Is there a dog?: Blog

It's been a while...

Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:08:37 GMT

...hasn't it?

I have been a wee bit busy lately, not really much time to do anything significant on here, just throwing the odd comment around. I have also been spending less and less time using Windows, because (a) it's crap and (b) I just got a new laptop, which I have now installed Ubuntu on, and it is a beautiful thing. A few teething problems aside (the sort of thing you always get with Linux, finding the right drivers mostly, plus a couple of 64-bit complications), I find it to be much quicker and far less system/resource-greedy than the ugly hog OS Vista which is now a thing of the past. If anyone wants the disc they can have it (don't tell Bill though ), although I wouldn't use it for anything but an undersized frisbee now.

As a result though, I am considering (although I haven't completely made up my mind yet) migrating this blog somewhere a little less Microsoft-oriented. To my shame I have left my foray into wordpress untouched for months now - I don't know why I thought I could update two blogs when I hardly have the time for one. However, I think I'll leave things as they are for now, as I am feeling sleepy...

Sometimes you get the bear...

Wed, 16 May 2007 11:14:36 GMT

Well, I am so glad this day is over. One of those I would rather forget, not that it was especially memorable. Then again, those sort of days tend to stick out in your memory...

First of all, I had to spend most of the day (nigh on all of it) coding a macro in Excel. Mostly, I don't mind that sort of work, as it often poses a challenge, keeps the brain active, and VBA is mostly fairly easy to work with - well documented and reasonably straightforward to debug. Excel, on the other hand, is a delicate little flower which really doesn't cope well with any more than about 10,000 rows of data for any operation more complex than copy and paste. Which can be a problem when you try and import 35,000 rows of data and perform another 50 calculations on them. As I found out...

So, as I was waiting for my macro to run to the next breakpoint, hoping (while touching wood) that I had broken the steps down to sufficiently small increments so that Excel wouldn't crash, again, I was reminded of an "urban legend" that did the rounds a few years ago - it's always the way, I honestly can't remember where I saw it, but it's true - apparently when Windows was in its infancy, the infamous "blue screen of death" (i.e. your OS has just died) was accompanied by an error message, in haiku form:

Three things are certain: death, taxes, and lost data.
Guess what just happened.

Just then, Excel crashed. Sometimes, the bear gets you.

Talking about Learning to Fly...

Tue, 08 May 2007 08:50:56 GMT

People are often uncomfortable with the idea of introspection - we use dismissive terms like "navel-gazing" and talk about people having their "heads in the clouds". I think possibly people who talk like that are scared of what they might face, when they face up to themselves...

Quote

Learning to Fly...

I'm learning to fly....

Aiming for the horizon...

...

I spread my wings...

...

I'm taking a leap of faith...

And lunging towards the unknown.

But the winds have shifted.

The horizons I aim for have taken on new forms.

The experience I seek is within me.

I want to fly inward.

I want to fly into the black hole that is my mind and explore...

I want to fly and swirl

Into depths unknown...

Into depths be thrown...

And by my depth be throned...

I want to be owned.

Land of the Weird

Tue, 08 May 2007 08:31:52 GMT

I find this hard to credit... after all the soul-searching after Columbine, and then Virginia Tech, ABC comes up with a solution: WE NEED MORE GUNS...

Of course! That's brilliant! Why didn't someone think of this earlier?

Family Values

Thu, 03 May 2007 10:46:57 GMT

I have been really disappointed over the last few months at the disinformation and reactionary fervour surrounding the so-called "anti-smacking bill". That more or less came to a head the other day when I happened to be walking through Parliament grounds while the Destiny church was protesting against NZ Traditional Family Values in Jeopardy.

I personally find it just a little disturbing that so many parents feel so strongly that they wish to hit their children. Of course, the marginally more palatable (but equally disturbing) possibility is that after the constant misrepresentation of the bill by sleazy point-scoring politicos, demagogues like Brian Tamaki may have actually managed to convince people that the bill is about taking away the rights of parents to discipline their children.

Wake up, people! The bill that Sue Bradford is passing is long overdue. Parents' rights are not under threat here. What is happening is that the right of any child not to be abused (while the parent hides behind the currently legal defense of "reasonable force") is being championed. What is happening is we're saying it is no longer ok for kids to be beaten with power cords and cricket bats. We're saying we've had enough of kids being subjected to levels of violence that would be called assault when inflicted on an adult, and the perpetrators of these crimes getting away with it.

