the Treasury Secretary, CEOs of most of the major players in these bubbles, and the list goes on. Goldman Sachs isn't the problem, because every other person with some position of authority is probably an alum of some other large investment bank.

I'm not saying that we don't need energy reform, we absolutely do. There is a lot of investment opportunity in upgrading the power transmission infrastructure to a "smart grid," switching over to new more ecologically friendly methods of getting energy, etc. I just don't think this is the way to do it. If the Obama administration wants a carbon tax, then pass a carbon tax. Do not burden us with this commodity market that will make the prices of energy skyrocket. We saw firsthand what market manipulation did to gasoline prices, and we cannot afford a bubble like that for the energy we use to heat our homes, especially not in this economy. If there must be a tax, let the government collect it and use it for research and development in new energy technology. Don't let it go to a banker's new summer home. I think Taibbi sums it up quite well.

It's not always easy to accept the reality of what we now routinely allow these people to get away with; there's a kind of collective denial that kicks in when a country goes through what America has gone through lately, when a people lose as much prestige and status as we have in the past few years. You can't really register the fact that you're no longer a citizen of a thriving first-world democracy, that you're no longer above getting robbed in broad daylight, because like an amputee, you can still sort of feel things that are no longer there.

But this is it. This is the world we live in now. And in this world, some of us have to play by the rules, while others get a note from the principal excusing them from homework till the end of time, plus 10 billion free dollars in a paper bag to buy lunch. It's a gangster state, running on gangster economics, and even prices can't be trusted anymore; there are hidden taxes in every buck you pay. And maybe we can't stop it, but we should at least know where it's all going. [Rolling Stone, via Zero Hedge]

P.S. Pick up the issue and read the whole article. It is fantastic.

Incredible Bowling Shot

2009-06-30T01:00:00.000-04:00

Holy Lord.

The Thornton Epiphany

2009-06-28T14:40:00.004-04:00

I was once again watching Real Time with Bill Maher as I was cleaning up around here. He was interviewing Billy Bob Thornton, so I wasn't paying that much attention and went to load the dishwasher. When I got back and sat down near the end of the interview, Billy Bob was telling a story about smoking in a bar in New York. As in Lafayette, smoking in restaurants is illegal, but it goes even farther there in that you can't even smoke in a restaurant's patio area. Of course, there are also alcohol consumption laws, so you can't drink beer on the sidewalk. The story concludes with the ridiculous circumstance of him not be able to drink or smoke without taking a step over a gate. Bill Maher then remarks, "I feel like that's why a lot of people vote Republican."

I laughed, but the more I think about it, the more right it seems. The negative stereotype of most progressives is the annoying hippie. People worry that liberals in power will mean that no one can have guns, non-hybrid cars, or any food not vegan soy based. The Democrats have allowed the Republicans to paint them in that light for years, and as if to confirm their lack of testicles never said anything about it. All the right had to say was, "They will force us to become hippies," and everyone with an SUV, a grill, or a rifle said fuck that. Of course there are progressives who like to hunt, race gas guzzlers, and eat meat but that isn't what conservatives want people to hear.

Progressives are losing people that way, being to easily labeled as a hippie or an environmentalist. We have these laws that tell people you can't let customers smoke in your business, even outside, and you will have a lot of people eventually decide they just want the government out of their face. In all, I agree with that sentiment, but that isn't what the Republicans stand for anymore. Republicans want to make government smaller by decreasing the protections and services offered to citizens, not increasing freedom. In fact, one could argue that conservatives are the leading candidates for decreasing personal freedom, but that is a different post. As long as the government is wrongfully intruding into the lives of people, there will be a large swath of people that will never vote on the side they perceive as increasing the size of the government. The Democrats need to fight to change that perception, and it will be difficult to do so with the healthcare debate going on.

The simple answer is, get rid of some of these intrusive laws. There are many countries where it is perfectly legal to drink in public, and the sun still rises there. We don't even have to get rid of laws, just get rid of some of this crazy (and costly) bureaucracy. Make it a Democratic cause to streamline the government, the same way it already is a progressive cause. There are already Democratic movements to simplify the tax code, so make that a highlight of the legislative agenda after healthcare. [CBS] Progressives need to make some headway against this freedom curtailing perception before they begin to work on energy policy. If the Democrats don't make people feel more free, the Republicans will be able to yell about socialism even louder than they are now. Eventually, someone is going to start believing it and the conservative renaissance will be on us again. I don't know if the world can handle that right now.

Art or Terrorism

2009-06-27T17:30:00.002-04:00

I read an article today about a comic book artist who was searched by the TSA because he was carrying a work in progress about terrorists attacking the United States. [SFScope] This story hit me pretty close to home, because my roommate is an aspiring comic book artist. I also have my own concerns about that. Who gets to decide what materials are questionable? If I travel with my combustion textbooks, is that questionable? What about math books? They could be about cryptography, I might be planning a cyber crime.

Terrorism is one of the biggest issues of our time. It is only natural, as human beings, that we make art about our feelings and opinions about it. Why does expressing those opinions mean that someone is a terrorist? Imagining extremists blowing up buildings is not reason to believe that the person doing the imagining is an extremist. We all have these thoughts and feelings, and this author took his thoughts and made them into these books. Why does that make him suspicious?

Ironically, the very people who say they are defending us from terrorists who hate our freedom are the ones taking it away. They claim to be the ones responsible for our ability to have our opinions, to draw our comic books, but please don't try to take them on an airplane. Don't put your ideas on paper anywhere they can be seen, we wouldn't want to think you are a traitor. Enjoy your freedom, but not the freedom to ask questions.

This is what Orwell was worried about in 1984. First, we can't think of terrorism. Terrorists use bombs, so one day we can't think about bombs. Bombs are made by chemists, and soon it is dangerous to know too much. It might even be at that point, I've never tried to fly with my chemistry books. Here is the most horrifying part about all of that; if you read about a student being searched at an airport for having chemistry books (or virology, cryptography, any of the "dangerous" sciences) would you even be surprised? That doesn't mean we are losing freedom, that means it is gone. When you can't even carry "too much" money onto a plane, freedom is dead. [ACLU] I still have hope that Obama or anyone can turn things around, but until someone does, this is the country we have to live in. This is the privacy that we are given by the authorities, where your unreleased intellectual property can be violated at the whim of a guard at a checkpoint. This time it was a comic book, what if next time it is a trade secret, or medical records, or something where privacy is of the utmost importance? Is that a country that you would call free?

R. I. P. Michael Jackson

2009-06-25T23:42:00.003-04:00

Michael Jackson died today at age 50. [CNN] Deepest condolences to his family, friends, and fans. The King of Pop left a tragically short period of brilliance and his unfortunate fall from grace.

Dangerous Assumption

2009-06-24T22:09:00.003-04:00

In my sophomore design class, we did a section about liability law. Of course, as a product engineer, if I design something inherently unsafe I am liable for any injuries it causes. Unfortunately, a lot of great lawyers have a funny definition of "inherently unsafe." Not that there aren't poor designs in the world, because there are plenty of horror stories about defective cribs, but the main takeaway of the lecture was that people are fucking stupid. We were told story after story of people using things in unforgivably dumb ways and getting a ton of money in court rulings. For me, the real takeaway from this lecture was that believing people possess even basic intelligence was a dangerous engineering assumption.

I watched Real Time with Bill Maher this Friday, and Bill Maher made a joke where he implied that most Americans were so stupid they thought Iran was a treadmill made by Apple. At the time I didn't fully appreciate the joke. Then, last night while watching the Daily Show, they did a piece interviewing people on the street both in America and Iran. Frighteningly, it's pretty clear that some people in this country can't name the president. The people in Iran seemed to know pretty well, and he isn't even the most powerful person in that country. All of this got me thinking.

As a product designer, it is wise for me to assume that people are dumb. Should this assumption be applied to progressive causes as well? I think about the big policy debates of some recent years, and they all seem to boil down to a nuanced viewpoint against a hardline slogan talking point. Here are some examples off the top of my head;

Marijuana Legalization:
Pro; Marijuana is relatively harmless substance and prohibition is very expensive compared to regulation and taxation of the substance.
Con; DRUGS ARE BAD!
Withdrawal from Iraq:
Pro; After an unjustifiable and expensive conflict which weakened our position geopolitically, it is time to reduce our prescence in the region and take our soldiers out of harm's way.
Con; DON'T CUT AND RUN! SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
Ending Torture:
Pro; Torture is an illegal, ineffective, and disgraceful practice.
Con; JACK BAUER!
Kerry vs. Bush:
Kerry; End Bush's policies of irresponsible deficit spending, restore civil liberties, aggressive foreign policy, etc.
Bush; I'M A WAR PRESIDENT!

This seems to be happening with the healthcare debate as well. Our healthcare system is a joke compared to those of other industrialized nations, yet an attempt to even offer a public insurance option to buy into is being met with cries of "COMMUNISM!" Which brings me back to the point, do progressive activists need to start talking in catchphrases? Obviously, we can't even assume that people possess any awareness of their political reality, but in a democracy progressives need them on their side. Should arguments that explain every nuance of a policy decision be abandoned? I would guess that, "We need to fix healthcare because... Here is how...," is much less effective than grossly oversimplifying and saying, "FREE HEALTHCARE!" Progressives don't even need to feel bad about it, conservatives do it all the time. This is how conservatives had so much power for so long. I'm not saying this is what I want, quite the contrary, but maybe if someone yelled "FREE HEALTHCARE!" as loud as the right is yelling, "COMMUNISM!" it would cause someone to pick up a fucking newspaper and find out who the goddamned president is. We need that more than anything else.

This Giraffe is Having a Bad Day

2009-06-23T22:51:00.005-04:00

I thought this was hilarious.

Office Supply Porn

2009-06-22T23:40:00.002-04:00

In high school, I had a friend named JoAnna who was a self proclaimed office supply nerd. She once instant messaged me that she had gone to buy some office supplies and excitedly proclaimed to me that her, "folders were nesting like dolls." I was reminded of her enthusiasm for this stuff by a post on the Make:Blog today. They highlighted some different planning and writing tools for brainstorming projects and ideas. This is something I have been interested in recently, since I have been trying to adopt the Getting Things Done method of time management. I chose this method because it seems to be pretty common with the hacker and maker communities that I tend to identify with. As such, I have been looking at the ways that other people keep themselves on top of stuff.

I haven't yet implemented GTD, and my system right now is pretty piss poor. It isn't that I am having trouble staying on top of my workflow, but my system is far from perfect. I get ideas for songs, blog entries, drawings, or things I want to look into all the time. Unfortunately, I never have anything to record this informations so the ideas get lost. I'm getting a little better using the note taking app on my iPod, but the real problem is my methods for tackling larger projects. I'm good at staying on top of smaller stuff like homework assignments and my day to day workflow, but I have trouble breaking up big stuff into smaller chunks to do. For example, if I have a paper to write, I'll do it all in one weekend. I do the same things for exams, where rather than starting my studying far in advance for a bit of time every evening, I'll sit down and have a couple several hour long study sessions. I see people around me stressing over these things a lot less and getting similar results to me. To me, this indicates that there is a more efficient way to approach big projects and I am hoping that GTD will be my way of doing it. In the meantime, any suggestions about the way people keep themselves organized is appreciated.

Statistics and Iran

2009-06-22T01:15:00.002-04:00

I will confess that I don't know much about the politics of the Iranian election. Frankly, I voted for Obama in the hope that I would be afforded the luxury of not having to worry about the stability of hostile Middle Eastern nations. In the long run, I'm not really sure that any of the Iranian candidates in this election will make a huge difference for the United States, due not only to the prevailing politics of the region but also the role that unelected clergy play in Iranian government. Regardless of the individual politics, the point of an election is to assert the will of the people onto the government. In any functioning democracy or republic, elections are the most critical function of the government. The fairness and accuracy of an election cannot be in question. This is, unfortunately, the case in Iran. President Ahmadinejad has been accused of rigging the election so as to steal it from opposition candidate Mir Hussein Moussavi. [New York Times]

While there has been an admitted discrepancy of 3 million votes, I suspect there will be more. Nate Silver, the genius statistician, used Benford's Law to analyze the election. His conclusion is that there is a suspiciously unlikely distribution of votes for at least one of the candidates. [FiveThirtyEight] I have heard of Benford's Law used before in an application like this, but today I read another article about another analysis. Benford's Law is concerned with the first number of the count for each candidate. This article instead looks at the last two number of the provincial counts. Since these are the least significant digits of the count, their distrubtion should be roughly uniform across the counts (as these numbers represent random noise for all practical purposes). They are not. In fact, they deviate from the expected distribution in such a way that the probability of a distribution matching the one in Iran is 200 to 1. [Washington Post]

As I have said before, I don't know much about the specifics of the politics in this election, but clearly the results do not match the will of the people. That needs to be fixed, regardless of the winner. The three million vote irregularity found by the Iranian officials is only the tip of the iceberg. When the statistics say smoke, there is almost always fire.

Kicking Around Some Ideas

2009-06-20T02:10:00.003-04:00

Thought I would write a little update on what I've been working on lately. The last project I mentioned on this site was an intersection with a stoplight modeled using a microcontroller. Unfortunately, that project did not function after the circuits were developed, as such I had no useful material to post. Here is a run down of the things I have going on right now.

Math research - This summer I am working on undergraduate research in Mathematics rather than Mechanical Engineering. I mostly wanted to do this because I'm considering going into mathematics for grad school rather than mechanical engineering and I wanted to get an idea about what math research is. I don't feel like I'm really qualified for the research I am doing. This is research involving heavy abstract algebra, and I have never had any formal coursework in the subject. For the first time in my life, I am having to encounter material at this level of difficulty without the benefit of a class to learn it. It is at the same time intellectually satisfying and endlessly frustrating. Anyone have some good links to some interesting abstract algebra stuff?
Podcast - My roommate and I have been kicking around the idea of doing a podcast. It would be in a similar format to Kevin Smith's brilliant SModcast, in that it would probably just be an unscripted conversation. This might be happening after the end of this month when we all get paid and can invest in the equipment we need to record.
Art - I recently got a digital camera, and I'm going to make an effort to get back into producing some visual artwork. Part of this will be photography, but I want to work on my drawing skills as well. Engineers have to be able to communicate graphically, and I couldn't draw my way out of a wet paper bag. I'd like to one day improve to the point that I can not only easily communicate with technical drawings but also use drawing as a creative outlet. I'll be posting some of that work here. If I get a decent amount of material I might even start up a DeviantArt account.
Music - Again, I have a few things I am working on. More details to come, possible performances or recordings to follow.

I think that's it for now.

E-Readers for College Students

2009-06-10T00:33:00.005-04:00

I hear a lot about Amazon's new Kindle DX, and how the people at Amazon are working with some colleges as a replacement for textbooks. You can read the Wall Street Journal story about it to see what I mean. I have thought a lot about it, since I love new gadget toys, but I just don't see it working out. Here are the reasons that I would love to have an e-reader, and then the big problems where I don't see it working.

