Category: Thoughts

Talk like a pirate day is coming up. Of course, nobody specified what kind of pirate that was.

Almost everybody has already seen this Popular Science article on the worst jobs in science. Of the worst jobs in computer science, I would have to say user interface design is one of them: everybody has an opinion about it, and most of them are wrong, but they’ll argue with you and criticize you and hate whatever you do anyway. At least, that’s what it feels like. It’s a fine line between listening to customer feedback and just ignoring the whingers, because there always are some whingers, who will like the new UI once they get used to it.

Of course, I think the UI designers say that the QA people have the worse job, and the QA people make fun of the support techs… I mean, we all chose these jobs. I’d take any job in science or software over most of the others, any day of the week.

But not DBA. You have to be crazy to be a DBA.

This NYT article on happiness made me understand, at least a little, why it is that I find it so hard to get out of bed in the morning, as much as I intend to do so when I go to sleep the night before. And how, if not why, I screwed up my last relationship. And why it seems, each time, like you’re never going to recover, even though you know in the back of your mind that you will. At least, after the first time, you know you will. So, I figure, jump in with both feet: you know the risks, you know you might, and in fact probably will get hurt. But it’s OK, you’ll get over it sooner than you think. Whoo.

Someone’s taken up the challenge posted by Volokh and seconded by me, to try to present a real reason that homosexuals should be second-class citizens, given that the majority of the objections to homosexuals and homosexuality are religious in nature. Something of an argument, I guess, although not by any stretch of the imagination convincing. Volokh follows up here.

For awhile now I’ve been wondering about the distinction that I make between the church and the state. This is particularly relevant what with the whole mess down in ‘Bama right now. secular editorialists were pretty angry about the encroachment of religion on the state, and religious editorialists felt the opposite, a but I find the most interesting discussion to be the one over at Volokh’s blog, and it hardly mentions the giant rock at all.

It discusses the differences between Hinduism and homosexuality. Few Christians would be able to argue that a Hindu should be denied rights, despite the fact that Hinduism violates several of the ten commandments. Really, if the ten commandments are so important, why do we allow people to violate them regularly? Blasphemy, idolatry, worshipping non-Judeo-Christian gods, coveting… none of these things are criminal acts.

Nor are the majority of the laws of Leviticus applicable today to blended fabrics, dietary practice, menstruation, selling your wife and children into slavery, or sleeping with your dead brother’s wife so that she can bear an heir to his estate.

So, why do they argue against homosexuality? It’s terribly difficult to make an argument that homosexuality is inherently dangerous, unhealthy, or damaging to society. I mean, really– if you want stronger families, why not encourage gay marriage? A gay family might not be your ideal family, but at least they’re married.

The objection to homosexuality is a religious objection and has no basis, and no place, in secular law. The only response I’ve been able to coax from the right on this one is “my objection to homosexuality has nothing to do with religious doctrine, it’s God’s word!” I hate to break it to you, buddy, but the things God says to you constitute a religious doctrine, a warning sign of paranoid schizophrenia, or both.

So, the religious right today, as represented by Judge Moore, insists on some, but not all, of the commandments. It insists on some, but not all, of the laws of Leviticus. These are profoundly inconsistent religious arguments about secular matters that just come down to “this is what I believe.” Well, good for you. We’re just going to have to agree to disagree then, so quit pushing it on me.

People like that make the vast majority of the faithful look bad. Those who are truly religious can be a powerful inspiration for those around them and for the world at large. But it takes a true force of belief, and humility, and respect for others. Religion is a beautiful thing, and what Moore and his ilk push isn’t religion. It’s political maneuvering and self-aggrandizement and arrogance.

Grrr. I shake my tiny fist in rage.

Plan Colombia comes in for a lot of flak from the left as being a militaristic adventure on the part of the DEA, and it’s certainly had its problems. But I recently got a rather involved comment on it from someone involved in some of its more successful, nonviolent, actions. Read on for some very well-reasoned opinions (which may or may not reflect those of any government agency or associated company and are not an official statement of any sort) about policy, economic development, and more. I’ll follow up later with links on guerillas, terrorism, drugs, and alternative development in Colombia and the world at large.
Continue reading “Plan Colombia”

My Do We Need Nature post keeps getting responses. Most of them seem to completely miss the point, both of the post and of the essay contest.

