2010-11-16

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

2010-08-24

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).

2010-07-08

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.


2010-06-28

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...

2010-06-16

(dis)believer

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

2010-06-13

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.

2010-05-31

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.

2010-04-20

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.

2010-04-05

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.

2010-02-02

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?

2010-01-13

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?

2010-01-07

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.

2010-01-06

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.

2009-12-28

on vacation

This is the first time we both take off completely between xmas and new year. Kinda nice to be able to drive around at the speed limit, and watch everybody else whoosh past me for a change, thinking somewhat gleefully they must be awfully busier than me. Is this what retirement feels like?

green bins

I like our city's new green bin program.
Now, the only things that we throw out in the regular trash seem to be plastic overwrap, bits tubs and bags that can't be recycled, diapers, broken dishes, and the orgy of one-time-use christmas wrap and associated paraphenalia. Pity more people aren't (re)using gift bags.

2009-12-16

Could this be your rebox Christmas?

http://www.sustainablelifemedia.com/content/column/design/could_this_be_your_rebox_christmas
...the creativity and variety of these Afrigadgets truly inspired me. I also realized that North Americans really weren't giving their 'reduce reuse recycle' brains much exercise.

Hmm. If necessity is the mother of invention, what does abundance breed?

2009-10-29

supervisor vs mentor

called a meeting with my supervisor today. she clarified a few things (things I didn't but should know) and I explained a few things to her about her "management" style. She didn't see how respecting each others' jurisdictions and responsibilities might be necessary or even conducive to good working relations, but she could take into consideration.
why am i (the underling) coaching/mentoring a supervisor in management approaches... it's a question of survival, I guess, to make my day to day work (for her) less painful, but it's not giving me any sense of fulfillment.

the cultural divide

Was just downstairs in the caf. The lunchlady asked if I wanted onions in my salad to which I replied no thanks (I don't particularly like onions). A rather large man of questionable hygiene behind me said "non, ca fait siffler" (course not, it makes you whistle) and chuckled. It must have been obvious that I didn't understand at first, so both he and the lunchlady repeated it until I figured out that "siffler" might be a euphemism for fart. I really didn't care to eat my lunch at all after that. Even half an hour later I was still unable to shake that vision as I leaned over my takeout container. I wonder that was part of an experiment to test a new commercial diet plan?

2009-10-22

grr

conflicting management styles/expectations suck.
professional self-restraint against blogging what's pissing me off sucks even more.
my only outlet/digestive aid is to email myself I guess.

2009-10-06

another day...

I'm still reeling from a discussion I had at work today. I blogged (but haven't published) the anonymous details of the disturbingly ignorant response I was given to why we shouldn't be implementing a collaborative workspace to capture, standardize and improve upon our team's role in a complex government decision-making process. I won't be publishing the details here (or anywhere), but I am finding the inane stupidity and desperate shortsightedness of the control-freakish response profoundly disturbing, and I am not sure I'm going to continue enjoying working under that.

Coincidentally, yesterday's Dilbert:

disturbingly stupid

In the vein of stupid manager comments, this one still has me reeling.

Context: a group of approx 15 young (and youngish) professionals managing projects, each lasting over 3 years with new ones launched every quarter. Although nearly identical in process, they vary greatly in scope, and the number of stakeholders/interrelationships, statutory time constraints, and potential economic impacts makes them quite complex. There is also a very strong reliance on other teams contributing and participating (it is government, after all), and some of these other groups have complained that our mini-projects are all being managed differently. Mistakes are being made, over and again.

If you've ever heard of iso9000 or six sigma (or been around one long enough), that ought to raise a sympathetic smile as you recognize the desperate need for some process/policy/decision-making/guidance/aide-memoire/SOMETHING documentation and share it with our sister team to provide a more standard and professional service.

So, I proposed (again) a collaborative tool (e.g., wiki) to capture and build upon lessons learned, checklists, resource descriptions, templates, best practices, tips and tricks, etc., with all the obvious associated benefits. The supervisor shot it down (again), this time with the following arguments:

  • training you guys is my job
  • I've been through it once and I know what you need to do
  • all the things you need to do are in the schedule (indeed, the deliverables and approvals are identified...)
  • everything's been done before, just grab any existing file and use it as example (and repeat the same mistakes with the same stakeholders? no thanks)
  • you are all professionals, professionals don't need to follow a standard/accepted process (what?)
  • as professionals, you should already know what resources are available and how to use the various tools, even if parachuting in from another department (double what?)
  • furthermore, the (sister team's) manager doesn't agree that we should be doing things this way and if she wants to do it her (lazy) way when it's her turn, well she'll just have to learn from her own mistakes. (triple-salko what?)

    I was stunned, but still strong enough to counter that as professionals we SHOULD absolutely be following a standard/accepted process, work out the solutions to the little things ourselves, capture and share them with each other (you know, "professional development"?), so that she could focus on making sure we have the resources we need to do the job on time and intervene only for the problems (unfortunately managing by exception seemed to be a completely foreign concept). "We can do that with a wiki," I added.

    That seemed to push her over the edge. Increasingly impatient, she blurted out, with some degree of desperation:

    "If you want a wiki, I'll be your wiki. I am your wiki!"

    I'm still reeling from this exchange, increasingly unsure I'll be able to continue enjoying work with her around.
  • 2009-10-02

    clarification

    the other day i commented that i was more intelligent than most.
    i forgot to specify "in some areas only" cuz in others, I'm as helpless as birdshit on a windshield. so i guess it all averages out. except it doesn't make me any happier. oh well.

    From boreal forest to, well... see for yourself



    2009-09-13

    overperfection

    Not me: "On things like these, I get a little too perfectionist."

    Me (sympathetic as usual): "Does it bother you when you realize you're being overly perfectionist, I mean, the fact that you're not just "optimally" perfectionist?" (speaking from experience...)

    2009-08-01

    great day of small frustrations

    we biked to a splashpad this morning, only to find it hasn't been built yet (we kept going and had a great afternoon at a friends house instead).
    we rushed halfway across the city to a particular store, only to find it had closed early on account of the long weekend (we spent the next hour or so watching ducks, canada geese and ringed gulls (aka sh*thawks) fight for breadcrumbs in a river in a nice park).
    we packed the camera and pulled it out on the riverbank, only to find I forgot to put the memory card back in.
    we drove to Dow's Lake to have supper and watch the mini flotilla of illuminated RC boats, only to wait another 1.5hrs to find out it was going to be another hour before they started (we returned home instead).
    we then got everything ready (and little one to bed early) to drive to my office to watch the fireworks, only to find out they had started half an hour earlier (thankfully I thought of confirming the time before leaving the house).

    on the bright side, summer is finally here! amazing how a little blue sky can go a long way at helping you get over such (admittedly minor) disappointments. :)

    2009-07-05

    clarification

    Clarification on my earlier statement that I was "more intelligent than most" - or something to that effect.
    What I really meant was "I can figure things out way better than most". I did not mean to appear as though I might be actually believe I was any good at understanding people at all, at least (a) not in any way that matters any, and/or (b) not when it might be important.
    (sigh) That's one of the things I'm learning as a parent (and I suspect, nay - hope, that there'll be many more such lessons).