Why E-Readers would be great;

My shoulders would hurt less - Like most college students, my textbooks are gigantic tomes. Carrying them to class or to the library is a huge pain, especially when you throw in the laptop (along with its necessary accessories) that I need for nearly every assignment. My large Timbuk2 bag is almost always filled to the brim, and usually weighs at least 40 pounds if I am going somewhere to work. If I could replace 25 pounds of dead tree with 9 ounces of plastic, I'll make that trade every day.
Use my free time more effectively - There are plenty of times during the days I have classes where I get little snippets of 20 or 30 minutes of dead time on campus. I don't carry around books that I don't absolutely need because they are so cumbersome, so I end up wasting that time when I could be doing useful work. Having all of my course material in one tiny device would alleviate that problem, because I always have full access to my books.
All the neat features - Excuse the nerdery for a second, but e-readers are fucking cool. You can save and export annotations (crucial for a textbook), get newspapers, magazines, and blogs delivered to them wirelessly, read PDFs (big for my research, as most articles you download are PDFs), and even make it read to you. That is pretty fucking neat compared to paper with ink stains. [Amazon]

Why E-readers won't work;

Cost - For just the $490 cost of the reader itself, I could get most of my textbooks used from the bookstore. Of course, once you buy the reader, the books aren't free. If this Statistics book is any indication, the Kindle price isn't much lower than the print price. According to those same links, the Kindle price is above the Amazon used price and therefore probably the bookstore's used price as well. I also can't sell back a Kindle book to the bookstore. The use of that e-reader pretty much effectively doubles the cost of textbooks in the first semester, and keeps the costs higher for each semester after that. I'm already living on Ramen noodles, so no thanks on that proposition.
Color - I know this is a minor gripe, but I really like color in my textbooks. I'm in a very technical field, and color really helps the clarity of diagrams and charts. I deal with technical drawings and printouts all the time, so I like to see color. According to Wired, color screens are a way off, so this is probably just a matter of technology getting there. For now though, I'll stick with the paper for clarity.
DRM - I had a friend with a lot of music they bought from iTunes. The tracks had Apple's FairPlay DRM scheme on them, which prohibits the files from being played on "unauthorized devices." I remember these tracks were a huge problem, because when you buy a new iPod or a new computer or even re-installed Windows, you had to jump through all these hoops to get your music back to playable. Amazon encumbers their e-books with their own DRM. Well, the trouble with textbooks is that I can't fuck around and just lose access to them for an indeterminate amount of time. I need access to them whether or not I replace the reader, re-install Windows on my laptop, or whatever else I need to do. I would much rather give my money to a company that doesn't assume I am a criminal and try to lock down the content I have paid for. [Defective by Design]

My second two gripes are pretty minor. If Amazon wants to really get my dollars, they should make a student edition of the Kindle. It should be cheaper, and to make it that way they can get rid of some of the superfluous features. The Kindle can pull down content from a wireless Internet connection. I carry with me, every day, approximately 4,000 things that connect to the Internet. I have no problems using my computer to sync an e-reader. It works for my iPod, subscriptions and all. Speaking of my iPod, I will always use that to listen to audiobooks and mp3s, so no need to have that on the Kindle. Those are just some components that can be discarded. I don't need another device to check my e-mail and ESPN, I have plenty of those. Don't sell me a computer, I already have one. I just want a book with more features, and the Kindle comes close, but it doesn't quite make sense for a college student just yet.

Is Science As Important As Football?

2009-06-04T13:35:00.001-04:00

I just read this article, which makes the case for a return to better science education. Check it out.

One Conservative Gets Waterboarded

2009-05-25T11:43:00.001-04:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

So, when is Sean Hannity going to man up?

The Current State of My Car

2009-05-20T12:48:00.003-04:00

There she is. My car, with the engine and transmission all out of it. I was driving back to my house from the grocery store right before finals, and the engine just died. I had it towed to a shop, where we found out that a connecting rod had failed and blown out the engine. So, there are two huge holes in my old engine block, and I have a 23 year old paperweight rather than a car. This picture shows the new engine which I am currently working on placing into the car. The pictures below show the aftermath of the old engine.

Waterboarding Isn't Torture?

2009-04-21T10:39:00.003-04:00

I have heard this sentiment from previous administration. [CNN] Even Senator Lieberman thinks that waterboarding is not torture. [Fox News] Dick Cheney thinks that we will somehow decide that this country should torture prisoners once we see what useful intelligence we got from it. [Guardian]

I found a video today of a Playboy journalist who subjects himself to this. Please keep in mind that this journalist knew he was never in any danger, he knows that he can stop whenever he wants, and that he was surrounded by people concerned with his well being. He also was not as scared or broken down as someone who had been kept in a captive situation would be. I think after you see the video, your opinion about waterboarding might change.

Upcoming Project

2009-04-21T09:49:00.001-04:00

I'm working on a model intersection (with a functioning LED stoplight) for my systems and measurements course, and I think I am going to write up a little how-to about it. I have always wanted to contribute something to a site like Make or Hack-a-day and I think that even though this project is a bit trivial it might be worthwhile to write something up. This would be a fun project to learn about basic circuits and microcontroller programming for someone who has no experience with them. This should be up shortly before or after finals.

Still need more fun iPod apps...

Posted with LifeCast

New iPod App

2009-04-20T12:21:00.001-04:00

Checking this guy out to see if I can update from my iPod. Also it is 4/20! More on that later.

Posted with LifeCast

I Just Discovered iPod Apps

2009-04-19T23:24:00.002-04:00

They rule, and I need more awesome ones. Suggestions?

Vermont too!

2009-04-07T17:09:00.002-04:00

Gay marriage now legal in Vermont! [Burlington Free Press] Could the rest of the nation follow suit?

Way to Go Iowa!

2009-04-07T10:35:00.002-04:00

Iowa legalized gay marriage. [Chicago Tribune] Hopefully other states follow.

Gaza Invasion, Worse Than I Thought

2009-01-06T23:04:00.002-05:00

After watching that video, it seems clear that Israel was not retaliating for Hamas attacks, but was the first nation to break the cease fire. This supports my idea that Israel was just looking for an excuse to attack Gaza before the Obama administration takes power. Meanwhile, the Bush administration supports, "Israel's desire to protect itself." [AP] Protect themselves from the consequences of violating their own treaties? This was a unilateral attack on Hamas, and their justification for the invasion is an attack they provoked. I will never understand why people in this country and this administration give Israel a free pass for their violent oppression of Palestinians. It could be because we are lied to about Israel. Even in that AP article I linked to, George W. Bush said, "The situation now taking place in Gaza was caused by Hamas." The facts disagree.

Make: television

2009-01-05T23:41:00.002-05:00

I was bored today, just looking around the web. I was reading the Make Blog when I came across Make: television. At first I was a little leery about the idea. I love Make magazine, the Make blog, and all the projects they feature, but I just wasn't sure about a public television show. It's fun to read about the projects, I just wasn't sure that same enjoyment would translate to video. I was definitely wrong, Make: television is fantastic. The interviews with makers are interesting, regardless of whether or not the project seems neat or not at first. To hear everyone talk about their process and their technique is so fascinating. It makes me want to open up my toolbox and get to work, which I'm sure is the point of the show to begin with. The bottom line is for anyone that likes DIY projects, Make: television is worth a look. Even cooler, they are offering the entire show for free on their website. Check it out if you are bored.

Israel Invades Gaza

2009-01-04T16:24:00.006-05:00

As of yesterday, Israel has begun a ground invasion of the Gaza strip. [Yahoo! News] This is after several days of a bloody bombing campaign in which many civilians were killed. I'm tired of hearing all of the excuses trying to justify Israel's actions. Yes, Hamas was launching rockets into Israeli territory. [Time] Any country would be forced to respond to that. If Canada launched rockets at Alaska, I'm sure that we would respond very quickly. It is not the act of retaliation that I disagree with however. It is the magnitude of the Israeli response that is a problem.

Imagine that you get slapped in the face by someone, and then you blow their arms and legs off with a shotgun. That is a pretty close approximation to what is happening in Gaza right now. Well, actually, imagine that you were making the guy's life a living hell before he slapped you, and that would be a pretty accurate representation of the situation. I wasn't able to find any casualty figures for the rocket attacks that Hamas engaged in, but the general consensus seems to be few casualties. Any casualties warrant a response, but not to the extent that Israel has responded. I found this picture below of the aftermath of a rocket fired by Hamas after the fighting began from Reuters.

It hardly looks more destructive than a some large fireworks. Yet the Israelis level buildings with civilians in them, because they suspect that a Hamas fighter may be inside. [ABC News] They began airstrikes as children were walking home from school. [Guardian] They rammed a ship coming carrying medical supplies and humanitarian aid, later saying, "they believed it was involved in terrorist activities." [CNN]

All this leads me to only one conclusion, this is not about protecting Israelis from rocket fire. Israel is more than capable of dealing with a few militants firing rockets across the border without dropping bombs from warplanes. This is about getting rid of the democratically elected leadership of the Gaza strip while they still have the support of the Bush administration. This action has been condemned by the UN, and there have been protests worldwide demanding that the cease fire be restored. [NPR] Why hasn't the UN issued a resolution demanding that Israel cease their invasion? The United States used their veto power as a permanent member of the security council to prevent UN action in Gaza. [AP] The Bush administration has been very friendly to the Israelis, thanks to their support in the war on terror while Obama is much less pro-Israel. [New York Times] Even our support comes as a bit of a shock to me, because Israel did not inform us about their intent to take action against Hamas. [AP] This is Israel wanting to oust Hamas before a new administration would hold them to a higher standard.

Israel had every right to respond to the rocket attacks. They could have done so in a way that got the support of the United Nations. They could have done so in a way that minimized the civilian casualties. They chose not too. Both of these groups, the Israeli government and Hamas, refuse to recognize each other's existence thus they refuse to negotiate for peace with each other. This is unacceptable. There will never be peace in the region until Israel stops abusing Palestinians and both side stop acting like spoiled children. We give Israel more foreign aid than any other nation, and that needs to end if they continue using your and my tax dollars to kill children. [Ynetnews.com] Israel must defend itself, but we give them more than enough power to defend. We give them enough power to oppress, ethnically cleanse, and abuse other people in the region. They have proven to be an oppressive and abusive nation, and our support for those actions must stop. Our support allows them to be the only super power in the region. Our support allows them to be the only nuclear power in the region, against the will of the United Nations. With that privileged position we provide them, we must demand better from the Israelis than the terrorism they currently engage in. Anything less is worse than hypocrisy, it is murder.

Fuck!

2009-01-03T23:41:00.001-05:00

Damnit Indy.

No Reservations

2009-01-02T23:18:00.003-05:00

I have been bored out of my mind, so I have been watching a lot of Travel Channel. They have this show where Anthony Bourdain goes around to places and just experiences the culture. They are doing a marathon this week leading up to the new season, and he was in some bush in Africa.

He is eating with this tribe, and they cook shit by literally burying it in fire. Then they try to dust off all of the ash and dirt and you eat it. Watching him try to choke down eggs covered in ash and sand, along with some boar anus, got me thinking about what an awesome job he has. I mean, aside from that meal, he spends the rest of his life professionally on vacation. He just goes around getting paid to do what most of us only get to do for one or two weeks a year if we are lucky.

Anthony Bourdain is living life. He goes around having new experiences everyday. I'm stuck in this boring dump, waiting for classes to get back in session. I'd totally tolerate the pig anus and sandy eggs to get out somewhere and see something new. Mr. Bourdain, you rule.

Resolutions 2009

2009-01-01T23:45:00.002-05:00

I have made a tradition of putting my New Year's Resolutions up here to keep myself accountable. I definitely fucked up in 2008. I can't dunk a basketball yet, I didn't get a 4.0 (though I came damn close), I didn't go to South Bend at all (car fucking up), and I didn't do any music performances. I did get an engineering research job, so it wasn't a complete waste. Fuck 2008 anyway. This year sucked. Aside from the election of Obama, I can't think of much good from this year. I can think of plenty that was bad though. All you have to do is read the front page of the financial section in any newspaper to see that it was a bad year. Or read about the latest Israeli aggression in the Middle East, or the fact that we are still there. Here's to hoping that 2009 is a lot better than 2008. Now, what I hope to do;

Dunk a basketball - I'm serious. I want to do this. My classes for this upcoming semester are scheduled so that I can hit the gym in the morning, rather than trying to squeeze a workout in during the day. I will make this happen.
Raise my cumulative GPA to 3.3 - My current GPA is 3.1. This isn't good enough to apply to most graduate schools in engineering or mathematics. Most schools require a 3.2 to apply for post-graduate work, and the honors society requires a 3.3. So, that will be my goal.
Read 24 books - Again, I've gotten away from reading in my free time. I'm trying to get back to it.

That's what I've got for 2009. Hope it turns out better than 2008.

Happy Holidays

2008-12-25T23:51:00.000-05:00

Hope everyone is enjoying the time off and getting some time to relax.

True Story

2008-07-31T11:57:00.003-04:00

I was at Kinko's trying to use their large format printer. I had this poster that I needed to print for work. Anyway, this dude behind me working on the copy machine ripped ass the loudest I have ever heard. What was fucked up is he didn't even acknowledge it at all! I'm sorry but if you fucking fart that blatantly, you have to say something. I don't care what, just say something, you have to acknowledge something that egregious.

"Excuse me."

"God damned barking spiders!"

"My bad."

Something!

It was all I could do to not look over my shoulder and just say, "So... we're not going to talk about it, huh?"

Best "That's What She Said!" Ever

2008-07-12T17:34:00.002-04:00

Me; Dude, let's watch Superbad.
My roommate; Sure.
Me; Cool, I'm going to take a leak, you put it in.
My roommate; That's what she said!

Gross.

Sweetened Honey

2008-07-12T14:46:00.007-04:00

My roommate and I just went to KFC for lunch, and I noticed something strange. The honey packets that came with the biscuits said "Honey Sauce" rather than just "Honey." So, I turned that bad boy around, and checked the ingredient list. It says, "High Fructose Corn Syrup, Sugar, Corn Syrup, Honey, Caramel Color." The worst part is that honey is the 4th ingredient listed. According to myfit.ca that means it is the fourth most common ingredient by weight. Honey isn't even the majority of the honey sauce, which I think is pretty fucked up. That isn't a picture of the packet I had, just one I found on Flickr, but the list is the same. Why, in the name of Jim Cramer, would they add sugar to honey? I can just imagine that meeting.

Dramatis Personae

KFC Executive #1; Staunch supporter of the Republican party, doesn't know what is in honey, wears size 12 shoes even though one foot is more like 11 and a half, deals with it
KFC Executive #2; Totally unprepared for this meeting, also doesn't know what is in honey, spends his weekends snorting cocaine off hooker's breasts with Nancy Grace, knows about Exec #1's asymmetric feet and would make fun of him, but just realized there are no funny jokes about that
KFC Executive #3; Has only one line, that's more than enough back story considering the role he plays within the plot line, might have the most interesting life you've ever heard of, seriously, just find this guy at a bar, put a beer in front of him and just wait for your life to change

Scene
Exec #1 sits at a table in a conference room, other people in suits walk in and take seats around the table. Exec #2 rushes in and hastily takes a seat directly to the left of Exec #1. He seems nervous.

Exec #1; Good afternoon everyone. As you know, sales last quarter were down 3 tenths of a percent. We need some ideas to bring customers back in and keep them coming back. Launching a new menu item would be too costly, so we need ideas to improve our current menu or our store experience. Let's go around the table and through out some ideas, starting directly to my left.

Exec #2; (Under his breath) Fuck! (Out loud) Well, gentlemen, after significant research and focus group testing my team and I have identified that we are not meeting customer's needs in one critical area.

Exec #1; Great work! What is that area?

Exec #3; That's what she said!

Exec #2; (He desperately looks at the poster along the wall of the conference room with pictures of KFC food on them. He stops on the pictures of biscuits as inspiration strikes.) Biscuits! People aren't satisfied with our biscuits.

Exec #1; Our biscuits? They are one of our most famous and popular menu items, how could they be unsatisfactory?

Exec #2; It isn't the biscuits per se... uh... it's what people put on them. Right! People aren't happy with jams and honey anymore, our customers crave something new. Something that transcends what we traditionally offer. A paradigm shift in biscuit toppings.

Exec #1; I enjoy your use of managerial buzzwords. Continue.

Exec #2; Our research has indicated that our... honey... isn't... sweet enough. Yeah! Our customers are looking for a sweeter sauce to put on their biscuits than the honey that we currently offer.

Exec #1; Fantastic! I'll get on the horn with our suppliers and our honey will be loaded with sugar by Monday.

Scene

Motivational Posters for Friendly Atheist Contest

2008-07-08T15:34:00.006-04:00

One of the blogs I read is Friendly Atheist, you may have noticed his RSS feed over in my sidebar. Well, he is running a contest to see some motivational posters relating to atheism or religion in some way. I'm always one for a good joke, so I found some pictures I have on my computer, went over to AutoMotivator and made a couple. They are posted here.

I think there is a better joke in there, but I'm too much of an engineer to think of it. The next one is just me being really mature.

Got any good ones for his contest? Send them to him, and let me know in the comments.

Favorite Album from Each Year I've Been Alive

2008-07-07T13:53:00.001-04:00

My friend Adam, over at enterthegrayarea posted an entry about his favorite albums released for every year he has been alive. It's a pretty interesting exercise, since I got to reflect on some music I haven't listened to in a while. So, here are mine;

1985 - Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms

This album features "Money for Nothing," which has a brilliant guitar riff. Mark Knopfler is constantly underrated as a guitarist, and Dire Straits never gets as much credit as they deserve. As a single, I prefer "Sultans of Swing," but I think this is a better overall album than their self titled effort.

