why so tough on crime?

after many years of positive reinforcement, it could be that Canadians need (the government) to flex some negative reinforcement muscles.

but I can't help but wonder, since "it takes one to know one", what does that say about parties with a heavy law and order agenda?

democracy and transparency

are these issues really important to Canadians?

recent byelections saw a candidate elected by a narrow margin, despite missing out on several opportunities for interviews or debates. 

Interesting excerpts from post-election interview at http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/11/30/qa-julian-fantino/

I will respect whatever duties and responsibilities the Prime Minister assigns to me. That’s more important than any wishful thinking at this point in time.

I’m going to leave it to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister knows who I am. He knows about my long and distinguished public service. He knows what my strengths and weaknesses might be and he knows where I can best be utilized to provide support as a team player in the Harper government.

I’m just so glad and honoured to be a member of a Harper government.

What's so interesting about this is that while the political right often criticizes the "nanny" state concept where everyone is decently looked after so they can pursue their aspirations, it seems to be very keen on restoring a "daddy" state - one where father knows best, I know cuz he told me so, and you better watch out cuz we got a law and order agenda.

And they still won the seat.

metronews.ca Tuesday august 3, 2010 p.9

Use any chargers for cellphones in Europe

Interchangeable
The uniform charger means new phones will no longer comes with chargers, and there will be less electronic waste.

The European Union will soon bid a fond farewell to a hassle that spares few cellphone users: a dead battery and no suitable power charger.
Starting next year, cellphones in Europe will have a one-size-fits-all charger.
It will also let owners easily borrow someone else's charger when the juice is gone.
"How cool is that?" asked EU spokesman Dennis Abbon on Friday.
The Associated Press

EU: 1,  David Suzuki foundation: 0
(I contacted them a few years ago about the senseless waste of resources this is and the entirely avoidable amount of waste this generates and they told me to go fly a kite.  Glad to see someone else persevered and made this happen!)
Consumers and environment: win-win

commodity oddity

The planet is not able to sustain human life everywhere. Some areas have lots of oil, some lots of water, some lots of gold, some lots of people, some lots of big empty spaces. Commoditization (as much as it rubs me the wrong way) is a way of facilitating the exchange between trading partners who have too much of one thing and not enough of the other, and both (should) come out ahead. If you can't live locally off the land and you can't generate enough of what other people want to trade for what you need, perhaps you simply shouldn't be living there. Unfortunately, that philosophy isn't compatible with the UN philosophies of human rights and anti-poverty campaigns that required when you enforce borders and citizenship. Without commoditization and trade, there is an imbalance, and the resulting feeling of resentment creates political and thus economic stability and we're all worse off. In the end, that means that for the developed world to maintain its lifestyle, it is in our best interest to provide basic needs like water where it is needed, as a form of protection money for us to keep living the way we do. Question is, though, how sustainable can that be?

having their cake - and eating it too

I half-listened to a segment on the news tonight, something about health care, aging population, and fewer working Canadians to support them.

Aren't they (demographically speaking) the generation of DINKs and Freedom55ers that was too busy enjoying life to put up with the inconvenience of raising families, and now have the gall to complain there aren't enough kids to pay for their care?
Gee, whodathunk that leisure wasn't a sustainable social model?

On the other hand, we have to give them credit for all the opportunities they've created for upcoming generations, what with all the foreign-owned shops looking for sales associates at minimum wage to sell wares made by countries where there still exists a strong work ethic (admittedly, out of necessity).

professional vs social recognition: and/or?

I'm acting two levels above my substantive position these days.
Uncomfortably busy, in that I am not "in control" of my workload - I'm constantly being chased after for approving this and that and responding to management requests, all of which is pretty much brand new to me, and I suspect I've left a few of the more quiet (and hopefully but probably not less important) files behind. Combined with lack of sleep and preoccupation with renovations that are going as should be expected, I've caught myself avoiding social situations and public image-making opportunities, probably out of concern of making a stuttering fool of myself. So today I forced myself to walk around more and take ownership of my current responsibilities in a hopefully not too transparent or suspiciously desperate attempt at claiming the requisite status.
But (throwing grammatical caution to the wind), that led to the most bothersome part of my day: trying to thank one of my colleagues during her farewell luncheon, and not being able to get a word in edgewise above the general din of miscellaneous conversations of the people I am supposedly leading. Another painful reminder that pursuing rank is counterproductive to social relationships/status. The words "It's lonely at the top" have never rung more true :(

Regardless, tomorrow's a new day and a quieter one at that. I'll have more time to talk to people, get things done, and continue building relationships one step at a time.

hedonic adaptation

This makes a lot of sense:

The hedonic treadmill, also known as hedonic adaptation,
is the tendency of a person to remain at a relatively stable level of
happiness despite changes in fortune or the achievement of major goals.
As a person makes more money, expectations and desires rise in tandem,
which results in no permanent gain in happiness.

