The Path of Destruction

Quick Post:

In a previous life (about 4 years ago) I was a GIS software developer. As a traveler, one thing that I loved about GIS was the information that you got from images, pictures, and other visual elements of geospatial analysis.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) has an incredible site set up right now showing the path of Hurricane Katrina. What is amazing, are the satellite images that have been taken and synched with the spots on the map. It really gives you a full impact of the scope of the damage done to the city.

Sound Off... The Hook.

Quick Post:

Some may call me a geek. And to this, I would probably not put up much of an argument. Having clarified that, I have been excited for the past week knowing that Apple was going to make a “big announcement” yesterday. Not because I am a Mac guy or that I even have an iPod... because I have neither a Mac nor an iPod. Although, if I weren’t a student, I would have both... and my iTunes count is up to around 8200 songs. I was excited just to see what new technology was going to be out there... And I was thrilled.

Yesterday, Steve Jobs announced the release of a new iTunes version (5.0), the iTunes-enabled phone (ROKR, by Motorola), the iPod nano. The phone is great and the nano is amazing! If I had the extra $500 bucks sitting around for both, I would have ordered them last night! In fact, I would have if I could even get a “student discount.”

The thing that I want to mention is iTunes 5.0. I listen to a lot of music. It is pretty much running all day long... and on my iTunes player on my laptop. Unlike other software vendors, I have a lot of faith in the integrity of Apple software in general. As a former software engineer, I am really picky about certain things in design, running, and memory... this last thing was my major complaint with iTunes 4.x and seems to be fixed in 5.0.

However, the thing that really kicks ass is the sound. I don’t know what the designers did to the signal processor, and maybe it is just my poor computer, but the same music I was listening to before (with the same iTunes configuration) has sound that is 10x better than before. I recommend downloading it for yourself and taking a listen.

... Now, onto the big problem... Affording all these gadgets...

Has Schwarzenegger ever read the California Constitution?

California Constitution, Article 1, Section 1:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Today, the Governator announced his veto of the bill (AB 849) passed yesterday which would have made California the first state in the Union to allow gay marriage. Shortly after allegedly stating, “hasta la vista, gay-bee” the Governator justified his actions by a 2000 vote of Proposition 22. The proposition, like many of its kind, stated that “marriage is between a man and a woman.” While he refused to comment on it himself, Schwarzenegger’s press secretary, Margita Thomson, stated that, “We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails the vote.” While this is somewhat true, there are a few problems that I have with this.

On a moral note, I cannot see why a person would care if two men or two women chose to marry. I am straight... it doesn’t really affect me now, does it? Gender should not be the issue... indeed, religion should not be the issue. Who cares about the whole separation of church and state?

California Constitution, Article 1, Section 4:

Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed. This liberty of conscience does not excuse acts that are licentious or inconsistent with the peace or safety of the State. The Legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

As in France, marriage should be a religious function and civil unions should be a government function. This would alleviate the headaches that people seem to have around the use of the word “marriage” with respect to homosexual relationships.

Secondly, while Ms. Thomson has her degrees from UC Berkeley and Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government (two wonderful institutions), she apparently has never read the California Constitution which grants the Legislature the power to “derail the vote.” The legislature is empowered to change the laws with the caveat that they are responsible to the voters: if the voters feel as though their current interests have been derailed, they can choose not to reelect their representative.

Which brings me to issue number 3: Does it make sense to look to a proposition passed in early 2000 to justify the Govenator’s actions in late 2005? In some cases it might, but not in this case. In the last 5 years there has been a lot of important activity. Most notably, the wave of anti-gay legislation passed in the last election in response to both Mayor Newsom’s allowance of gay marriage in San Francisco and the ruling of legality in the Massachusetts Supreme Court. California has always been a source for political reform and activity.

So, for Christ’s sake, why did the Govenator step in, anyway?

