Is it just me, or does this seem to suggest Virginia as the key state in the election?
Thursday, June 26, 2008
What is 538 trying to tell us?
Is it just me, or does this seem to suggest Virginia as the key state in the election?
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Revenge of the Cavendish
I was trying to decide whether to rename "The Banana" as "Pudding," so I checked on Google Trends:
Surprisingly, Pudding jumps up near the end of every year - Thanksgiving and Christmas presumably. The surprising this is that Banana tracks with it...
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Celebration Guns
There's no good way to come at this.
Reading Spencer Ackerman's blog, I come across a column in which gun rights people are upset with the Republican party. The pro-gun people are upset with the Justice Department because it argued in favor of continuing gun restrictions in the D.C. v. Heller case. In the column he references, one quote stuck out:
Barack's gun-phobia is presumably linked to the possibility of assassination, but it could be a more banal, if not benign fear. Michelle Obama (in response to a question about assassination):
So, when Michelle Obama talks about a black man pumping gas, I fill in the blank "on the South Side of Chicago," an area where you really could get shot while pumping gas.*4
Which brings me to my last meditation. Amadou Cisse. Cisse was a graduate student in Chemistry at the University of Chicago. I never met him, but his death is still a subject of discussion. Without sources or verification, this is how it went down: Two guys borrowed a car from their neighbor with the intention of going clubbing. However, they realized that they were short on money. No big deal, they figured, we'll just get some off those rich students at the UofC.*5 First they mugged two students coming out of the biology / med school lecture building, and netted a pen. Coming back south, they threatened a professor near 60th and Woodlawn, who ran away as they shot at him (and missed). They continued west, finally running into Cisse near 61st and Ellis. Cisse was coming back from lab, had no money, wasn't even carrying his wallet. They got frustrated, so they shot him.
No. Seriously.
This takes me back to the D.C. gun ban. Chicago also bans handguns, which the murderers used. A lot of people have said a lot of very intelligent things about guns. I have something not very intelligent to add:
If someone were mugging me, and God came down and said, "You can either have a gun in your pocket, or $40," I know that with one of those options, I'm guaranteed to walk away.
*: Is it? The murder rate and murderer rate are much higher in blacks than whites. Concurrently, black on black murder is way more common than black on white or the reverse. This isn't to say Barack is likely to get murdered at the BP in Gunbarrel...
**: A couple years later, gangs of malicious 12 year-olds would ambush students cutting through that park after school and steal their electronics.
***: SDS is a white guy, so, you see, I'm not racist. I'm afraid of everyone in the dark.
*4: A takeoff of the infamous survey question from Freakonomics "How does it feel to be poor and black on the South Side of Chicago."
*5: We don't think of ourselves as rich, of course, but as people with well-off parents (yup) or very few expenses (yup), we tend to walk around with iPods (nope) laptops (sometimes) or other saleables (yup).
Reading Spencer Ackerman's blog, I come across a column in which gun rights people are upset with the Republican party. The pro-gun people are upset with the Justice Department because it argued in favor of continuing gun restrictions in the D.C. v. Heller case. In the column he references, one quote stuck out:
As the gun grabbing Brady Campaign acknowledges, such a finding by the Supreme Court could open the door to striking down as unconstitutional most, if not all, of the victim disarmament laws on the books.Emphasis mine. I was tickled by that characterization of gun laws. It reminded me to write the rest of this post, which was originally hung on a gaffe that Mike Huckabee made at the NRA national convention a couple of weeks ago. A clatter was heard during Huckabee's speech, to which he joked:
“That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair and someone pointed a gun at him and he dove for the floor.”
Barack's gun-phobia is presumably linked to the possibility of assassination, but it could be a more banal, if not benign fear. Michelle Obama (in response to a question about assassination):
I don't really lose sleep over it. Because the realities are that, you know, as a black man, you know, Barack can get shot going to the gas station...She took a lot of flak for that. Reading the words on this page, I can see why. The flat invocation of blackness is weird.* But the invocation of gas station sends a tingle up my spine. I remember one night my first summer in Hyde Park, gassing up the van at the ill lit Mobil on 53rd. The station was flanked on both sides by dark apartment buildings. On the opposite side of the street was a park,** empty. A man riding by on a bicycle abruptly turned in and started calling to me. And I thought, "O.K. this is going to be my first time getting mugged." And I checked my pocket. "Hey," said the man, "are you ready for the anatomy test tomorrow?" It was SDS.***
So, when Michelle Obama talks about a black man pumping gas, I fill in the blank "on the South Side of Chicago," an area where you really could get shot while pumping gas.*4
Which brings me to my last meditation. Amadou Cisse. Cisse was a graduate student in Chemistry at the University of Chicago. I never met him, but his death is still a subject of discussion. Without sources or verification, this is how it went down: Two guys borrowed a car from their neighbor with the intention of going clubbing. However, they realized that they were short on money. No big deal, they figured, we'll just get some off those rich students at the UofC.*5 First they mugged two students coming out of the biology / med school lecture building, and netted a pen. Coming back south, they threatened a professor near 60th and Woodlawn, who ran away as they shot at him (and missed). They continued west, finally running into Cisse near 61st and Ellis. Cisse was coming back from lab, had no money, wasn't even carrying his wallet. They got frustrated, so they shot him.
