When I saw the headline, "The Ten Most Dangerous Cities for Pedestrians in America," I knew already which region of the U.S. those cities would be in--the South.
Of course, any list of the ten worst cities in any category under the Sun would tend to cluster around the South. But I know from experience that in any given neighborhood in the South, there is likely to be no sidewalks, narrow and poorly maintained roads, erroneous or absent road signs, and little regard shown for pedestrians.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Linux
I figured out the Linux developer's game. They don't want Linux to be popular--ever. There's nothing in it for them. The way they make money is consulting with big companies. Linux is used for servers. So companies pay mega-bucks to developers with lots of Linux ability. The only thing the developers do is craft fancier bells and whistles in the OS. They never have, and never will, iron out the thousands of hardware incompatibilities, even ones that are ten or twenty years old.
I tried a variety of Linux OSes on three different machines, and my mileage varied. Some systems were silent. Some had no video. Some didn't boot. Some had no mouse. Needless to say, I forgot all about Linux and went back to the only working OS that works all the time and supports all hardware: Windows. Linux is crap and will always be crap because the developers don't want it to be anything but crap. It may, however, be feasible in certain niche applications such as a back-end server, where only a limited amount of hardware needs to be supported.
I tried a variety of Linux OSes on three different machines, and my mileage varied. Some systems were silent. Some had no video. Some didn't boot. Some had no mouse. Needless to say, I forgot all about Linux and went back to the only working OS that works all the time and supports all hardware: Windows. Linux is crap and will always be crap because the developers don't want it to be anything but crap. It may, however, be feasible in certain niche applications such as a back-end server, where only a limited amount of hardware needs to be supported.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
The Media Obsession with Violent Crime
The media's obsession with violent crime, suicide, and sexual crimes, does encourage the perpetuation of such crimes. Weak-minded young people have large amounts of energy, but not much internal direction, and these types will go whichever way the wind blows, and the media passes wind.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
The Case Against War with Iran
The Guardian makes a persuasive case against war with Iran.
Even so, I favor bombing Iran, because Iran is the embodiment of evil in the world. It is far better and far cheaper to reduce Iran now, before it gathers nuclear weapons. Any delay merely postpones the inevitable bill that will come due. Iran is completely focused and completely determined to have a war with the United States at some future point in time.
The strongest argument against bombing Iran is the poor state of the U.S. economy. We are not prepared for another war from an economic standpoint, and war with Iran might cause another Great Depression. For this reason, it may be better to stay cheap and simply rely upon M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) to deter nuclear aggression.
I think the decision confronting American and Israeli leaders is very difficult, and I don't envy them. I expect that they will not bomb, simply because of political considerations, and that is perfectly understandable. No one wants to go down in history as the aggressor or war-monger, no one that is except for Iran. Perhaps it is better from an ethical standpoint to permit Iran to make the firststrike blunder, which will then morally justify comprehensive and terminal retaliation. Iran will also be held directly accountable, along with Pakistan and North Korea, for any and all nuclear attacks waged by independent terrorist groups.
Even so, I favor bombing Iran, because Iran is the embodiment of evil in the world. It is far better and far cheaper to reduce Iran now, before it gathers nuclear weapons. Any delay merely postpones the inevitable bill that will come due. Iran is completely focused and completely determined to have a war with the United States at some future point in time.
The strongest argument against bombing Iran is the poor state of the U.S. economy. We are not prepared for another war from an economic standpoint, and war with Iran might cause another Great Depression. For this reason, it may be better to stay cheap and simply rely upon M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) to deter nuclear aggression.
I think the decision confronting American and Israeli leaders is very difficult, and I don't envy them. I expect that they will not bomb, simply because of political considerations, and that is perfectly understandable. No one wants to go down in history as the aggressor or war-monger, no one that is except for Iran. Perhaps it is better from an ethical standpoint to permit Iran to make the first
Friday, February 3, 2012
Iran
Once Iran obtains an atom bomb, it is only a matter of time before it is used. Those who believe that Iran will show the same restraint as the U.S. and Russia are kidding themselves.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Iran
I don't shed any tears for the slain Iranian nuclear scientists. In fact, my reaction is right on! Iran is a center for terrorism and fascism on Earth. Iranian leaders are savages. I think that Israel has the right to do everything within their power to reduce Iran.
Certainly the world would be a better place without Iran's tyrannical regime. The only thing Iran ever does is torture, imprison and kill good people, and assist terrorists and dictators like Assad and their own dictator. Iran is the embodiment of evil on earth.