    2009-06-17

    reorgs

    the whole division is in upheaval with the creation of two new sections and restructuring and people moving around to fill new positions and the domino effect that usually ensues (well, granted may not be so usual in the private sector). anyway, when i heard my supervisor was taking a management position, at least temporarily, I said i thought it was too early for me (being rather new to the department) to backfill his position; he said he thought our new manager should make his new team.
    Yesterday, I revised my position to say I would consider it. I still feel I don't have enough "time in".
    Today the director general put on a video "so you think you want to be an executive" . a short while later, in our unit meeting, he announced officially he was leaving (temporarily) and I felt the leaving manager's eyes on me but I didn't say anything.  New baby on the way, I'll be away for 9 months.  Timing just isn't right.

    (still) life imitating art

    We all know what cherry-flavoured cough syrup tastes like. But eating cherries that taste like cough-syrup is a bizarre experience.

    2009-06-02

    professional introspection & resistance to change

    I'm beginning to realize that I am slightly more competitive, ambitious, enthusiastic, conscientious and intelligent than most in the workplace. which also makes me more resented than most by some in the workplace. (it's only taken me, oh, 30-odd years to figure this out, which i suppose also makes me more naive than most.) not realizing my "superiority" in that regard has made me expect others be just as capable as me; naturally, those expectations don't do anything to alleviate the aforementioned resentment.
    Now, if only i could figure a way to get the senior members of the section (same age, but who've been there for 8-10 years compared to my 7 months) to recognize that some of the things they have been doing "forever" desperately need to be modernized...

    almost making the world a better place

    Can you imagine how much better the world would be if only engineers knew how to talk so people understand?

    2009-06-01

    who watches the watchmen?

    the answering machine at the bank just warned me that my call would be recorded for quality purposes - twice in a row - which leads me to wonder, who assures quality assurance?

    2009-04-18

    beautiful

    Ok, I recon this makes quite a few youtube videos I've been posting lately.
    But if you haven't heard Susan Boyle on Britain's Got Talent yet, sit down, turn your speakers up and truly enjoy this diamond in the rough.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxPZh4AnWyk

    I dream the dream indeed! Inspiring. We should all be as lucky as her to find our inner diamond, and have our biggest critics raise their eyebrows in astonishment as the infamous Simon Cowell.

    Kudos to the producers, editors, camera and sound crews too, who did a great job reinforcing the emotional effect.
    ------------
    UPDATE: apparently I wasn`t the only one inspired by this. Check out: http://mashable.com/2009/04/18/susan-boyle-video-jimmy-fallon/

    2009-04-15

    programming quality


    Don't you wish there was a knob on the TV to turn up the intelligence? There's one marked 'Brightness,' but it doesn't work.
      - Gallagher

    problematic plastic and inspir-action

    Excellent documentary I watched on plastic last Monday night:
    http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/passionateeyemonday/2009/addictedtoplastic/
    If you get a chance, watch it, it's really good!

    Here's an informative review:
    http://www.nationalpost.com/life/footprint/story.html?id=901421
    "[…] I knew it would resonate with people because plastic is something we touch every day without even thinking about it." Indeed, from alarm clocks and toothbrushes to shampoo bottles and razors, most of the developed world relies on this material just to get out of bed and showered in the morning. The problem, explains Connacher, is that nobody stops to wonder where all this plastic came from and what happens when we throw it out.

    2009-04-02

    Green to the grave

    I am shocked. From the Ottawa Citizen, 1 April 2009 page B5:
    In U.S. cemeteries alone, some 90,000 tons of steel, copper and brass, 1.6 million tons of reinforced concrete, and 800,000 gallons of embalming fluid like buried in caskets, vaults and corpses. That's not to mention the energy consumed in cremating a body at temperatures of more than 900C or the dioxins [and heavy metals] spewed into the atmosphere in the process.

    This article got me thinking. When the time comes, I want people to know I want a green burial. Particularly:
    -It would be nice to be exposed, but embalming fluid has to be non-toxic and organic. If formaldehyde is the only option, just close the lid.
    -dispose of my dental filling(s) (and any other toxic accumulator) as hazardous waste.
    -biodegradable coffin (soft, locally sourced, fast growing wood; without metal hardware).
    -lot: no heavy machinery (soil compaction) and no pesticides! let those bugs do their job so my body can support the local eco-system. Toss in a few red wrigglers and coffee grinds to get the process started.
    -service: should focus on my physical reunion with mother earth and spiritual reunion with the universe.
    -music: favourite pieces are Toccata & Fugue in D Minor (J.S. Bach) and Mozart's Requiem.
    -no concrete liners or vaults.
    -no headstone; an indigenous rock as a grave marker would be nice. if the plot allows, plant a dogwood shrub (I like the smell). Ideally, I'd like a silver maple.
    -organic local flowers, if any. ideally hardy maintenance-free perennials that could be planted at home or at my plot. Absolutely no carnations (my wife doesn't like them).
    -donations? ideally, to a land conservation organization - save the forests, creeks and bees; they are the silent guardians of our race who will look after our progeny a whole lot better than any profit-minded association.

    "best be mindful, we are but guests in mother nature's house"

    I haven't seen their sites yet, but here are potential sources for more information (listed in the Citizen article):
    naturalburialassoc.ca
    naturalburial.coop
    greenburialcouncil.org
    naturaldeath.org.uk

    Life's for Sharing

    Watch this first:

    Then watch this:

    there is something prehistorically attractive about so many people doing the same thing at the same time - so many bodies orchestrated and synchronized - almost like precision drill, but so much easier for ordinary people to relate to and enjoy!

    Colbert may finally get his way

    Unbelievable - I hope this is an April Fools.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE52T5TN20090330

    I can imagine a lot of folks at NASA would privately agree with this choice, though it would signal the end of the somewhat haughty pride and dignity in space program (disconnected from public's imagination long ago). Gene Roddenberry must be turning in his grave - the future USS Enterprise, Reliant, Defender etc will likely be named USS Double-Double, Colbert and Rockstar.

    I can also imagine there are many people regretting the choice to open the name to a vote - the scene from the upcoming "Parks & Recreation" program on NBC (where a bureaucrat groans "oh I hate the public") comes to mind.

    http://www.nbc.com/Primetime/parks-and-recreation/

    New World Order

    or, another step closer to Orwell's 1984.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idUKL295567120090402

    Denial / self-acknowledgment

    "I'm only a near-perfectionist."

    2009-03-31

    Is orthodoxy carbon-neutral?

    Officially, according to guardian.co.uk's terms of use, I can't reproduce the article here (even for non-commercial ops). Oh hell, here it is anyway, you never know how long it'll be available for at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2009/feb/25/religion-christianity, and rationalization of religious customs (like burning vs stoning people and sacred cows) always makes for great discussion:

    It is good to know that two bishops are undertaking a "Carbon fast" which will require them to turn off their computers every night, rather than leaving them on standby.