No. Seriously.
This takes me back to the D.C. gun ban. Chicago also bans handguns, which the murderers used. A lot of people have said a lot of very intelligent things about guns. I have something not very intelligent to add:
If someone were mugging me, and God came down and said, "You can either have a gun in your pocket, or $40," I know that with one of those options, I'm guaranteed to walk away.
*: Is it? The murder rate and murderer rate are much higher in blacks than whites. Concurrently, black on black murder is way more common than black on white or the reverse. This isn't to say Barack is likely to get murdered at the BP in Gunbarrel...
**: A couple years later, gangs of malicious 12 year-olds would ambush students cutting through that park after school and steal their electronics.
***: SDS is a white guy, so, you see, I'm not racist. I'm afraid of everyone in the dark.
*4: A takeoff of the infamous survey question from Freakonomics "How does it feel to be poor and black on the South Side of Chicago."
*5: We don't think of ourselves as rich, of course, but as people with well-off parents (yup) or very few expenses (yup), we tend to walk around with iPods (nope) laptops (sometimes) or other saleables (yup).
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
60% Cancer, 20% Parkinson's Prevention, 20% Pure Pleasure*
I was listening to Dan Carlin's podcast, Mad about Torture, and after the apparently controversial bit about hating torture** he talks about the idea that fat people are using all the oil to move their fat butts around and eating all the food, therefore increasing food prices for people abroad.***
I'm not going to talk about that.
I'm going to talk about cigarettes. In the '90s Phillip Morris did a study in the Czech republic indicating that cigarette smoking is a net positive for government revenue. I suppose there's a debate about healthcare costs, but if someone dies before the age of 65, they get no social security, whereas if they die at age 90, they suck up a lot.
This phenomenon is enhanced in the U.S. by private insurance. If someone dies before 65, they don't get Medicare at all, and private insurance pays for it.
So: Cigarettes = Gov't saves money. Private insurers hosed.
Now, the government introduces cigarette taxes, with the idea that they're going to recoup the added costs that smokers cause the government. Remember, those costs are illusory. But, the taxes will cause some people to stop smoking, which will increase government costs, which will be offset by cigarette taxes****
So: Cigarette taxes = Gov't increases spending and revenue (no idea which is greater). Private insurers save money.
It follows that: Smoking Ban = Gov't increases spending with no consummate increase in revenue. Private insurers go to the bank (increased tax revenue?).
Therefore, a cigarette tax is a win, win, win, win, lose situation (gov't, insurers, quitters, smokers, smokers).
*: via VKP, actually cigarettes are a mixture including emphysema, prevention of Crohn's
disease, various cancers, and asbestos, in addition to the ingredients presented above.
**: Apparently some people thought he was pro-torture 'cause he projects a very manly image. I don't know, I just started listening 'cause I wanted more podcasts. Anyway, one of my great formative experiences was reading The Gulag Archipelago. I swore when I read it that I would fight against any government that resurrected those principles. I have to say that an America in which citizenship and fair skin may or may not protect you from getting kidnapped, taken to a black site, disappeared and tortured to death deserves fighting.*****
***: It's the old mother's standby - how can you leave food on your plate when children in India are starving. As far as I can tell, the world food price increase is a result of more numerous meat eaters everywhere, thick and thin, combined with biofuels, and agricultural subsidies in the West.
****: Yes, I realize that cigarette taxes are local and medicare and social security are national. I'm assuming that since governments are always passing around responsibility / grants, it's fungible. Feel free to correct me.
*****: But, you say, It's just a few people. IT ALWAYS STARTS SMALL. Part II of The Gulag Archipelago talked about the establishment of the Gulag in the Solvetsky Islands in the 1920's, and how it started small, and now the original camps were replaced by voleyball courts. Sick stuff, kids.
I'm not going to talk about that.
I'm going to talk about cigarettes. In the '90s Phillip Morris did a study in the Czech republic indicating that cigarette smoking is a net positive for government revenue. I suppose there's a debate about healthcare costs, but if someone dies before the age of 65, they get no social security, whereas if they die at age 90, they suck up a lot.
This phenomenon is enhanced in the U.S. by private insurance. If someone dies before 65, they don't get Medicare at all, and private insurance pays for it.
So: Cigarettes = Gov't saves money. Private insurers hosed.
Now, the government introduces cigarette taxes, with the idea that they're going to recoup the added costs that smokers cause the government. Remember, those costs are illusory. But, the taxes will cause some people to stop smoking, which will increase government costs, which will be offset by cigarette taxes****
So: Cigarette taxes = Gov't increases spending and revenue (no idea which is greater). Private insurers save money.
It follows that: Smoking Ban = Gov't increases spending with no consummate increase in revenue. Private insurers go to the bank (increased tax revenue?).
Therefore, a cigarette tax is a win, win, win, win, lose situation (gov't, insurers, quitters, smokers, smokers).
*: via VKP, actually cigarettes are a mixture including emphysema, prevention of Crohn's
disease, various cancers, and asbestos, in addition to the ingredients presented above.