I've lost count of how many times have people said in relation to the bill, "I was smacked as a child and it never did me any harm." Here's where the problem really lies - there is a fundamental disconnection between the people who are all too ready to protest any bill that outlaws smacking because they "don't see the harm in it", and the abusive cowards the bill is aimed at criminalising. The horrific violence done to our young people is jokingly referred to as a short, sharp smack. Meanwhile, the children whose welfare is at the heart of this debate have been put to one side. Politicians and media commentators who play on this discrepancy to their advantage are at best confused about the intent of the bill, and at worst are cynically uncaring. Shame on them.

The Humanist Symposium

Tue, 01 May 2007 09:41:38 GMT

The first edition of the Humanist Symposium blog carnival has now been posted at Daylight Atheism.

I would encourage everyone reading this to get over there and take a look - there are some brilliant essays there, promoting humanism as a positive lifestyle and an answer to those who believe that people living life without religion are somehow 'missing out'. My own post of a couple of weeks ago, Why be good? is included there, which I find quite humbling considering the quality of thought and argument that can be found in the posts making up the carnival. I won't single out any as I think you should go there and take a look for yourself, and I must admit, I'm still working my way through them all! Suffice it to say, I think I will find a lot of inspiration there for future ramblings.

Actuaries

Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:18:38 GMT

I couldn't resist this, as most people I tell what I'm doing want to know what an actuary actually does...so here's a definition, and a few pointers...

An actuary is a person, who passes as an expert on the basis of a prolific ability to produce an infinite variety of incomprehensive figures calculated with micrometric precision from the vaguest of assumptions based on debatable evidence from inconclusive data derived by persons of questionable reliability for the sole purpose of confusing an already hopelessly befuddled group of persons who never read the statistics anyway!

In response to "How much is two plus two?", a marketing VP will say "22"; an accountant will say "4.00"; a mathematician will say "I can demonstrate it equals 4 with the following proof ... "; an actuary will ask "What do you want it to equal?"

Question: How many actuaries does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: a) How many did it take last year? b) How many do you want it to take? c) None, after credibility weighting, we have indications that the bulb is still lit. d) None, the insurance department is not allowing any modifications to the bulb at this time. e) Have any of our competitors changed bulbs yet? f) None, they prefer to leave us in the dark. g) Five: one to screw it in, and four more to estimate the length of its life before being screwed in. h) The same number that it took last year, adjusted for trending. i) Two- The Senior Actuary presents the proposal to Managment and the Junior actuary does the work. j) One- But he/she has to do battle first with Sales and Marketing over the issue. k) One- But first, it takes ten years to pass the exams.

List of actuarial pick-up lines:
7. Of course I won't tell anyone. I'm like the exponential distribution, I have the memoryless property.
6. Is that an official SOA calculator in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me? Please note that only an official calculator, bearing the seal of the Society of Actuaries, will be accepted as an answer.
5. So, what exam are you sitting for? Hey, what a coincidence, I'm on that exam committee. I've seen the questions they're gonna ask this time. You should see them, it's gonna be a real killer ...
4. My love for you is endless, like a perpetuity.
3. Since the first time I saw you, my interest in you has compounded continuously.
2. I love the way your hairline emulates the p.d.f. of the Gamma distribution.
1. If you put 5 red, 4 yellow, and 3 green balls in an urn, what's the probability of you coming home with me tonight?

And, my personal favourite:

What does an actuary's wife do when she has insomnia? She rolls over and says, "Tell me again, darling. Just what is it you do for a living?"

-Source: ACTUARIAL JOKES

Why be good?

Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:30:27 GMT

Not so long ago I had a discussion with someone who was discontented with the state of their life - in fact they were very angry about it. Their anger was all directed at the perceived source of all the trouble and wrongness in their life - in a word, God.

The reason God was blamed was that this person's Christian beliefs were at the heart of their behaviour. They followed the Golden Rule (the do unto others thing), as well as all of the Ten Commandments, and yet, their life was in tatters. People mistreated them, took advantage of their good nature, they had bad luck with their investments, they had developed a stress-related disorder and their relationships were disintegrating. Now, this unfortunate person argued, I know that God has set aside a reward for me in Heaven. I know that suffering brings virtue. I know that I cannot expect life to fall into place for me. But why does it have to be so hard? What would happen if I were to renounce my beliefs and all the moral imperatives that go with them? I could act exactly as I wanted then, and maybe my life would be easier and better.