My post asked “would there be a legitimate argument that nature is not necessary?” and noted that the best likely answer to that sort of question is to attack the question rather than accept its legitimacy. Responders stated, more or less, “nature is good!”

Yes, thank you. Thank you also for noting that puppies are cute and rainbows are pretty.

The essay contest, doesn’t even ask the question ‘Do we need nature?’ That’s just a theme. The essays are supposed to define an appropriate place for humanity in the world. No, I don’t think I’ll be entering– I’m not sure I have an opinion on humanity’s just place in the world.

Secretly Ironic and the cynical frowning face logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Secretly Ironic Industries. GreedHead, Logo Brand Logowear and the Logo Brand Logowear logo are are trademarks or registered trademarks of Logo Brand Logowear. Logo Brand Logowear bearing the GreedHead slogan and/or logo is distributed in partnership with GreedHead corporation.

One of my Spanish profs in college was from Argentina, and had been in college during the Dirty War years. She thought at the time that she had kept herself safe by not associating with subversives, keeping her head down.

After the dictatorship, when she learned who had done what, when she found out just how bad it was, she realized she was totally wrong. Just being in a class with a suspected subversive, knowing the wrong person, being in their addressbook, was grounds for detention, disappearance, death. All her efforts to keep herself safe were useless: only chance averted disaster.

Similarly, although I have tried my best, I recognize the more-than-significant role of chance in my own good fortune. I am not sure if I deserve it, and more importantly, I am not sure how much my own efforts have determined any of it. It makes the phrase “those less fortunate” ring in my ears: in many cases it’s only luck that brings people low.

Much will be expected from those to whom much has been given.

Crooked Timber has some interesting articles on identity and humanity and nature.

Questions: To what extent is the nonhuman world an obstacle to human endeavor? What about the endeavor to change human nature? Does the human portion of the natural world become an obstacle to human endeavor?

Genetically modified food, for the most part, does not bother me. I am not troubled by ‘golden rice’ or by pest-resistant bT soy any more than I am by a hybrid rose, a plumcot, or a purebred dog. Which is to say, there’s potential for trouble there, but not, for the most part, awful trouble. It’s perfectly possible to have all of these things without ethical problems– but they can arise.

So what if we synthesize all of our food some day? So much of what I eat is contaminated with industrial waste: the mercury in my fish, the pesticide in my vegetables. Why wouldn’t hothouse everything be safer? An individual hothouse tomato, grown without pesticides, might be better. An individual farm-raised fish could be safer than one roaming free in the heavy-metal ocean. But human beings cannot maintain the biodiversity or healthy balance of nature. At least, not yet. Remeber what happened to the various biodome experiments? Systemic failure.

I saw a blind woman in the T this morning, holding the cane just a fraction of an inch below her foot level as she descended the stairs, so it tapped only when she reached a landing. She went all the way into the station, mostly not touching the walls or the floors, tapping only once or twice when she needed to make a turn. But she was close by the wall. She’d need sight, (or a much longer cane, or a lot of practice) to walk down the exact middle.

Moderation is often the hardest route to take. It’s much easiser to hew closely to one wall or another.

Reasons to be a Republican. And a complimentary list of candidates for the White House in ’04, scoring them based on ‘scandal points.’ I like the scandal-points system.

Some people seem to be betting against John F. Kerry because they have been unsure of his ethnicity. Apparently he had Eastern-European Jewish relatives, and everyone has been assuming he’s Irish because he has an Irish-sounding name and wants to be John F. Kennedy.

I’m surprised that this is an issue. But then again, I’m also surprised when people do things like confuse religious law for secular law. Not to say I’m immovable or perfect. I’ve been swinging more and more towards gun-ownership, on the premise that guns, like drugs, are best regulated rather than criminalized. The statement “if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns’ is, in essence, true. And nothing is made safer by placing its manufacture, distribution, and usage into the hands of organized crime.