**: Apparently some people thought he was pro-torture 'cause he projects a very manly image. I don't know, I just started listening 'cause I wanted more podcasts. Anyway, one of my great formative experiences was reading The Gulag Archipelago. I swore when I read it that I would fight against any government that resurrected those principles. I have to say that an America in which citizenship and fair skin may or may not protect you from getting kidnapped, taken to a black site, disappeared and tortured to death deserves fighting.*****
***: It's the old mother's standby - how can you leave food on your plate when children in India are starving. As far as I can tell, the world food price increase is a result of more numerous meat eaters everywhere, thick and thin, combined with biofuels, and agricultural subsidies in the West.
****: Yes, I realize that cigarette taxes are local and medicare and social security are national. I'm assuming that since governments are always passing around responsibility / grants, it's fungible. Feel free to correct me.
*****: But, you say, It's just a few people. IT ALWAYS STARTS SMALL. Part II of The Gulag Archipelago talked about the establishment of the Gulag in the Solvetsky Islands in the 1920's, and how it started small, and now the original camps were replaced by voleyball courts. Sick stuff, kids.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Obama Must Name VP Nominee NOW!!!
Via Matt Yglesias:
Specifically (from NY Post MY links to), "We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California."
The thinking being that if Barack gets assasinated now, the Democrats would nominate Sen. Clinton. The only way to avoid this is if Obama names his VP nominee now. While I can't think of any examples of nominees being assassinated, surely the VP nominee would take the top slot?
New HRC campaign rationale -- Obama might get shot and killed before formally securing the nomination, so she may as well stay in the race!...
Specifically (from NY Post MY links to), "We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California."
The thinking being that if Barack gets assasinated now, the Democrats would nominate Sen. Clinton. The only way to avoid this is if Obama names his VP nominee now. While I can't think of any examples of nominees being assassinated, surely the VP nominee would take the top slot?
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Creativity = Synthesis
Once upon a time, I was worried that I wasn't creative. All I did was take two things that existed and put them together, sometimes in an unusual way. My friend Marc said "But, J, that is what creativity is."
Monday, April 28, 2008
Haha haha haha what?
I just finished Flyboys. I would have thought a WW I period piece about fighter pilots had real potential. Perhaps it does...
I think I'm usually pretty generous to movies, and don't even notice many of the things that others gripe about. I noticed them in Flyboys. Let's start with the utterly inhuman portrayal of the Germans. Surely, after Downfall we can stand for all of our enemies to have more than 1 dimension. Not a single German word is translated and the 'honorable' German seems more random than deliberately noble. The SWAT-esque ransacking of a French house seems unlikely to impractical.
Move past the 'Real World' rainbow of American stereotypes that make up the protagonists. Forgive the magical learning of English by the female love interest. Pay no attention to the 'one of these guys is a spy' plot that unspools and wraps up, tensionless, in the space of 15 minutes. Feel relieved when the 'hero' American is supposed to get court martialed, and instead gets a medal. Accept the fact that the EXACT wound that kills 'gruff, experienced, but heart of gold' American pilot is not only survived by 'hero' American, but he is able to do aerobatic maneuvers, and shoot 'super-evil' German guy with a pistol at range while flying, and survive.
Whenever characters need to be interacting in the background, or chattering, or filling dead air, they laugh. They always laugh. Everyone in the movie is constantly laughing, but no one ever tells a joke. This 2:30 epic movie was done so cheaply that they couldn't even pay a guy to throw in chatter about the latest cinemas, or whores, or whatever.*
Of course, this happens in other shows as well. The episode of The Tudors I'm listening to right now, for instance. But it usually doesn't rise to my level of notice.
* In all fairness, it's not as bad as the soundtrack of On the Beach.
1. Waltzing Matilda Overture
2. Waltzing Matilda piano only
3. Waltzing Matilda sung by drunk guys
4. Waltzing Matilda flute only
5. Waltzing Matilda variations
One saving grace of OTB is that they seem to realize how annoying it is when the captain yells at the drunks singing WM.
I think I'm usually pretty generous to movies, and don't even notice many of the things that others gripe about. I noticed them in Flyboys. Let's start with the utterly inhuman portrayal of the Germans. Surely, after Downfall we can stand for all of our enemies to have more than 1 dimension. Not a single German word is translated and the 'honorable' German seems more random than deliberately noble. The SWAT-esque ransacking of a French house seems unlikely to impractical.
Move past the 'Real World' rainbow of American stereotypes that make up the protagonists. Forgive the magical learning of English by the female love interest. Pay no attention to the 'one of these guys is a spy' plot that unspools and wraps up, tensionless, in the space of 15 minutes. Feel relieved when the 'hero' American is supposed to get court martialed, and instead gets a medal. Accept the fact that the EXACT wound that kills 'gruff, experienced, but heart of gold' American pilot is not only survived by 'hero' American, but he is able to do aerobatic maneuvers, and shoot 'super-evil' German guy with a pistol at range while flying, and survive.
Whenever characters need to be interacting in the background, or chattering, or filling dead air, they laugh. They always laugh. Everyone in the movie is constantly laughing, but no one ever tells a joke. This 2:30 epic movie was done so cheaply that they couldn't even pay a guy to throw in chatter about the latest cinemas, or whores, or whatever.*
Of course, this happens in other shows as well. The episode of The Tudors I'm listening to right now, for instance. But it usually doesn't rise to my level of notice.