    Unfortunately, I am not very good at piety and it made me wonder, in a rather irreverent way, about the the environmental consequences of burning heretics. Is orthodoxy carbon-neutral? It turns out to be quite difficult to calculate this. Cremation is less green than burying people, but this is partly a result of the attempts that crematoria now make to avoid pollution, which requires burning the bodies at very high temperatures.

    But an auto-da-fe does not need to be nearly as hot as a modern crematorium. The purpose of the fire is not to reduce the heretic to ashes, but to impress the onlookers with the horror of the crime. But even at these lower temperatures it seems at least as environmentally sinful as a barbecue and we know we are meant to be giving those up, too.

    Perhaps the greenest religion ever developed was that of the Aztecs, who kiled their victims with stone knives. In fact their entire way of life has been analysed from an ecological point of view by the late anthropologist Marvin Harris, who concluded that human sacrifice was an ecological necessity for an urban civilisation in central Mexico. So far as I know, they did not sacrifice heretics, only enemy prisoners, but you can see how heresy was discouraged by the practice all the same.

    It is a commonplace of anti-Aztec propaganda that the hearts of the sacrificial victims were offered to the gods, after being cut, still beating, from their bodies. This was a waste, and would of course have required fuel for the sacrificial pyres. But Harris was the first man to ask what happened to the rest of the prisoners; and he concluded that their bodies were also cooked, and then eaten. Central America had very few native domesticable sources of animal protein – only birds and dogs, in fact. So the meat from these vast temple sacrifices would have made a noticeable difference to the soldiers lucky enough to be fed. By the same token it would have increased their zeal in battle very considerably. To be taken prisoner really was a fate worse than most other deaths. You can see how the system could become self-perpetuating.

    Harris is rather out of fashion now: he analysed all sorts of religious taboos as disguised ecological rules: the sacredness of cow, he thought, was an expression of the fact that the farmer who eats his bullock in a famine year might as well be dead, since when the rains come he will be unable to plough.

    Similarly, the taboo on pork in Judaism and Islam makes sense in the Middle East, where the pig is a bad ecological bargain.

    Obviously, if you are a true believer, this kind of explanation will be unsatisfactory. It's also unsatisfactory if you are the kind of rationalist who wants all religions and all superstitions to be equally ridiculous and unscientific. And it offends, finally, people like me who dislike the idea that religious practice can be explained away or reduced to anything else.

    None the less, the link between religion and ecology is worth thinking about. One of the things that all religions have are prohibitions which have to be obeyed "just because". Heresy is shunned not because it is rationally wrong, but because it is heretical. But these attitudes aren't confined to religion. Nor could they be, because they are indispensable for any large scale social organisation. If everyone stops to question everything, nothing gets done. What religions do, to some extent, is to internalise social disciplines so that they come to seem morally binding and quite impossible to analyse coldly. We're going to need that kind of social discipline to cope with the shrinking resources of the world.

    Actually fiddling around to discover the precise carbon footprint of everything we do is absurdly time consuming and in any case unlikely to come up with the right answer. In this sense, environmentalism is indeed a religion, though one without any defined supernaturalist dogmas. Trust in authority, whether Pope Benedict or George Monbiot, is the only way we can hope to link the greater rationality of wanting to preserve humanity with the rationality of the small scale decisions we make all the time about how to live. Of course it is absurd. But so are all the alternatives; and they are worse.

    from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2009/feb/25/religion-christianity

    2009-03-29

    at least they are committing environmentally sound murder

    Should hunters switch to 'green' bullets?

    • Story Highlights
    • Green bullets are those that don't contain lead, a toxic metal
    • Last year, California banned lead bullets in the area where an endangered bird lives
    • Copper bullets are the main alternative to lead
    • Hunting and gun groups oppose bans on lead bullets, saying they pose no risks
    By John D. Sutter
    CNN

    (CNN) -- Three years ago, Phillip Loughlin made a choice he knew would brand him as an outsider with many of his fellow hunters:

    He decided to shoot "green" bullets.

    "It made sense," Loughlin said of his switch to more environmentally friendly ammo, which doesn't contain lead. "I believe that we need to do a little bit to take care of the rest of the habitat and the environment -- not just what we want to shoot out of it."

    Lead, a toxic metal that can lower the IQs of children, is the essential element in most ammunition on the market today.

    But greener alternatives are gaining visibility -- and stirring controversy -- as some hunters, scientists, environmentalists and public health officials worry about lead ammunition's threat to the environment and public health.

    Hunting groups oppose limits on lead ammunition, saying there's no risk and alternatives are too expensive.

    The scope of the trend is difficult to measure. Americans spent an estimated $1.08 billion on ammunition in fiscal year 2008, according to tax reports from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. But the bureau does not track ammunition sales by type.

    Industry groups are tight-lipped about their sales figures. Manufacturers contacted by CNN declined to release specific numbers.

    Barnes Bullets, which manufactures copper bullets because, the company says, they perform better than lead, is seeing increased interest in its non-lead products, said Jessica Brooks, the Utah company's spokeswoman.

    Loughlin, of Union City, California, has noticed new manufacturers jumping into the green bullet game.

    "They're definitely coming out. Winchester and Remington, all the big-name ammo makers are loading green ammunition now," he said.

    Some firing ranges are banning lead for safety reasons. Lead bullets contaminate military training grounds across the country and are the subjects of many environmental cleanups.

    California and other state governments have taken up lead bullets as a matter of policy. They worry that lead from the bullets contaminates ecosystems and could affect people.

    Last year, California banned lead bullets in the chunk of the state that makes up the endangered California condor's habitat. The large birds are known to feed on scraps of meat left behind by hunters. Those scraps sometimes contain pieces of lead bullets, and lead poisoning is thought to be a contributor to condor deaths.

    Arizona, another condor state, gives out coupons so hunters can buy green ammunition. Utah may soon follow suit.

    In North Dakota, a hunter has raised concerns about lead's potential impact on humans.

    Dr. William Cornatzer, a dermatologist and falconer, saw a presentation about the potential dangers of lead at a board meeting of the Peregrine Fund, a group devoted to conserving birds of prey. He decided to collect and test venison samples that were going to be donated to a local program for the hungry. About half of the 100 samples -- all shot by hunters -- tested positive for lead, he said. Food banks and shelters pulled the meat from their shelves after the report.

    "When we did this, I about fell out of my shoes," he said. "The scary thing is these fragments are almost like dust in the meat. They're not like metal fragments you would feel when you bite down."

    States in the area started investigating the issue after Cornatzer's findings.

    Working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the North Dakota Department of Health ran a test to find out the health effects of lead-shot game. The agency compared blood-lead levels of people who regularly eat meat shot with lead bullets with the levels of those who don't eat much wild game.

    The results were inconclusive. Those who ate the lead-shot meat had slightly higher blood-lead levels than those who didn't, but none of the 738 people in the study had levels above the government's threshold for danger.

    Still, the health department recommended that children younger than 6 and pregnant women stop eating venison shot with lead bullets because those groups are at particular risk for lead poisoning, even at low levels.