My first impulse (which I'm glad I resisted) would have been to state "God doesn't exist. It is completely irrational to place blame on something which doesn't exist, so I suggest you start looking elsewhere for the reason you are unhappy with your life." The reason I hesitated to say this was because the problem this person was facing was bigger than simply a consequence of their beliefs. This is a problem which everyone faces, whatever their belief system is and regardless of whether it happens to contain a deity. Simply put, it is this: If I am good, what do I get out of it?

When we are young, we are told to be nice to others, to be polite, to refrain from violence, to share our toys, to help those who need our help, to tell the truth. In other words, to be 'good'. When we are not 'good', we face a consequence which hopefully teaches us to be 'good'. When we are 'good', we are praised, which hopefully reinforces our behaviour. Of course, whether or not that works as a young child, as our powers of reasoning develop we need to be shown a rational path to realising for ourselves that it is right to behave in a certain way. We need to reach a stage in our moral development which allows us to make decisions about often complex situations without reference to a parental figure for guidance.

What exactly constitutes the right way to behave can vary somewhat, depending on our cultural setting. In some places personal property is less important than sharing with the community. In one culture a casual smile between a boy and girl publicly imbues their relationship with an inappropriate level of intimacy, whereas the same smile could simply be a polite gesture elsewhere. However, certain things remain true regardless of where you are. An act which brings harm to someone is wrong, in general. To act, therefore, in a way which minimises harm (not always an easy thing to judge) is right. To act for the good of others is right. It is right in a way which is fundamental to the fabric of all society.

This is a principle embodied by the words of Jesus Christ: "Love thy neighbour as thyself". (Its polar opposite has often been seen in the motto of Aleister Crowley, "Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law." Funnily enough though, Crowley intended 'what thou wilt' to be something quite different to the self-interest it has often been misinterpreted as.) The Confucian virtue expressed in the Doctrine of the Mean advocates harmony and benevolence. The Buddhist Pancasila has its followers renounce killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying and intoxication. The Hindu concept of Dharma guides each individual along a path of right living at each stage of their lives.

For each of these, there is a different reason to obey their particular instruction - often enlightenment, Heaven or communion with God as a reward for right behaviour, or perhaps Hell or a similar consequence for malfeasance. In the same way as the child behaves rightly to win reward or to escape punishment, the follower of religious doctrine is motivated to receive a return on their investment of good behaviour. This has the advantage of allowing the person who does not want to think about why it is right to behave this way to still live a good life.

If you were to think about it, though, why would you want to act in an ethical way, if not to receive some sort of reward? The fact is that if everyone in the world consistently behaved ethically, the world would be a better place to live. We would treat each other respectfully and peacefully, and my friend would have no reason to complain about being treated badly. There is no need for the promise of Heaven or Hell after death when we can play a part in creating either here and now.

Pictures and Words

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 10:07:10 GMT

Of all the people I lost touch with when I stopped updating this blog, perhaps the one I felt worst about was Lili. If you were reading last year, you'll know I was a huge fan of her writing, and she was also a good friend.

Sadly her blog is no longer on Windows spaces, but Google is a wonderful thing...I hope she doesn't mind me posting the link here ... Lili now has a photo-blog Picture-Writer and her photography can also be seen at Flickr, together with some of her writing. Well worth a visit!

Coke for Christ

Mon, 09 Apr 2007 00:19:08 GMT

What do you get when you combine a multinational company, Jesus and Italian cinema? Apparently not a PR opportunity...Jesus drinking Coca-Cola? Not this Easter

One of the more bizarre moments surrounding Easter, a holiday that has more than its share of bizarre moments...what I found funny was that Coca-Cola thought that "the use of its brand was unacceptable and could get (sic) the company a bad image". So Santa is OK, but not Jesus?

I wonder if Pepsi has been watching? Opportunity knocks, people...

A curious predicament

Mon, 02 Apr 2007 11:50:51 GMT

Religion is one of those things that tends to excite a reasonable amount of controversy. I've made a couple of comments about it over the last year or so. Way of the Mind has several entries on it, as do several blogs of both religious and secular/atheist focus. Also, the usual prohibition against discussing the forbidden topics of religion and politics aside, most people have some sort of opinion on religion, whether fully formed or not.