* In all fairness, it's not as bad as the soundtrack of On the Beach.
1. Waltzing Matilda Overture
2. Waltzing Matilda piano only
3. Waltzing Matilda sung by drunk guys
4. Waltzing Matilda flute only
5. Waltzing Matilda variations
One saving grace of OTB is that they seem to realize how annoying it is when the captain yells at the drunks singing WM.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Hardy Heron
One of the things I love about running Ubuntu is that every 6 months I get a 'new' operating system. This time, it's the upgrade to Ubuntu 8.04, codenamed Hardy Heron.
I've done this once before (7.04->7.10) and the experience is the same - on the day of the release, you click the upgrade button, hang around while it downloads all the new files, and then reset to a new system.
Here's the thing - everything still works after the reset, and you get a couple of new features. Of course, this is considerably better than Windows.
Being a partial Linux fanboy, I trolled around for sites talking about the upgrade (there were several about new features as they were announced) and came across this piece on the Linux Format site. Other than it's blahblah writing style, I paused when I read:
Of course, that sentiment contrasts with:
The Linux Format article also included a discussion of some theoretical interest
***: Firefox 2.x is probably the least stable program on my computer, a comment I have heard from other Ubuntu users.
****: Part of the age-old battle in the linux community. The desktop people have traditionally lost because most of the people paid to work on linux are using servers and other high-end machines.
I've done this once before (7.04->7.10) and the experience is the same - on the day of the release, you click the upgrade button, hang around while it downloads all the new files, and then reset to a new system.
Here's the thing - everything still works after the reset, and you get a couple of new features. Of course, this is considerably better than Windows.
Being a partial Linux fanboy, I trolled around for sites talking about the upgrade (there were several about new features as they were announced) and came across this piece on the Linux Format site. Other than it's blahblah writing style, I paused when I read:
...as an LTS (Long Term Service - pe) release... [Hardy Heron] will be supported for three years... to give corporate users the reassurance that they are getting something stable. However, having said that, the release cycle for this version was the normal six month cycle, so there's been no surface change to the work rate that has gone into the Hardy Heron ... To be honest, when the delay to Dapper was announced, it communicated that Ubuntu and Canonical were committed to delivering a quality release. Looking at it this way, Hardy feels like just another notch on the bed head of Ubuntu, which is a shame.Are they saying that because the release was delivered on time, that means It wasn't significant? When a game company, or a filmmaker delays a release date, it usually means something's going wrong.* As a student, when I ask for an extension, the product is usually far from my best work. Would the author feel better if he knew the product wasn't available 'til 9 AM central time, a full 15 hours into the Grenwich mean time day? Also, see what I mean about the writing? Doughy, doughy, doughy (I admit this isn't often my best work, but I hope I'm not that bad)
Of course, that sentiment contrasts with:
The development of Ubuntu has not let up since 6.06 (the last LTS -pe) got out the door, with some impressive releases that have lead up to this point in time.So they have been working on this LTS for more than six months... right? From my perspective, it seems like what makes an LTS and LTS isn't the work that's put into it before release, but whether it is Supported over the Long Term.
The Linux Format article also included a discussion of some theoretical interest
With the 6.06 release, Kubuntu (Ubuntu + the KDE environment**) was classed under the LTS banner; however, with the advent of 8.04, this is not the case due to the... recent release of KDE 4. ...KDE 4 was [considered] too new to be... stab[le]... for a[n] LTS release, [and it would be ] difficult to... support... KDE 3.5 over the next three years. This is... understandable, but...inconsistent as Ubuntu 8.04 ships with Firefox 3 Beta 5... with which we've had minor stability issues.
I invite you to read the tortured original. My opinion? Apples and Oranges. Firefox may be the most used program on my computer (and probably most others) but it is just a program. KDE is an environment, several programs that run in that environment, and the toolkit used to add programs to that environment. Instability there has much wider ramifications. A downgrade to Firefox 2.x*** is easy. A downgrade to KDE 3.5 may be impossible.
This also has something to do with the fact that Ubuntu releases occur 'like clockwork' not only 6 months after one another, but also 1 month after the most recent GNOME release. Since Ubuntu is coordinated with GNOME, that means it's not coordinated to KDE.Presumably, the customer also matters. I'll probably upgrade to Ubuntu 8.10 in October. A smaller number of critical users and servers will be the ones still using Hardy Heron in 2013. It makes sense to get them all on the same platform to decrease duplication.
*: I'll make no mention of Windows since, as far as I can remember, no version has ever been released on time
**: KDE = K desktop environment**2, as opposed to the Gnome environment that comes standard with Ubuntu.
***: Firefox 2.x is probably the least stable program on my computer, a comment I have heard from other Ubuntu users.
****: Part of the age-old battle in the linux community. The desktop people have traditionally lost because most of the people paid to work on linux are using servers and other high-end machines.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Disambiguation page
Hopefully you're not too focused on Aliza Shvarts. The Yale art student who claims to have repeatedly artificially inseminated herself and induced miscarriage and is using the resultant blood / products of conception in an art installation.*
via Andrew Sullivan, I see this quote:
It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.