Right... Jesus... and the Right.... Right! I’ve got it. Republican governor + conservatives + Christians ≠ No gay. Okay. Why didn’t he just come out and say this instead of spending a day and many hours figuring this one out... Probably for the same reason he didn’t come out and say anything... he sent his press secretary.

The answer is simple: Schwarzenegger is a girly man.

The Larger Shame... Where to Lay the Blame?

Quick Post:Today there was an article authored by Nicholas Kristof entitled The Larger Shame (alternate link here). Kristof paints a picture of the United States that is real... it is what you would see if you peeled back the plastic red and white stripes of patriotic rhetoric which politicians spout and the media regurgitates. Here are some of the statistics:

• Infant mortality rate in Washington D.C. is twice that of Bejing.


• US ranks 43rd in infant mortality (CIA factbook) behind Aruba, Greece, the Czech Republic, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, just about every country in Western Europe, and (most notably) Cuba - despite the embargo.


• Poverty has increased 17% under Bush.


• At some point in the last 12 months, 29% of the children of the US did not have health care.


• The U.S. ranks 84th for measles and 89th for polio

Where have we, as a country, been for the poor? Our failure as a democracy based upon support of others has been emphasized by this disaster... and yet, I fear that little will change with time.

On Waterbugs, Websites, and Wordage...

Recently, I have been very upset over the devastation that has hit New Orleans in a physical sense and our country in a political sense. Every time I see images of the poor, black people in New Orleans it hits home to me how we as a society have failed the poor of our country... have failed African-Americans and other minorities in our country... and have failed those who have fought to make strides to strengthen the fabric of our society, rather than weaken it. And George Bush has failed us, yet again, as our leader. Every time I see these images, I know that if this had happened to a wealthy, white community the response would have been timely, well funded, and would have gained the attention of those who we pay to watch over us.

(For a very interesting article about just this, read this article entitled "The Two Americas")

Like others, I use hobbies to escape. Everyone has a hobby. For some it is a formalized process or activity, and for others it is just instinct. It is something that we do to escape from the monotony or the pains of daily life and, to some extent, amuse ourselves. One of my hobbies is letter writing. I love to send letters (preferably through the mail) making a connection (albeit sometimes absurd) to a person I don't know. Today, this hit me in response to a conversation I had with my dad about waterbugs. He claimed that a waterbug was a big beetle, but not a cockroach. I thought it was a big cockroach, and decided to do some online research when I found a site of an exterminator in Kansas. The following is the email that I sent to this site regarding what I read on the website... really, this is just to entertain myself... but I am looking forward, as always, to the response.

*****

To Whom It May Concern:

With regards to your helpful and informative website on various roach nuisances (http://www.focusedxterm.com/roach.html), I have a couple of recommendations for corrections to your sections on "Oriental Roaches or Waterbugs" and "American Roaches."

The first paragraph of the section on Waterbugs reads as follows:

The Oriental cockroach A.K.A. "Waterbug" is a roach, but without the stigmatism of the German roach. They do not reproduce as rapidly, and are usually found around drains and water supplies. They are a problem during wet seasons.

I am hardly a Entomologist nor a practicing Christian at this point, but I doubt that the German roach is blessed with stigmatism - which the American Heritage Dictionary defines as "the condition of being affected by stigmata." These are, as you know, the wounds on the hands, feet, and side of Jesus. The stigmata is generally given to a chosen few. While there is no doubt in my mind that the Waterbug could live through a nuclear holocaust, this hardly implies that it has been "chosen" by the divine. I would recommend changing "stigmatism" to "stigma." If this is correct however, I would have pegged the German or American Roaches as claiming the stigmata before the Oriental Roaches any day of the week. But, again, I am not an Entomologist.

Also, with respect to the last line, if I found a waterbug in my house during any season (not just the wet season) it would be "a problem."

The second correction is on the section dealing with American roaches. The first paragraph reads:

American Roaches are large ugly roaches usually found in basements and outside in the summer. They are not a major health problem like Germans, nor do they reproduce as rapidly.

