1/26/2006

New class – Energy Outlook and Technology Options
Filed under: Engineering,General,Technology — nobrainer @ 9:19 am

I came into this semester needing only one class to satisfy my coursework requirements for my masters. Energy Outlook and Technology Options does not satisfy that requirement. Nonetheless it piqued my interest and I signed up.

A large part of the grade for the class is discussion. Every third lecture or so, will be dedicated to presenting new information and discussing it, and the topics from the previous few lectures.

This is good news for you, my loyal reader, because over the next few months my breadth and depth of understanding the state of the energy debate around the world. In addition, for each classroom discussion, we have to write up our thoughts on several questions beforehand to get our brains in gear. To kill two birds with one stone, look for me to be posting questions & my answers. Other bits of information and interesting resources will be posted regularly.

Look for an energy related post later today about OPEC, Iran, the IEA and strategic reserves.

1/25/2006

Buy Microsoft – god’s imbeciles want to make you rich
Filed under: General — nobrainer @ 1:03 pm

When people opt for the “buy high sell low” strategy, I think you really ought to help them meet their goals.

OLYMPIA, Wash. — A pastor who threatened a national boycott against Microsoft and other major corporations for endorsing a gay rights bill urged supporters Tuesday to buy up the companies’ stock and dump it to drive prices down.

Rev. Ken Hutcherson, pastor of Antioch Bible Church in the Seattle suburb of Redmond, said the stock-dumping plan had been part of his strategy all along.

“You got to find out how you affect a company,” Hutcherson said, conceding that it would be hard to get people to shun products from companies that dominate the marketplace as Microsoft and Boeing do.

He wants supporters to buy one or two shares over the next few months, then sell them May 1.

For Rev. Hutcherson’s sake, I hope that he does indeed one day manage to figure out how to affect companies. This way sure as shit ain’t it.

Now, Hutcherson’s idea might kinda work if he already had a lot of willing followers who owned such stocks. Then on May 1 they could all sell their shares as cheaply as possible, presumably for a penny or so each. But since he’s announced that idea, then everyone in the market will immediately buy up those nearly free shares, presumably initiating a lot of activity until the price approached its value just before the bargain sale.

Otherwise, for Hutcherson to drive the price down, his followers will first drive the price up. So if they’re buying with a relatively inelastic demand, buy now and sell high. Then buy again when they give their shares away.

Hutcherson really knows how to stick it to the man.

1/24/2006

Losing is for winners
Filed under: General,Politics — nobrainer @ 2:07 pm

Or so goes the logic of some conservatives who suggest the decline of today’s left is directly attributable to Roe V. Wade. By winning that lawsuit, the political left aborted itself out of power. This explanation does not seem so unreasonable.

If true, shouldn’t conservatives be at least a little bit apprehensive about trying to outlaw abortion? Which, according to the logic, would mean an increase of liberal babies who will become liberal voters.

Be careful of what you wish for I guess.

1/22/2006

I did not know this was possible
Filed under: General — nobrainer @ 6:04 pm

For perhaps the 4th time in the last 5 days my power has gone out. About 15 minutes ago it all went out. Right after I found my flashlight it came back on. Then went off as soon as I was 20 feet away from my flashlight. I found the light and lit a candle. Then the power came back on — sort of.

Right now about half my apartment has power, and the other half does not. My range for example is working, but the clock it is attached to is not.

EE’s, have any explanations?

The bad news: My TV runs off one of the non-working outlets.

The good news: I keep 50 foot extensions cords around.

Bad news: The cable is out, too.

More bad news: The internet crapped out as well.

Now I’m back in my office, but I swear that my lights came back on between the time I left my apartment and drove past it on my way out of the lot.

Global Warming Could Spell Disaster
Filed under: General — nobrainer @ 2:55 pm

… for blacks? Drudge linked to this earlier. It is a particularly bad piece of journalism, if you choose to call it that, which is probably why it found itself on Drudge. Anyway, after writing about it and almost not posting, I decided to just because of the state of Bruce Britt’s main resources for the story.

Global Warming Could Spell Disaster for Blacks
By Bruce Britt

Well this is from BET.com, so hopefully it’s for black entertainment purposes only and not anything serious.