First, I can think of several ways of accurately identifying the resulting blood, including whether or not there was a fertilized ovum, and whether Shvarts used 'abortifacient herbs.' Shvarts obviously isn't up on her PCR or mass spec.*** Furthermore, the ambiguity on my part exists because something has been artificially concealed from me, but it is not ambiguous to Shvarts. Therefore it is inappropriate to say "it remains ambiguous." IT is not ambiguous. IT is determined. Apparently, Shvarts did not determine whether she had conceived prior to inducing abortion, so that fact is ambiguous. But the cat and mouse over whether this is a prank, a Sokol affair against science, that's definitive.
*: Not related to the point of this post, but my opinion is:
1. Yuck
2. Moral revulsion, possibly tied to my aesthetic revulsion - if an human conceptus has one iota of rights derived from being human then it deserves not to be created for the sole purpose of being aborted for art.
3. Scientific skepticism - what is the success rate for DIY artificial insemination? What is the success rate for 'abortifacient herbs'? What are said herbs?
4. Puzzlement - Why use DIY artificial insemination instead of ordinary sex? Various explanations have been offered, usually based on the romantic preferences of Shvarts or her 'fabricators'** I speculate there is some sort of feminist message a la "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a needle-less syringe." But considering the 'message' which as far as my untrained mind can discern is about the arbitrary control of society over the body of its female members, I would think cruising for roofies would be more meaningful, though perhaps less reliable.
5. Side note that this is exactly what pro-choicers don't need.
**: WTF?
***: Polymerase chain reaction to genotype the blood. Conceptus-containing blood would include 'DNA fingerprints' that are not present in the... artist. Mass spec would identify foreign compounds in the blood. If it were me, I'd spring for sequencing the albumin gene, on the probability that it's actually chicken or cow blood.
via Andrew Sullivan, I see this quote:
It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.
First, I can think of several ways of accurately identifying the resulting blood, including whether or not there was a fertilized ovum, and whether Shvarts used 'abortifacient herbs.' Shvarts obviously isn't up on her PCR or mass spec.*** Furthermore, the ambiguity on my part exists because something has been artificially concealed from me, but it is not ambiguous to Shvarts. Therefore it is inappropriate to say "it remains ambiguous." IT is not ambiguous. IT is determined. Apparently, Shvarts did not determine whether she had conceived prior to inducing abortion, so that fact is ambiguous. But the cat and mouse over whether this is a prank, a Sokol affair against science, that's definitive.
*: Not related to the point of this post, but my opinion is:
1. Yuck
2. Moral revulsion, possibly tied to my aesthetic revulsion - if an human conceptus has one iota of rights derived from being human then it deserves not to be created for the sole purpose of being aborted for art.
3. Scientific skepticism - what is the success rate for DIY artificial insemination? What is the success rate for 'abortifacient herbs'? What are said herbs?
4. Puzzlement - Why use DIY artificial insemination instead of ordinary sex? Various explanations have been offered, usually based on the romantic preferences of Shvarts or her 'fabricators'** I speculate there is some sort of feminist message a la "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a needle-less syringe." But considering the 'message' which as far as my untrained mind can discern is about the arbitrary control of society over the body of its female members, I would think cruising for roofies would be more meaningful, though perhaps less reliable.
5. Side note that this is exactly what pro-choicers don't need.
**: WTF?
***: Polymerase chain reaction to genotype the blood. Conceptus-containing blood would include 'DNA fingerprints' that are not present in the... artist. Mass spec would identify foreign compounds in the blood. If it were me, I'd spring for sequencing the albumin gene, on the probability that it's actually chicken or cow blood.
I was wrong, sort of.
The final polls had it 43% Obama, 49% Clinton. Of the 8 percent undecided, I figured all 8% would go to Obama. So 2% went to Obama and 6% went to Clinton - a neoclassical Bradley.
CNN has it at - Clinton 55%, Obama 45%
Since 10% is the magic over/under, get out/stay in number, it's worth going into further...
Clinton: 1,258,245 to Obama: 1,042,297... type type type... calc calc calc.... 9.4%
I'm so pithy.
CNN has it at - Clinton 55%, Obama 45%
Since 10% is the magic over/under, get out/stay in number, it's worth going into further...
Clinton: 1,258,245 to Obama: 1,042,297... type type type... calc calc calc.... 9.4%
I'm so pithy.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Pennsylvania prediction
I got a bad feeling in my stomach today. Not the rumble of too much 'better-living-through-chemistry' Kosher for Passover coffe cake, no. Barack Obama is going to lose Pennsylvania. Badly.
The voters of Pennsylvania aren't plugged into my narrative. They're going to vote for the candidate they think is best prepared. I can't decide whether to congratulate them for focusing so closely on what matters to them, or damn them for conducting their election in a vacuum, which is exactly the same thing.
RCP has Barack with 43% vs. Clinton's 49%. Consider the lesson of New Hampshire, where undecideds broke almost entirely for Clinton, giving her those extra 8000 votes. Consider Texas, where voters that made up their minds in the last 24 hours overwhelmingly went for Hillary. Those 8 percent of faux fence sitters will swing to Clinton.