-Chris Hall's status on facebook earlier today

This also explains the usual tendency for scope creep in projects.
(Chris is a high school friend of mine and currently teaches languages at a Montreal CEGEP when he's not busy observing the world)

between a rock and a hard place

I posit that Science (as a movement and eventual public policy) was borne (in part) of the inability of religious orders and their unsubstantiated posturing to satisfy the natural curiosity and insatiable thirst for knowledge of the people.

However, I sense "the people" are starting to feel the same skepticism and frustration as our ancestors once did, only toward "science" - after so many abusive ad campaigns such as those stating that "4 out of 5 doctors smoke camels", that "BPA is harmless", that pharmaceutical X is good, global warming, etc., who can really blame them (us) for not being satisfied with the answers we're being given.

This is making it increasingly hard for government scientists to convey the importance of certain problems and the benefits of the recommended measures (yes, measures, not "solutions").

Recent press releases from US EPA contain statements like "final" assessments, "science has proven" etc - are a (desperate) attempt to reassure the public - but any such reassurance will be short-lived and they'll be worse off the next time a paper is published that indicates something slightly different, which is what research is supposed to do. The core principle of science is that it does not 'prove" anything - it merely reports on what we can observe and measure now with tools and test methods currently available. Any attempts to convince the public that the science is clear/final/conclusive/etc will inevitably backfire.

Sure makes my job interesting - and I don't even work in communications. Meanwhile, the anti-global warming groups and anti-pharmaceutical groups are having a field day, dancing circles around frustrated well-meaning scientists whose rep has been, I fear, irreparably damaged.

The scientific era is coming to a close, after causing much excitement and advancing our quality of life to the point I can sit very comfortably in my air conditioned two-story house in front of a PC, leisurely typing this away on the internet for nobody in particular to read. Meanwhile, while power generating stations blithely devour fossil fuels that were safely tucked beneath the earth's surface for millions of years, and I know nothing more about my neighbors whose help I may need in the event of an inevitable catastrophe or societal collapse. Religious orders of old are probably shaking their heads, having tried to warn us against eating the forbidden fruit. (sigh) Oh well. I wonder who's winning at Farmville tonight.

keeping your cool

funny email from government colleague who survived the great quake of oh-10
(names removed to protect the identity of the self-incriminating author)

Subject: FW: GOC Notification NT086-10 5.7 Magnitude Earthquake, Buckingham, QC

FYI.

This scared the crap out of me. When it hit, I was doing a presentation in a conference room in the basement of my office tower, discussing R&D testing that involved blowing up highway tanks...eerily enough. The first thing that crossed my mind was that something in the building had exploded...

Lessons learned from this - I don't respond well to these "emergency type" situations. I interrupted my presentation by yelling "OMG! What the hell is that?!" and proceeded to run out of the conference room, leaving everyone behind. I REALLY need to work on my emergency reaction skills...

Hope everyone is safe and sound. And I hope my bunnies aren't freaking out at home right now (or peeing all over their cage...poor things).

B

p.s. Everyone told me they will remember my presentation, but for the wrong reasons...

(dis)believer

bumper sticker: "Please, God, protect me from your believers."

western ideological sustainability

difficulties in Afghanistan etc where we (the western world) are trying to implement "democracy" is exposing some of its dirty secrets... Given:

1. Came across an article that concluded that the human brain was not wired for reading. The brain is naturally wired for moving, speaking, relating, and strategizing, but we have to re-wire our brains to communicate through writing.

2. Structured civilization (high degree of civility) is, Darwinianally speaking, the pinnacle of evolution that depends on education and hard work (and resources to exploit).

3. Higher education is to society what fertilizer is to grass: to keep it strong, you have to keep investing in it to prevent the weeds from sprawling.

4. American (and likely Canadian too) politics are won largely by convincing the biggest number of rich people that you can win over the biggest number of "ordinary" people. (interpretation of political fundraising and advertising campaigns)

1+2+3+4 = Human beings are social animals. Democracy is not our natural state, and requires great investment to maintain it. As the western world starts running out of environmental resources and poor (but still naive) people to exploit, where will investments to sustain our way of living come from? More importantly, will we have the resources (and knowledge) to protect against the weeds growing from within?

1. Came across an article that concluded that the human brain was not wired for reading. The brain is naturally wired for moving, speaking, relating, and strategizing, but we have to re-wire our brains to communicate through writing.

2. Schools are to society what fertilizer is to grass: to keep it strong, you have to keep investing in it to prevent the weeds from sprawling.

3. American (and likely Canadian too) politics are won largely by convincing the biggest number of rich people that you can win over the biggest number of peasants.