1986 - The Police - Every Breath You Take: The Singles

I know it's lame to choose a greatest hits compilation for a list like this, but I don't care. I am a huge fan of The Police, and all of their best stuff was recorded before I was born. I actually don't like "Every Breath You Take," but there are so many other great tracks on this album that I can forgive The Police for one song that isn't very good.

1987 - Dead Kennedys - Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death

Two greatest hits CDs right in a row! Guess what, I still don't give a fuck. It isn't my fault that all of the best punk was recorded before my time. This is one of the greatest albums in history. Listen to it all the way through, and you can see just how influential the Dead Kennedys were with songs like "Holiday in Cambodia," "Police Truck," and "Nazi Punks Fuck Off."

1988 - Metallica - ...And Justice for All

Remember when Metallica was a sort of rebellious rock band, and not a punchline? Really, any of their albums from back when they were more metal than Republican could have made this list. Their music was melodic and displayed a virtuosity that was at best genius and at worst simply pedantic. It's hard to believe that the same band responsible for the whole business with the RIAA once put out an album with the statue of Justice symbolically raped on the cover. Also, that the same band who recorded "One," is also responsible for a travesty like "St. Anger." I suppose a lot changes in 20 years.

1989 - Fugazi - 13 Songs

A great album from one of the last true punk bands. Fugazi always did things DIY. On top of that, their songs are amazing. This is their first 2 EPs compiled on one album. It is a great introduction to the band.

1990 - Social Distortion - Social Distortion

This one has a little bit of a country twang to it, but it is a very influential punk album. It is definitely Social Distortion's best known album, thanks to "Ball and Chain," and more recently "Story of My Life," which was featured in one of the Guitar Hero games (it might have been 2 or 3, I vaguely remember playing it at some point).

1991 - Red Hot Chili Peppers - Blood Sugar Sex Magik

This one barely edges out Nirvana's Nevermind for 1991. I think this is just a better album. It has "Suck My Kiss," "Under the Bridge," and "Give it Away." Not only that, there are some tracks on Nevermind that just aren't as good as the non-single tracks on this album. So, I give the Chili Peppers this one.

1992 - Pantera - Vulgar Display of Power

Cowboys from Hell could have also made this list, but I prefer this album. Pantera was a fantastic band, and the tragic death of Dimebag Darrell was a huge blow to the music world. To this day, I don't know anyone who plays guitar that doesn't know of Pantera's work.

1993 - Nirvana - In Utero

This is a better overall album that Nevermind in my opinion. Pablo Honey by Radiohead is some stiff competition for this year, but the combination of "Pennyroyal Tea," and "Rape Me," are just a bit better than "Creep." Pablo Honey also has some definite misses on the album (I'm looking at you "Anyone Can Play Guitar") where In Utero is solid from beginning to end.

1994 - Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral

This album has "Closer," on it. That should be enough of a reason, but in case you need more reason, it also has "Hurt," "Ruiner," "Big Man with a Gun," and "March of the Pigs." No other album released this year comes close to being as good as this one.

1995 - The Smashing Pumpkins - Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness

Much like last year's album, this is far and away the best released this year. This is definitely the Pumpkin's opus, and the tracks range from sublime to brilliant.

1996 - Sublime - Sublime

This is a difficult decision. Sublime's greatest album, against Rage Against the Machine's brilliant Evil Empire. In the end, I went with Sublime because there are just so many quality songs on the album. To me, this is the very definition of CD that is great from beginning to end. I listened to both albums from end to end and there are more memorable tracks on the Sublime CD than there are memorable tracks on the Rage CD. So, I give this one to Sublime.

1997 - KMFDM - Symbols

There is a soft spot in my life for industrial music and techno music. This is one album that has tracks in almost every playlist I've ever made for my iPod. This album is hard industrial music, but still accessible. Definitely worth checking out if you are new to the genre or to KMFDM.

1998 - Beastie Boys - Hello Nasty

The Beasties put out consistently great records. This one is a masterpiece. This has some of their best beats, and great lyrics. They definitely outdid themselves on this record.

1999 - Rage Against the Machine - The Battle of Los Angeles

They had to show up somewhere on this list. Tom Morello is a genius on guitar, and he has probably done more to influence the way people think about the guitar than anyone since Eddie Van Halen. His groundbreaking work continues on this album, which had some great singles.

2000 - The Suicide Machines - The Suicide Machines

This one features "Permanent Holiday," and "The Fade Away." I didn't get into the Suicide Machines until Adam introduced me to this album, and it is still one of my favorite punk records.

2001 - Tool - Lateralus

Every bass player on Earth knows the intro to "Schism," but so few people really appreciate the full depth of this album. The only way to experience this one is to play it from beginning to end without interruption. The strange rhythms, the ambiance, just the whole experience. If your only exposure to this album was "Schism," you are doing yourself a disservice.

2002 - Flogging Molly - Drunken Lullabies

To this day, this is the craziest mosh pit that I have ever been in. This album has so much energy. The mix of Celtic instruments into punk rock is amazing, and the album just has a fantastic sound. I don't know how people can hear this album and not just need to get up and move.

2003 - Anti-Flag - The Terror State

This was Anti-Flag's first full studio album since 9/11 and the beginning of the Iraq War. This is Anti-Flag at their best and most relevant. The is some of their most blistering, desperate, angry, and frantic punk, as well as a remake of a Woody Guthrie song. This is, in my opinion, their best album to date.

2004 - Bad Religion - The Empire Strikes First

I agonized over this decision. We have this album, Dynamite Boy's self titled final album, and American Idiot by Green Day. I eliminated Green Day, because even though it's a great overall CD, and a great concept, I cannot fucking stand "Boulevard of Broken Dreams." While Dynamite Boy is my favorite band, I still think Bad Religion's album is better. Bad Religion draws parallels between the policies of the Bush Administration and the novel 1984, and once again there are just a few more memorable tracks than on the Dynamite Boy album.

2005 - Against Me! - Searching for a Former Clarity

I have been a big fan of this band since I saw them open for Anti-Flag back in 2003. There albums are consistently solid. What I have always liked about their stuff is the way they go from straight ahead punk rock, to a few acoustic songs. There is a lot of versatility on their stuff, and this might be their best album.

2006 - Tenacious D - The Pick of Destiny

I love Tenacious D, and this album (along with their previous album) remind me of times with my friends. All of us can play some kind of musical instruments, and we all know the words to pretty much every Tenacious D song. Is this the best album of the year? Probably not, and even I would say that NOFX's Wolves in Wolves' Clothing gets more play on my iPod, but this is definitely my favorite from 2006.

2007 - Foo Fighters - Echoes, Silence, Patience & Grace

Another album in the line of the Foo Fighters consistently quality work. This netted them a well deserved Grammy. Also, the dig at emo bands with "Cheer Up, Boys (Your Make Up is Running)," is priceless.

I can't decide for 2008. Right now, the early leaders are the Nine Inch Nails Internet releases, Radiohead's In Rainbows (though the digital release was in 2007, the physical release was in 2008, so I don't know whether that counts). This year I have mostly been listening to The Dollyrots' album Because I'm Awesome, which was released in 2007. Flight of the Conchords might end up making an appearance, as an indie equivalent of Tenacious D's metal humor. What is your list?

Wall-E

2008-07-02T11:58:00.003-04:00

Wall-E may have been one of the greatest films I have ever seen, animated or not. If you haven't seen it yet, what are you waiting for? This is, without a doubt, the new standard bearer for computer graphic movies and perhaps even animated films in general.

The movie begins by showing us the expanse of the new Earth landscape. There are trash towers that dwarf the nearby skyscrapers, and the surface is covered with garbage and desert. We then meet Wall-E, a trash compacting robot who toils endlessly to gather the trash, compact it, and stack it into these towering landfills. He has one companion, a cockroach that follows him around keeping him company. Wall-E is curious, and collects items from the garbage that pique his interest, which provides for some funny moments. We also see that Wall-E is lonely as he comes home every night to watch "Hello Dolly," longing for company. All of his companion robots have broken or been deactivated in the long course of their work. Yet, Wall-E still does his duty to try and clean the impossibly toxic planet.

The love interest in the story, EVE, is a probe sent from the remaining humans in order to determine whether the planet can support life. After finding a plant that Wall-E has collected, EVE attempts to bring it back to the spaceship where humanity has been living in order to tell them it is time to come recolonize the Earth. Wall-E, quite smitten with the probe, follows her as they try to bring the plant to the Captain of the ship. They run into trouble when the other robots on the ship conspire against them to destroy the plant and end their hope of recolonizing the Earth.

This movie is unbelievably creative. First off, the setting is very dark for a children's movie, taking place on a barren Earth and a spaceship where humanity has become fat and lazy blobs. The humans are so plugged into their devices and their consumerism that they hardly recognize each other's existence or their surroundings. There is very little dialogue, outside of some minor supporting characters. It is uncanny, the feelings that these robots can evoke in you without ever speaking a single word. They turn metal objects, with little more than eyes for faces and no voices, and they make them so expressive with so much personality. It is incredible. I have heard that friends of mine even cried during the film.

The graphics are absolutely stunning in this film. From the wasteland of Earth, to the flights through space, even the interior of the spaceship (while a bit "cartoony," if you catch my meaning) are just breathtaking. The robots are expertly done and the attention to detail is astounding. From the rust spots on Wall-E and the scratches on his power readout to the space dust pock marks on the spaceship, the artwork is unreal. Despite all of this detail, the movie never forgets its sense of humor, and never takes itself too seriously.

In short, this is a beautiful, funny, creative, and fun movie. I just hope that the success of this movie leads to a sequel, because this movie left me wanting to see more of these robots. Go and see this movie if you haven't. I'll certainly be seeing it again.

The Love Guru

2008-07-01T21:51:00.003-04:00

I've read a lot of negative things about the Love Guru recently. So, I thought I'd weigh in on the film. My roommate and I went to go see it last weekend, and I liked it. Sure, it's not original or groundbreaking and it's not going to change your life, but I laughed a lot. Mike Myers is funny, but really it's all the same jokes from Austin Powers. If you were waiting for Austin Powers 4, this is it, it just doesn't have the same characters. It's the same running gags, the same sophomoric jokes, and the same feel. It's definitely not high comedy, but anyone who came in expecting South Park or something relevant with a real message obviously hasn't seen the last 3 Mike Myers movies.

One thing I do have to say, Jessica Alba and Justin Timberlake were fucking awful in this movie. It's inconceivable that they got paid for that. This was the acting equivalent of prison rape, except somehow worse. It is a damn good thing Jessica Alba is so hot, or her very presence in this film would be indefensible. Justin Timberlake's performance wasn't as bad, but he can't get the same pass from me because I don't roll that way.

The bottom line is, if you want some mindless laughs and your expectations aren't so high, this is a movie that you can enjoy. If you are expecting something as new and original as the first Austin Powers was, then you will be very disappointed. If you are expecting the next step down the road that Goldmember and The Spy Who Shagged Me were on, then there are plenty of gags and quotable lines to keep you happy. I'm not saying it's a great movie, but I don't regret the money I spent to see it.

R.I.P. George Carlin

2008-06-23T14:01:00.001-04:00

We all lost a great artist this weekend, as George Carlin died yesterday at 71. [Associated Press] I'll remember him, not only as a brilliant comic, but as a pioneer and a champion for the right of free speech. His most famous sketch, the seven words you can't say on television, was a fantastic observation about political correctness and the curtailing of free speech. I am stunned to hear this news. Carlin has an upcoming HBO special and just last week won the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. [MSNBC] He certainly didn't show any signs of slowing down. I'd like to end this post with one of my favorite George Carlin bits.

Shitty way to start the week.

1 Down, 49 to Go

2008-06-21T14:54:00.000-04:00

Gay marriage is finally legal in California. [LA Times] Finally, in at least one state, homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals. It is about time. Now, hopefully the rest of the country follows suit and allows gay marriage.

I don't understand why people are so opposed to gay marriage anyway. I understand the religious issues, but those are absolutely irrelevant thanks to the separation of church and state. So what else is it? God doesn't like it doesn't cut it as an argument, so what else can it be?

Thankfully, due to the magic of the Internet, I can find ten reasons why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed (a couple of of them secular, which honestly was a shock to me) put forth by an anti-gay marriage group. This give me the opportunity to address them one by one. These arguments are all taken directly from NoGayMarriage.com.

Argument #1.
The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. A recent article in the Weekly Standard described how the advent of legally sanctioned gay unions in Scandinavian countries has already destroyed the institution of marriage, where half of today's children are born out of wedlock.

It is predicted now, based on demographic trends in this country, that more than half of the babies born in the 1990s will spend at least part of their childhood in single-parent homes.

Social scientists have been surprisingly consistent in warning against this fractured family. If it continues, almost every child will have several "moms" and "dads," perhaps six or eight "grandparents," and dozens of half-siblings. It will be a world where little boys and girls are shuffled from pillar to post in an ever-changing pattern of living arrangements-where huge numbers of them will be raised in foster-care homes or living on the street (as millions do in other countries all over the world today). Imagine an environment where nothing is stable and where people think primarily about themselves and their own self-preservation.

The apostle Paul described a similar society in Romans 1, which addressed the epidemic of homosexuality that was rampant in the ancient world and especially in Rome at that time. He wrote, "They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless" (v. 29-31, NIV).

It appears likely now that the demise of families will accelerate this type of decline dramatically, resulting in a chaotic culture that will be devastating to children.

Even though they link to none of the relevant studies to which they refer, nor do they provide references to them on their website, I'll address this issue based on the assumption that they are right about their sociological data. First, let's talk about that Weekly Standard article. Of course since they don't link to it, or properly cite it anywhere, I searched for an article in the Weekly Standard archives that talked about gay unions in Scandinavia. I'm guessing that this is the article to which they are referring by Stanley Kurtz from 2004. [Weekly Standard] That is quite an interesting read. The article, despite citing statistics which seem to say that marriage was actually becoming stronger over the course of the studies conducted, is based on the premise that the strength of marriage in a country can be measured by children born out of wedlock. So, according to the Weekly Standard, any non-traditional family is unacceptable and a sign of the decay of both civilization (lest we end up like that Bible verse, written well over 2000 years ago) and the institution of marriage in general. Yet, when they examine these Nordic nations, they don't mention all that depravity, deceit, and murder they are filled with.

The article claims that the root cause of this decay is the perception that marriage is no longer linked to parenting. This causes the erosion of the traditional family unit, the article hypothesizes. Forget the fact that the evidence presented is mostly anecdotal, relying on a few radical thinkers and a celebrity affair, the little sociological evidence that is put forth is never fully addressed. Along with gay marriage the causes they attribute to the rising dichotomy between marriage and parenting are the welfare policies of these nations, rising secularism, weakening of state churches, and pervasive liberal attitudes in universities. Yet, it insists that gay marriage is a cause of this dichotomy, despite acknowledging the lack of data on the subject. With a lack of hard data, we can call this exactly what it is, a correlation and therefore not necessarily a cause.

All of these arguments are based on the assumption that anything but the traditional family unit is bad. "There is a serious scholarly debate about the spread of the Nordic family pattern. Since gay marriage is a part of that pattern, it needs to be part of that debate." [Weekly Standard] I'm sure there are still traditional families in Norway, and I'm sure there are perfectly happy and healthy children being raised in non-traditional family settings both in Norway and elsewhere. I'm also sure that the sun still shines in Norway, and Satan probably hasn't risen to claim his unholy throne in Oslo. In fact, nowhere in this article do they support the idea that a non-traditional family is bad for society in general. The article cites one sociological study undertaken in 1953 which suggests that children who's parents separate may end up worse off, but they mention nothing of stable same sex households because they did not exist at the time. I would guess that if the Nordic family model was really such a bad thing, the life expectancy in Norway wouldn't be higher than it is for the United States, but it is. [CIA World Factbook] Maybe there is something to be said for non-traditional family models after all.

Argument #2
The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions.

In Utah, polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal. This past January, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy. Their justification? Lawrence v. Texas.

The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will "have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society"-as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture. Do you see how the game is played? Despite 5,000 years of history, the burden now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family "may not be necessarily the best model." Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case.10 It took less than six months for his prediction to become reality.

Why will gay marriage set the table for polygamy? Because there is no place to stop once that Rubicon has been crossed. Historically, the definition of marriage has rested on a bedrock of tradition, legal precedent, theology and the overwhelming support of the people.