Barack loses by 14.
See you in August.
The voters of Pennsylvania aren't plugged into my narrative. They're going to vote for the candidate they think is best prepared. I can't decide whether to congratulate them for focusing so closely on what matters to them, or damn them for conducting their election in a vacuum, which is exactly the same thing.
RCP has Barack with 43% vs. Clinton's 49%. Consider the lesson of New Hampshire, where undecideds broke almost entirely for Clinton, giving her those extra 8000 votes. Consider Texas, where voters that made up their minds in the last 24 hours overwhelmingly went for Hillary. Those 8 percent of faux fence sitters will swing to Clinton.
Barack loses by 14.
See you in August.
Several birds
I see that John McCain opposes a bill to improve educational benefits for troops because it might hurt retention rates. I also have an idea that would increase retention rates. And I have an idea that would decrease American troop casualties. And I have an idea that would save more than 10 times what McCain would save by cutting the $51 billion of earmarks he has identified.
By strange coincidence, they are all the same idea.
By strange coincidence, they are all the same idea.
Monday, March 31, 2008
12 years ago, I thought girls were gross
And aparently, 12 years ago, Barack Obama held positions so liberal that they "won’t even fly with a large number of Democrats, let alone in a general election"
Evidence:
Evidence:
The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.Late last year, in response to a Politico story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, his aides said he “never saw or approved” the questionnaire.
They asserted the responses were filled out by a campaign aide who “unintentionally mischaracterize(d) his position.”
But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago non-profit group that issued it. And it found that Obama – the day after sitting for the interview – filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes adding to one answer.
emphasis mine. So Barack Obama filled out a questionnaire twelve years ago, then forgot that he filled it out. Perhaps they might follow up with whether he might have, you know, changed his mind since then?
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Barack Speech
The Clintons are elated because Barack Obama is being forced to give a major, very well covered and publicized speech about race, religion, and his personal connections to Rev. Wright.
What they don´t know is that Barack Obama gives an outstanding speech, and that the three things Barack Obama speaks about best are race, religion, and Barack Obama.
Wait... they don´t know that?
What they don´t know is that Barack Obama gives an outstanding speech, and that the three things Barack Obama speaks about best are race, religion, and Barack Obama.
Wait... they don´t know that?
Sunday, March 16, 2008
A Bit of Veiled Conceit*
Quick, what is Michal Kleinlerer (the woman)´s profession?
If you looked at that toothsome smile and guessed ´toothpaste model´ you´re exactly wrong! She´s an orthodontist. As in the old joke about the barber with the worst haircut in town, if you need some molars out, you should look at the competition.
I was originally going to make fun of her for padding her dental school application with one of those ridiculous Masters in Medical Studies,** when I glanced at the photo and BAM!
Speaking of dpp target genes (of which BAg of Marbles is one), Dr. Kleinlerer has a hit on Google Scholar, where she studied the role of the activin receptor III in skull development. I suppose one peer reviewed abstract isn´t bad for a year of masters work. And the abstract is from ´07, which means she did it after her ortho school.
Shenkin, the groom also has some research chops, and I was able to dig up this study on cavities and second-hand smoke.
So I´ve completely failed to make fun of these people, while simultaneously distracting myself from plant development for an hour.
sorry.
*:The idea of making fun of people in the NY Times Weddings section is from Zach at Veiled Conceit on hiatus for the last 3 years.
**: Many people who are not accepted to medical school on the first go-around because of a lack of research experience or a low college GPA apply to these programs. Some teach the first year of medical school, with the possibility of transfering into the second year, some are serious research programs (though I am suspicious of any research whose pace is controlled by the clock and not the internal logic of the data), and some are an expensive waste of time. I frequently assume the latter case.
If you looked at that toothsome smile and guessed ´toothpaste model´ you´re exactly wrong! She´s an orthodontist. As in the old joke about the barber with the worst haircut in town, if you need some molars out, you should look at the competition.
I was originally going to make fun of her for padding her dental school application with one of those ridiculous Masters in Medical Studies,** when I glanced at the photo and BAM!
Speaking of dpp target genes (of which BAg of Marbles is one), Dr. Kleinlerer has a hit on Google Scholar, where she studied the role of the activin receptor III in skull development. I suppose one peer reviewed abstract isn´t bad for a year of masters work. And the abstract is from ´07, which means she did it after her ortho school.
Shenkin, the groom also has some research chops, and I was able to dig up this study on cavities and second-hand smoke.
So I´ve completely failed to make fun of these people, while simultaneously distracting myself from plant development for an hour.
sorry.
*:The idea of making fun of people in the NY Times Weddings section is from Zach at Veiled Conceit on hiatus for the last 3 years.
**: Many people who are not accepted to medical school on the first go-around because of a lack of research experience or a low college GPA apply to these programs. Some teach the first year of medical school, with the possibility of transfering into the second year, some are serious research programs (though I am suspicious of any research whose pace is controlled by the clock and not the internal logic of the data), and some are an expensive waste of time. I frequently assume the latter case.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Open Access
A couple of months ago, there was a paper published in Cell describing a way to turn skin cells into stem cells. Personally, I think it´s crap - using four modified HIV strains to induce multipotency? And they demonstrated said multipotency by immunofluorescence for so-called signature proteins? Nonsense.