Having lived in Germany for a while, I understand your concern over the health detriments of living around Germans. I myself gained nearly 18 pounds (or 1/8th my body weight) in 7 weeks while there. If this was intended as an insult to Germans, I would personally be more even-handed about it. Consider changing the beginning to "Americans are large ugly roaches usually found in basements and outside in the summer." Then at least you insulting both ethnic groups, instead of just the Germans. However, as you are a pest control site, the proper change would be to "... like German roaches, nor..."

In addition, contrary to your statement, Germans have a slow birth rate (8.33 births/1,000 population) relative to the United States ( 14.14 births/1,000 population). Indeed, the German government is concerned about this and trying to find ways to have Germans reproduce with other Germans to strengthen the pure-blood of the German ancestry. Understandably so, Germany's neighbors are a little concerned about this move on the part of the German government and are watching this closely.

Again, thank you for your informative website. Although it raised some important theologic and sociologic questions for me, it did put to rest a long-standing argument between my father and I over the waterbug.

Best Regards...

Signs of the Times

Paper Baggin' Liberal

A few nights ago I borrowed a few DVDs from the the library: The 400 Blows (Les Quatre Cents Coups), Lolita (Kubrick, 1962), The Singing Detective, and Bush's Brain. While I didn't get a chance to watch The Singing Detective, by the sounds of it I wasn't missing much (despite the impressive cast). When I returned them last night, I didn't want to misplace any of them and so I put them into a paper bag that I had from my last trip to Peet's. As I walked down the streets to the gorgeous public library, DVDs hidden in a specialty coffee bag, I felt like a deviant with a bag full of pornography from the 1950's - hiding my booty that could only be viewed within the Constitutionally protected limits of my home. And then it dawned on me... Today, in 2005, in the United States, it would probably be less offensive for me to walk down the street with pornography in hand than it would be to walk down the street with what I had: A DVD which was critical of the actions of the current President...

The 400 Blows (Les Quatre Cents Coups, by François Truffaut) is a beautiful film that gives an insight into the psychology of a young French boy (Antoine) who is not so different than other boys in most ways. Certainly, by today's standards, he would appear to be very well behaved. Yet his parents (primarily his mother) don't take the time to care for him. He reacts the way a young boy might suffers the consequences of the lack of attention given to him. Near the end of the film (in a scene that was mostly improvised), Antoine speaks with a psychologist and reveals the source of his behaviour. His dream, to see the sea, is realized only at the end of the film... and, like the ocean he was looking accross, it is hard to say what may lie ahead for him. This film, while winning the acclaim of its time, surely drew criticism for subject matter and light in which it was presented.

Lolita is based on a book by one of my favorite authors, Vladimir Nabokov, and was horribly scandalous to Americans when it was released in 1962. It was thought to be, amongst other things, obscene merely because the subject matter was so contrary to (what everyone believed to be) American values. The main character / narrator (Humbert Humbert - a middle-aged man) is infatuated, indeed in love with the daughter of his less-than-charming landlady. The daughter, Lolita, is 14 at the time. It is not a particularly sexual book at all. In fact, whatreferencess are there are quite begnin. The 1962 film is quite true to the book overall. There are no scenes that would be considered obscene... at least by today's audience. But that is the point... When the later version came out, albeit a fair film, it was radically more sexual than either the book or the previous film. Yet, there was hardly more than an peep about it.

Bush's Brain

... Then there was Bush's Brain. This is a film (based on the book, Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential) which is not as much a criticism of George Bush as it is an insight into the man who (by anyone's account) is very much responsible for the political successes that George Bush has enjoyed.