    The department also recommended lead-free bullets as the simplest solution to possible contamination.

    The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources followed with its own study, which found that when lead bullets explode inside an animal, imperceptible particles of the metal can infect meat up to a foot and a half away from the bullet wound -- farther than previously thought.

    More research is needed to tell for sure if lead-shot meat poses a risk to people, said Dr. Steve Pickard, an epidemiologist at the North Dakota Department of Health. But until that research is done, people should take sensible precautions, he said.

    "There is no cause for alarm, but it is another source of lead in the environment," he said of lead ammunition.

    Hunting groups say lead bullets pose no risk to people or the environment.

    Available studies -- particularly the one from North Dakota -- prove that point, said Ted Novin, spokesman for National Shooting Sports Foundation.

    "The CDC study confirmed what hunters have known for centuries: Consuming game hunted with traditional [lead] ammunition has never been shown to pose a health risk to anyone," he said.

    Pickard said Novin's group is misrepresenting science.

    The NSSF and the National Rifle Association say efforts to ban lead ammunition are veiled attempts to take guns away from hunters. They also point to the fact that lead's main alternative, copper, is more expensive and isn't available in all calibers.

    Novin said the added expense will drive many people away from a sport that is part of American heritage.

    "Many hunters believe lead is the best metal to be used for hunting," he said. "Add into that that it [lead] is very affordable and it is very available. We think this absolutely should be left up to hunters."

    Dr. Joseph Graziano, interim department chair of environmental health sciences at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, said the public should switch away from lead bullets -- even if the research is still developing.

    "It's hard to imagine that you could make a bullet out of something more toxic than lead," he said.

    Loughlin, who switched to green ammo and blogs on the issue, said that lead shouldn't be banned from hunting but that hunters and the public should be more aware of lead's potential to cause harm.

    "Lead will get into you, and we need to be working towards getting it out of the system," he said. "I think it's something we could do away with over time."


    ------------------------------------
    Find this article at:
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/03/04/green.bullets/index.html

    2009-03-26

    Messed up dream

    Dreamed a few nights ago that I was in a sky-diving (or similar sport) program with a military-like academy.  The program required certain inoculations.  We were en route in a shuttle bus and got caught in a Republican pro-vaccination rally (a point not immediately important) on the way to the training facility where I was to receive the 2nd dose of the vaccine before starting the training regime.  The nurse did an independent blood check and did not find any of the antibodies that I was expected to have with the supposed vaccine, and informed me of a possible conspiracy where the pharmaceutical companies were pushing this substance that would detect changes in brain chemistry when you think seriously (and passing it off as a vaccine).  That substance would then trigger a signal that could be detected remotely electronically.  I had a few newspaper articles and other quasi-evidence stashed in my room on campus that supported that story and that I felt compelled to leak to some organization (one of the few still independent and professional media?), so a few trusted friends and I started bundling, protecting and disguising them as a package that wouldn't rouse suspicions by "authorities" whose integrity (dedication to free will and independent thought) may or may not be compromised   Meanwhile, legislation looking into this matter was being proposed in an Asian government body (china?) with a complex procedural voting process.  When the lawmakers were asked to vote on the bill, machine guns popped out of walls and ceilings and started shooting all them.  Though fatally wounded (limbs shot off etc), they still managed to summon enough composure and last breaths to hobble through the complex voting process and the legislation passed despite the bloody chaos.  Still, it was too late, mind control had already been achieved and bloodily demonstrated for anybody else in the world to dare do anything about it.

    Victims of their own virtues

    Science proves climate change threat
    By David Suzuki - Victoria News

    Published: March 05, 2009 4:00 PM
    Updated: March 05, 2009 4:18 PM

    Why does the public often pay more attention to climate change deniers than climate scientists? Why do denial arguments that have been thoroughly debunked still show up regularly in the media?

    Some researchers from New York's Fordham University may have found some answers. Prof. David Budescu and his colleagues asked 223 volunteers to read sentences from reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The responses revealed some fundamental misunderstandings about how science works.

    Science is a process. Scientists gather and compare evidence, then construct hypotheses that "make sense" of the data and suggest further tests of the hypothesis. Other scientists try to find flaws in the hypothesis with their own data or experiments. Eventually, a body of knowledge builds, and scientists become more and more certain of their theories. But there's always a chance that a theory will be challenged. And so scientists speak about degrees of certainty. This has led to some confusion among the public about the scientific consensus on climate change.

    What Prof. Budescu and his colleagues found was that subjects interpreted statements such as "It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent" to mean that scientists were far from certain. In fact, the term very likely means more than 90 per cent certain, but almost half the subjects thought it meant less than 66 per cent certain, and three quarters thought it meant less than 90 per cent.

    According to an article in New Scientist, the researchers concluded that scientists should use both words and numbers to express certainty. For example, the IPCC considers "virtually certain" to mean more than 99 per cent likely; "very likely" to mean more than 90 per cent certain; "likely" to be more than 66 per cent; "more likely than not" more than 50 per cent; and so on.

    It's important to understand the distinctions. People who recognize the urgency of the situation are more likely to get behind solutions. And businesses and governments are more likely to work toward solutions when the public demands that they do.

    And how urgent is the situation? The IPCC has concluded it is "very likely" that human emissions of greenhouse gases rather than natural variations are warming the planet's surface. Remember, that means they are more than 90 per cent certain. That's about as close to unequivocal as science gets. The IPCC has also concluded that the consequences could be catastrophic.

    This is science that has been rigorously peer-reviewed and that has been agreed upon by the vast majority of the world's climate scientists, as well as more than 50 scientific academies and societies, including those of all G8 nations. There has been no peer-reviewed scientific study that has called into question the conclusions of the IPCC, which represents the consensus of the international scientific community.

    So why does the debate still continue? Why are we fiddling while Rome burns? Well, as Prof. Budescu's research shows, some people don't really understand how science works. And people with vested interests, many of whom work with the oil and coal industries, are all too willing to exploit that lack of understanding by sowing confusion.

    It's also true that many people fear change. We've seen examples of economic prosperity and job creation brought about by investments in green energy in places such as Germany and Sweden. And leading economists, including former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern, have warned that not doing anything to confront climate change will cost us far more in the long run than acting now. But many people still fear that any profound change will upset the economy or diminish their quality of life.

    We may never reach 100 per cent certainty on climate change and its causes – that's not what science is about – but one thing is certain: if we don't get together to work on solutions now we'll have a much tougher time dealing with the consequences later.

    Take David Suzuki's Nature Challenge at www.davidsuzuki.org.


    Find this article at:
    http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/victorianews/opinion/40810628.html

    2009-02-11

    boring, but solid

    Canada is now "remarkably responsible" - but don't tell them yanks or our last month's trade deficit will have been more than a blip...
    http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2009/2/9/4086913.html

    2009-02-10

    dirty oil, "made in canada"

    Amazing how western politicians mesmerized us with the notion that we were an energy superpower, while so much damage was being caused...
    I'm glad somebody's trying to get the message out there that this may not be the ideal solution to our energy "woes."
    http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/pressroom/viewnews.php?id=533

    2009-02-08

    Now stop worrying and enjoy your life

    Given that religion gives rise to all sorts of intellectual, uhm, "self-satisfaction" at the best of times, such as whether Christians got the day of rest wrong, and provides motivation for wars in the worst of cases, the atheist bus campaign is really refreshing.