Here... see for yourself.
Oh, wait, you probably can´t, not unless youŕe willing to pay $30 for the privilege. While scientists churn out new information every month, most of it is behind terrifyingly high subscription walls. If youŕe at a cush research institution like this one, they pay ungodly fees for unlimited access, but if youŕe at Drake, or a civilian, just interested in an article about your illness or trying to understand the latest scientific fad, then youŕe stuck with your nose to the glass.
But, I hear you say, many magazines are subscriber only. Certainly theyŕe under no obligation to give away their product for free? Am I just trying to guilt them because itś about medicine?
There is a difference here. When Matthew Yglesias writes an article for The Atlantic, The Atlantic gives Matthew money to write the article. If he needs to go to Belgium to follow the story, they pay for it. If heś a staff writer, they provide him with a computer to write it on and coffee to think with.
Letś say I write an article. My stipend, tuition, insurance, everything, are paid for out of an training grant from the National Institutes of Health. My advisor is paid out of a research grant from the NIH. My equipment is paid for by the same grant. If I have to fly to Belgium to do an experiment, same grant. If I go to a conference, same grant. Itś all paid for by the NIH. Which is to say the U.S. Government. Which is to say, the people.
Keep in mind that when my research gets published, I write the paper. My advisor edits the paper. The peer reviewers brought in by journal are also professors on NIH grants. The editor at the journal and the formatters at the journal are the only ones not paid by NIH.
So, of the expense in producing a scientific paper, greater than 95% is paid for by the taxpayers. I´m not saying screw the journals out of that 5%, but rather the government should spring for the cost of publication and democratize the whole thing.
As wikipedia never tires of reminding me in photo credits:
This is from here. While I don mean to imply that I work for the Air Force, or that the current situation is unlawful, I am arguing for the general understanding that documents paid for by the government ought to be public property.
Here... see for yourself.
Oh, wait, you probably can´t, not unless youŕe willing to pay $30 for the privilege. While scientists churn out new information every month, most of it is behind terrifyingly high subscription walls. If youŕe at a cush research institution like this one, they pay ungodly fees for unlimited access, but if youŕe at Drake, or a civilian, just interested in an article about your illness or trying to understand the latest scientific fad, then youŕe stuck with your nose to the glass.
But, I hear you say, many magazines are subscriber only. Certainly theyŕe under no obligation to give away their product for free? Am I just trying to guilt them because itś about medicine?
There is a difference here. When Matthew Yglesias writes an article for The Atlantic, The Atlantic gives Matthew money to write the article. If he needs to go to Belgium to follow the story, they pay for it. If heś a staff writer, they provide him with a computer to write it on and coffee to think with.
Letś say I write an article. My stipend, tuition, insurance, everything, are paid for out of an training grant from the National Institutes of Health. My advisor is paid out of a research grant from the NIH. My equipment is paid for by the same grant. If I have to fly to Belgium to do an experiment, same grant. If I go to a conference, same grant. Itś all paid for by the NIH. Which is to say the U.S. Government. Which is to say, the people.
Keep in mind that when my research gets published, I write the paper. My advisor edits the paper. The peer reviewers brought in by journal are also professors on NIH grants. The editor at the journal and the formatters at the journal are the only ones not paid by NIH.
So, of the expense in producing a scientific paper, greater than 95% is paid for by the taxpayers. I´m not saying screw the journals out of that 5%, but rather the government should spring for the cost of publication and democratize the whole thing.
As wikipedia never tires of reminding me in photo credits:
 | This image or file is a work of a U.S. Air Force Airman or employee, taken or made during the course of the person's official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image or file is in the public domain. Subject to disclaimers. |  |
This is from here. While I don mean to imply that I work for the Air Force, or that the current situation is unlawful, I am arguing for the general understanding that documents paid for by the government ought to be public property.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Barack Obama is your new PI*
In re: barackobamaisyournewbicycle.com
Barack Obama is your new PI.
Barack Obama thinks you should start writing your thesis.
Barack Obama said you work too hard.
Barack Obama proofread your grant same day.
Barack Obama went ahead and arranged your committee meeting.
Barack Obama found a protocol for your antibody.
Barack Obama put an awesome paper on your desk.
Barack Obama told everyone to stop coming in on Saturdays.
Barack Obama got 1554 for beer hour.
Barack Obama hired a tech for you.
Barack Obama sent you to a Gordon Conference.
Barack Obama is okay with you coming in at 10:30.
Barack Obama is in his office.
Barack Obama analyzed your data.
Barack Obama knows the perfect lab for your post-doc.
Barack Obama bought you new pipettes.
Barack Obama promised to watch your mice when you went on vacation.
Barack Obama laughed at the joke slide in your lab meeting.
Barack Obama agrees with your hypothesis.
Barack Obama thinks you have adequately characterized your system.
...
*: PI = principle investigator, lab head, research professor, person in whose lab you work
**: Credit ANA, I.
Barack Obama is your new PI.
Barack Obama thinks you should start writing your thesis.
Barack Obama said you work too hard.
Barack Obama proofread your grant same day.
Barack Obama went ahead and arranged your committee meeting.