The film looks back over both the careers of Karl Rove and of George W. Bush. The thing that struck me most about the film was the manner in which acquaintances of Karl Rove spoke about him. It was with a bizarre combination of adoration and fear. Adoration for his talents and fear of the ramifications of dissent. On a playground this attitude doesn't really matter. In state governments the damage is containable. But, in the office of the President of the United States you go to war over that kind of attitude... You stifle journalism and trample on citizens' rights with that kind of attitude... and you put the needs of the one ahead of the needs of the country with that kind of attitude.

The message at the end of the film is simple: That the political goals of person should not drive policy decisions. More specifically, a campaign director should not be at the helm of policy decsions because those decisions are being made with one end in mind - to improve the image of the candidate or official in the minds of voters.

Complaisant Conservative

As this notion that politics were driving policy was stewing in my mind, I received an email from a cousin of mine who lives in St. Louis, MO. He is nothing short of brilliant and (generally) funny as hell. He is also a rabid Democrat... and more importantly, can't stand George Bush. The email sent to most of my living relatives (and probably a few dead ones) reads:

Is anyone out there feeling the rage at the incompetence of our elected leaders to respond effectively to this disaster in Louisiana? Did any of you ever think that we would be using the term "Refugee" for Americans in the United States?

This really is a national disgrace. We are the richest country on the face of the earth and look how we have discarded the poor. Those who were left in New Orleans were the poorest of the poor.

Let's give another tax cut to the rich and send more money and troops to Iraq at the expense of maintaining and improving our nation's infrastructure and preparing for disasters.

We are a nation of haves and have nots and the schism is getting bigger. George Bush is a strong supporter of "No Child Left Behind". He is blind and can't see that his policies are leaving millions of Americans behind, 100,000 of them are sitting on freeway overpasses, walking through sewage and dying in shelters in New Orleans.

In Missouri, our Republican lawmakers just cut 90,000 poor people from Medicaid yesterday and our state no longer pays for feeding tubes!

What a frickin disgrace. I hope all of you vote in 2006 and those of you who voted for the "Compassionate Conservative" Republicans in 2004 wake up from your coma because at least in Missouri, feeding tubes aren't covered by Medicaid anymore.

I don't have a television that actually can receive signals from anything but my DVD player, but I do follow the news closely. Was it the fact that Bush was still on vacation? Was it the fly-by in Air Force One? Or was it the fact that this was a disaster that Bush didn't plan? I just remember the confusion and, frankly, lack of strength that Bush showed immediately after the attacks of 9-11, and thought that this was probably it. The Tsunami gave us the same deer-in-the-headlamps Bush that we saw before. Where other countries, without hesitation, were donating millions of dollars and aid, the first numbers we heard from our White House was somewhere in the hundreds of thousands of dollar range. The same response now in New Orleans. When he is not being fed the policy to match the political environment he has created, he freezes. He is inactive.

Now, in New Orleans, there are not only those who are displaced, or have everything taken from them, or have died... but inaction has lead to anarchy and violence to a degree that armed National Guardsmen are being deployed to suppress such activities (and there are reports that shoot to kill orders have been issued).

The signs of the times are telling of the erosion of the fabric that makes us, as Americans, community. Art and literature make us push the artificial limits of our experience. Dissent makes our democracy healthy and active. And the spirit of giving to those in need is very strong in US. However, the policy decisions being made today with only apoliticall end to not represent the values of the people and will only weaken the faith Americans have in our government.

----

If you are in the Santa Clara, CA area the SCU School of Law is giving $2 for every $1 donated for the Katrina Relief. Please stop in the library and give as much as you can.

The best way to help if you are not is to check you local newspaper (in paper or online) to see how your own community is moblizing.

Greener Pastures...

Quick Post:

A picture taken by yours truly at the Rancho San Antonio Reserve a little while back...

"Sometimes Pulling The Plug is the Best Way to Get Re-Energized"... and sometimes it is just a the product of apathy. The above quote is taken from a someone who I am no longer in touch with, but always had brilliant things to say.