The thing that always strikes me is, what's the problem with discussing religion? Is there actually anything to disagree over? Well, on the face of it, yes. In fact, there are a great number of religious texts and tracts, quite apart from the obvious ones (the Bible, the Qur'an, the Bhagavad-Gita, etc.) which make a great number of claims to knowledge of God, or mystical experience, or divine inspiration. Most of which are contradicted at some point by one of the others. Or by itself , a point wittily exposed by the experiment on Way of the Mind. Or by anyone who cares to say, "You know what? That's a nice story but I think you made it all up."

But there's where the argument then gets strange. Because it's not like an argument about scientific theory, where one can appeal to quantitative evidence to demonstrate the truth or otherwise of the assertion. The religious writer claims to have knowledge of the divine, which s/he has received by divine inspiration or guidance. Now clearly for the writer it's not a problem that there's no proof. There's no need, just as there wasn't for Saul on the road to Damascus or John in the grip of revelation. For them, the "truth" is clear. It can just be a problem for the rest of us, who weren't privileged to receive the same blast of inspiration.

It's not like an argument over something fluffier either - say like mathematics (yes, actually, maths can be very fluffy) or economic theory or ethics or even aesthetics. There, an argument, in order to be convincing, must first demonstrate soundness. In order to demonstrate that, one must first examine the assumptions which form the basis of the argument. What can we take as axiomatic? Merely this: what any reasonable person would most probably agree with, given the chance (yes, even in maths this is the case). So what are the assumptions of, say, Catholic theology? How about the virgin birth for instance? Or the resurrection of Jesus? Or we could start with the truly basic assumption common to a whole lot of religions (but granted, not all), the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent deity?

Now without dwelling on the problems that arise out of that last assumption (and there are many of them), and without challenging the soundness of the arguments which follow from the rest, this is where I lose interest in continuing the argument. Because these are assumptions I disagree with. Not that I reject; that's a little too strong a statement. I merely question the reasonableness of any of these assumptions. I am open to their truth; I would be very keen to see any form of proof, other than an appeal to faith. Once that happens, there's something to argue over.

Study Plan

Sun, 01 Apr 2007 09:52:41 GMT

Yes, exciting times - tonight I sat down to revisit my study plan for the next few months. I know, I know, you can probably hardly contain your excitement.

Anyway, assuming you've calmed down enough to read on, I had already done the first part, which was to sort out exactly what I needed to study. This was the easy part - I have the course notes, I know the topics I need for the exams coming up (in September), and now it's just a matter of putting them all together in a nicely laid out plan. The tool I wanted to use for this, as opposed to the pre-built calendar in the absolutely awful M$ Outlook (I have to use it for work but I flat-out refuse to install it at home) was Excel, as it has a lot of nice calendar functions and it's possible to do some nice interactive things in it. While I was getting ready to do this, I thought, why not look for a template? There is no doubt one out there which would be suitable, or at least modifiable to suit what I need.

As it turns out, not really. Not terribly surprising in a way, but nothing that wasn't either designed with entirely the wrong purpose in mind, or just really ugly and not worth the time of installing. Anyway, something which happened while I was downloading a template struck me as worth commenting on. If you're not familiar with VBA, this could possibly throw you a little.

There's a way to personalise the Excel start-up so that it comes set up the way you want it - basically, you just record (or write) a macro to specify what needs to be where and then save it as Workbook_Open() in a module in your Personal.xls workbook. For instance, this is the macro I have saved in mine:

Sub Workbook_Open()
'
' Workbook_Open Macro
'
    Application.CommandBars("Standard").Visible = True
    Application.CommandBars("Formatting").Visible = True
    Application.CommandBars("Control Toolbox").Visible = True
    Application.CommandBars("Formula Auditing").Visible = True
    Application.CommandBars("Task Pane").Visible = True
    Application.CommandBars("External Data").Visible = True
    ActiveWindow.Zoom = 80
End Sub

Now this is a fairly simple thing - all it asks Excel to do is to set the Zoom on the page to 80% and to make the Standard, Formatting, Control Toolbar, Formula Auditing, Task Pane and External Data toolbars (which I tend to use fairly frequently) visible. So not too complicated. Feel free by the way to use this code if you would like to.