Posted Jan. 18, 2006 – If you thought Hurricane Katrina was a once-in-a-lifetime fluke, think again. Concerned environmentalists say that unless the United States gets real about the threat of global warming, African Americans and other people of color can expect a repeat of disasters like Katrina.

Yes, it turns out that we have decades of records of hurricanes hitting all over the Southeast United States. It also turns out that we do not expect them to stop forming any time soon. Except in the future Whitey won’t have to worry about natural disasters; I better make sure I stay out of the sun – don’t want to be gettin’ to tan.

“When you look at the trends and put them all together, it’s undisputable that the sea levels are rising,” says Ansje Miller, director of the Environmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative (EJCC).

Shouldn’t they be the EJCCI? And who is this group? Well according to google, they have a website at ejcc.org. According to that website: “This domain name expired on Jan 18, 2006.” The world may never know.

“Warmer seas mean more intense hurricanes…. You’re going to have intense flooding like we have never seen before. Katrina is really the hurricane of the future.”

Bad News for Blacks

Environmentalists blame the fierce new storms on global warming. . .

Well the whole thing pretty much goes on along the same way. Half of it is quotes and info direct from the EJCC. But hey, we all write some complete BS from time to time. Maybe Bruce was having a bad day. Maybe he was just fulfilling a requirement to get his paycheck (none of us would ever think about half-assing something). Bruce’s BS is a little aggravating, but I’m just going to call it entertainment and let it go.

Canada blames America; the Baldwins soon to be bombed
Filed under: General,Politics — nobrainer @ 1:28 pm

Increase in Toronto gun deaths has fingers pointing toward U.S.

Canadians horrified by culture of violence they feel is quintessentially American

TORONTO – When a 15-year-old bystander was gunned down last month while holiday shopping on busy Yonge Street, it set off a wave of concern about the safety of citizens in this traditionally safest of cities.

Outrage is only an option when bystanders are hit, not when the real targets are offed.

Toronto’s gun-related homicides nearly doubled last year with 52 shooting deaths. A few miles to the south, Buffalo, a substantially smaller city, had 41 gun murders in 2005. And, the homicide rate of Canada’s largest city still lags far behind comparable American cities, like Chicago and Houston.

If you’re going to kill someone, a gun is a pretty effective tool. Apparently criminals in Canada are smarter than the average bear. Dropping safes, pianos, and icicles on the heads of intended targets is just too difficult these days.

Yet, the crackle of gunfire has horrified residents of Toronto – a city of 2.5 million that prides itself on safe streets and good manners.

With a national election scheduled for Monday, top Canadian politicians are pointing to the United States as the culprit for the city’s eruption of gun violence.

“The U.S. is exporting its problem of violence to the streets of Toronto,” Toronto Mayor David Miller told reporters days after the Dec. 26 shooting.

Well that’s one way to narrow our trade deficit.

Ricardo McRae, a 36-year-old Web-based artist

WTF is a “Web-based artist”? I think someone’s into kiddie porn.

. . . who lives in downtown Toronto, spoke about the cross-border differences last week as he dined at a Front Street restaurant near the CN Tower.

“Canadians are appalled by crime, while for Americans, this is just a part of life and they’re a lot more complacent,” McRae said. “The foundation of the U.S. is based on fighting, guns and protecting yourself. The Canadian way of life is built on multiculturalism, acceptance and peace.

Their multicultural factions want to split the country up. Violence, self-defense, and gun ownership are unacceptable.

“There’s just a culture of guns and violence in the U.S.,” he adds. “Even their national anthem talks about guns and bombs.”

Rockets and bombs. And most of us have neither of those.

That perception of a different tolerance for violence is widespread in Canada.

“Toronto’s just not used to this level of violence. We’re just shocked,” said Vanessa DiMaria, a 31-year-old teacher in Toronto, as she stood in front of the Eaton Centre, a mall in the hub of the downtown shopping district.

“I agree that the States is to blame a little bit because the States allows you to bear arms a lot more.”

And Canada allows you to bear arms a lot less. But the gun violence is still there isn’t it?

In the Boxing Day shooting, 10th-grader Jane Creba was killed and six others wounded when they were caught between rival teenage gangs firing into a crowd of shoppers near the Eaton Centre.

Maybe it is not a gun problem. It’s a gang problem.