...So here I am with nothing to say. There have easily been a thousand things to blog about since my last post in early July - but I haven't. And now I feel the need to blog about nothing. That is to say, that I have been feeling the need to find greener pastures over the last couple of months. Sometimes greener pastures are places that are new and other times places you have been before. Sometimes greener pastures are novel (for you, at least) ways of seeing something. Other times, greener pastures are not green at all, but golden. I can't say.

I can however say that something is driving me to look for one after a spell of seeming apathy... which I am beginning to realize was probably the product of a mean case of stimulus overloadus. Changes in a personal life; family misfortune, fortune, and illness; weddings and births; school and more school; job... just kidding... but I tried; the looming bar (for me, February is looming); and all the rest. It really wasn't apathy, but overload. And now that I know that... I have to figure out where I have been for the last couple months and put my head on right.

Side note: I finally got a real digital camera shortly after one of my finals posts. So hopefully the quality of the original photography on the site will go up from those taken with my cell phone.

Daily Metathesis: yawler lawyer

Brief Memorandum:

I love words... I love word games, playing with words, teasing with words, teasing things out, making words up, making words over, and over doing everything with words. That is why I have been having too much geeky fun looking over the website for the National Puzzler's League. Take a look and you will either love it or be amused at how nerdy a freaky, mishaped weirdo-egghead-deviant can be. (Oh yeah, be sure to look at the word finder that allows the use of wildcards and word length... so cool.)

PS. For cryptographers, lexicographers, hackers, and crackers there is a great supply of dictionaries of all varieties to use for your favorite pastime.

Louis Brandeis: Words of Wisdom From a Historic Privacy Advocate

Quick Post:

Also in response to Judge Posner's article mentioned in my last post, I think this quote is poignant:

Applying to the Fourth and Fifth Amendments the established rule of construction, the defendants' objections to the evidence obtained by wire-tapping must, in my opinion, be sustained. It is, of course, immaterial where the physical connection with the telephone wires leading into the defendants' premises was made. And it is also immaterial that the intrusion was in aid of law enforcement. Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.

- Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, dissenting in Olmstead v.United States (277 US 438, 1928, emphasis added).

Economizing Privacy: My Comment to Judge Posner's Post on Privacy

My comment:

Judge Posner, I very respectfully disagree with the view that you take of information privacy.
First, by stating:

All that privacy means in the information context (for I am not talking about the Supreme Court’s usage of “right of privacy” to describe the right to an abortion and other sex-related rights—the Court appropriated the word “privacy” to describe these rights presumably because of its positive connotations) is that people want to control what is known about them by other people

you are ignoring the fact that modern technology allows for "information" to be used to evaluate movement and location. This monitoring (dare I use the word "surveillance") goes directly to issues of autonomy privacy - a clearly constitutionally protected right. Tracking and monitoring cases (e.g. US v. Karo, US v. Knotts, and Dow Chem. v. US) have already shown the line between use of electronic information used in tracking - as "low-tech" as these may seem today. Cases involving physical tracking using Internet and electronic transactions will inevitably arise at some point. The physical rights of privacy are blurring with the informational rights of privacy. Control of this information may be as important as physical freedom.

Secondly, you state that people often want to "conceal facts about themselves that are embarrassing or discreditable." While this is true, people also want to conceal facts which may be flattering or neutral as well. The point being that a person ought to have some control over how they are presented or represented to society to some degree of certainty. Allowing a person control over personally identifiable information is a natural result of this desire. While information cast into society and made public should not be given such protection, the Court has regularly recognized a private person's ability to do so.

Often this involves concealing information that would cause potential transacting partners to refuse to transact with them or to demand better terms as a condition of doing so. Such concealment is a species of fraud.

More often, this likely does not and protection into the seclusion of one's personal life advocated for in Warren and Brandeis' seminal work, the Right of Privacy.

While your view of privacy may hold true in some instances, basing policy decisions upon such a view in a era of such technology growth would subject the general public to unprecedented scrutiny by the government as well as other citizens, and would greatly weaken the privacy rights which have been established and relied upon.