    2009-02-04

    Economic "growth" is no way to rate the health of a city

    just sent this to the local paper and ward councilor in response to this article http://www.yourkanata.com/StittsvilleNews/article/10022

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    Date: Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 22:46
    Subject: Economic "growth" is no way to rate the health of a city


    Re: What cost development? Feb 4 2008

    I believe that pushing the urban boundary for new developments is extremely shortsighted, and plain wrong on all other levels.
    We have lived in a time when growth was considered good - as long as there were more people coming, more consumers in the market, more agricultural land to deplete, more forests to clear-cut, more oil to burn, more credit to stretch - things were supposed to be good. However, "measuring economic growth – as the current crisis proves – is no way to rate the health of the planet" (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/02/climatechange-economicgrowth for details).

    What exactly does building more homes achieve? Canadians have already outpaced our American neighbors in terms of spending on credit (a very bad habit of overconfidence fueled by recent political statements like "ours is the most robust banking system in the world" and "we are sheltered from this storm"). Is this really the time to encourage people to buy new homes and stretch their mortgages even more? Is it really beneficial for the city to increase the new areas it has to service while the infrastructure in older neighborhoods is on the verge of collapse? From what I've heard the construction trades in Ottawa were already over-stretched, with houses taking 16 months to build rather than the normal 9. It sure is fun and exciting for people to obsess over new homes, but what does that do for us in the long term? For example, what are we going to do in fifteen years, when the existing neighborhoods currently bedlocked by the babyboomer bulge are finally available, but all the new families have moved ever further out?

    I profoundly disagree with the comment that "growth" - at least in the sense of construction - is "good" for us, even if it generates "profit" for the lucky few, who then spend much of it offshore for electronic gadgets that our own labour force is too expensive to manufacture here, because too many people are tied to construction... Just moving money around simply does not create wealth. You can't export homes. You can't really export residential construction expertise to other parts of the world. All you can do is increase demand for natural resources best left untapped and artificially boost wage expectations due to false labour shortages (because people are working on the wrong things). How is that supposed to be good for us in the long run?

    Let's focus on ruban renewal instead - better services, better quality of life. The charm of old cities like Montreal and Boston arose directly from the intensities of their populations. Rather than obsessing over manicuring their 5,000 square feet of grass and driveway with pesticides and oil products, and filling their homes with ephemeral gadgets, residents should be able to gather in cafes, markets, theaters, pubs and parks, and focus on the finer qualities of life.

    It's easy, and politically convenient to focus attention on shiny new things, especially when the old things aren't turning out as well as we had hoped. It's simple and simple sells. But praising expansion is also cheap politics, and poor public policy.
    Never taken such a public stance before; we'll see where this goes. I wonder if it'll even be published. At least my local councilor is already a strong proponent for intensification.

    2009-01-29

    short-term politics fail to address underlying issues

    'Western' democracies usually allow a few years of actual governance between pre-election orgies. That kind of directional stability is usually pretty good provided it doesn't drift too far off-ideological center. However, when it comes to generational trends, 4-year terms doesn't even come close to even giving them the time to grapple, let alone understand or even communicate, the magnitude and complexity of the problem.

    But here's a key primer from http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1176152765213
    :
    PLAINLY, A key to reducing violence is to reduce birthrates. According to Heinsohn, this could be achieved through widespread knowledge of birth control measures and the will to use them. Such an option, however, is unlikely because of religious opposition among traditional Muslims.


    Since they can't tackle religion, they can, and do (especially in the current budget) focus on jobs. Giving people opportunities to work forces them to think (hopefully at least a little) more carefully about their own future. A little employment uncertainty (take too much time off and you might be fired) probably "helps" in that regard.

    But this is still terribly short-sighted. Jobs in the service industry (Home Depot, Tim Hortons etc) may keep people busy, but they aren't as rewarding as, say, having a loving family. And the construction industry is only going to last as long as the city centres and old suburbs are bedlocked with aging baby-boomers who don't want to turn their 4-bedroom homes over to new families.

    Expect the perfect storm in 10 years or so: the boomers will be buried, after straining our healthcare system to the breaking point, there will be a ton of real-estate available (housing market collapse), service industry will follow (no boomers sipping coffee all day every day at Tims anymore), and the public service will be left with a massive gap of experience, and industry as a whole will be staffed with people who were raised in perpetual economic growth and will resent no longer having what they've come to believe as entitlements rather than a reward for a strong work ethic. Economy as a whole will implode, people will stay at home with nothing to do but have kids, and you're set for another generation of extreme violence.

    This is why I think the current budget, or even 4-yr politicking, doesn't even come close to trying to balance the underlying pressures that contribute to social stability or collapse. It's purely reactionary and terribly short-sighted.

    I'm still hoping for a politician with a vision for the future, that can carve a proper role in the world to give Canadians from shore to shore to shore a sense of pride, common long-term purpose, and opportunity to share peace and prosperity. Perhaps that should be added to the Constitution, so the Senate can fulfill that as part of their mandate to defend, protect and promote it.

    2009-01-23

    I can't believe their childishness

    I don't know how many rants I've emailed myself with the intention to post, but I just came across this and can't get over it:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/politicalbytes/2009/01/stalled_investigation.html


    this is the type of protective action I would find amusing in a 5 or 6 year old who knows he's doing something wrong; from a party charged with leading the country, that's a whole other story.

    and do they expect to lead a minority government "in good faith" ??

    and the budget's gonna be a good one, "trust us" ???

    it's almost as principally offensive as their communications campaign aimed squarely at the gut.

    2009-01-22

    this nails it right on the head

    I've felt something has been profoundly wrong with the Conservative Party's communications strategy for a few years. Now I know exactly what it is. Read the 2nd review (the one by Stephen Haines):

    http://www.amazon.ca/product-reviews/0771032994/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&2115RM6D8KAPZVI6GHelpfulReviews1.s=SUCCESS&2115RM6D8KAPZVI6GHelpfulReviews1.v=1&voteError=0

    in those words, what makes me react so is that the communications campaign is so deliberately aimed at "the gut" to silence "the head," that we (the public) become very susceptible to being manipulated and gladly give them "absolute power" / corruption a la evil Empire. Not that I expect them to be that way, but I can't help but wonder why they choose a strategy that sets that up so beautifully?