After the introduction of marriage between homosexuals, however, it will be supported by nothing more substantial than the opinion of a single judge or by a black-robed panel of justices. After they have done their wretched work, the family will consist of little more than someone's interpretation of "rights."

Given that unstable legal climate, it is certain that some self-possessed judge, somewhere, will soon rule that three men and one woman can marry. Or five and two, or four and four. Who will be able to deny them that right? The guarantee is implied, we will be told, by the Constitution. Those who disagree will continue to be seen as hate-mongers and bigots. (Indeed, those charges are already being leveled against those of us who espouse biblical values!) How about group marriage, or marriage between relatives, or marriage between adults and children? How about marriage between a man and his donkey? Anything allegedly linked to "civil rights" will be doable. The legal underpinnings for marriage will have been destroyed.

Inexorably? So it is impossible to have gay marriage without polygamy as well? What about the Nordic countries just discussed in the last argument? Polygamy is illegal there while they still allow gay marriage. Pedophilia, consanguineous marriage, and bestiality are just a few of the other things that are still illegal in these countries, but should be legal any day now if this argument is to be believed. Just for sport, let's forget that and take their slippery slope argument and run with it.

A little background here, Lawrence v. Texas has nothing to do with gay marriage and has everything to do with sodomy laws between consenting adults. [Duke Law] That goes beyond just talking about allowing homosexuals to marry. Without Lawrence v. Texas, states would have the ability to outlaw consenting adults from engaging in any sexual activity, gay or straight. So, the crux of this argument is that we should outlaw engaging in homosexual intercourse because it would keep polygamy illegal. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me too. Well, it might anyway if they could show one case of legalized gay marriage ending up in legalized polygamy.

Even then, I have to ask, what is so bad about polygamy? If a group of people all want to marry each other, I don't care. They are consenting adults, and I don't make it my business to control other people's lives. It even happens to this day in Africa and the Middle East. [Indianapolis Star] If polygamy is detrimental to our society, you said it yourself, you have 5,000 years of evidence to help you make your case. Just do so when you get your chance in court and you have nothing to worry about. These people want to be polygamists, and you want to stop them. The purpose of the courts is to resolve that conflict. I'm sorry to burden you with having to justify your reasons for restricting their decisions, but that is how the system works.

There are other reasons why the next steps down this slippery slope are more and more absurd. There are real health concerns about relatives mating. The other two situations involve relationships without consenting adults. That makes them an entirely different situation. I'm not advocating for or against polygamy, I'm just saying maybe it isn't as black and white as this argument would have you believe. It is a big leap to go from gay marriage to polygamy. It is unthinkable to go from gay marriage to pedophilia, inbreeding, and bestiality.

Argument #3
An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state's compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver's license or a hunting permit. With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.

I'm not sure that I completely understand this one. Somehow, legalizing gay marriage will make it so easy to get a divorce that marriage itself won't matter? I'm sure gay divorce will be just the same as straight divorce. The objective of the homosexual movement is to obtain the same rights as the rest of us. I fail to see how making divorce easier does that. I also fail to see how gay marriage puts the family "out of the way." Either way, there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. They don't show us any secret homosexual movement documents that say this is their purpose. They don't even support this speculation with more of their own speculation.

Argument #4
With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Textbooks, even in conservative states, will have to depict man/man and woman/woman relationships, and stories written for children as young as elementary school, or even kindergarten, will have to give equal space to homosexuals.

We would have to teach children tolerance, even in conservative states! We can't tell them that the love a homosexual couple has for each other is the same as the love a straight couple has for each other! This is getting into the moral argument again. They stop short of calling on their religious beliefs, but it is certainly implied. Just because their narrow view of morality doesn't allow for gay couples to exist doesn't mean that everyone else's does. Much like my moral view doesn't allow for ignorance and intolerance to exist, where their morality clearly does. In fact, it might do their children some good to learn about treating other people's lifestyles with some respect, since they clearly won't be getting that education at home.

Argument #5
From that point forward, courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad. The prospect of fatherless and motherless children will not be considered in the evaluation of eligibility. It will be the law.

As it should be. In their viewpoint, the least qualified heterosexual couple is better equipped to raise a child than any homosexual couple. Why is that? There is absolutely no evidence to support the fact that heterosexual couples are better parents than homosexual couples. [Sacbee.com] So, two high school dropouts, living in a trailer, with low paying jobs if any at all, and perhaps even a criminal history would be better parents than two educated individuals, with a secure home and finances simply because the first couple has different genitals? Parenting is a hell of a lot more than just being a man and a woman. So much more in fact that simply being a man and a woman doesn't qualify you to be a parent, nor does it disqualify a couple who lacks those qualities. At least, that's what all the evidence says.

Argument #6
Foster-care parents will be required to undergo "sensitivity training" to rid themselves of bias in favor of traditional marriage, and will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens.

Since people are born homosexuals, I would hope that someone raised in a loving environment would support a gay son or daughter. Foster parents already have to be trained and licensed, at least that is the case in Indiana. [Indiana Foster Care and Adoption Association] So, what is the problem with teaching foster parents how to handle what will be a difficult situation in the child's life? This is simply more ignorance from this group. Gays aren't good enough to have equal rights, so why should we teach foster parents to raise a gay child? It is really disgusting the level of intolerance this group has.

Argument #7
How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. And how about the cost to American businesses? Unproductive costs mean fewer jobs for those who need them. Are state and municipal governments to be required to raise taxes substantially to provide health insurance and other benefits to millions of new "spouses and other dependents"?

Yeah, it sure would be a shame if all those gay couples finally the marital benefits they deserve. Of course, we would have a huge budget surplus to deal with some of these issues if it wasn't for "conservative" leadership these last 8 years, but I digress. Forgetting the fact that these couples deserve the equal protection that marriage has to offer (thus the whole fight for equality in the first place), what about the costs to business? I'm sure anyone in the marriage industry and the related industries would welcome a whole new market opening up to them. I guarantee there isn't one bakery, catering firm, DJ, wedding photographer, banquet hall, or wedding planner who would not want the extra business.

Those huge costs to business, well they simply don't exist. "Did you ever wonder why more and more companies, state and municipal governments, and colleges and universities are granting benefits to gay workers' partners and children? One big reason: It's cheap. On average, it would add 1 percent - 2 percent tops - to employers' benefit costs, says Susan Sandler, editor of a newsletter, HRfocus, for the Institute of Management and Administration in New York." [Christian Science Monitor] Oh, and studies by the Congressional Budget Office also suggest that legalizing gay marriage would decrease government spending. [Christian Science Monitor] Therefore, if we are talking about a strictly economic standpoint, it is stupid to not legalize gay marriage, especially during this current downturn with rampant surplus spending.

Argument #8
Marriage among homosexuals will spread throughout the world, just as pornography did after the Nixon Commission declared obscene material "beneficial" to mankind.11 Almost instantly, the English-speaking countries liberalized their laws against smut. America continues to be the fountainhead of filth and immorality, and its influence is global.

The point is that numerous leaders in other nations are watching to see how we will handle the issue of homosexuality and marriage. Only two countries in the world have authorized gay marriage to date-the Netherlands and Belgium. Canada is leaning in that direction, as are numerous European countries. Dr. Darrell Reid, president of Focus on the Family Canada, told me two weeks ago that his country is carefully monitoring the United States to see where it is going. If we take this step off a cliff, the family on every continent will splinter at an accelerated rate. Conversely, our U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that it looks to European and Canadian law in the interpretation of our Constitution.13 What an outrage! That should have been grounds for impeachment, but the Congress, as usual, remained passive and silent.

If America was really that influential, how come there isn't worldwide free speech? Why are there still state churches in this world, when our very Constitution outlawed that practice in our nation over 200 years ago? Why is there slavery in this world, when we abolished it in our nation over 150 years ago? This argument also contradicts their earlier arguments. They say that gay marriage is only legal in Belgium and the Netherlands, yet earlier they were trying to use the Nordic nations as an example of how gay marriage leads to the destruction of the family. So, which is it? Either they didn't do the research, or they just don't care because they are making up arguments when what they really want to say is, "Gay marriage should be illegal because I believe it is wrong."

Why should we care about the laws in other countries? In our country, the 14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. That protection is not being extended to gay Americans. This debate isn't about Canadian law, or European law, or any other international law. I've already addressed their argument that gay marriage weakens the social structure of families or society. Despite all of this, apparently we shouldn't extend equal protection to our citizens, lest other gay people get equal rights in Europe too? I fail to see the problem.

Argument #9
Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed. The family has been God's primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning.

Its most important assignment has been the propagation of the human race and the handing down of the faith to our children. Malachi 2:15 reads, referring to husbands and wives, "Has not the Lord made them one? In flesh and spirit they are His. And why one? Because He was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth" (NIV).

That responsibility to teach the next generation will never recover from the loss of committed, God-fearing families. The younger generation and those yet to come will be deprived of the Good News, as has already occurred in France, Germany and other European countries. Instead of providing for a father and mother, the advent of homosexual marriage will create millions of motherless children and fatherless kids. This is morally wrong, and is condemned in Scripture. Are we now going to join the Netherlands and Belgium to become the third country in the history of the world to "normalize" and legalize behavior that has been prohibited by God himself? Heaven help us if we do!

BZZT! Oh, so sorry, faith based arguments have no place in a legal debate. The first amendment takes care of that one. The spread of the Christian gospel has no place in this debate. Just as the Muslim belief that alcohol should be forbidden has no place in a debate about whether or not alcohol should be legal. Just as people whose faith prevents them from getting vaccinated shouldn't be able to prevent the rest of us from doing so. If this is, as they say, the most important aspect of their arguments, that speaks volumes about why gay marriage should be legal. If they are trying to legislate Christianity, that is their first mistake. If that is the best reason they can give, then they are wrong.

Argument #10
The culture war will be over, and I fear, the world may soon become "as it was in the days of Noah" (Matthew 24:37, NIV). This is the climactic moment in the battle to preserve the family, and future generations hang in the balance.

This apocalyptic and pessimistic view of the institution of the family and its future will sound alarmist to many, but I think it will prove accurate unless-unless-God's people awaken and begin an even greater vigil of prayer for our nation. That's why Shirley and I are urgently seeking the Lord's favor and asking Him to hear the petitions of His people and heal our land.

As of this time, however, large segments of the church appear to be unaware of the danger; its leaders are surprisingly silent about our peril (although we are tremendously thankful for the efforts of those who have spoken out on this issue). The lawless abandon occurring recently in California, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington and elsewhere should have shocked us out of our lethargy. So far, I'm alarmed to say, the concern and outrage of the American people have not translated into action.

This reticence on behalf of Christians is deeply troubling. Marriage is a sacrament designed by God that serves as a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and His Church. Tampering with His plan for the family is immoral and wrong. To violate the Lord's expressed will for humankind, especially in regard to behavior that He has prohibited, is to court disaster.

Another faith based argument, talking about how they believe that it is immoral and wrong to interfere with God's plan. Again, their personal beliefs and morality play no role in our laws. Their God isn't mine, and their want to prevent gay marriage violates the supreme law of our land. In a democracy there are very few laws that aren't up for debate or majority vote. Equal protection under the law is one of them, and that is what gay marriage is about. It isn't about God or someone else's belief that their personal morality is the absolute universal benchmark for the rest of us.

Thankfully, California officials recognize this and have even gone so far as to reassign state employees who refuse to perform their public duty based on their beliefs. [LA Times] Even the appeals court in the state has respected the California Supreme Court decision and refused to ban gay marriage until the voters of California make a decision on a ballot measure for a state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. [San Diego Union Tribune] This is all in the hands of the California voters then. They can either recognize the rights of gay Americans, or they can pass the amendment and watch it be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In either case, eventually, I believe the rights of gay couples will be recognized in this nation. In the end, conservative commentator Terry L. Garlock says it better than I can.

That wedding ceremony wouldn't be about me or my personal discomfort. It would be about those two people who love each other and decided to publicly announce their permanent mutual commitment. Should my personal attitudes prevent them from doing that? Should my religious beliefs keep them legally unrelated even if they remain committed to each other for life?

While I am free to have my personal disquiet about homosexuality, am I also free to interfere with their desire to be recognized as a family unit? If they are a permanent couple, should my aversion withhold from a lifelong pair the same rights as family for hospital visitation, for consultation with doctors when one is ill and maybe even dying?

Is it right that we tell a committed lesbian couple they cannot marry, and at the same time tell them they cannot inherit from each other tax-free at the first death, like a married couple, because they are not married, that they must pay estate taxes that quickly climb to 50 percent and cannot take spousal advantage of income tax, Social Security and other benefits of a married couple?

I appreciate strong religious beliefs against same-sex marriage, and a church has every right to prohibit the practice for its members. Marriage is a legal status to which we are free to choose to add religious covenants, but those religious covenants should not govern the legal status of marriage, especially since we are free to choose our religion and even free to reject religion entirely. We shouldn't codify religious beliefs into law.

...

I've given this a lot of thought, and I think my prior stand against same-sex marriage was based on my personal thoughts about homosexuality rather than individual liberty. Those are two separate issues. My uneasiness may never go away, no matter how many names the enlightened ones call me, but the freedom of same-sex couples does not depend on my endorsement of their lifestyle.

As a conservative, I believe the state should stay out of the business of judging which unrelated adults may and may not make a marriage commitment to each other, that when a same-sex couple chooses to marry, we conservatives should value their liberty far more than any personal or religious disagreement with homosexuality. Conservatives should welcome the contribution of same-sex marriage to the virtues of commitment and family stability we hold so dear. [Atlanta Journal and Constitution]

I couldn't agree more.

A Scarlet Letter

2008-06-20T14:28:00.000-04:00

I had to attend one of those diversity seminars recently. I hate these kind of corporate seminars, where we have to learn all about outside the box thinking, paradigm shifting, or whatever other fucking buzzwords are in vogue at the time. I understand that some people have trouble with diversity. I don't. I have friends of every race, creed, color, sex, nationality, sexual orientation, whatever you want. I'm not saying the presentation was bad. In fact, the guy who was presenting did an admirable job considering the dull topic, but there was one uncomfortable moment.

He asked everyone to raise their hands for certain aspects of their character. At first, nothing serious, like raising your hand if you were a chocoholic. He got to religion eventually, and he went down the list. Catholics, Presbyterians, Jews, Muslims, Methodists, on and on. As this is happening, I'm just looking around the room, not really for any particular reason, just nothing else to do. He calls on atheist, and I am the only one on my half of the room to raise my hand. It was a bit uncomfortable, not because I was the only one, but it seemed like everyone around me instantly changed their opinion about me. It felt like I went from being John to being "the enemy" or something like that.

It isn't just me, and it wasn't just those people either. It has been well known for some time that the public views Atheists less favorably than any other minority. [Legal Times] In fact, I didn't know about the tyranny that I am imposing on the world. Just ask William J. Federer.

Daily there are news reports of atheists offended by prayers at graduations and football games; offended by a Cross or Star of David; offended by Christmas carols or patriotic hymns; offended by Christmas trees and menorahs; offended by the Ten Commandments or "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance; offended a teacher might hint there may be a Creator; offended a soldier said "God bless you" at a funeral; offended the Boy Scout Oath says "Do my duty to God and my country"; or offended by a cross on a Veterans Memorial.

Whereas basic Christian teaching is to forgive when offended, these atheists, when offended, protest, intimidate, threaten and sue to have their will enforced as law.

...

A minority forcing its will on the majority – isn't this the classic definition of tyranny?

Americans may as well be back in colonial times when the king of England used government to enforce his minority views. [WorldNetDaily]

I won't address the ignorant claims made in that column, because I think I have made my opinions abundantly clear. In fact, by making those outrageous claims, he strengthens my point. Imagine if he had written that column in the fifties, and he talked about how a minority of black people are trying to impose their differing views on the greater American public. What if he had written it around the time of the suffrage movement and talked about how women were trying to impose their views on us all? These statements illustrate exactly why atheists are hated. Not because we have different beliefs, but because we want the equality that should have been given to us and is guaranteed to us in the Constitution. We want to level the playing field that has been slanted against us, and the people who benefit from that don't want to see it happen.

Why do people like Federer oppose equal protection? There are plenty of reasons. They want to control us. They want to tell us what we can read, what we can say, what we can watch, what video games we can play, what laws get enacted, who gets to marry whom, the medical decisions we make, on and on and on. The issue isn't about spiritual beliefs, it is about control and power. It isn't enough for them to live within their faith, they have to make sure that everyone else does by making it impossible for anyone to live any other way.