There are many very interesting comments... mostly the first ones. Be forewarned that the latter posts are filled by people that should be either having a discussion offline or should start their own blog... as their are very enthusiastically posting comments.

Economizing Privacy: Judge Posner Writes On Information Privacy

Recently Judge Richard Posner, one of the leading advocates in the school of jurisprudential thought known as Law and Economics (see also FindLaw's Encyclopedia of Law and Economics), posted a short article to the blog that he shares with Gary Becker regarding Privacy. I couldn't help myself but post a comment to it... a short, not particuarly well-thought-out comment because... well, frankly I had my Evidence final the next day and didn't have the time. But, if I only had the time, I would have further and better explained the problems I had with his perspective (a very common one, albeit contrary to my sensibilities, understanding of the law, and personal thoughts on the matter).

Here is Judge Posner's Post (see also Gary Becker's response):

Recent controversy over the digitizing of medical records has brought to the fore the issue of balancing privacy against other values. Digitizing medical records would help doctors and patients by making it much easier, swifter, and cheaper to transfer these records when a patient switches doctors or is treated by a new doctor in an emergency or needs to consult a specialist. But once records are digitized rather than existing solely in hard copies in the office of the patient’s primary physician, the risk that unauthorized persons will gain access to them is increased.

So, as often in law and public policy, a balancing of imponderables is required. My own view is that we tend to place somewhat too much weight on privacy. The word “privacy” has strongly positive connotations (like “freedom”), which obscures analysis. All that privacy means in the information context (for I am not talking about the Supreme Court’s usage of “right of privacy” to describe the right to an abortion and other sex-related rights—the Court appropriated the word “privacy” to describe these rights presumably because of its positive connotations) is that people want to control what is known about them by other people. They want to conceal facts about themselves that are embarrassing or discreditable. The two motives should be distinguished. In many cultures, including our own, there is a nudity taboo (oddly, it is much weaker in northern European nations); except for commercial purposes (prostitution, striptease, pornography, etc.), and the tiny band of nudists, people are embarrassed to be seen naked by strangers. Why this is so is unclear; but it is a brute fact about the preferences of most people in our society, and since transaction costs are low, it makes sense to assign the property right, in this instance at least, to the individual whose privacy is sought to be invaded. There is no dearth of persons willing to sell the right to see them performing or otherwise appearing in the nude, so there is a well-functioning market without need to coerce anyone to so appear.

The second motive for privacy, however—the desire to conceal discreditable facts—is more questionable from a social standpoint. In order to make advantageous transactions, both personal (such as dating or marriage or being named in a relative’s will) and commercial, people try to “put their best foot forward.” Often this involves concealing information that would cause potential transacting partners to refuse to transact with them or to demand better terms as a condition of doing so. Such concealment is a species of fraud. It is too prevalent and, on the whole, insufficiently harmful to require legal sanctions (other than in exceptional cases). In addition the potential, victims of such fraud can usually protect themselves (though not costlessly): for example, lengthy courtships are a way in which potential spouses verify the implicit and explicit representations of each other and thus unmask the frauds that are a common feature of romantic entanglements. Moreover, to require blanket disclosure of private facts, thus treating every individual as if he were the issuer of a securities prospectus regulated by the SEC, would drown society in trivial and distracting information.

It does not follow that the law should go out of its way, as it were, to enable, to protect, these (minor) frauds by granting expansive legally enforceable rights of information privacy. Medical records are a case in point. People conceal their medical conditions (sometimes as a means of concealing behaviors that have led to medical conditions), in order to obtain insurance at favorable rates, obtain and retain jobs, obtain spouses, becomes President (in the case of John F. Kennedy, who concealed his long array of serious illnesses), and so forth. These concealments can impose significant costs on the other parties to the transactions.