    2009-01-13

    righteousness vs self-righteousness

    context: ottawa bus drivers are on strike (this is now week 6), severely inconveniencing ottawa residents. negotiations broke off several times; the city refused to comply with a mediator, the union refused to put the city's final offer to its members, etc. meanwhile, both sides held wildly different public relations programs: the mayor has been on the news daily nd city council is taking full page ads in the local papers, while the union is refusing to speak to media outlets that don't paint them in a neutral (if not positive) manner (side note: that ugly tactic worked with the Harper Conservatives, but the union doesn't quite have the same clout). anyway, the results of a public opinion poll were released last week, indicating something like 90% of residents agree with the city's approach to stand firm and not give in to the scheduling demands of the union. the city (especially right-wing nutsoid radio stations) now claim that gives them a clear mandate to maintain its position.

    point: Besides the fact that both sides aren't negotiating in good faith and are holding the residents hostage in this debacle, it really bothers me that they are using public opinion as a weapon, and claiming "the right thing to do" on public opinion after a deliberate media campaign.

    I'd like to remind them that an effective communications strategy does NOT in itself give them the moral high ground!

    from hell to television

    according to some ideologies, transgressors of social/moral customs (usually called "sinners") go to a place called "hell" though sometimes only after spending some time in a decision-making process ("purgatory") until a time when history (or some conventionally-accepted authority) has decided they are "good" or "bad" (called "judment day").

    IMO, hell is therefore only a dark place in people`s minds where they associate memories of dead people with negative emotions (jealousy, anger, hate, contempt, resentment, etc). sometimes people dwell or even thrive on those negative emotions, and anybody who merely harbour them passively are vulnerable to being hijacked by others (kinda like a computer infected with a virus predisposing it to hacker control). if you forgive them, you let go of those negative emotions, you can focus on things that are more likely to contribute to your good health, and you ensure you cannot be taken advantage of through your emotions.

    easier said than done, I know.
    deep stuff; I should be charging for this. or at least write a book or run my own cable tv channel.

    2009-01-10

    demographics - not fully digested yet

    I haven't figured out what makes people want to have kids/not have kids. Might not make sense. Likely oversimplified. Probably not politically acceptable. Certainly not complete.

    I think it has something to do with a combination oflifestyle:
    --For you "haves" who have none or few kids: is it because it is inconvenient when both work and you want to give each other (and your one/few kid(s) if you have any) the best because that's what you've had/known and you want them to be able to experience it too one day?
    --For you "have nots" (who seem to have more kids than the "haves" think they can afford to care for but you seem to manage anyway): Is it because hardship is all you've ever known and you see nothing wrong with raising your kids that way too?

    and Social pressure and optimism/faith:
    --I suspect majority of peoplesocial groups with no or few kids are ok with that because it makes it easier to control the variables in their favor of their legacy/lineage; they have bought into the "establishment"; they are (over)confident everything is fine and don't see any cause for it to change now (or ever);
    --I suspect majority of peoplesocial groups with many kids are doing so partly in the hope of future generations outnumbering and taking down the dwindling but ever-ascending "elites".

    Either way, I suspect our "western" ways are leading us to reproductive insufficiency. Comment/email me if you have any thoughts to share.

    peeve

    I'm really getting annoyed at shows and journalists that interview people on the street or callers and report what they say on some event as the "news." I want the details of the controversial event itself, with commentary from reasonably credible and informed "experts" providing pertinent context and justification.

    580 CFRA ("the heartbeat of the city") (puke) is a local radio station that makes me ill. At least I'm not alone in thinking that's where the crazies gaggle. And don't anybody get me started on that idiot "News, Understood" slogan/attitude from Global.

    This whole right-wing anti-elitism trend (the FOX network, Harper's Conservatives, the Sara Palin phenomenon, et al.) is making me lose respect for many segments of society that I previously considered equal, which annoys me because it effectively labels me as "elite" - I'm certainly not going to choose sides with self-appointed "real" people who want to hear the same bigoted spitup again and again and can't see that they've fallen for propaganda from power-hungry ideologists who can only truly attain absolute power if people feel good being stupid.

    2008-12-23

    thoughts for 2009

    Whereas:
    -Support for socialism died (in most parts of the world) due to corruption and ineffectiveness, leading to non-responsive to the needs of the people; and

    -Nationalism is going the same way, mired in stakeholder consultation/communication planning loops and poisoned with petty partisanship; and

    -Capitalism is imploding because of the rotten core and the absence of regulatory assurance; and

    -Consumerism, the punch-drunk high of unbridled environmental exploitation and nouveau-riche giddiness, is environmentally unsustainable and economically doomed;

    I ask you,
    What -ism do you think will drive the next generation??
    (this is a serious question - the first to answer "geo pr-ism" wins a kick in the ass)

    I wish you a balanced 2009.
    Happy Festivus!

    what's the frequency kenneth?

    my mental song dial is stuck between stations right now; i can tell there are a couple of songs competing in the background noise but its too vague and broken to be discernable. kinda neat.

    2008-12-03

    petition

    http://causes.ca/signatures/petition?cause_id=2

    letter to GG

    Excellency,
    I have been shocked again and again at the belligerence, divisiveness, and contempt for Canadians that Mr. Harper has shown, all the while marketing himself as an "ordinary" Canadian and "protector" of democracy. I hoped the recent election would bring about a more humble, cooperative nature, and initially that is what he portrayed. Unfortunately, that was probably only a ploy to buy time and public opinion while preparing a budget update that clearly goes against core values of this country: respect, fairness, equal opportunity for personal growth, and entraide. His party's actions time and again indicate to me that they wish to diminish all Canadians to "ordinary" status, such that they can be easily manipulated (need to look no further than the conflicting attacks in English and French) and poorly paid, with limited ability to defend let alone promote themselves (example: the contempt for galas). I do not believe that the Conservative Party of Canada is taking this country down a good path.

    Given the Parliament we have elected, I believe the Liberal-NDP Coalition is the most effective means of achieving a government that is fair and representative of the values Canada enjoys at home and has promoted abroad. I cannot say whether proroguing the current session will be beneficial or not (likely best merely to cool tempers and let coole heads prevail), but I do humbly request that you grant the Liberal-NDP Coalition the opportunity to form a government, with all the authority of your position and a reassuring speech that we must remember what we stand for together, not only with our traditions, but with our vision.

    Sincerely,

    sigh

    after writing and erasing three rambling rants on the proposed coalition, how harper's reacting to it, and how disappointed I am that so many Canadians seem to be lapping up the obviously manipulative lies without questioning harper's raw contempt for quebec, i've decided i have too many thoughts to write interesting words.
    i'm going to bed.

    who's being undemocratic?

    Nelson Wiseman, political science professor at the University of Toronto, […] dismissed Harper's attacks on the coalition, who reportedly called it an "undemocratic seizure of power."

    "The Conservatives are arguing it's undemocratic, but actually elections don't elect governments," said Wiseman. "They elect Parliaments. Parliaments make a government. Parliaments can break a government."

    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/02/gg-return.html

    deconstructing Conservative party lies

    Broadbent (past leader of NDP) speaks out:
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/03/coalition-broadbent.html

    And former GG speaks up:
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2008/12/03/parl-schreyer.html

    This type of scenario (arguing over who/what we vote for/give a mandate to (i.e., party or MP)) will never be put to rest until we elect a President (or GG), independently of parliamentarians we send to the Commons. This is the real democratic reform this country needs (Senate reform is purely a red herring that simultaneously provides a convenient excuse to abolish it in the quest for absolute rule).