Anyway, when I downloaded a template from M$ Office Online, I ended up with a run-time error, which asked as it usually does for the user to either end the macro or to debug it. I chose to debug as I had a fair idea what was going on; a less experienced user might have ended, or even shut down Excel in fright. Anyway, this is one of those traps to look out for when you start customising programs like Excel: sometimes files (particularly templates) will have their own set-up routines or other macros, which can conflict with ones like the above. In this case it was a case of "a toolbar too far", and so I just commented out the offending line (the Control Toolbox toolbar) and let it run on.

And after all that, I didn't use the template. So what did I do? Just a quick and dirty autofill down the leftmost column and a note in the next two for each of my courses. I may format it in a nicer way later on if I feel like it and have the time. Works for now.

In case you missed it...

Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:33:17 GMT

The feed on the right from Barking Dog is my new incarnation, mostly (well, actually, completely so far) updated from Ubuntu.

The main difference between the two from a content perspective would be that here I tend to stick to rants and ramblings and questions of belief and other blather about life in general, whereas there I intend to contain it more neatly to the more technical side of my interests. That's the idea, anyway - it may be that I will end up moving to one or the other, but not for a while yet....

He's Back...

Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:26:22 GMT

Yes, it's true - not only is he back (sort of) keeping up with this ol' space thing, he's also succumbed to the truly awful habit of speaking about himself in the third person. Of course, that is going to stop immediately.

Hopefully, though, I'll manage to contribute regularly here once again. I was away for quite some time, mostly because there was a new baby in my life (I have two little girls now, it's sooo cool :D), and partly also because other areas of my life became quite busy. I started playing a text-based mmorpg called Marcoland also(which didn't help with the time commitments), but more about that later. I've also picked up other computer-related interests, in particular programming in C/C++ and a few other languages, which is a nice wee hobby, and very suitable for a geek like me. Keeps me out of trouble anyway. I have also been dabbling in Linux, and a few months ago I took the plunge, partitioned my hard drive and installed Ubuntu Linux on the other side, meaning I now have a PC with Multiple Personality Disorder. That also took me away from this space because I was spending more time playing in Ubuntu-Land than in Windows-Land. What else...oh yes, I changed career and left the classroom behind, started as a trainee actuary at the beginning of the year, which is another thing keeping me out of trouble. Full on but very cool, very challenging and ultra-geeky(in a good way). Soooo me.

If it sounds like I'm trying to make excuses for not updating my space, then I sort of am...I feel a little guilty as I did sort of leave without so much as a goodbye, which is not very good. I see there are a few people I remember still blogging away, which is cool, so I plan to pop in and say hi on a couple of spaces over the next few days, and maybe also apologise abjectly. Btw if you feel like you deserve an apology, just put a comment below with an indication of how badly I've treated you. I'm sorry. (That was an apology in advance.)

Take care and have fun.

Talking about Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - God Is In The House - The Mercy Seat (Live)

Thu, 01 Jun 2006 11:26:36 GMT

I just had to put this in here... Lili put this in her blog the other day, and it reminded me of times spent early on with a good friend who remains a friend to this day... a wasted youth is never truly wasted. Hey Smitty if ya see this it took me back to Allenby eh...

Quote

Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - God Is In The House - The Mercy Seat (Live)
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - God Is In The House - The Mercy Seat (Live)

Conspiracies can be fun...

Wed, 17 May 2006 21:06:33 GMT

Just finished reading the Da Vinci Code. I must confess that I was initially not going to, but I was just the tiniest bit intrigued by the idea of a conspiracy, and I always find theories involving secret societies and masonic rituals lots of fun. In case you didn’t know, there is a great deal of quasi-religious (usually Christian fundamentalist) claptrap out there claiming that the entire world is being run by one of a number of different secret societies, including groups variously named as the Freemasons, the Knights Templar and the Illuminati. These groups, one of whose members is always the president of the United States (he/she gets initiated directly after being sworn in – now that’s something you don’t see on Commander in Chief, or maybe you do, I wouldn’t know really), are in control of something known as the New World Order (not like the band formerly known as Joy Division, more like the Ministry song) which has been subtly converting everybody in the world to devil worship or homosexuality or some such perverse practice for the last two thousand years. They also variously practice astrology, witchcraft, tarot, pagan sex rites and other bacchanalian activities, depending on who’s doing the claiming. I know, I know – sounds like fun, right? ;)