This is one area where I do sympathize a bit with the Republican front-runners. However, I'm not sure. I have doubts that probably never occur to Republicans. My main issue is cost. Can Iran be reduced at low cost, or will it mean another trillion dollars gone?
It may become necessary to nuke Iran in order to prevent nuclear terrorism. The ultimate source of Iranian nuclear scientists is the Iranian people. Why pick off one nuclear scientist at a time, when you can eliminate the source?
Certainly the world would be a better place without Iran's tyrannical regime. The only thing Iran ever does is torture, imprison and kill good people, and assist terrorists and dictators like Assad and their own dictator. Iran is the embodiment of evil on earth.
This is one area where I do sympathize a bit with the Republican front-runners. However, I'm not sure. I have doubts that probably never occur to Republicans. My main issue is cost. Can Iran be reduced at low cost, or will it mean another trillion dollars gone?
It may become necessary to nuke Iran in order to prevent nuclear terrorism. The ultimate source of Iranian nuclear scientists is the Iranian people. Why pick off one nuclear scientist at a time, when you can eliminate the source?
Russian Irony
Since the 1917 Revolution, Russia has supported tyrants around the world that make Tsar Nicholas look like an enlightened monarch. Lenin would be turning over in his grave to know that Putin supports Assad.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Obama is Safe
The only reason the right wing hasn't assassinated Obama is that they perceive he is one of their own: mediocre and conservative. In the U.S., only the best and the brightest get assassinated. Ours is a mediocracy.
The Right Way to Treat Pets and Children
The right way to treat a pet is as a member of the family, with gentleness and compassion. Always make sure the animal has enough to eat, clean water, and a good place to poop. What I'm against is the practice of chaining a dog to a tree for years, to the point where he has to walk around his own feces, or placing a dog in a small fenced area less than thirty feet squared. I have known even liberal and educated people to do this to their dog, and I thought it was indicative of mental illness. To see their dog wallowing around in a tiny area filled with feces made me think that the owners were lunatics or at any rate not very pleasant.
I also think that corporal punishment, e.g. a swat on the hind end, should be an exceedingly rare event. Especially when the human being is much bigger and stronger than a small pet, such as a cat, there are ethical problems with hitting. A cat loses all respect for an abusive owner. Most important between cat and human is the bond of trust. The cat realizes that the human being is bigger, stronger, and smarter. But if the human being is also perceived as mean or hurtful, then the cat will seek to evade the human being at all times, and then the relationship between pet and owner is over, and the value of the pet is nil. It is important to be a gentle giant. Always use strength in positive and helpful ways. When I visit a person and find that their cat is in hiding and will only come out to eat, then I know the owner is an abusive owner and not a very pleasant person. What pets say about their owners can be more revealing than anything else.
With an average animal, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, tone of voice or a hand gesture is sufficient to ensure compliance with basic instructions. The only scenario where I might swat a cat is when they have destroyed property, and even then one must be moderate and use restraint, because the difference in strength between humans and cat is very great. At all times I remind myself that I am a giant, enormous in their eyes, and I think of how I might feel if I were the cat. It is important to empathize with other creatures and try to understand them. I think the same general philosophy applies to the rearing of children. Total abolition of corporal punishment probably is not desirable, but it should be used sparingly if at all. I remember at work a couple of people would tell me that the whippings they received made them the great people they are today. But I did not think they were so great. I rather thought that they were insensitive, cold and taciturn. If a race of brutes is desired, then acts of brutality certainly will help to achieve that end.
I also think that corporal punishment, e.g. a swat on the hind end, should be an exceedingly rare event. Especially when the human being is much bigger and stronger than a small pet, such as a cat, there are ethical problems with hitting. A cat loses all respect for an abusive owner. Most important between cat and human is the bond of trust. The cat realizes that the human being is bigger, stronger, and smarter. But if the human being is also perceived as mean or hurtful, then the cat will seek to evade the human being at all times, and then the relationship between pet and owner is over, and the value of the pet is nil. It is important to be a gentle giant. Always use strength in positive and helpful ways. When I visit a person and find that their cat is in hiding and will only come out to eat, then I know the owner is an abusive owner and not a very pleasant person. What pets say about their owners can be more revealing than anything else.
With an average animal, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, tone of voice or a hand gesture is sufficient to ensure compliance with basic instructions. The only scenario where I might swat a cat is when they have destroyed property, and even then one must be moderate and use restraint, because the difference in strength between humans and cat is very great. At all times I remind myself that I am a giant, enormous in their eyes, and I think of how I might feel if I were the cat. It is important to empathize with other creatures and try to understand them. I think the same general philosophy applies to the rearing of children. Total abolition of corporal punishment probably is not desirable, but it should be used sparingly if at all. I remember at work a couple of people would tell me that the whippings they received made them the great people they are today. But I did not think they were so great. I rather thought that they were insensitive, cold and taciturn. If a race of brutes is desired, then acts of brutality certainly will help to achieve that end.