I've already come out as an Atheist. In fact, I did that a long time ago, mostly because I don't think it should matter. My Atheism doesn't make me a better or worse student, a better or worse researcher, or a better or worse person. In fact, if my spiritual beliefs (or lack thereof) causes one of my professors or peers to change their opinion of me or my work then I think that is far worse reflection on their character than the label "Atheist" has on me. To me, "Atheist" sounds a lot better than "Bigot."

Since I've already come out, I have decided to join Richard Dawkin's Out Campaign. [OutCampaign.org] This the scarlet A that is the picture for this post, and the one on the sidebar there as well. A being for Atheism of course. I'm not doing this for myself, because I've been out as an Atheist for a long time. I'm doing this for anyone struggling with their Atheism who stumbles upon the campaign and sees the list of over 700 bloggers who have joined the campaign thus far. [OutCampaign.org] I can imagine that it would be difficult to come out as an Atheist in a place where people might not be as tolerant. It is probably a very lonely feeling. In my mind, the Out Campaign is similar to the gay pride movement. We can't make a difference or stand up for ourselves if some of us are so ashamed of ourselves, or afraid of what the people around us think, that we won't even allow ourselves to be identified as Atheists. So, I'm marking my website with the A, and I would encourage other people to do the same. It is the first step we can take to make progress toward ending the intolerance.

New Blogger Features

2008-06-17T21:30:00.002-04:00

Blogger just released this cool thing that shows the first post of the RSS feeds of the sites you link to. So, I changed from the boring link list I once had to the cool one I have now. Check out the new sidebar. I cleaned it up a bit.

Kung Fu Panda

2008-06-17T20:12:00.001-04:00

I am a big dork for computer animated movies. I loved Shrek, and anyone who knows me personally is really sick of hearing about how excited I am to see Wall-E when it comes out. I was actually not interested in seeing Kung Fu Panda, even though I had seen the previews before Iron Man and the numerous commercials. The reason for this was mostly the marketing. Any movie that has Happy Meal toys, clothes at Wal-Mart, and all the other kid's stuff before the film is released, that is a red flag in my mind. I was a bit worried that this movie would be more like Garfield than like Shrek. Garfield was an extraordinarily bad movie because it tried to cash in on some fancy graphics with an unbearable plot, poor voice acting (despite Bill Murray's best efforts) and just overall crappiness. Fortunately for me, this movie was much more Shrek.

Jack Black's personality comes through very well as Po, the main character. I had trouble imagining Jack Black as a kung fu fighter, but his performance is fantastic. The movie seems to take on his personality as well, where some of the training and fight scenes are appropriately over the top and ridiculous. The Wushi Finger Hold feels like a play out of Jack Black's book. Dustin Hoffman also does a great job as his sensei, but there is no question that this movie is about Jack Black.

Much like Shrek, the movie is funny while still being family friendly. The animation is incredible. The fights are fast and fluid. The animals have their fur and feathers, the cloth tapestries and plants sway in the wind. The artist's did an amazing job with the setting and the technology. There are some gorgeous landscapes in this movie. Overall, this movie was a joy to see and I highly recommend it to anyone who is as bored as I am over the summer in this college town.

Ouch

2008-06-10T18:03:00.002-04:00

With Leather calls this the greatest thing you'll see all week. It's definitely hard to top.

http://view.break.com/516659 - Watch more free videos

Odd Thought

2008-05-29T20:32:00.002-04:00

You ever get the feeling that text messaging is a sign of the regression of human intellect?

Iron Man

2008-05-24T02:16:00.003-04:00

If you haven't seen Iron Man, go see it. I've never read the Iron Man comics, so I don't have any real basis to go on to say whether or not the movie is faithful to the comic book universe. In fact, I can honestly say I knew nothing about Iron Man before I saw this movie. I was initially a little hesitant to see the movie, especially after the debacle that was Spider Man 3. I was worried that this would be a hastily thrown together piece of garbage that was trying to cash in on the nostalgia of Iron Man fans the world over. Plenty of in jokes and nods to the fan boys at the expense of the overall quality of the film. I was pleasantly surprised at how good the movie is.

Robert Downey Jr. does a great job as Tony Stark. It would have been so easy to turn this movie into another romp down emo alley (I'm looking at you again Spider Man 3). He manages to bring depth and humanity to his character while still keeping himself from becoming completely enveloped in his conflict. He is clearly changed after the tragedy that makes him into Iron Man, but he still has his sense of humor and his charisma. Gwyneth Paltrow does very well as Pepper Potts (even though the role was small) and Jeff Bridges is appropriately conniving as the film's antagonist, Obadiah Stane.

I did have one issue with the movie. As I said, I know nothing of Iron Man, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't really any "villain" in the classical sense. Everyone knows all the classic rivalries in most superhero universes. The X-Men have Magneto, Batman has the Joker, Superman has Lex Luthor, etc. I wonder, did Iron Man have an arch nemesis like this? It seemed that in this movie his main nemesis was just the idea of the military-industrial complex. While that didn't detract from the film, due mostly to the subtle scheming of Obadiah Stane, I wonder where they go for the sequel, which they hinted at countless times. They coyly lay unsubtle hints for movies about the Avengers and War Machine, but I am sure there will be another Iron Man movie before these.

Overall, this is a great movie. The minor annoyances of the sequel shilling are definitely overshadowed by the great effects, well thought out plot that flows very well, and solid acting by every cast member. They didn't beat you over the head with the love story, they didn't sacrifice plot to squeeze in two more action sequences to really get their special effects moneys worth, they didn't make it inaccessible to people who didn't wear Iron Man underwear when they were kids, they just generally dodged all of the cardinal sins of bad superhero movies. If they can keep it up for the sequel, I might have a new favorite superhero.

Reflecting on UIFI

2008-05-17T18:26:00.004-04:00

Last week I attended UIFI at Camp Jameson in Indianapolis. This was a leadership institute for men and woman involved in Fraternities and Sororities at Purdue. This was an amazing experience, and it really changed my feelings about the Greek community at Purdue.

I arrived at the institute really not knowing to expect. I didn't make much of an effort to learn what the institute was actually about, instead I had figured it would be an opportunity for me to network for my house. I had precious few connections with the Greek community hear, and all I was hoping for was to expand that to a few more. My house is very insulated from the community, and my primary goal was to make some in roads to get involved. I did not expect to learn as much as I did at the institute.

We started off meeting our chapters, which was the smaller group that we would be having our discussions in. It was a little intimidating at first. We started off with those team building activities and I am not great at those. I'm a little shy to begin with, and then to throw in some kind of strange activities with that and I was not in my comfort zone. Fortunately for me, I had some amazing people in my group who were very cool and we had an amazing time.

You start UIFI by learning what a leader is. It seemed like everyone had part of an idea about what a leader is, but no one quite had the full definition that we were looking for. A leader is someone who uses shared values to create collaborative relationships leading to collective action to elevate a cause. Even this was enlightening, just to hear what we all thought leadership meant, and then to have put into those words and realize that was exactly what we all meant but didn't have the words to express it that way. I always thought that leadership was just something that you did. I could tell you what a leader did, but I couldn't tell you how. I was missing the shared values part. That seemed to be a common theme.

After this, we split off into our smaller groups and we talked about our personal revolutions. Some event in our lives that played a big role in making us the people we are today. I wrote a few down, Kelly and I breaking up, my returning to Purdue, finishing pledging, etc. I was a little nervous about sharing these with a group of people that I didn't know, but the first person in our group to share told us a very personal story. It was incredible to just have someone we just met open up to us like that. It really set the tone for the rest of the institute. After hearing his story it was a lot easier for us to share our stories, and to then talk about how that shapes us as a leader and a person.

From there we talked about what kind of leadership you'll typically see in an organization. You can see regressive leadership that moves the organization backwards. You can see managing leadership that really just maintains the status quo. The organization doesn't get better, but it doesn't get worse. There is progressive leadership, where the organization gets better in measurable ways but the real root causes for many of the problems are not addressed. Finally, there is revolutionary leadership that transforms an organization and ensures long-term success. This was another eye opener for me. Before this, I had used my position in the house and I would say that all of the goals I had for my position fell under progressive leadership. I was thinking too small. Things might have gotten a little better under my leadership, but I wasn't making the changes that I could've made to ensure that things were easier for the next person in my role.

The next day, we began to talk about what kind of leadership personality we have. It was interesting to see where people fit. Based on some of my interactions with the people in my group, I thought that I had a pretty good idea about where they might end up. I was right in a couple cases, but wrong in some others. We then did an activity where they split us up by our personalities and had us perform a task. It was interesting, because these groups each had the same problems as the other groups with the same personality types. We then talked about how we can take advantage of these different kinds of skills as we work with these people in our organizations.

We spent the next part of the day studying Toyota. Toyota allows GM to view and study their manufacturing processes, in order to improve GM's own processes. In exchange, they learn from GM's process and can include what GM does well into their techniques. It is this sense of cooperation that we are definitely missing in my chapter. We sort of view everything as an us versus everyone else struggle. For our rush, we need to get these guys as members, or someone else will and then we've lost. It never even really occurred to us to reach out for help. I know that I assumed everyone thought the same way about us that we did about them. This is simply not the case, as everyone was more than willing to help us out. Toyota also does something else that I found to be extraordinary. They are constantly looking to improve their process, even looking for a way to improve the way they improve their process. This might not seem unusual, but it is when you think about it. Most companies just wait until all their tiny little problems become big costly issues and then hire consultants to come in and they make big changes once or twice a year. Toyota meanwhile is making little changes everyday, always looking for some little way to improve. Clearly, this is much better than the alternative of making big changes once things get unmanageable.

We then moved on to talking about conflict resolution and ethical decision making. Ethical decision making is a nuanced issue, and obviously our own personal ethics are subjective so there is no absolute moral compass that we can be directed to follow. However, despite thinking about your own ethics and issues such as that the best advice I heard was do what you say that you will do and be who you say that you will be. People can argue about the details of ethics and whether or not certain aspects of a bigger issue are right or wrong, so the best that you can do is act with the highest amount of personal integrity and live within your ethics. The conflict resolution talk was also especially helpful. I have been taught since grade school, as I'm sure everyone else has, to always seek out the compromise that will allow both parties to win something. Compromise is good, in some cases it might be the best that you can hope for, but is there something better that we can strive for? Collaboration is better than compromise. In our organizations, we should all have a shared goal. So most conflicts that you are going to come across in that setting are people conflicted over different way to get to the same goal. Rather than compromise, we should collaborate and work together so that the concessions necessary to reach the goals we set are at a minimum.

The real eye opener of the whole institute took place that evening. We held a debate, and the stakes were the Greek community. One side argued that Greek organizations provided a significant benefit to college students and the community and therefore should be allowed to continue to exist on their campuses. My side argued that Greek organizations are a hindrance to college students and the community, and therefore should be dissolved. It was too easy to argue on my side. To think of all the problems that we have as a community, the hazing deaths, the drinking issues, the sexual assaults, the intolerance, the academic problems, it was quite easy to come up with material on my side. That was the hardest part. To take a real hard look in the mirror, and to think about the way people view your chapter and your community. The other side couldn't even convince the panel of motivated leaders in the Greek community that Greek organizations should be allowed to exist, despite the fact that as leaders in the Greek community we have experienced the many benefits of Greek life firsthand. That was difficult to handle, to realize that even us, who gave up our vacation time to improve our Greek community, couldn't convince ourselves objectively that we should be allowed on campus. To know that our houses that we all cared about so much are seen by outsiders as a negative force in our communities and that we could barely defend our value to ourselves.

We were left the rest of the evening to really absorb the debate. I spent the whole night really reflecting about my chapter. I sat and I asked myself the hard questions that I never really asked myself before. Is my chapter intolerant of homosexuals? Does my chapter haze new members? Does my chapter really benefit the Purdue community, or are we just a glorified drinking club? If someone got it in their head to dissolve my house, how could I stop them? It became clear to me that I was focusing on small issues in my house. I came to UIFI worried about our recruitment numbers and changing the stereotype at Purdue that we are a house full of nerds. I hadn't even considered the real issues facing my house and the Greek community. It really motivated me to make some changes.

The next morning we went to the Boys and Girls Clubs in Indianapolis to do some volunteer work. That was a very affirming activity, to work with people in my Greek community to help make a difference for the people at the Boys and Girls Club. My house does very little community service and that is going to change. I made so many friends working like that, and that seems like a fantastic way to build relationships in the Greek community, to get involved in other chapter's service and philanthropy projects. We might even start one of our own in the near future. One of the more important aspects of Greek life is community service and it is an area where my chapter has been seriously lacking. After returning from the Boys and Girls club, we had some more discussions about our leadership personalities and conflict resolution.

Finally, after being made aware of all the problems we face in the past days, we were given the solution. It was so simple, it should have been obvious to begin with. We need to start living our Rituals. If everyone in their respective fraternities and sororities lived up to the values set forth in their Ritual, or even tried to live up to those values better, the Greek community would be a much different place. Our Rituals challenge us to become better people, to expect more from ourselves and our brothers and sisters than we do from an average person walking down the street. All of the problems we face can be eliminated by refocusing on our core values, and getting rid of those people who cannot do that. If they can't align themselves with the most important values of an organization, then why bother to have them as a member of that organization? All of the sudden, it seemed like there was a light and I began to think of solutions for our problems. How we could get our house moving in the right direction, and make it better for the next generation of men in my house.

We spent the next days working on our individual plans for our chapters. We talked a lot about leaving our legacy. We need to implement our changes like Toyota. There needs to be a new culture in our Greek communities and our individual chapters. One where the status quo isn't good enough, and we can always be better. Where we don't have to stray this far off course again so that it takes another revolution to get us back to where we should be. We should be working everyday to get just a little bit better at living our Rituals and being the best Greeks we can be.

The last day was just our graduation ceremony and our goodbyes. I want to thank everyone in my chapter, and everyone that I interacted with over the course of the institute. You all played a huge role in what was an amazing experience for me. I'm sure that the next time I write about a personal revolution in my life, UIFI will be mentioned. I learned so much from everyone, and made so many friends I will never be able to thank you all enough for that experience. I even played Euchre with the CEO of the NIC, and we were an awesome team by the way. All in all, this was a great experience and it really motivated me and reminded me why I became a Triangle in the first place.

The Writer's Strike

2008-05-14T22:31:00.002-04:00

I was watching House today online, catching up on the episodes I missed while I was at UIFI and watching the NBA Playoffs. It got me thinking about the writer's strike from earlier this year. It definitely ruined the second season of Heroes, which is the other show that I watch. Still, I support what the writers did.

The media landscape is evolving and it is clear that all future distribution and publishing models for any form of media is going to have to include the Internet. As a content creator, not including digital distribution in your compensation package is short sighted and hugely detrimental. Look at what happened to musicians with iTunes. Weird Al Yankovic gives his account of the situation;

I actually do get significantly more money from CD sales, as opposed to downloads. This is the one thing about my renegotiated record contract that never made much sense to me. It costs the label NOTHING for somebody to download an album (no manufacturing costs, shipping, or really any overhead of any kind) and yet the artist (me) winds up making less from it. Go figure. [Digitalmusic]

These labels are profiting off of the creative output of other people, because they are providing the necessary capital to distribute and copy that work to the masses. Television and movie production studios can turn screenplays into reality, and for shouldering that financial risk they deserve their compensation. However, trying to game the system to avoid paying royalties to your business partners who create the content that you are selling doesn't make any sense. The record companies tried to do this to musicians, and fortunately for the writers they were able to get ahead of it before having to bring lawsuits like the Allman Brothers and Cheap Trick had to. [MP3.com]

It seems like new media is always a huge boon for the publishers before those benefits trickle down to the artists. That may be fair to a point, since there is inherent risk in developing a new distribution medium, I just don't see it being fair to the point that artist's are exploited currently. Have their been media failures? Sure, but for every Betamax, there is a VHS and a DVD. For every Laserdisc there is a CD or an mp3 or digital streaming. Distributors and publishers need to start including fair provisions for new and emerging media in their contracts with content providers, or we are going to see more and more of these strikes that alienate fans and cost everyone money every time that a new and better way to release something comes along. Really, I can't stand another shortened season of Heroes.