This is not to say that all such concealments are strategic. I believe that many people would be uncomfortable to learn that their medical history had been disclosed to people living in distant countries, people with whom the possessor of the medical history will never transact. This would be like the nudity taboo: concealment motivated by embarrassment rather than by transactional objectives.

I mentioned that in exceptional cases in which people try to keep information about themselves private the law does step in. No one wants privacy more than criminals! Yet searches, wiretapping, and other means of surveillance are authorized to invade the “privacy” of criminals, terrorists, and other antisocial persons. Because of its favorable connotations, the word “privacy” is rarely used in such contexts. It would be good if the word was either purged of those connotations, or, more realistically, was understood, in disputes over measures such as digitizing medical records that compromise “privacy,” that was what stake was simply reducing somewhat the ability of people to manipulate other people’s opinion of them by selective disclosure and concealment of information.

Even strategic secrecy, however, can have positive social value. An example is trade secrecy, which is a method of obtaining protection against copying that would prevent appropriating the benefits of an innovation. In addition, some, perhaps a high, degree of privacy of communications is socially beneficial (hence wiretapping and other forms of eavesdropping are lawful only when directed against criminal and other public enemies, actual or suspected), because people will not speak freely if they think they are being overheard by strangers, and there is value in frank communications, including being able to try out ideas without immediate exposure to criticism. The particular concern I have with defenders of privacy arises when they argue for legal rights to blanket concealment not of communications, and not of embarrassing facts, but of facts that would be material to the willingness of other persons to transact with the concealer on terms favorable to him.

Next, Parking Will Require An Advanced Degree In Astrobiology

While studying for finals with a friend who just bought a condo near SBC Park with her husband, I came across this parking sign... Actually, I parked in front of it and spent a healthy amount of time discerning what exactly the sign meant... and even longer asking myself if this was really what things had come to in the city with the most enthusiastic of parking enforcement.

As if San Francisco parking wasn't confusing and costly enough, this is proof that it is f*$#ing out of control. For those who cannot see, this is a calendar at the bottom of this sign letting you know when you can and cannot park in this particular spot... And this is only the bottom half of the sign! Frankly, I parked in this spot with all expectation that my car would be towed when I got back. However, that concern was eclipsed by my nausea at the thought of the community precursors that lead to the posting of a sign like this. In retrospect, my only thought on the matter is that someone in the web of bureaucracy which is the San Francisco Department of Parking and Traffic should lose their job over this.

... Now, back to contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271...

Atheist Monk

Quick Post:

After a grueling final in Evidence yesterday, I had a few great conversations with friends that relieved what stress I had left and cured the post-exam blues. The first was with a friend from college who like myself is in law school. He and I were commiserating over the stress and ridiculousness of it all. He described the lot of a law student as an Atheist Monk - an image of a non-spiritual person spending their days toiling over the writings of their predecessors without the goal of salvation. A statement which I think is brilliant. Secondly, there was a conversation with a distant friend who was a little drunk when he called - just to check up on me and see how my final went. After laughing hysterically about things that would only make sense to us for a good half hour, a friend of his in the background yelled that they were going to "cut him off". To which I responded in my best Southeastern voice, "Ya just keep on drinkin'. God'll tell ya when you've had enough." At which point the hilarity ensued once again.

These are the times that you need friends to keep you sane.... the times when you need to remind yourself of your humanity and spirituality.

Catatonic Corona

Quick Post:

Eclipse of Fluorescent Tubes


View of Chateau from above...

Note: These are both unaltered photographs. One was taken from a multi-million dollar space station using a multi-thousand dollar camera. The other was from a f*$%ing ugly, uncomfortable, cheap early-80s styled chair using a free camera phone. So, if only I could find a way to siphon a little of money away from our space program - say, about 300 bucks which is about the cost of a stapler in our well-oiled bureaucracy - I could get myself a real digital camera and take better pictures of eclipses and such. Still, I would be no Crunchkin, that's for sure. Ahhh... conspiracies abound during finals...