    2008-12-02

    this is NOT a "coup d'état"

    from Google:
  • (Fr. "strike at the state") the sudden overthrow of a government by a small group.
    www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/tignorterms.php

  • A sudden, decisive exercise of power whereby the existing government is subverted without the consent of the people, in a more or less violent fashion.
    arabbox.free.fr/islamaphonia1/Muziq.htm
    "without the consent of the people" - that must be why Conservatives are desperately trying to rally Canadians...

  • a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
    nothing illegal or forceful about this

  • A coup d’état (also coup) is the sudden, illegal overthrowing of a government by a part of the state establishment — usually the military — to replace the branch of the stricken government, either with another civil government or with a military government.
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup d'état
    nothing illegal about this

  • The sudden overthrow of a government, differing from a revolution by being carried out by a small group of people who replace only the leading figures
    en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coup d'état
    for the record, wiktionary's big sister wikipedia defines it a lot better:
    A coup d’état, often simply called a coup, is the sudden unconstitutional overthrow of a government by a part — usually small — of the state establishment — usually the military — to replace the branch of the stricken government, either with another civil government or with a military government.
    there is nothing unconstitutional about this proposal, unless they go so far as to disregard an unfavorable decision by the Governor General...

    So please, if you're ignorant, please feel free to continue calling this a coup d'etat.
  • Information - bad for public opinion!

    ...You'd think that's the marketing mantra for the conservatives these days.

    They've created a website, rally 4 canada (i'm not going to honour them with a link or even correct spelling), with a lot of misinformation. allow me to deconstruct some of their lies:

  • Layton negotiating with Duceppe "for quite some time to form a plan to seize power" - that's what opposition parties do during a minority government. In fact, I'm pretty sure the Conservatives were doing the same when Martin was PM...
  • "and to overthrow the government" - that's part of how the first past the post system is supposed to work.
  • "overturn the results of the last election" - overturn the results, you mean introduce non-elected members to parliament? clearly Harper is trying to implant the (FALSE) notion that Canada elected Him personally. (that's NOT how our system works, folks!)
  • "without seeking consent from we the Canadian voters" - the electorate does NOT choose who the government will be - they, we merely choose who we send from our riding to REPRESENT us. Forming the government is the responsibility of the party representing the most ridings, and consent is only required from the Governor General (symbolic, I know).
  • "from we the Canadian voters" - WE ??? disappointingly reminiscent of the divisive neo-conservative (somebody will surely correct me) friend or foe strategy.
  • "the Bloc Quebecois is dictating the terms of the next government" - meanwhile, in French, they mock the Bloc for "selling out to a federalist party."
  • "this unelected government" - again, their members were elected exactly the same way the cons. were; besides, in a minority government, MORE people voted AGAINST the party in power than in favor...
  • "the government of Canada would be at the mercy of the people committed to destroying our confederation." - how is that different from before? The Bloc has (when convenient to Quebec) supported the previous cons. minority government on surely several occasions. Doesn't that also put Harper's government at the mercy of the same good people?
  • "people committed to destroying our confederation" - there's an interesting hint of Trudeau in that! fact of the matter is, separatists just don't believe that the current direction Canada is heading in corresponds to the promises made during Confederation; they are bitter over the ol' "bait and switch" that was pulled on them time and again, and they are simply there to ensure an eventual transition is orderly and respectful when (if) ever they choose to go their own way. That's a little different from say, Iran committed to destroying Israel, for example, wouldn't you agree? Additionally, they have a better chance of creating a ideologically compatible federal atmosphere with Dion and Layton than under Harper.
  • "democracy-loving Canadians... gather to support democracy" - uhm, didn't we do that at the polls six weeks ago? what's undemocratic about parties coming together to represent a majority of ridings trying to form a government? didn't the old PC and Reform parties do exactly that a few years ago?
  • "support democracy, not political games" - ha, that's funny coming from them.
  • "in this time of crisis" - what crisis? I thought our "fundamentals were strong," this was only a "technical recession," and "a good time to invest" ?

    Funny too, how I can't find the rally 4 canada website in French... might actually allow people to compare their claims! No wonder they are against "expensive" bilingualism - it just makes it harder for them to divide and conquer.
  • 2008-11-25

    the senate

    "By virtue of our appointment, we are able to focus on long-range issues that may not receive the same attention by politicians running for re-election. In this way, we provide a balance to Parliament that ensures that legislation and important concerns facing Canadians get the attention they deserve."
    http://www.liberalsenateforum.ca/In-The-Senate/Our-Role

    2008-11-20

    cattle as recyclers

    Printed on a trading card from The Ontario Cattlemen's Association:
    Cattle are recyclers. As plants grow, they take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. When cattle eat the grass, they burn the gasses back into the air. Some of this gas is carbon dioxide that is then recycled by the plants.

    Uhm, wtf?
    Mr. OED, please invent something that allows us to distinction between recycling that is good for the planet, from that which is bad for the planet. Because clearly, this company is greenwashing on semantics.

    Throne Speech: Environment Critique

    The following excerpt from the Speech from the Throne, 19 November 2008 sounds really good; it is uplifting and, I am surprised to say, almost inspirational. Here it is, with my observations:
    Our Government understands that Canada’s economic prosperity cannot be sustained without a healthy environment, just as environmental progress cannot be achieved without a healthy economy. Our Government will continue its realistic, responsible approach to addressing the challenge of climate change.
    responsible and realistic? the alliteration makes it sound nice, and it is surely meant to be reassuring, but it's also a cheap partisan shot.
    Our Government has committed to reducing Canada’s total greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020.
    I'm glad to see he's using all GHGs, not just carbon, but what year is he using as a baseline?
    We will meet this goal while also ensuring that Canada’s actions going forward remain comparable to what our partners in the United States, Europe and other industrialized countries undertake.
    While this may be good for the (currently deeply flawed) economy, it is not good enough to protect unique Canadian environmental needs.
    We will work with the provincial governments and our partners to develop and implement a North America-wide cap and trade system for greenhouse gases and an effective international protocol for the post-2012 period.
    Another partisan shot (implying other approaches would be ineffective), and buys him lots of time - a clear warning too that any delays will be the fault of the partners' and/or provinces. Does that qualify as bullying?
    To meet the challenge posed by climate change, we will also need to make greater use of technologies that do not emit greenhouse gases.
    No shit, sherlock, but what about the continued rape of the tarsands?
    Our Government will set an objective that 90 percent of Canada’s electricity needs be provided by non-emitting sources such as hydro, nuclear, clean coal or wind power by 2020. In support of this ambitious national goal, our Government will continue to provide support for biofuels, wind and other energy alternatives.
    "continue?" how about increasing them?
    To ensure protection of our vital resources, our Government will bring in legislation to ban all bulk water transfers or exports from Canadian freshwater basins.
    Outstanding! But what is "bulk water" - does bottling count? And for the Great Lakes, on which our southern neighbors have a legitimate 50% claim, what action will he take to prevent them from piping that water down to Arizona?
    Our Government will work with all parties in Parliament to introduce sensible policies that can help consumers and improve our environmental well-being, such as increasing incentives for energy-saving home retrofits.
    Glad to see he's reaffirmed the stupidity of scrapping the previous gov'ts program.