I Love This Fucking Song

2008-05-10T22:38:00.000-04:00

Semester Over

2008-05-03T22:33:00.002-04:00

I managed to survive the spring semester here at Purdue. I actually did quite well, thanks to a single minded, borderline excessive, focus on my schoolwork. Fingers crossed, but I might have managed a 4.0 this semester. Where have I been since I last posted?

As far as my resolutions are concerned, I'm continuing to work out and practice to accomplish my goals. I did manage to land an engineering job, and this summer and fall I'll be doing research in biodegradable lubricants and getting ethanol from agricultural waste. I'm making progress toward my goals.

Unfortunately, the area of my life that I have been the most neglectful of is the one that I feel is the most important. I haven't managed to go to South Bend as often as I wanted, and I have even been distant from my friends here. I miss my friends in South Bend, and I hate that I haven't been able to see them more often. I plan to change that over the summer. I also want to go to the coasts to visit people.

As my responsibilities are decreasing for the summer, posts here will increase. I always feel better when I can write and reflect, so I plan to do that more. I leave tomorrow for a leadership conference, and I'll be writing entries about my experiences there for the next couple of days.

Primary Season

2008-02-10T19:04:00.000-05:00

Indiana is the least politically important state in the Union. We always vote republican nationally, and our presidential primary is in May, when everything will already be decided. Our voice in national politics is minimal.

To tell the truth, I don't even follow the primary races, because there is no difference that I can possibly make. I'd like Obama to win the democratic nomination, but there is no way to give my opinion any voice nationally. By the time I get a chance to cast my vote in the primary, the decision has already been made. As far as the system is concerned, no one in my state has an opinion that matters. Why should the people in Iowa and New Hampshire have a bigger say in who becomes a presidential nominee than I do? If we are having a national election for the president, why not have a national primary to make the decision?

Since my opinion doesn't matter unless I can influence someone in another state to change their opinion, I'd like to make an endorsement. I'd like to endorse that everyone educate themselves about what the candidates stand for, and make an informed decision this year about the direction you want the country going in. Just this week, I heard my roommate say this, "I don't really know what any of the republican candidates stand for, but I'll probably end up voting for them in the election." We ended up talking about what some of the candidates stand for, and he realized that he didn't agree with a lot of what some of the republican front runners stand for. It is just as easy as going on the internet and reading a little about how the person you believe deserves your vote thinks about the choices you are empowering them to make. It's even as simple as looking at a chart like this one. If you are going to make a decision, why not make it an informed decision?

Performance Enhancing Drugs

2008-02-10T16:05:00.000-05:00

A while back, I worked at a restaurant where the manager and I were both crazy about baseball. This was the season that Rafael Palmeiro got busted for abusing steroids. [ESPN] Steroids, of course, have been the hot topic in baseball for most of the past several seasons, with Barry Bonds and his chase of the home run record, to the Mitchell report, to the first round of "Steroids Era" players coming on the Hall of Fame ballot. We were discussing steroids, and their impact on the sport when my friend said this, "I would have never suspected that Rafael Palmeiro was juicing." Palmeiro did have a reputation for being a good guy, someone who played the game the right way. I told him, "Just wait until a couple of years from now, when you hear about pitchers like Roger Clemens who were juicing."

The idea made sense the whole time. Pitchers play forever, and get injured very often. The human body just isn't designed to be able to exert the forces necessary to propel a baseball at that speed, that many times over and over. Pitchers are constantly getting elbow surgeries and shoulder surgeries, because it's very easy to blow out your arm by pitching like that. It makes sense when you're biggest athletic obstacle is your ability to get your arm back in time for the next start that steroids would be a huge benefit. It improves your recovery time, and it makes you build muscle (and therefore speed on your pitches). [Bodybuilding.com] Really, it makes more sense for a pitcher to be juiced than any other position on a baseball field. I can be a stronger hitter, but that isn't going to help me put my bat on the ball.

Sure, added muscle mass may increase the distance a player is able to hit a baseball, but what negative effect does that added mass have in altering the fluidity of the player's swing and, thus, his ability to hit the ball in the first place? A popular baseball refrain cautions fast players who have deficiencies in the batter's box that one cannot steal first base. Similarly, a power hitter cannot hit a home run if he cannot hit the ball. And hitting a baseball is a unique skill in the world of sports. It is a powerful act that does not require extraordinary muscle strength. Instead, it is primarily dependent on technique, reflexes, and hand-eye coordination, not brute strength. It is a correlation that so many people are failing to make these days. [The Diamond Angle]

So, when the whole Roger Clemens thing happened with the Mitchell Report, I wasn't surprised. Even the talk about him being excluded from the Hall of Fame, due to the allegations contained in the Mitchell report. Where do I stand on Roger Clemens? I think he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, regardless of what the congressional committees find out about his steroid use. As I said when I wrote about Barry Bonds, I think it's fair to compare anyone from the same steroid abuse era to others at the time. Steroids are against the rules, sure, but there are already cheaters in the Hall of Fame and now baseball is finally making some efforts to curb their use. I don't like cheaters, and I don't like Roger Clemens, but he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame as does Mark McGwire. Roger Clemens was one of the greatest pitchers ever, and for a vast majority of his career, steroid use wasn't legislated against in baseball. What about people now who get LASIK surgery? We don't call the modern era of baseball, the "LASIK era." [Slate.com] As far as I'm concerned, I don't like steroids, and I would like to see them out of professional sports. However, as a fan, I can't pretend that it never happened, nor should I. I can't say I didn't root for every Cubs team of the steroid era, and I can't say that I like the Cubs any less now that I know some of them were juicing up.

2008 Resolutions

2008-02-10T16:04:00.000-05:00

It helped me last year to make my resolutions public, and to post about them (when I did post). So, here is what I've got for 2008.

Slam dunk - Ever since I was a little kid, I've loved basketball. I'm a really tall guy, and now that I've lost some weight, it is possible that I might be able to finally achieve something athletic. Why dunking? It is simply the most embarrassing you can do to another human being in sporting competition. Try and convince me that this isn't embarrassing.
Get a 4.0 for one semester at Purdue - I want to go to grad school for ME. I don't think I'll be able to convince anyone of the fact that I am capable of being a graduate student in engineering if I can't have even just one semester of knocking it out of the park with a 4.0 GPA.
Visit South Bend at least once a month - One of my biggest regrets of my college career is that I don't stay close with my high school friends. I still feel close with them, but it is strange to see them as infrequently as I do. Purdue is only 2 hours from South Bend, there is no reason for me not to set aside one weekend a month for them. They deserve at least that much from me.
Get an engineering job or internship - As much fun as I had bartending and waiting tables, I'd rather not have to go back to that. I have spent all this money and effort trying to get the knowledge that I have, so why aren't I using to get some more money, or something to prove that my effort isn't totally wasted?
Play music for people - I've always loved music, and I like to perform. Something that I really miss from when I was younger was playing music on stage. So, I'm going to make it my goal to do that at least once this year.

Grades

2007-12-20T22:26:00.000-05:00

Grades for Purdue were released yesterday. I got 1 A, 2 B's, and 1 C. I half expected 1 A and 3 C's, so I am thrilled that I ended up better than that. At least I can justify the amount of stress I was under over finals week. Trust me, there was a lot.

What Happened?

2007-12-18T18:41:00.000-05:00

In a strange confluence of events, I haven't written for this blog in since August. It is no coincidence that this date is similar to the date that classes began for the fall semester at Purdue. This was the first time that I had ever tried to balance a full time job along with being a full time student. It was difficult for me to find a decent balance, and I guess when it really came down to it I wasn't able to, because my social life and my academics suffered as a result. In order to keep up with my coursework, it was this aspect of my life that had to suffer.

I have since decided to quit my job and focus on school and return to my writing here. I have saved enough to make this possible, and in order to improve my GPA for grad school I have decided that I will not work during school anymore. Of course, I'll be back to writing here more regularly and hopefully producing some other items in my free time.

As far as my 2007 resolutions are concerned, I was not able to accomplish them all. My weight goals have been accomplished, and for next year I plan to have new fitness goals. I was also able to get back in to school and remain there for the entire semester. As far as my reading and writing goals, I obviously abandoned those in order to focus on my academic work. Given the choice, I would have liked to accomplish all of those goals, but the circumstances would not allow it.

I was employed at a place where my scheduling requests were frequently not acknowledged. In fact, there were many weeks where my only days off conincided with evening exams. Weeks where I had no exams, I would often have one night off. As you can imagine, this is not very conducive to doing homework or studying. When I left my job in late November, I was focusing on studying for my final exams to undo the damage that I had done over the course of the semester. Now that my finals are complete, and I am on break until January I intend to write here more often, and I am trying to get into some sort of system for when school picks up again on the 7th.

2007 Resolutions: 30th Update

2007-08-23T23:38:00.000-04:00

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 224 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 225.57. Therefore, I have lost 43.2 pounds and I am 84.38% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 41.63 pounds and I am 81.3% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I am in the process of reading my 13th book.
Write 250 entries - This is 103th entry of the year meaning I have 147 more to write in the next 130 days and this resolution is 41.2% complete.
Get back to school - I've got a schedule for my classes. If I can make it past the first drop deadline, I am home free.

The Dollyrots

2007-08-15T13:04:00.000-04:00

I've been listening to a lot of internet radio while unpacking in my new place. I usually listen to Punk Radio Cast, and they played a catchy song by a group called The Dollyrots that I really liked. Between that and the bass player being really hot, I think they deserve to be checked out.

Here is the video for the song I heard, "Because I'm Awesome."

Michael Vick

2007-08-14T23:12:00.000-04:00

I never had anything against Michael Vick, until recently. He has been indicted for running a dogfighting ring. The court documents detail the execution of several dogs, and some of the other disturbing things that went on at Vick's kennel. [The Smoking Gun]

I don't understand how people could do those things to a dog. The dog hasn't done anything wrong. The dog can't choose not to fight. I fail to see why this amuses people. You are torturing two innocent animals and killing one. I'm sorry, Atlanta Falcons fans, but I have to say that I hope Vick does at least a year of hard time for this.

One thing that I am sick of hearing is how Vick is just a product of his upbringing. Bullshit. Maybe he came from a rough neighborhood, but you don't hear about the kid from down the street who became a neurosurgeon running his dogfighting ring. Vick made it as an NFL star quarterback, one of only 32 people in America. You can't tell me that is any different than applying yourself and making something of yourself regardless of your background. This is a flaw with Vick's character, not with his upbringing. He deserves everything that he gets for these crimes, if he is in fact responsible for them.

2007 Resolutions: 29th Update

2007-08-14T14:35:00.000-04:00

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 225.4 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 227.55. Therefore, I have lost 41.8 pounds and I am 81.64% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 39.65 pounds and I am 77.44% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I am in the process of reading my 13th book.
Write 250 entries - This is 100th entry of the year meaning I have 150 more to write in the next 139 days and this resolution is 40% complete.
Get back to school - I've got a schedule for my classes. If I can make it past the first drop deadline, I am home free.

One Last Thing

2007-08-03T03:58:00.000-04:00

Today I tear down my computer and begin my more than a week of homelessness. Before I go, I just wanted to post this e-mail I got from the Palm Beach Post. It was in my spam folder, and I just happened to catch it before it fell into the great abyss of the internet.

Mr. [My name here],

Thanks for contacting us about this issue. Turns out a mistake was
made. The first URL you listed was a shorter version of the story
posted on PalmBeachPost.com the day before an expanded version ran in
the print edition of The Palm Beach Post. The redirect was supposed to
jump from the shorter version to the longer version of the same story.
However, it was mistakenly redirected to a follow-up story written a day
later (the July 12 story).

I went ahead and fixed the redirect, or if you'd prefer to link directly
to the complete version of the first story, you can use this URL:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/local_news/epaper/2007/07/11/s3b_ban_0711.html

Thanks again,
Clay Clifton
Assistant Online Director
PalmBeachPost.com

2007 Resolutions: 28th Update

2007-08-01T22:49:00.000-04:00

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 230.6 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 232.54. Therefore, I have lost 36.6 pounds and I am 71.48% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 34.66 pounds and I am 67.69% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I am in the process of reading my 13th book.
Write 250 entries - This is 98th entry of the year meaning I have 151 more to write in the next 152 days and this resolution is 39.2% complete.
Get back to school - I've received a grant for the money that I owe to Purdue, and as soon as I get the check, I can continue classes. My family has borrowed money from me to the point that it has used some of the money from the first check that I received. I am trying to replace this money and pay my bill as soon as I can.

Le Tour de France

2007-07-29T13:56:00.000-04:00

Le Tour de France ended today with Spaniard Alberto Contador winning the 2007 race. [Washington Post] While this is a fantastic achievement for Contador, this isn't the most important story surrounding the race. Doping scandals seemed to get more coverage than who was leading the race and winning the stages. On any give day I could tell you who failed doping tests, but I couldn't tell you who was wearing the yellow jersey of the leader. Well, until he got tossed for doping anyway.

Contador had seemed destined for second place until the Tour was hit by a bombshell just five days from the finish: the ouster of race leader Michael Rasmussen. His Rabobank team accused the Dane of having lied about his whereabouts before the Tour to evade doping controls.

Rasmussen's departure catapulted Contador into the race lead, Evans of Predictor-Lotto to the runner-up spot and Leipheimer to third.

...

Contador was a new star for a race searching for a successor to Armstrong, who retired in 2005, and which is struggling to repair its credibility after two straight years marred by doping.

The 2006 winner, Floyd Landis, did not defend his crown because of doping charges hanging over him. This Tour turned into a circus after it emerged that Rasmussen was competing despite missing doping controls in May and June, and after Kazakh star Alexandre Vinokourov _ a pre-race favorite _ and Cristian Moreni of Italy failed doping tests. They and their teams left the race, and police raided their hotels, searching for doping products.

Instead of putting the doping cloud left by Landis behind them, Tour organizers again found themselves having to contend daily with the issue. [Washington Post]

This raises the question about the ethics of doping. If this is all about entertainment anyway, then why should we care what the racers do to make themselves faster? The author of Freakonomics (one of the best books ever written, in my opinion) poses that very question.

Is it time, perhaps, to come up with a pre-approved list of performance-enhancing agents and procedures, require the riders to accept full responsibility for whatever long-term physical and emotional damage these agents and procedures may produce, and let everyone ride on a relatively even keel without having to ban the leader every third day?

If the cyclists are already doping, why should we worry about their health? If the sport is already so gravely compromised, why should we pretend it hasn’t been? [Freakonomics Blog]

I don't know about that. If you allow some kind of performance enhancement, then all you are doing is requiring it from all of the athletes. Right now, you don't need performance enhancers to remain competitive. Competitive athletes are the only ones that make money (which incidentally is the reason that I didn't declare for the NFL Draft this year). If you allow potentially dangerous performance enhancing drugs and procedures, then you are significantly and adversely affecting the athletes in the field. The problem isn't that the Tour de France is too hard, the problem is that some people are cheating. Just changing the rules doesn't eliminate the people that are going to cheat to gain an unfair advantage over the athletes that follow the rules. The only way to change the rules to eliminate all cheating is to say that anything goes and nothing is outside of the rules. Joe Lindsey agrees with me on this point.

But athletes, who eagerly seek out anything that will give them a competitive edge, will still try and get them. H. Lee Sweeney, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, was shocked when, after publishing research in an obscure scholarly journal on an experimental gene therapy technique to inhibit myostatin (as a therapy for muscular dystrophy), he began receiving inquiries from athletes, and even a high-school wrestling coach, on how to use the technique to boost performance.

Simply put, wherever you draw the line, something, some technique or substance, will always be off-limits. And so you’ve merely moved the line, not erased it.

Finally, none of that addresses the moral problems involved in legalizing doping. Doping in sports isn’t inherently wrong; it’s wrong by the value system with which we judge sports. Sports themselves are by their nature civilized: everyone agrees to follow a certain set of rules. If you don’t, that’s cheating. Legalizing doping doesn’t change those rules as much as remove them altogether, and then it’s no longer a sport, but merely entertainment. Right or wrong, we look to sports and to athletes for an inspiration that mere entertainment cannot provide – there is an implicit contract that the sweat and effort we see before us is real and natural. Do you want to see who’s the best athlete, or just who had the best access to pharmaceutical enhancement? [Freakonomics Blog]

The real issue isn't the drugs, it is the cheating. We aren't trying to find a faster way around France, because we have had one ever since horses, cars, planes, trains, etc. We are trying to find out who is the best cyclist within the rules set forth for the race. Violating those rules means that you should no longer take part in the competition. I wouldn't be opposed to having a circuit where they allowed doping, or whatever cyclists wanted. I just think that it cheapens a sport to reduce it to the point where you cannot compete without the assistance of illegal substances.