Barack Obama found a protocol for your antibody.
Barack Obama put an awesome paper on your desk.
Barack Obama told everyone to stop coming in on Saturdays.
Barack Obama got 1554 for beer hour.
Barack Obama hired a tech for you.
Barack Obama sent you to a Gordon Conference.
Barack Obama is okay with you coming in at 10:30.
Barack Obama is in his office.
Barack Obama analyzed your data.
Barack Obama knows the perfect lab for your post-doc.
Barack Obama bought you new pipettes.
Barack Obama promised to watch your mice when you went on vacation.
Barack Obama laughed at the joke slide in your lab meeting.
Barack Obama agrees with your hypothesis.
Barack Obama thinks you have adequately characterized your system.
...
*: PI = principle investigator, lab head, research professor, person in whose lab you work
**: Credit ANA, I.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Conspiracy theory
Not being in the Military Industrial Complex, I have limited knowledge...
But a former comrade of mine in international relations suggests the satellite shootdown by the U.S. recently was a response to the Chinese shootdown last year of one of their own weather satellites.
Two pieces of evidence weigh in:
The Navy's stated reason for destroying the satellite was worry about environmental damage from unspent hydrazine in the satellite's fuel tank. Hydrazine is toxic in the sense that if someone is exposed to a lot, they may die, be seriously injured, or have an increased risk of developing cancer. It is not highly lethal (like VX), nor catalytic (like CFC's) nor long-lasting in the environment (like plutonium). There was no statement about where the satellite was likely to crash, so public health exposure is either an unknown or a known unlikelihood. If one looks at this from a strictly environmental perspective, the damage due to not breaking up the satellite must be weighed against the damage due to launching the SM-3, who's solid fuel is not exactly candy and puppy dogs.
What argues against this is that I already assume the U.S. had the ability to shoot down satellites. There's no point in attempting something that everyone already thinks you can do if there's a real chance you might fail. And the op might have failed.
But a former comrade of mine in international relations suggests the satellite shootdown by the U.S. recently was a response to the Chinese shootdown last year of one of their own weather satellites.
Two pieces of evidence weigh in:
The Navy's stated reason for destroying the satellite was worry about environmental damage from unspent hydrazine in the satellite's fuel tank. Hydrazine is toxic in the sense that if someone is exposed to a lot, they may die, be seriously injured, or have an increased risk of developing cancer. It is not highly lethal (like VX), nor catalytic (like CFC's) nor long-lasting in the environment (like plutonium). There was no statement about where the satellite was likely to crash, so public health exposure is either an unknown or a known unlikelihood. If one looks at this from a strictly environmental perspective, the damage due to not breaking up the satellite must be weighed against the damage due to launching the SM-3, who's solid fuel is not exactly candy and puppy dogs.
What argues against this is that I already assume the U.S. had the ability to shoot down satellites. There's no point in attempting something that everyone already thinks you can do if there's a real chance you might fail. And the op might have failed.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Turnout
Not that I really have time to discuss this, but a lot of people have made a big deal about the high turnout in Democratic primaries (see here for instance).
Bullshit.
The really high turnout in Iowa, New Hampshire, and other early primary states conveys real interest in the election.
High turnout in Hawaii is simply because the primary there has never mattered before. Who is going to turn out to vote after someone has already sewn up the nomination?
Deconvolute that, then Iĺl get excited.
Bullshit.
The really high turnout in Iowa, New Hampshire, and other early primary states conveys real interest in the election.
High turnout in Hawaii is simply because the primary there has never mattered before. Who is going to turn out to vote after someone has already sewn up the nomination?
Deconvolute that, then Iĺl get excited.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Playground nonsense
I was just listening to the Schmitt/York bloggingheads, and Byron York was saying the proportional allocation system was the electoral equivalent of everybody-wins-don't-keep-score-in-soccer-rah-rah-self-esteem nonsense, as compared to MANLY ROBUST and FAST winner-take-all Republican system. A quick tabulation of Delegates, based on winner takes all the delegates by state, shows Obama CRUSHING Hillary in a MANLY REPUBLICAN RAAARGH fashion, 1396 to 1325.*
Theory, meet reality.
Apparently, the close delegate totals in real life, the close number of states won, the close 'popular vote' insofar as it can be calculated, and the close national polls reflect, amazingly, that fact that Democrats are torn between two vary good choices.
GRRRRRRRRR. MAAAAANLY.
that is all
* Those are the totals if winner takes all, including Superdelegates. If one goes by pledged delegates the totals are Obama: 1093, Hillary: 1075. At this time, the real-world delegate totals are actually farther apart than in Yorkland.
** Delegate counts from Wikipedia, as always.
Theory, meet reality.
Apparently, the close delegate totals in real life, the close number of states won, the close 'popular vote' insofar as it can be calculated, and the close national polls reflect, amazingly, that fact that Democrats are torn between two vary good choices.
GRRRRRRRRR. MAAAAANLY.
that is all
* Those are the totals if winner takes all, including Superdelegates. If one goes by pledged delegates the totals are Obama: 1093, Hillary: 1075. At this time, the real-world delegate totals are actually farther apart than in Yorkland.
** Delegate counts from Wikipedia, as always.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