1+2+3 = Human beings are social animals. Democracy is unnatural.

dimensional units

so I was thinking on the bus home today that there are units for each of the regular 4 dimensions (depth, width, height, time), mass (not the sunday type) and charge, plus the compound units (functions of the aforementioned 6 like speed, force, power, field, etc. But what about something unmeasureable, like intentionality?
I propose that intentionality be recognized as another basic unit, which can form the basis for other compound units:
intentionality x desire = will
intentionality x enthusiasm = motivation
intentionality x strategy = plan
intentionality x (plan + resources) = mission
etc
I came to realize today (save your slow learner jokes) that knowing/understanding your intentions is essential to feeling like you're doing the right thing, and finding a compatible job makes it easier to harness your true intentions and the integrity and conviction will speak for themselves, making it easier for you to be successful in your own work.
at least that's what I presume most self-help books talk about.
this can be identified (even programmed) through meditation/prayer/astral-planing, and seems to work. what struck me though today was that such meditation somehow influences the intentions, moods and/or dispositions of others towards your intentions and can positively affect your ability to pursue your intentions, making intentionality another basic unit of measurement, albeit intangible.

ok, rambling wasn't my intention... it seemed clearer at the time, really.

gun control

I don't often care to wade into the active political movements, but the proposed changes to the gun control policy make damn good sense to me.
Keeping the tool available to enforcement and facilitating compliance is a win-win for the law-abiding citizen.
Maybe one day there'll be an app for that too.

The best anti-graffiti initiative of all time

The best anti-graffiti initiative of all time

Ottawa in Wonderland

"It's curious and curiouser,"
Colin Robertson, a former senior diplomat at Canada's embassy in Washington, now a senior fellow with the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, commenting on recent issues between ottawa and washington:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/clintons-tough-diplomacy-stings-ottawa/article1517805/

Sounds like it might be something out of Alice in Wonderland. Then again, Ottawa's been compared to far worse.

swimming against the current

Had an epiphany/d-uh moment over the weekend after accumulation of numerous rejected improvement recommendations at work:
Arguments are won with the heart, not facts.

I've always regarded the pursuit of knowledge, information, truth, and consideration of the bigger picture as fundamental, and assumed most people would share that interest in continuous self-/improvement.

Unfortunately, (most of) the rest of the world doesn't seem to work like that. Usually, the rest of the world (at least part of my work environment) seems to value collaboration and conventionalism in general. Relevance of any supporting facts presented is generally not (well?) understood, and many openly revel in being able to point out your errors and discredit you. It can become a competition of show-uppance. It's also very difficult for someone to accuse you of not being kind and considerate, regardless how mistaken their direction.

Looking past the probable negative outcomes of people's intentions and effectively reguiding their efforts is an ability I clearly have yet to learn to fake, never mind develop.

career coaching

I recently won a free career coaching session. Not sure what that entails, nor am I sure whether I'll be able to avoid digressing into philosophical over-analysis use it optimally.

Kinda reminds me of the stupid "Choices" program our guidance counselor offered in high school. It suggested completly random jobs like architect, politician, teacher, garbageman, hotel concierge, helicopter pilot and heavy-equipment operator. When I asked the guidance counselor for actual "guidance" (silly me), she merely reflected: Well, tell me what you want to do and we can do the test again with that in mind. Though subconsciously sensible, it's hardly a logical response and certainly did not impress my concretish way of looking at things (which inevitably led me down an engineering path). Thing is, dealing with imperfections, inconsistencies, public ignorance/apathy and other such irritants on a daily basis is a never-ending battle. On that, can anyone tell me how that finger-in-the-failing-dyke fable ends?

disposable gadgets

Apparently you can't change the batteries on iphones, ipods, and probably other such devices (at least not cost-effectively), pretty much forcing consumers to buy new and toss the old.
That obviously generates a lot of unnecessary waste. I wonder, is there an app for that?

In case of nuclear attack

Funny, when I was visiting the Diefenbunker they said they were instructed to eliminate the dying to extend available resources. I wonder if that was part of the official "government continuity plan?"

social graces

I believe shaking hands is an important formality to get right (i.e., firm, not limp dead fish, nor osteoporous-bone-crushingly strong either) when I meet someone, especially in a professional context. Once past the initial formality with colleagues I usually find it awkward though, sometimes even suspicious they're still trying to size me up or win me over like a politician.
is it just me?

mosaic effect

interesting exercise to describe oneself anonymously (user profile on wikipedia), and then to decide whether to cross-reference yourself in your blog, considering that accelerates the aggregation of information that will eventually reveal your "secret" identity.

what kind of disclaimer is this?

Seen briefly at the bottom of a TV ad:
"monetary exchange is required for the use of this product"

I wouldn't mind living in a place where that kind of disclaimer is necessary. At least, it would satisfy my curiosity.