The killing occurred in the middle of a national political campaign, and thus sparked politicians to intensify their backlash against America’s gun exports.

“Mindless violence’

“Canadians deserve safe streets. Toronto isn’t Detroit,” Prime Minister Paul Martin was later quoted as saying. “Vancouver isn’t South Central Los Angeles. We are not going to allow our cities to fall into mindless violence.”

As Canadians head to the ballot box Monday, gun control has become a key campaign platform for each of the major political parties.

The Canadian choices include Martin, leader of the Liberal Party who is seeking re-election, Conservative Stephen Harper and New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton.

The Liberals are proposing a complete ban on private handgun ownership, an idea criticized by the Conservatives, who argue that handguns are already severely restricted in Canada.

Hahaha. I’ll get back to this in a minute.

“The Conservatives here, just like the ones in the U.S., are viewed as tougher on law and order, while the left-leaning Liberals are viewed as more focused on the root social causes,” said Nelson Wiseman, a political science teacher at the University of Toronto. “It’s like they’re trying to outdo each other with their crime-fighting initiatives when the policies of these parties are not that much different.”

Some Canadians, though, say pointing the finger at America is unfair.

“It’s a copout, and it’s a very cheap shot,” said John Thompson, president of the Mackenzie Institute, a nonprofit think tank based in Toronto.

“The U.S. is our biggest trading partner, chief ally and best friend, and it irritates Canadians that Martin’s blaming America,” he said.

Staff Inspector Brian Raybould, head of the Toronto police homicide squad and a 36-year veteran of the Toronto police force, says 90 percent of the city’s shooting deaths are gang-related and are mostly “young black men shooting young black men.”

I’m guessing that all their social engineering is proving itself ineffective.

But police estimate that half the guns confiscated in criminal investigations are from their southern neighbor. “When we trace a lot of these guns, they are typically from a U.S. manufacturer, sold to a U.S. gun shop and then sold to a person and then the gun pops up in Toronto,” Raybould said.

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. But it’s obvious that the American culture is one of firearms, and Canada’s not like that.”

Culture shock

Raybould said he experienced a major culture shock when he recently visited Quantico, Va. – which is home to a major Marine Corps base and the FBI Training Academy – and saw people walking around with guns in holsters.

I can’t imagine why there would be so many visible guns in an area like that.

“People can’t carry a handgun legally here unless you’re a police officer, and all handguns are registered here,” he said.

The Canadian reluctance to embrace the gun culture draws mixed reaction from U.S. visitors.

Last week, American couple Rick Lemcke and his wife, Lona, were walking along Toronto’s Yonge Street after lunching at the Hard Rock Cafe.

You gotta love American tourists. We go to other countries to eat at restaurants that are just like the ones we left back home.

Rick Lemcke is a member of the National Rifle Association, a pistol permit holder and owns a collection of hunting guns.

“I don’t know if Canadians realize it, but gun ownership is a right they’re giving up,” said Rick Lemcke, 52, who is supervisor of Parma, a town in Monroe County near Rochester.

I hate to tell you this Rick, but Canadians don’t (yet) live under the American Constitution, so that’s really not their right.

“If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will own guns.”

So it’s a little lot cliched, but correct nonetheless. Regulating a legal market where a black market is already thriving is tantamount to doing nothing. Do you doubt for a second that the gang members aren’t aware that they are already breaching the law? If they are OK with breaking the law, what can be gained by writing more laws?

Despite the vast differences in murder statistics between the two countries, some community groups in Toronto are reaching out to their American neighbors to help clamp down on crime.

Early this month, the Rev. Eugene Rivers, who inspired an effort that reduced Boston’s skyrocketing homicides in the 1990s, spent three days in Toronto preaching a faith-based network of social programs – a combination of youth mentoring, church intervention and increased police presence.

And the Guardian Angels, a New-York based civilian vigilante group visited Toronto last week with plans to patrol troubled neighborhoods.

Read chapter 4 of Freakonomics.
Instead of enacting more gun laws, blaming America, or bombing the Baldwins, they would probably be best served by increasing their police forces and locking up their criminals. And Rev. Eugene Rivers probably had almost zero effect on the murder rates in Boston in the 1990s.


« Previous PageNext Page »