The Simpsons Movie

2007-07-28T15:17:00.000-04:00

I was more than ready to be disappointed by The Simpsons Movie. It would be very difficult for a movie to live up to the constant brilliance of the series and lately the movies I have seen haven't lived up to my expectations. My expectations for this movie were very high, and every one of them was met.

The movie starts out at a furious pace. Joke after joke, you hardly have time to stop laughing before you are laughing again. Eventually, the movie slows down a bit as the plot progresses, but it still has the same relevant satire that you can expect from The Simpsons. They take stabs at Fox, Al Gore, Bono, Green Day, the Bible, no one is safe from the sharp satire of Groening. My personal favorite line, which my friends and I must have recited 1,000 times since yesterday is, "Ah, for once the rich white man is in charge."

Of course, as with any movie like this, I can't imagine many people who don't like the Simpsons enjoying the movie. For all of its merits, the movie does contain several in-jokes. Nothing so obscure that a casual viewer like myself couldn't catch, but if I don't imagine many people who have never seen The Simpsons before will appreciate as much as the people who do watch the show. Overall, this movie is mostly a bigger, longer, and more polished episode of the show. If you ask me, that's a great thing.

Walking Score

2007-07-27T16:02:00.000-04:00

I was reading the mental_floss blog the other day, and they linked to a really cool website called Walk Score. This is a pretty cool website. You enter your address and they use Google Maps to assign a score that measures the "walkability" of your address. My current apartment scores a 57 out of 100. My new apartment, where I am moving in two weeks scores a 9 out of 100.

What's up, Palm Beach Post?

2007-07-26T12:03:00.000-04:00

The entry that I wrote yesterday was about a week in the making. A friend of mine sent me the link to the Palm Beach Post Story, and I bookmarked it. I also made a rough draft of sorts, including a couple of sentences from the articles that I wanted to quote. I have been busy with moving into a new apartment, so I put everything aside for about a week and just decided to come back to it when I got the chance. Imagine my surprise when I found out that following the link I had bookmarked the week previously led to an entirely different article.

This is the original article. You can view it if you click on the link I provide at the bottom and press the "Stop" button on your browser before it redirects you.

By LAURA GREEN

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Eighty books in high school library stacks are corrupting students with tales of abortion, homosexuality and atheism. That's according to a West Palm Beach mother who has appealed to the school board to remove the books from the shelves of Dreyfoos and Royal Palm Beach high schools.

Laura Lopez has been fighting since September to ban these books that she says "promote sin and lies."

Committees at both schools have already shot down her request. So has Superintendent Art Johnson. On Wednesday, she will ask the full school board to intervene.

Palm Beach County School District staff can't recall any book challenges reaching the school board in at least seven years.

Lopez admits she hasn't read a single one of the objectionable books cover-to-cover.

In her appeal, she quotes scripture and blames the Columbine school shootings, drugs, bullies, teenage pregnancy and other ills on what she considers the removal of God from schools.

She targets literary genres ranging from reference books to short stories. Among the books she wants removed are "Medical Ethics: Moral and Legal Conflicts in Health Care," "Warriors of God: Richard the Lionhearted and Saladin in the Third Crusade," "Coping When a Parent is Gay" and "The Cider House Rules," a John Irving novel about a rural doctor who runs an orphanage and performs illegal abortions.

Lopez said the book challenges stemmed from a basic interest in the types of books in her sons' school libraries.

So, she went to the computerized card catalogue and typed in the keywords "homosexuality," "abortion" and "atheism." She was shocked by the dozens of titles that popped up.

"My kids are going to school to learn, not to become a homosexual or an abortion doctor or an atheist," she said.

Lopez requested a meeting with Royal Palm Beach High Principal Jose Garcia.

During the meeting, she didn't name any specific titles, but was generally concerned about the kinds of literature students were being exposed to in the school library, Garcia said.

He told her he couldn't simply pull books off the shelves based on her complaint.

Parents who want to challenge library books or classroom materials must file a written request for reconsideration with the school where the objectionable book, movie or other material was found. Then the principal convenes a committee of parents, students and staff members, which evaluates the objection, reads reviews from professional journals and consults school board policy.

In Lopez's case, committees at Dreyfoos and Royal Palm, where she two teenage sons attended, found no merit in her objections. They said she did not cite specific passages to which she objected, as required, and noted that board policy dictates that materials be chosen to represent "all points of views." Rather than referencing specific pages, Lopez included mostly general comments.

In her objection to "Am I Blue?: Coming out from the Silence," a collection of 18 short stories about gay and lesbian issues, Lopez wrote: "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, and not Eve and Sue."

Lopez appealed the decisions of Garcia and Dreyfoos Principal Ellen Van Arsdale to Johnson. He sided with the principals.

Lopez said she doesn't know what her chances are before the school board.

Even within her own home, reaction is split.

"My oldest son doesn't believe in God," she said. "I guess he kind of thinks I'm stupid." [Palm Beach Post]

This is the article that you get if you follow the link and allow the page to fully redirect you.

By LAURA GREEN

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Thursday, July 12, 2007

The Palm Beach County School Board refused to pull 80 books referencing homosexuality, atheism and abortion from the library shelves of two high schools.

But the mother fighting since September to ban them refuses to give up.

Laura Lopez said she will start a church-to-church petition and reach out to a Christian law center to represent her.

"To me, it doesn't end here. This is just the beginning," said the West Palm Beach mom.

Two school committees and Superintendent Art Johnson had already shot down her request. On Wednesday, the board voted unanimously to back Johnson.

It was unclear whether Lopez had any challenges left.

Lopez had 15 minutes to make her case during a school board workshop. She listed a litany of sins that she says are promoted by books she found doing a simple key word search on the library computers at Dreyfoos School of the Arts and Royal Palm Beach High School. She acknowledged she hadn't read a single one of the books cover-to-cover.

Among the objectionable books were: Medical Ethics: Moral and Legal Conflicts in Health Care, Coping When a Parent is Gay and The Cider House Rules, a John Irving novel about a rural doctor who runs an orphanage and performs illegal abortions.

She also expanded her objections to include the curriculum taught in schools.

"They're teaching kids the Big Bang. They're teaching kids lies," she told the board. "The world was created 6,000 years ago. In my son's elementary school book, it says the world was created several million years ago."

Board members applauded Lopez's advocacy but found no grounds to support her.

Board member Monroe Benaim talked about students who struggle with their sexuality or contemplate suicide and might be afraid to talk to someone but could find some solace in a library book.

"As a school board member, I'm a school board member to all children whether they are heterosexual or homosexual, pregnant or not pregnant and no matter what they believe religiously," he said.

One of Lopez's two teenaged sons, Jesse, a sophomore at Royal Palm Beach, came to support his mother. Her oldest son, whom she did not name, does not agree with his mother's objections to the library books.

Jesse Lopez said he worries about his fellow classmates who turn to friends for information, who may consult books full of lies. "If their friends rely on them and if those books are teaching evil, that's just corrupt," he said.

Despite the controversial topic, Lopez's hearing drew only a few people to the daytime board workshop. She brought a friend and a youth pastor. Two members of the Atheists of Broward County also came, but did not testify.

"If you don't like a book, walk to the next aisle and find a different one," Ken Loukinen, president of the atheist organization, said after the meeting. [Palm Beach Post]

Why do the addresses for two different articles take you to the same article? I didn't care about the article written on the 12th, I wanted to reference the article from the 10th. The URL for the first article is: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/
epaper/2007/07/10/0710bookban.html?imw=Y
The URL for the second is: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/
epaper/2007/07/12/s3b_BOOK_0712.html
These both take you to the same story. I think it is a bit deceiving. What if someone such as myself had used quotes from the first article. We would not be able to link to the original story we had quoted. This raises questions about the credibility of people who would quote the original article, even though they quoted the article properly. If I were to have accused Lopez of being hateful to homosexuals by quoting her "Adam and Steve," comment, I would have been accused of fabricating statements, because that quote does not appear in the article that shows up at the URL I would have linked to.

I understand the idea behind this. If I was looking for this article, I'd probably want to be appraised of the latest developments. However, that can be accomplished by a link to the related story at the bottom of the article, not redirecting to a new article. These articles even share the same comment thread at the bottom. I can't understand the benefit to the paper of representing the second article as the first. Perhaps someone in the industry can clue me in.

I wrote this e-mail to the Palm Beach Post, where I pose the question to them.

To Whom It May Concern,

Recently I referenced your July 10th article titled, "Mom urges WPB school board to ban 80 books," in an entry on my website. This article is located at the URL; http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2007/07/10/0710bookban.html?imw=Y

When one follows that link, it takes them to an article written on July 12th titled, "School board rejects call to ban books on gays, atheism." This article is located at the URL; http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2007/07/12/s3b_BOOK_0712.html

I am curious as to the reason for redirecting readers to the July 12th article, when a person with the URL for the July 10th article would rather be reading that article. It might damage the credibility of a person quoting statements from the July 10th article. I understand that your readers desire the most up to date information on a particular story, but that doesn't necessitate making previous information harder to access. Is there a reason for redirecting people to the July 12th article, rather than simply placing a link to that article at the bottom of the July 10th article? Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
John

P.S. The relevant entries on my site can be found at;

http://jberlako.blogspot.com/2007/07/censorship-for-christ.html
http://jberlako.blogspot.com/2007/07/whats-up-palm-beach-post.html

Now I'll just wait for a response.

Censorship for Christ

2007-07-25T13:19:00.000-04:00

How is it possible to hate a book that you have never even read? I guess it is possible and it happens a lot. So much so that it might cause a woman to demand the removal of 80 books from a public school's library, books that she has never read. The books referenced, "homosexuality, atheism, and abortion." [Palm Beach Post] That isn't the only problem that she has with the schools, of course.

"They're teaching kids the Big Bang. They're teaching kids lies," she told the board. "The world was created 6,000 years ago. In my son's elementary school book, it says the world was created several million years ago." [Palm Beach Post]

So, you have no real objection about the the content of the books, because you don't know what they contain, because you haven't read them, and yet the very idea that someone else might be reading the books is so offensive to you that you cannot bear to have them available. You were so ignorant as to include in your list two books that present opposing viewpoints about homosexuality and abortion. "Two of the books that Lopez challenged are: Sexual Values: Opposing Viewpoints by Charles P. Cozic and Abortion: Opposing Viewpoints by Tamara L. Roleff." [South Florida Sun-Sentinel] Gosh, it sure would be sinful to have kids be informed about both sides of a debate.

This isn't anything new. Remember a while back when Christian groups were trying to ban Harry Potter? [BBC] The overriding theme here, in contemporary America anyway, seems to be that it is primarily fundamentalist Christian groups that are trying to keep people away from information that might conflict with their religion. It reminds me, in a way, of communist Russia or the dystopia of 1984. The best way to make sure that people believe what you want is to make sure that they never have access to any conflicting ideas. If people have the ability to make their own informed opinions, they are less likely to agree with yours.

This is something that has always bothered me about groups that want to control how the rest of us think. If their ideas were so great in the first place, then it wouldn't matter what information the rest of us had access to. We would likely reach the same conclusions that they did. As an atheist, I have never begrudged a faithful person their beliefs. As someone who is pro-choice, I've never tried to censor pro-life articles or books. As someone who eats meat, I have never once tried to silence PETA. Why can't these groups do the same?

Lopez has the answer.

Lopez, in a January letter to Johnson, wrote, "I know that the Constitution says freedom of speech, but what about my freedom as a parent to not want [my children] to read about abortion and homosexuality in their school library."[South Florida Sun-Sentinel]

That is the heart of the issue. You do have the freedom as a parent to not want your child to be exposed to something. You don't have the freedom to take it away from everyone else. You need to get off your ass and do the parenting yourself, not have the library and the school board do it for you. If you don't want your kids reading those books, then don't let them check the books out of the library. Was that so hard? Instead you would rather keep the books out of the hands of people that would want to read, people who you have absolutely no business telling them what they can and cannot read.

Either way, the law is on my side. Not only are the books protected by the first amendment, but there is existing Supreme Court precedent to cite in any legal challenge that Lopez might raise. The case Board of Education, Island Trees School District vs. Pico prohibits schools from removing books that contain ideas which they do not find favorable. [First Amendment Center] All of this isn't stopping Lopez. Neither is the fact that the school board denied her request to remove the books, she still plans to "explore legal action." [South Florida Sun-Sentinel] At least the people on the school board in Palm Beach have some sense.

The last thing that needs to be said comes from Goethe. He once said, "Nothing is worse than active ignorance." [The Quotations Page] Not only is Lopez fighting for ignorance, but she is fighting to keep us ignorant. The only thing standing between her and succeeding were the people on the school board. For every good school board like this one that doesn't bow to people like Lopez, I promise there is one that does. Fighting people like this, and the active ignorance they stand for is the most important thing to do to keep our freedoms. I, for one, am glad that in this case, the people in power felt the same way.

2007 Resolutions: 27th Update

2007-07-25T01:04:00.000-04:00

Moving into a new place sucks, especially when it means being homeless for 8 days.

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 230.4 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 231.7. Therefore, I have lost 36.8 pounds and I am 71.88% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 35.5 pounds and I am 69.34% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I am in the process of reading my 13th book.
Write 250 entries - This is 92nd entry of the year meaning I have 158 more to write in the next 160 days and this resolution is 36.8% complete.
Get back to school - I've received a grant for the money that I owe to Purdue, and as soon as I get the check, I can continue classes. My family has borrowed money from me to the point that it has used some of the money from the first check that I received. I am trying to replace this money and pay my bill as soon as I can.

2007 Resolutions: 26th Update

2007-07-17T18:32:00.000-04:00

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 231.6 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 231.57. Therefore, I have lost 35.6 pounds and I am 69.53% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 35.63 pounds and I am 69.6% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I am in the process of reading my 13th book.
Write 250 entries - This is 91st entry of the year meaning I have 159 more to write in the next 167 days and this resolution is 36.4% complete.
Get back to school - I've received a grant for the money that I owe to Purdue, and as soon as I get the check, I can continue classes. My family has borrowed money from me to the point that it has used some of the money from the first check that I received. I am trying to replace this money and pay my bill as soon as I can.

Sicko

2007-07-15T12:04:00.000-04:00

Recently, I saw Michael Moore's newest film. I think that this may be Michael's best work so far. Universal health care is an issue that has been near my heart since I was 12. This was the issue that first sparked my interest in politics. My mom was a nurse, and my dad had worked in the computer room at the hospitals in South Bend. My mom later had some serious health problems and we were paying hand over fist for those bills. My dad was making great money at the time, so we were able to manage. When my dad had to take a pay cut, the next job he found had health insurance and to this day he says, "I don't know what we would do without this health insurance."

Even then, this health insurance has done nothing but play games with us since day one. My last semester in school, I was never able to pay my bills, so Purdue would not release my transcript. As such, the company canceled my coverage because I couldn't give them proof that I was a college student. I sent them a copy of my schedule, printed off from Purdue's website, but it wasn't good enough for them. It wasn't good enough to know that I was in school and have my schedule. They needed a copy of my transcript for reasons that I can't comprehend, because my transcript only shows what classes I have taken and not the classes in which I was enrolled. Thankfully, I have been lucky enough to avoid injuries and illness since I left school.

If health insurance was so important to my family, I wondered, what about all of the families that didn't have it. We were pretty well off, fortunately, and not everyone was doing as well as we were. My family did a lot for charity, and I can remember vividly the poverty that I encountered when we did. On top of that, my mom was a nurse, so from a very young age I learned how important health is. Rich or poor, young or old, black or white, good or bad, cancer will kill you either way. Nothing is more important that staying alive. So, if health insurance was such a great help to our family, and everyone's health is of such great importance, why didn't we all have access to health care?

I started to look into it, to answer my own question, why didn't everyone get the care they needed regardless or whether they could pay for it or not? I found out that we were the only industrialized country that doesn't provide health care for their citizens and I wondered why. My father and grandfather, both very conservative, explained to me that it would involve a substantial tax increase to socialize health care, and that it would require so much government oversight and red tape that it would make our system worse. For a while, I accepted that answer, but why would everyone do it if it was such a terrible idea?