... Maybe, I could even find a way to show once and for all that Bush is a liar and has made a mockery of the presidency through his unprecedented lies, war-mongering, and deceit...

Finals Hell or Final Cell?

Quick Post:

Row of trees... Indigenous flora.

Some people enjoy spending the spring relaxing in the sun and sipping on a fancy cocktail. Not me. I like to spend my time in a late-sixties / early-seventies styled, hell hole under fluorescent lights. I like to spend my waking hours from dawn until dusk staring at pages of text... some of the same pages that I have been staring at for the last 4 months. I like to remind myself that the sacrifices of my social life, health, eyesight, sanity, and relationships are all worth it. I like to think about the fact that 4 months of experience comes down to to 3 hours, but not really because the final that I am taking is curved... which means it doesn't really matter how well I know the material, it matters how well I know it relative to my peers... relative to my friends... relative to my future colleagues - this is not the best way to bring people together. That's okay. This is law school. It is about making lawyers, not friends... not cooperative social beings. It is competitive and adversarial... like the "real world": Whoa, their lawn looks so much better than mine... "Honey, we're going to Home Depot! I need some fertilizer!... and some Round-Up!"


View from the chateau at sunset...

Federal Rules of Evidence, 402:

"Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

Fanciful Rules of Existence, 101:

"Relevant experience" means an experience having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to your life more meaningful or less meaningful than it would be without the experience.

... Now, if I can only figure out if this is relevant...

FCC Song

Quick Post:

All you Python fans out there will appreciate Eric Idle's FCC Song posted to Python Online.

Good Reads on Terrorism and Imperialism

Quick Post:

Here are two really good, quick reads from the Christian Science Monitor. The first is a report entitled Global terror attacks tripled in 2004, by Tom Regan:

Terror attacks around the world tripled in 2004, rising from 175 in 2003 to 655 last year, according to statistics released by the US government's National Counterterrorism Center (NCC) Wednesday. The figure includes the children killed in the Beslan massacre in Russia, and the victims of the Madrid train bombings.

Terror attacks in Iraq - 198 - were nine times the previous year's total. The numbers did not include attacks on US troops.

The US State Department held a briefing Wednesday on its global terrorism report (formerly called 'Global Patterns of Terrorism,' now called the Country Report on Terrorism) Wednesday, but did not include the statistics on actual attacks, on the order of Secretary of State Condelezza Rice, the Washington Post reported. Ms. Rice had said she wanted US terrorism officials to decided whether or not to release the figures.
...

The second is a report / op-ed piece entitled The new imperialism, by David R. Francis, discusses the differences between classical imperialism with what he calls new imperialism (quoting a Rochester economist, Engerman). It is an interesting discussion generally from the point of view of the imperialized:

...[T]oday Kipling's call to spread, as he saw it, civilization to remote parts of the world could be rephrased "Take up the Western Man's burden." The industrial nations are once again asking how much they should help poor countries establish good government and greater prosperity. University of Rochester economist Stanley Engerman calls it a "new, good imperialism."

Good imperialism - if it exists - deals more with economics than the political control of the past. Academic economists have been revisiting colonialism to see if they can find clues as to what encourages or discourages progress in poor nations. Trade unions want to impose "fair labor standards" on developing countries. Most industrial nations rely on the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and other development institutions to provide technical, economic, and governance advice to poor countries. Foreign aid often becomes a tool to impose Western ideas on struggling nations.

To some - especially those in the developing world - this new imperialism can look a lot like the old colonialism, except that permanent occupation is no longer the means of control.

Iraq is seen as Exhibit A of the new imperialism. President Bush ordered the invasion of the country, claiming a need to remove weapons of mass destruction. When no WMDs were found, the proclaimed purpose evolved into removing a dictatorship and establishing a democracy. Some Europeans and those in the Middle East remain skeptical, suspecting the US of wanting to ensure control of Iraqi oil.
...