One Trillion of Taxpayer Dollars
These are the brainiacs that George Bush and Obama thought were worth $1 trillion of taxpayer dollars to "liberate".
The people of Afghanistan are ignorant savages only capable of rule by dictatorship, if at all. It is pointless to invest even a penny in that blighted nation of bandits. They have not had a republic in ten thousand years. Anyone that wanted a republic was killed. Once the U.S. leaves, business as usual returns. All of this is obvious. I wish our leaders would wise up and cut our losses now rather than later. Pride is an awfully expensive bad habit to maintain.
The people of Afghanistan are ignorant savages only capable of rule by dictatorship, if at all. It is pointless to invest even a penny in that blighted nation of bandits. They have not had a republic in ten thousand years. Anyone that wanted a republic was killed. Once the U.S. leaves, business as usual returns. All of this is obvious. I wish our leaders would wise up and cut our losses now rather than later. Pride is an awfully expensive bad habit to maintain.
Syria is the Dog of Nations
I wouldn't want to be an Alawite or a Christian in Syria, that's for sure. For that matter, I wouldn't want to be anyone in Syria. That country makes our country look good from every angle. Syria is one of the lowest dogs of the nations: led by a stupid thug of a dictator (eye doctor or not, he lacks the capacity to see the problem with clear eyes), isolated from the world, torn by civil war, and with Iran and Russia its two friends. Iran and Russia! One would think a clue would be due from having such friends. Any reflective person (which Assad is not) would look at Iran and feel a sense of nausea.
And I don't think Syria is going to get better in the next twenty years. Too much blood has been spilled. There will be vengeance on the minds of men for generations to come.
And I don't think Syria is going to get better in the next twenty years. Too much blood has been spilled. There will be vengeance on the minds of men for generations to come.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
The Government of Arizona
I never hear about Arizona in the news except more reports indicating that the Arizona government is composed of barbarians without understanding or intelligence.
Death is a Good Thing (in Dungeon Crawl)
I"m glad death is so cheap in Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup, because it forces a break in play. Otherwise, one could keep going at it all day long.
However, the constant dying reinforces the feeling I have that the game is pointless; every single character dies no matter what strategy is pursued. In fact, I would say one in a thousand could possibly succeed, if every turn was played in the perfect manner with knowledge of what would happen next. Without foreknowledge, one in a trillion characters might succeed. I doubt I will live long enough to see such a character. So, I am looking around for a game to replace Crawl.
However, the constant dying reinforces the feeling I have that the game is pointless; every single character dies no matter what strategy is pursued. In fact, I would say one in a thousand could possibly succeed, if every turn was played in the perfect manner with knowledge of what would happen next. Without foreknowledge, one in a trillion characters might succeed. I doubt I will live long enough to see such a character. So, I am looking around for a game to replace Crawl.
Dungeon Crawl is Literary
Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup is a literary game. I find delightful excerpts from all sorts of interesting poems and history books that I should have read long ago. Perhaps it is an educational game in some respects.
Food Lion Sux
Food Lion is a thoroughly detestable grocery store. One of those spoiled-milk stores went out of business recently, and everything was marked down 25%. I decided to stock up on laundry detergent at the 25% off Food Lion.
A week later, I discovered that my brand of laundry detergent was on sale at Publix, so I did a cost comparison. Even with 25% off, the Food Lion detergent was more expensive. Moral of the story: Food Lion sucks. If they don't get you with their spoiled milk and rotting meat, they will get you with their tricky pricing.
A week later, I discovered that my brand of laundry detergent was on sale at Publix, so I did a cost comparison. Even with 25% off, the Food Lion detergent was more expensive. Moral of the story: Food Lion sucks. If they don't get you with their spoiled milk and rotting meat, they will get you with their tricky pricing.
I Could Be a Republican
If twenty points were subtracted from my I.Q., and I abandoned ethics, I could vote Republican.
The race for the G.O.P. nominee interests me only for its soap opera value.
I'd like to see a real challenger to Obama from the left, not the right. The Republicans are in a race to nominate someone that is worse than Obama.
The race for the G.O.P. nominee interests me only for its soap opera value.
I'd like to see a real challenger to Obama from the left, not the right. The Republicans are in a race to nominate someone that is worse than Obama.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Another Great SEAL Team Rescue
The real deal is much better than a Hollywood movie. I'd like to see a documentary with interviews with each hero of the SEAL team.