As I got older, I researched the idea more and I came to believe that universal health care was something that America needed. I learned about how the system works in Canada, France, and Great Britain. I lived with a gastrointestinal surgeon in Germany when I was 17, and we often spoke about the differences between our country's especially on the subject of health care. It just seemed like a much better way of doing things.

Michael Moore makes the argument for universal health care by exposing the dichotomy between a public company and health care. Legally speaking, a public company is required to maximize their profits for their shareholders. Therefore, their first priority is their profits, and not the health of their policy holders. In fact, it is their legal obligation to provide the fewest benefits that they possibly can. This doesn't match up with basic human ethics. Think about it, how much would you pay to keep your brother, sister, wife, husband, son, daughter, or friends alive? How much would you pay to keep yourself alive? Can't we all agree that a human life is worth more than money? These companies are legally required to have their priorities out of order.

Moore also addresses the fear of socialism. He points out that we have socialized fire departments, police departments, school, and libraries. Shouldn't we have the same access to medicine that we do to the Harry Potter books? Moore also shows several cases of people who were killed because of the way that their HMO dealt with their situation. It is a very difficult thing to watch, to know that a little girl died in a hospital so Kaiser Permanente could save the cost of having to treat her. Coming to terms with the fact that these companies are making money at the cost of people's lives is a disgusting thing. In general, this is as well researched and as effective an argument as Michael Moore has ever made, and this should be required viewing for every American. If nothing else, we need to start talking about this, because our situation is certainly less than ideal.

Unfortunately, because this is Michael Moore, the film is being attacked as inaccurate because of him. The Associated Press, USA Today, and Dr. Sanjay Gupta on behalf of CNN have all made false claims about the facts in the film. The worst part of that was CNN, who contacted Michael with their questions, and then after he sent them the facts they aired their incorrect information anyway. [Huffington Post] Michael talks about CNN in an open letter to them.

Admit you were wrong. What is the shame in that? We all make mistakes. I know it's hard to admit it when you've screwed up, but it's also liberating and cathartic. It not only makes you a better person, it helps prevent you from screwing up again. Imagine how many people will be drawn to a network that says, "We made a mistake. We're human. We're sorry. We will make mistakes in the future -- but we will always correct them so that you know you can trust us." Now, how hard would that really be?

...

I expect CNN to put this matter to rest. Say you're sorry and correct your story -- like any good journalist would.

Then we can get back to more important things. Like a REAL discussion about our broken health care system. Everything else is a distraction from what really matters. [MichaelMoore.com]

These are the real points of the movie. First, that our system is broken. Second, Michael's ideas about how to fix it. This is meant to spark discussion and debate, and I think the movie does that fantastically. See this movie.

New Picture of Me

2007-07-12T13:54:00.000-04:00

I always get crap from my friends about my profile picture on Facebook. It happens to be the same picture just to the right of this post. The South Park guy isn't a terrible approximation of what I actually look like. Well, I heard that there was something at Simpsonsmovie.com that actually allows you to create your own Simpsons character. So, this is me on the Simpsons.

2007 Resolutions: 25th Update

2007-07-10T22:11:00.000-04:00

Lose 51.2 pounds - My weight as of this morning is 231 pounds. The trend suggests that my true weight is 231.76. Therefore, I have lost 36.2 pounds and I am 70.7% toward completing my goal. The trend suggests that I have lost 35.44 pounds and I am 69.22% toward completing my goal.
Read 24 books - I read Make Love the Bruce Campbell Way by Bruce Campbell. This book is laugh out loud funny, with some hilarious pictures that are photoshopped. The story is fnatastic, and the writing style is very conversational. It is a fantastic read.
Write 250 entries - This is 88th entry of the year meaning I have 162 more to write in the next 174 days and this resolution is 35.2% complete.
Get back to school - I've received a grant for the money that I owe to Purdue, and as soon as I get the check, I can continue classes. My family has borrowed money from me to the point that it has used some of the money from the first check that I received. I am trying to replace this money and pay my bill as soon as I can.

Libby's Commuted Sentence

2007-07-10T21:17:00.000-04:00

President Bush commuted Scooter Libby's 2.5 year prison sentence saying that he believed the prison sentence was excessive. [International Herald Tribune] Was anyone surprised by this? The only people that Bush has on his side right now are the hardcore base republicans, and they wanted Libby pardoned. He isn't losing moderates, they already disapprove of him, this was Bush's best move. If he lost the support of the base, that means impeachment. Talk of impeachment is already creeping into the mainstream American mind, and if Bush loses the hardcore republicans, there is no one between him and removal from office.

The only problem that I have with the commuting of Libby's sentence is that Bush is hiding his reasoning for commuting it. He has retreated behind executive privilege again, probably because his real reason isn't something he wants us to hear.

Conyers, D-Mich., urged Bush "to waive Executive Privilege and provide the relevant documents and testimony of any relevant aides regarding your decision to commute Mr. Libby's sentence."

The congressman said that his committee on Wednesday will hold a hearing to "explore the grave questions that arise when the Presidential clemency power is used to erase criminal penalties for high-ranking executive branch employees whose offenses relate to their work for the President."

Conyers acknowledged that President Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, whose ex-wife was a major Clinton campaign donor. But Clinton waived executive privilege and allowed top aides to testify before Congress about that matter, Conyers noted in his letter.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Office of Legal Counsel had not finished reviewing the letter, and so could not comment fully on it. But he said two things _ what Snow called "admissions" _ "jumped out" in the initial reading: that Conyers appeared to concede that the president has both executive privilege rights and clemency authority. [Washington Post]

Conyers believes that Libby's sentence was commuted to shut him up. [Guardian Unlimited] It wouldn't surprise me if that were the case. Libby's convictions is related to the outing of CIA operative as a possible revenge against Joe Wilson, who exposed some of the Bush administration's lies about the lead up to the war. The war is already very unpopular, and can hardly be justified at this point. The last thing that the Bush administration needs is for Libby to start talking. He was obstructing justice to hide something, always remember that. He knows where at least one skeleton is in the deep closet of the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

Am I disappointed in this administration? Sure, but the minute I heard Libby's sentence, I knew he would pardoned or the president would step in somehow. I can't say I wasn't expecting this. Now that the Democrats control congress, expect a lot more hiding behind executive privilege in the remaining year and a half of this administration's rule. They've done it so much recently and I don't see it getting any easier for them going forward.

Transformers: Not as Good as MTV Said

2007-07-07T12:30:00.000-04:00

I went along to see Transformers. I have to say that I was not impressed. The graphics were very well done, and the special effects were great. That is about all that I can say that was good about the movie. Oh, and Megan Fox was hot. Other than that, the plot was thin, the jokes were childish, the movie is pretty much inane and boring every time there isn't a giant robot fight on screen. Thankfully, that happens very rarely. I have my doubts that this will end up being the best summer movie, especially with the Simpsons movie coming out later this month.

The Problem With NeoConservatives

2007-07-07T10:47:00.000-04:00

I enjoy a political debate. It is good to share opinions with friends, or to engage in a conversation with someone over current events. I'm all for it. However, there seems to be a movement away from real dialogue toward baseless and stupid name calling. It isn't just Ann Coulter, pictured here, it seems to be most of the famous pundits on the right. Michael Savage is famous for being completely crazy. He said this on July 2nd, "[W]hen I see a woman walking around with a burqa, I see a Nazi ... a hateful Nazi who would like to cut your throat and kill your children." Then, when Media Matters reported what he said on his radio show he accused them of being, "the homosexual mafia." [Media Matters] This isn't anything new for Michael Savage.

The issue is that this type of name calling is unproductive. Rather than make a counterpoint, Michael Savage resorts to, "Fag!" This is only slightly worse than when Bill O'Reilly cuts off the mic of someone to whom he is losing a debate. Instead of defend their position, they would rather call you a name, cut off your mic, and leave it there. They haven't really lost, because they've gotten the last word. Even if that last word is just a cheap shot about your sexuality, it still allows them to hole up in their indefensible position.

One pundit that constantly makes me laugh is Ann Coulter.

Ann Coulter continued her bizarre jihad against the Edwards family last week, telling Good Morning America that she's learned her lesson from calling John Edwards a "faggot" and next time she'll just "wish he'd been killed in a terrorist assassination plot."

Is anyone else starting to notice a bit of a pattern in Coulter's comments? (And I'm not just talking about the increase in invective whenever she has a new book out.)

First it was nutty fascist stuff like, "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building" and "we need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals." Then she got personal, suggesting that John Edwards drove around with a bumper sticker which read, "Ask me about my son's death in a horrific car accident." And now she's resorted to calling Bill Clinton a "latent homosexual" and Al Gore a "total fag" and John Edwards a "faggot."

I'm just wondering how her most recent comments mesh with the conclusions she draws in her book Slander. For example:

Page 121: This is how six-year-olds argue: They call everything "stupid." The left's primary argument is the angry reaction of a helpless child deprived of the ability to mount logical counterarguments. Someday we will turn to the New York Times editorial page and find the Newspaper of Record denouncing President Bush for being a 'penis-head.'"

Page 199: Much of the left's hate speech bears greater similarity to a psychological disorder than to standard political discourse. The hatred is blinding, producing logical contradictions that would be impossible to sustain were it not for the central element faith plays in the left's new religion. The basic tenet of their faith is this: Maybe they were wrong on facts and policies, but they are good and conservatives are evil. You almost want to give it to them. It's all they have left.

Projection much? "Latent homosexual." "Total fag." "Faggot." And we're the ones who are supposed to have run out of ideas? [Top 10 Conservative Idiots No. 297]

The same person who cries out that liberals are lowering the dialogue in this country, is one of the worst offenders of the same crime on the conservative side. It makes me wonder, does she write her own books? It seems pretty clear that she doesn't read them, or believe what they say. Ann Coulter is famous for another trick though, calling everyone who disagrees with her un-American. You can't even walk by one of her books without seeing it, Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. Not even on page one and already you are a treacherous traitor if you are a liberal. Bill O'Reilly was also famous for this, but it appears that he has changed his ways.

For those of you who say I'm never wrong, I never admit I'm wrong, well, you're wrong, because I was wrong when I said that Americans who continue demonstrating against the war once the shooting begins are being un-American. I'm taking that back.

The word un-American implies some kind of lasting stigma and is a word of intimidation. Thus it is the wrong word to use in this scenario.

People who lawfully dissent should never be labeled un-American. Instead, I will call those who publicly criticize our country in a time of military crisis, which this is, bad Americans and it is my constitutional right to make that judgment and you are free to agree or disagree. You can call me a bad American for making the judgment. [FOX News]

Ah, much better! Now, rather than argue the point, he'll just call you a bad American. Hey, it's better than un-American, Bill said so. I guess that is a start? Certainly this is a bold move to raise the dialogue in our country.

The real problem isn't all of the name calling, it is that these people use the name calling to try and win their debates. If they can lower the dialogue, if they can cut you off, they don't have to defend their position because they are attacking. It doesn't matter to them whether they are attacking your position or attacking you as a person, just so long as you are the one forced to defend. Winning the debate isn't all that matters. If it is, then we are going to end up as a country full of people like Neal Boortz.

In a legitimate debate, you would not have to make up facts to defend your position. That position is indefensible if it requires that you fabricate facts. The only reason to even take a stance like that is if being right is so important that you would rather misinform your listeners than try to actually develop a cogent argument in defense of your position. It is intellectually lazy and completely unethical as a supposed journalist.

Democracy Isn't That Great

2007-07-06T12:45:00.001-04:00

I defended the idea of democratic rule yesterday, but democracy isn't without it's flaws. Majority rule just makes sure that every decision is popular. It doesn't mean that every decision is good. If popular meant the best, then the following statements all must be true:

The Eagles Greatest Hits 1971-1976 is the best album ever released. [InfoPlease]
Titanic is the best movie ever made. [IMDb]
The Toyota Corolla is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. [AutoMotoPortal]
Super Mario Bros. is the best video game ever released. [Answers.com]
America's Got Talent was the best show on television last week. [Nielsen Media Research]
Coke is better than Pepsi. [CNN Money]
Oreos are the best cookie. [Kraft Foods]
Vanilla is the best flavor for ice cream. [International Dairy Foods Association]
Pepperoni is the best kind of pizza. [Pizzaware.com]

I'm sure that everyone can disagree with one of those. The fact of the matter is that just because many people believe it, that doesn't make it good policy. Stephen Colbert made a very good point about democracy when he was talking about Wikipedia.

He talks about democratizing the truth. As his example shows, ridiculous things happen when you try to do that. This smoking ban here is West Lafayette is a perfect example of the problem with democracy. If you aren't in the majority, then you have no way to prevent the majority from interfering with your life and your freedom. We talk about inalienable rights in the Constitution, but all it would take to eliminate free speech is two thirds of Congress and three fourths of the state legislatures. [United States Constitution, Article 5] Constitutionally removing rights from people has been done before, like when alcohol was prohibited. [United States Constitution, Amendment 18] We are even trying to do it today, by preventing homosexual couples from having the same rights as heterosexual couples. [Washington Post] This is where democracy fails. When the majority wants to impose restrictions on people there is very little that can be done to stop them. If you live in a culture where individual liberties are respected, then democracy functions fantastically. It fails on issues where the rights of others are not of great concern.

Democracy and the Free Market

2007-07-05T17:54:00.000-04:00

I printed off the entry I wrote about the West Lafayette smoking ban so that a friend of mine could read it. After he had finished reading the entry, he mentioned that he was surprised to find out that I was one of those free-market types. I was confused by this, because I am definitely not a free-market type of person. I am for universal health care, among many other things that I support that go against the free market. "Clearly," he said, "you believe in the power of the market, otherwise you wouldn't have suggested that as a way to determine how much smoking there should be in West Lafayette."

I do believe in the power of the marketplace. I have taken far too much economics here at Purdue to not believe in it. However, a completely free market is an evil thing. Imagine if there were no regulation on any industry. Think of all the things that this ideal free market would allow. It would allow sweatshops, slavery, child labor, no safety regulations for workers, no safety regulations for products, monopolistic practices, no environmental regulations, no minimum wage, no fair employment practices, are among the many other evils that a free market will allow. You can argue in the gray areas for some of those, like the merits of sweatshops in economically desolate areas, but in the end the regulations are there to put everyone on a somewhat equal playing field in any given industry. If you have ever read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, then you are well aware of the evils of an industry that has very little regulation.

Worse than that, the market is completely anti-democracy. In a democracy, everyone has equal authority. My vote is worth just as much as anyone else's vote (except when it comes to presidential elections, but that entry is for another time). In a free market, what counts is money. All people don't have an equal say in their government, because not everyone has the means. One of the only mechanisms through which the free market works is by customer demand. I'll use cars as an example, if I support the idea of safe cars I am supposed to only purchase a car from manufacturers that live up to my standards. However, these manufacturers will have to compete with others that will flood the market with cheap cars of questionable quality. It is even possible that because safety features are expensive to implement that I might not be able to afford a car that has the safety features I want. Then I am forced to weigh the benefits of owning a car against the costs of supporting an industry practice that I believe is wrong, thus perpetuating it. To a certain extent, this will always happen in any marketplace, but if almost everyone were to agree that we shouldn't be driving around in deathtraps there would be no mechanism to impose that onto the manufacturers. To do so would inhibit the market. There would also be no way to force the manufacturers to prove that their car is safe, so there is no recourse for a consumer. Average people have no authority over that which they cannot purchase or produce. Democracy allows us, if most of us agree on it, to say that manufacturers are not allowed to sell us unsafe cars at any price and puts in place the mechanism for testing and enforcement of those restrictions. It levels the playing field.

Having said that though, I think the market is a great place to find a natural equilibrium once we have established that level playing field. Democracy is great for enforcing the minimum standards that we all must adhere to, beyond that democracy isn't so great. The issue here is that non-smokers don't like being around smokers. So, rather than find or create a place for non-smokers to be, or to organize boycotts, or any of the other ways that they could have used to dissuade businesses from allowing smoking they used their numbers to restrict the freedoms of business owners and smokers. No one was forcing the non-smokers to go to smoking bars and restaurants, but they wanted to be there. Instead of simply dealing with the nuisance of smokers, or telling the management, "I'd be here more often if it was smoke free," they had a law passed so that they could go to these places on their terms. They prefer to not be around others who are consuming a legal substance in a private place of business. This is a law to enforce that preference, and preferences should be left for the marketplace to decide.