    Bottom line: are these words meant merely to impress?

    2008-11-17

    fast food - tasty, but...

    some things you`d rather not know, but you're glad you do.
    Another illustration of science (chemistry and research) raising
    concerns of the 'fast food' industry i.e. tracing the source of this
    industry's food supply and what is really in your combo/trio selections
    from McDonald's, Wendy's and Burger King ...

    http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081114/forbes_fast
    _food_081115/20081115/

    2008-10-30

    one, for the money; two, for the show

    From http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=dcdefae2-c7aa-4655-abbf-61446f34c608:
    Jim Flaherty, as expected, keeps the key portfolio of finance. Senior government officials say it is vital to show some stability in that role during the current economic crisis.
    Silly me, I would have thought competence would have been the first consideration.

    2008-10-29

    Pollster Frank Luntz, a regular guest on the Fox News, joked that MSNBC is "the only network with more letters in its name than viewers."

    On a more serious note, Luntz said it's a problem that the electorate chooses to watch news programs not for information but to confirm already-held beliefs, and that applies to viewers of CNN and Fox News as well.

    Note that this isn't meant to discourage anybody who reads this...

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49R0GK20081028

    power

    an effective illusion - if somebody seems to have power, we naturally tend to respect (not necessarily honour) it.
    is it our survival instinct, out of greed (share of likely spoils), or just mental laziness (accepting what others seem to have already decided)? something else? likely a combination of several.


    background: knighthood (the facebook game) made me reflect on this. since i no longer play, i thought i'd offer the stores of various weapons and gold my minions have produced on autopilot to the player that i thought was the most worthy. he came back with appreciation and a promise to distribute them to lower-ranked players to help them along.

    i recognized his power by (a) his power score but mostly (b) the number of people actively playing with him (he is the founder of a successful league or alliance or something). he was acting as an escrow or something in a trade i was conducting, and that's when he earned my trust (what little was needed for me to want to offer him my redundant riches).

    this isn't democracy - this is benevolent monarchy, but in a fantasy world that you can take your chances in and not lose anything if things go wrong. yet the social interaction, honour and recognition between players is something that the current political "democratic" system fails to offer - or at least seems to fail to offer and by extension isn't in a position to offer it. and so our governments are relegated to the back burner of social conscience, to a role of dealing with the things that have to be done but without significant meaning to the average person, and subject to control by parties that seek opportunities for financial gain (if not for them, then for the people that supported them). a competition of kingdoms, so to speak, where the winner is decided not on the battlefield but in elections. the fact that elections are now scheduled regularly just makes them more mechanistic and dull. one ray of hope survives, that the canadian people have insisted once more to maintain their involvement and hold on to the strings of power by denying yet again a majority government.

    2008-10-23

    poisoning principles

    how can you have a proper democracy (with informed, caring and idealistic voters) when one party campaigns (regardless of whether an election has been called, I might add) with an obvious bloodthirst for power?
    http://communities.canada.com/vancouversun/blogs/thesearch/archive/2008/10/23/pollsters-conservatives-attack-ads-hurt-voter-turnout-and-democracy.aspx

    2008-10-22

    x or... ?

    Had a very interesting discussion today with a new colleague.
    Range of topic was very broad, but definitely political-philosophical in nature.

    For example, binary "Friend or foe" is an ancient school of thought obviously still used in modern politics. As to whether W used it intentionally (ie what he truly believed) or manipulatively (purely to mobilize the masses for political support) is questionable, also leading to the other age-old debate over whether the ends justifies the means. We also briefly discussed the variants of that philosophy (a german (Kant?) once believing that it is more accurately an incantation of "I or not-I") or something like that, which led me to ask "what about friend or "not-friend"? He recognized the importance of that distinction, and stroked my ego by taking the time to think about it, then surmised that is an interesting shade of gray that is too complicated for most people to ponder and therefore usually ignored.

    Another discussion about what makes a good leader - his intrinsic values and actions (righteousness), or his effectiveness (heavily dependent on external factors)? That question arose when we disagreed over who would be a "better" leader for this country (at this time).

    I learned a few other things, and was rightfully corrected on one in particular:
    I offhandedly remarked that PM Harper was a brilliant but Machiavellian strategist; when in actuality he's (and his group) are more students of the "Straussian" political school, and that it is very elitist. one message for the elite, a different message for the masses (sidenote: i wonder if that ever influenced Depeche Mode's choice of album title?) Anyway, it would seem once you've proved yourself worthy and smart enough to read between the lines you get the secret decoder ring - meanwhile, all sorts of things happen with contempt for the ignorant supporting public).

    I just now looked up Straussianism on Wikipedia - all about "deadly lies" and "noble truths" (myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society). Takes us right back to the question of ends justifying means.
    Interesting. Very interesting...

    2008-10-20

    well said

    A female CNN journalist heard about a very old Jewish man who had been going to the Western Wall to pray, twice a day, every day, for a long, long time.

    So she went to check it out. She went to the Western Wall and there he was, walking slowly up to the holy site.

    She watched him pray and after about 45 minutes, when he turned to leave, using a cane and moving very slowly, she approached him for an interview.

    'Pardon me, sir, I'm Rebecca Smith from CNN. What's your name?

    'Morris Fishbien,' he replied.

    'Sir, how long have you been coming to the Western Wall and praying?'

    'For about 60 years.'

    '60 years! That's amazing! What do you pray for?'

    'I pray for peace between the Christians, Jews and the Muslims.'

    'I pray for all the wars and all the hatred to stop.'

    'I pray for all our children to grow up safely as responsible adults, and to love their fellow man.'

    'How do you feel after doing this for 60 years?'


    'Like I'm talking to a fuckin' wall.'

    2008-10-08

    time for debate, not more bait

    Open Letter to leaders of Canada’s federal political parties
    The signatories agree on these 10 principles:
    1. Canada needs to act on climate change now.
    2. Any substantive action will involve economic costs.
    3. These economic impacts cannot be an excuse for inaction.
    4. Pricing carbon is the best approach from an economic perspective.
    1. Pricing allows each business and family to choose the response that is best and most efficient for them.
    2. Pricing induces innovation.
    3. Carbon is almost certainly under-priced right now.
    5. Regulation is the most expensive way to meet a given climate change goal.
    6. A carbon tax has the advantage of providing certainty in the price of carbon.
    7. A cap and trade system provides certainty on the quantity of carbon emitted, but not on the price of carbon and can be a highly complex policy to implement.
    8. Although carbon taxes have the most obvious effects on consumers, all carbon reduction policies increase the prices individuals face.
    9. Price mechanisms can be regressive and our policy should address this.
    10. A pricing mechanism can allow other taxes to be reduced and provide an opportunity to improve the tax system.

    contempt of democracy

    old file, still highly pertinent.