Note that even on an important article like this one, and even with computerized spell-checkers, the mainstream media could not avoid grammatical errors.
Note that even on an important article like this one, and even with computerized spell-checkers, the mainstream media could not avoid grammatical errors.
Passing My Piss-Test
There is a contradiction in a Republic when unreasonable search and
seizure is being conducted against bodily fluids. Piss tests are
something that no patriot who loves his country could ever support. They
are demeaning and degrading and aimed only at workers, not at the rich
and privileged owners and leaders who actually make the decisions that determine our national destiny.
If I am wrong, and urinalysis is right, then members of Congress and all CEO's should be piss-tested on a random basis for drugs and alcohol, and the results should be accessible on the web. Their jobs are far more important than ours and have far more impact on our nation's destiny. If checking urine is so important, then the urine of a CEO is more to the point than the urine of a Wal-Mart greeter. Have CEO's and Congress as a whole performed particularly well over the last twenty years? You tell me.
Sometime while I was ranting against the immorality of urinalysis tests, companies and government quietly decided to loosen their standards. I don't know when this happened and I don't know why. Old research indicated that marijuana could be detected in the urine for as long as 30 days after use, which seemed unfair, given that harder substances such as meth become undetectable much sooner. The "30 days" bit is an oft-repeated talking point. The reality, I have found, is rather different.
Recently, I was offered a job, contingent upon passing urinalysis. I researched NORML to learn more about the state of the art in regard to piss-tests. NORML is my go-to source for any questions regarding cannabis, and I regard it as the very best source on the Internet. Google should rank NORML as the #1 result for any search of "marijuana," but it doesn't. Instead, mainstream media sites with articles about pot busts are cited, followed by Wikipedia, a couple of other sites and then NORML around #7. I am not sure whether my Google results are the same as everyone else's, because Google is getting too smarty-pants, customizing their results for individual users.
Today, companies and government tend to have a cutoff point of 50 nanograms of THC metabolites per milliliter. Any amount in excess of 50 ng / ml triggers a "positive" result, with negative consequences for the poor soul being tested. However, recent research has found that this 50 ng / ml cutoff allows more leeway than previously thought and that people can pass piss-tests even if they have used marijuana two weeks prior. Marijuana remains the most easily detected substance, and the situation is still unfair. However, the "30 days" business only holds true for heavy daily users with high residual levels, the wake-and-bake crowd. A chronic daily user with a slow metabolism might test positive for as long as two months after the last use! However, an occasional, once-a-week user with a normal metabolism has little to fear after a dozen days of strict abstinence. I assume that this 50 ng / ml cutoff was established in order to eliminate the possibility of false positives, an occasional problem with urinalysis in the past.
For occasional users facing preemployment tests, there is an advantage to delaying the test as long as possible in order to increase the number of days of abstinence and reduce the metabolite concentration in the body. When an email is received with an invitation to test, there is typically a deadline to respond to the invitation. The moment the invitation is accepted, a piss-test "date" is made three days in advance. Thus, it is advantageous to wait until the very last day of that deadline before accepting the invitation. I wouldn't wait until the last hour, because the Internet may be down.
I considered substituting someone else's urine in the place of my own, but I was reluctant to blemish my record of having never cheated in all my life. I believe it is ethical to cheat on a piss-test, for the same reason that it is ethical for a nation to engage in espionage during wartime. Piss-tests are wrong, and thus any method that can circumvent them seems to me fair game. Anyone with the least amount of imagination could invent a dozen different ways to conceal and substitute another person's urine while maintaining a plausible temperature for the urine. Nevertheless, I just don't like the idea of cheating, even though I can't explain why. It is just a personal preference of mine. I prefer beating the test if possible through abstinence and background research of the testing technology. That is my way, because I'm a techie.
In the end, after researching NORML, I determined I would pass the test without any difficulty. I am an occasional user with a normal metabolism and do not drink. The test was scheduled exactly twelve days after my last use. According to the consensus of all my sources, the chance of my failing a piss-test with a 50 ng / ml cutoff was miniscule.
I did not bother with any vitamins or supplements and did not exercise any more than usual. I think that there is a lot of pseudoscientific hogwash about ways to defeat piss tests, with various vitamins and herbs promoted that have little or no actual effect but may make certain vendors rich.
I only did what NORML recommends--on the day of the test, I voided my bladder several times prior to my arrival at the clinic. This helps, because it is well-established and often repeated that the greatest concentration of metabolites is found in the first void of the day. Also, by drinking plenty of fluids, one dilutes the concentration of metabolites. The sample I provided contained only urine deposited in my bladder during a narrow 2-3 hour window. It had little or no color, because I had been drinking about double the usual amount of tea and water that day in preparation for the test.
