| Saturday,
July 2, 2005 Home and back from my
morning walk. Over in mail there
is considerable controversy over some notes from another conference; this is
in mail, and I do want to warn you, rhetorical restraint is not
characteristic of that conference, nor is restraint in the use of irony and
metaphor. Perhaps I should have said that earlier, but I thought it obvious.
Clearly not everyone did. But when a civilized executive of a high tech
outfit speaks of mass slaughter of political opponents, it's a pretty good
bet he is being ironic not literal. I doubt many of you needed to know that,
but apparently some do.
There is a column to do, and this place needs a bit of work. I put up a
good bit of mail on the airplane, most under Short Shrift rules.
I should note: in my business we have a technical term for people who
believe that every letter we put up contains material we agree with unless
we comment on it. It is not a flattering term. Clearly, sometimes, we just
post notes that we need not comment on. As an example, if an otherwise
intelligent man speaks of shooting all his political enemies, it is not
impossible that he means it, but the likelihood is high that he is indulging
in exaggerations for ironic effect or at least thinks he is. Indeed, that is
the most likely and certainly the most charitable interpretation, and I for
one do not think it required that every such instance be deconstructed by
the editor who posted the letter. If that rule is unacceptable, then I have
no remedy for I have neither the time nor the energy to comment on every
letter I post.
You may take it as a rule: I seldom find everything in a letter I post to
be a statement I could agree with entirely; and I do not always comment or
minute my disagreement. If that rule is unacceptable, I have no remedy; I do
not propose to change it.
========================
That brings me to another point: we purport to believe in free speech in
the US, but we all know that is not true: we all know what you cannot say
and who you cannot say it about, and on some subjects no rational discussion
is possible because to bring up the subject at all earns you a permanent
label, and in some countries, a jail sentence. Some taboos are absolute. I
try here to have as few of those as possible, but no one can escape them
all.
=======================
On the subject of Dark Age Coming:
PASSING IT ALONG: School officials in Victoria,
Australia, say it's too hard for students to calculate equations using the
constant 9.8 meters/second/second -- the acceleration of gravity at Earth's
surface -- so it's changing the Year 12 physics exam for the Victorian
Certificate of Education to use a rounded-off figure of 10 m/s/s. Close
enough? No: "The difference could cause a parachutist or bungie jumper to
plummet into the ground, or the launching of a rocket to fail," say people
who actually understand physics. After hearing the criticism the Victorian
Curriculum Assessment Authority announced that it would not penalize
students who used the correct figure. (Melbourne Herald Sun, Australia)
...No penalty for wrong answers, no penalty for the right ones -- modern
education in a nutshell.
==============
The impending retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor is likely to dominate
things for a while in the near future. I doubt I have anything to say on
this that others have not said.
I prefer strict interpretation of the Constitution. That would instantly
void Roe vs. Wade, and leave the matter to the states where it ought to be
left. It would leave many other matters to the states. My view is not likely
to prevail and I believe you and I and everyone else will live to regret
that. A nation of States cannot become an Empire. By definition leaving
matters to the States will result in some people being very unhappy about
what is going on in some places. It still comes closer to rule by consent of
the governed than most. And yes, I am aware that the States allowed slavery.
We have the Civil War Amendments as a result, and Congress has the explicit
power to enforce them. The Courts, absent action by Congress, do not.
============
RETRACTION/CORRECTION The Apple power supply performed perfectly on
English power, charging the system without any modification using the World
Wide adaptor. (I erroneously reported earlier that it would not accept
220; that was incorrect.) Alternatively you could use the US input plug
and an external adapter. It all worked fine. There is, however, no airplane
current input adapter for the Apple World Wide travel kit. Otherwise the kit
and power supply work as advertised. Recommended.
===================
The Wilton Park SF Writers in the Great Hall: Oliver Morton of The
Economist; Wil McCarthy; Allen Steele; Jerry Pournelle; Vernor Vinge;
Orson Scott Card.
=============
Brazilians Streaming Into U.S. Through Mexican
Border
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/30/international/americas/30brazil.html
By [3]LARRY ROHTER
BRAŚNAS, Brazil - For years, Jaider de Andrade,
a 35-year-old farm worker, talked about going to the United States to look
for work, and early in March he finally agreed to a trafficker's offer to
fly him to Mexico and have him guided across the border there. By month's
end, though, he was back home here again, in a coffin.
"His dream had always been for us to have a
little house of our own, but he never could make enough here to get ahead,"
his widow, Nilce Aparecida Moreira da Silva, said at the couple's homestead.
"He knew there was some risk, but he wasn't nervous, because he saw that so
many other people from around here had gone and done well in the United
States."
Encouraged by highly organized groups of
smugglers offering relatively cheap packages, Brazilians recently have been
migrating in record numbers to the United States.
With direct entry to the United States tougher
than in the past, more often than not their route of choice is through
Mexico, which in recent years has stopped requiring entry visas of
Brazilians. <snip>
================
And GOOD News:
Scientists to Begin Studying Kennewick Man
http://www.sfgate.com
/cgi-bin/article.cgifile=/n/a/2005/06/28/national
/a174937D91.DTL&type=printable
- By WILLIAM McCALL, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
(06-29) 14:04 PDT Portland, Ore. (AP) --
After nearly a decade of court battles,
scientists plan to begin studying the 9,300-year-old skeleton known as
Kennewick Man next week.
A team of scientists plans to examine the bones
at the University of Washington's Burke Museum in Seattle beginning July 6,
according to their attorney, Allen Schneider.
Four Northwest Indian tribes had opposed the
study, claiming the skeleton could be an ancestor who should be buried. The
Interior Department and the Army Corps of Engineers had sided with the
tribes.
But a federal judge in Portland, backed by the
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled that the researchers could study
the bones to determine how the man died and to find clues to prehistoric
life in North America.
"What they're getting is absolutely essential
baseline information that has never been obtained for this skeleton,"
Schneider said Tuesday. <snip>
Saturday TOP
Current Mail
|