I had no doubt whatsoever that I passed. The clinic never informed me, because their master is the employer, not me. However, the employer offered me a job, so there's my answer.
If I am wrong, and urinalysis is right, then members of Congress and all CEO's should be piss-tested on a random basis for drugs and alcohol, and the results should be accessible on the web. Their jobs are far more important than ours and have far more impact on our nation's destiny. If checking urine is so important, then the urine of a CEO is more to the point than the urine of a Wal-Mart greeter. Have CEO's and Congress as a whole performed particularly well over the last twenty years? You tell me.
Sometime while I was ranting against the immorality of urinalysis tests, companies and government quietly decided to loosen their standards. I don't know when this happened and I don't know why. Old research indicated that marijuana could be detected in the urine for as long as 30 days after use, which seemed unfair, given that harder substances such as meth become undetectable much sooner. The "30 days" bit is an oft-repeated talking point. The reality, I have found, is rather different.
Recently, I was offered a job, contingent upon passing urinalysis. I researched NORML to learn more about the state of the art in regard to piss-tests. NORML is my go-to source for any questions regarding cannabis, and I regard it as the very best source on the Internet. Google should rank NORML as the #1 result for any search of "marijuana," but it doesn't. Instead, mainstream media sites with articles about pot busts are cited, followed by Wikipedia, a couple of other sites and then NORML around #7. I am not sure whether my Google results are the same as everyone else's, because Google is getting too smarty-pants, customizing their results for individual users.
Today, companies and government tend to have a cutoff point of 50 nanograms of THC metabolites per milliliter. Any amount in excess of 50 ng / ml triggers a "positive" result, with negative consequences for the poor soul being tested. However, recent research has found that this 50 ng / ml cutoff allows more leeway than previously thought and that people can pass piss-tests even if they have used marijuana two weeks prior. Marijuana remains the most easily detected substance, and the situation is still unfair. However, the "30 days" business only holds true for heavy daily users with high residual levels, the wake-and-bake crowd. A chronic daily user with a slow metabolism might test positive for as long as two months after the last use! However, an occasional, once-a-week user with a normal metabolism has little to fear after a dozen days of strict abstinence. I assume that this 50 ng / ml cutoff was established in order to eliminate the possibility of false positives, an occasional problem with urinalysis in the past.
For occasional users facing preemployment tests, there is an advantage to delaying the test as long as possible in order to increase the number of days of abstinence and reduce the metabolite concentration in the body. When an email is received with an invitation to test, there is typically a deadline to respond to the invitation. The moment the invitation is accepted, a piss-test "date" is made three days in advance. Thus, it is advantageous to wait until the very last day of that deadline before accepting the invitation. I wouldn't wait until the last hour, because the Internet may be down.
I considered substituting someone else's urine in the place of my own, but I was reluctant to blemish my record of having never cheated in all my life. I believe it is ethical to cheat on a piss-test, for the same reason that it is ethical for a nation to engage in espionage during wartime. Piss-tests are wrong, and thus any method that can circumvent them seems to me fair game. Anyone with the least amount of imagination could invent a dozen different ways to conceal and substitute another person's urine while maintaining a plausible temperature for the urine. Nevertheless, I just don't like the idea of cheating, even though I can't explain why. It is just a personal preference of mine. I prefer beating the test if possible through abstinence and background research of the testing technology. That is my way, because I'm a techie.
In the end, after researching NORML, I determined I would pass the test without any difficulty. I am an occasional user with a normal metabolism and do not drink. The test was scheduled exactly twelve days after my last use. According to the consensus of all my sources, the chance of my failing a piss-test with a 50 ng / ml cutoff was miniscule.
I did not bother with any vitamins or supplements and did not exercise any more than usual. I think that there is a lot of pseudoscientific hogwash about ways to defeat piss tests, with various vitamins and herbs promoted that have little or no actual effect but may make certain vendors rich.
I only did what NORML recommends--on the day of the test, I voided my bladder several times prior to my arrival at the clinic. This helps, because it is well-established and often repeated that the greatest concentration of metabolites is found in the first void of the day. Also, by drinking plenty of fluids, one dilutes the concentration of metabolites. The sample I provided contained only urine deposited in my bladder during a narrow 2-3 hour window. It had little or no color, because I had been drinking about double the usual amount of tea and water that day in preparation for the test.
I had no doubt whatsoever that I passed. The clinic never informed me, because their master is the employer, not me. However, the employer offered me a job, so there's my answer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)