The Da Vinci Code is just the latest of a number of books which touch on the topic of conspiracies like this – a couple of others include Philip K. Dick’s Valis (or was it The Divine Transmigration of Timothy Archer? I forget now, maybe both) and the sublime Umberto Eco novel, Foucault’s Pendulum. Now I happen to be quite the sceptic when it comes to ideas like this – my own thoughts on Gnostic spirituality being founded on my own Catholic upbringing. I was poorly educated in the Catholic tradition, with very little in the way of sex rites or anything like that. Perhaps if I had indeed been educated by the Jesuits (who any good conspiracy buff will tell you are all in on this too) I would right now be sitting in a freemason hall, getting my tarot done, drinking a psychedelic aphrodisiac, waiting for my turn in the sex rite. Ah well, what are you gonna do?

So anyway, there was a point to this ramble. Although the vast majority of the ideas in the Da Vinci Code are a bunch of rubbish (IMHO only, of course), there is one that stands out as having a grain of truth. Because among the claims the book makes, one is that the Church (Catholic of course) has from very early times, right back in the fourth century at the Council of Nicaea, suppressed the notion of the sacred feminine in religion. The idea of woman as a sacred vessel, a being capable of the ultimate miracle, the creation of life, is ruthlessly and even savagely oppressed and driven out of doctrine, thought and practice. The only woman that the writers of the gospels appeared to think any good of was the mother of Jesus, and in order for her to be any good at all, they had to strip her of any appearance of sexuality and make her a virgin. And of course the act of sex itself had to be demonized. Instead of a sacred and beautiful communication between two people, it became a bothersome duty of married people to perform behind closed doors, lights off and as little noise as possible, just long enough for impregnation to occur. Heaven forbid you should actually enjoy it.

[It goes far beyond this too – the suppression extended to any other religion at all, as these posed a direct threat to the Catholic domination of the world. When you think about it, it was sort of like a religious version of the business model for Microsoft – if there was a competitor in operation, start doing the same thing with better marketing and distribution and tell everybody those other guys won’t get you into heaven. ]

Anyway, I was just thinking about this because my wife is currently undergoing this very miracle – we are very soon to become parents to a second child, and it is a beautiful thing. Perhaps this is the limit of my own spiritual experience: this is the one thing that I acknowledge is a miracle.

Terrorism redefined

Wed, 10 May 2006 11:52:35 GMT

Is Gary McKinnon guilty of anything other than simply having a look around in a "secure " network? US prosecutors seem to think so - his transgression has been described as the "biggest military computer hack of all time". - UK hacker 'should be extradited'

But wait a minute - he was arrested in 2002 in the UK, and has admitted hacking into the Army, Navy, Air Force, Department of Defense and Nasa. And why? In his own words, "I was in search of suppressed technology, laughingly referred to as UFO technology." (Thanks Click)

That's right, he was hacking into these supposedly secure networks (which by the way he asserts were frequently playing host to a large number of hackers from all over the world), not to do any sort of damage to the US government or for his own personal gain, but to look for UFOs. All right, he admits - he knew at the time that he was not supposed to be there. So now he is being extradited to the US to face trial there, basically as a terrorist, facing up to 70 years in prison. I wonder if he'll learn his lesson. I think perhaps the US military is a little embarrassed about its lack of security, hmm?

A Letter to George

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:48:07 GMT

I was browsing through Reddit earlier on today, and saw this letter, which was written by a number of concerned physicists and urges the Bush administration to take a different tack on Iran:

"Using or even merely threatening to use a nuclear weapon preemptively against a non-nuclear adversary tells the 182 non-nuclear-weapon countries signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that their adherence to the treaty offers them no protection against a nuclear attack by a nuclear nation...
"...Once the US uses a nuclear weapon again, it will heighten the probably that others will too....there will be a greatly enhanced risk that regional conflicts could expand into global nuclear war, with the potential to destroy our civilization."

This letter was to be read out on April 26, across from the White House. I just hope someone listens...

I've been tagged...

Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:36:27 GMT

OK, so I have been tagged by Ingrid, which means I now have to name 6 weird things about myself, and tag 6 other people...I must say that although I thought this was a little lame at first, now that I have done it I have found it a very interesting exercise. I don't remember who it was that said, "First, know thyself"...so here goes, 6 things about me that are weird:

1. My personality type according to the Myers-Briggs test is INFJ...not particularly weird, although a little rare, sort of like type AB blood, but what is weird about that is the strength of the N component, which for those of you who haven't taken the test signifies intuition or intuitive thinking. Which is odd for someone who is biased towards the left brain, as I always thought I was...and yet, as intuitive as I supposedly am, I have never yet managed to pick a winning horse in the Melbourne Cup...go figure.

2. I nearly became a priest, or at least, I nearly decided to become one. Probably a good thing in hindsight that I didn't, considering that I have consciously decided to give up on organised religion altogether due to not being entirely sure there's anything to it at all...in fact, I taught in a minor seminary (grade school for prospective priests) for a couple of years, and lived a religious lifestyle while I was there. It was alright I suppose, but the thought of going the rest of my life without, you know, ...

3. While I was living in the above place, I almost got caught up in a tribal fight in Papua New Guinea. Well, not that I was involved directly, just literally in between two warring parties. Thankfully they turned out to be from the same team so to speak, but it was a bit frightening at the time...

4. Up until recently when I did an ego search on Google (I never did them that often, honestly... ) the first result that came up was an essay that I wrote when I was working for the Catholic church. I think the topic was something like, where do I find God? Sheesh...btw if anyone knows, please tell me, I've got some questions for her...;)

5. OK this one isn't weird so much as just gross, but to protect the innocent all of the major details have to be omitted. Suffice to say it involves New Years Eve celebrations, most of a 40 oz. bottle of black rum which to this day I can't even look at without feeling a little sick, a fence, a beach and a somersault. OK, ok, move along folks, nothing to see here...

6. I once had a dream where I met the devil. True story! We had quite a chat, offers of a lifetime of riches in exchange for my soul, yada, yada, yada...the freaky thing is that when I woke up, and I swear this is true, my bedclothes were moving by themselves, just like in the Emily Rose film. I cannot place my hand on my heart and say I was completely sober at the time, but there you go, it is still very vivid to me.

Ah well now, there you have it, 6 weird (sort of) things about me. Now 'tis up to those I tag, and as I pass the torch I emphasise that participation is entirely voluntary. Here they are, in no particular order:

Lili - Hungarian author and blogger par excellence;

Happy - her ebullient, cat-loving husky companion;

Annemiek - the ever-helpful and cheerful student with the awesome space;

Simply be free - the anonymous Canadian artist with a spirit searching for truth;

Mr Southey - British student/writer/historian/zookeeper/drinker with a very full Jacuzzi - I shudder to think what he will make of this;

Angie - Canadian philosophy student, unafraid to quote Supertramp and Eminem.

Have fun and stay safe...

Requiem for a goldfish

Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:55:16 GMT

The following is a poetic tribute to our dear friend Hammerstein, who passed away peacefully on Thursday. Hammerstein will be sadly missed by his lifelong companion Roger, his owners and friends Vic and Dave, and of course by all of us here. We're not really sure how old he was or whether he suffered much, but he was swimming upside down for a while which was sorta funny to watch but probably not very fun for him (we did try to heal him, honestly, but he was beyond the reach of medical science). We were looking after Roger and Hammerstein for Vic and Dave while they are away in northern parts. Vic was very understanding when she heard the news, and although she couldn't be there for the final flush, she did send this poem over, which we were very touched by - I'm sure you will be too.

An Ode to Hammerstein.

O Hammerstein you were a fish,
A pet that is, not a fish in a dish.
You were little and black with eyes that bulged.
No noise you made, no secrets divulged.

You lived in a tank on our kitchen bench
No wife you had, no love for a wench.
You lived with another, his name was Roger,
Your quirky mate, like the Artful Dodger.

Were you in love, the two of you?
I really don't mind I'm sure you knew.
Two male fish in love, it's a beautiful thing,
These days it's the norm, to be sealed with a ring.

You moved in with Sophs, when we moved away,
I always thought I'd see you again one day.
By then, I suppose, you were growing weary,
Your eyesight dim, your expression leery.

You were looked after well, your whole long life,
No problems, no worries, no struggling, no strife.
But now you've gone to the big loo in the sky,
And this poem is written, to say goodbye.

Time travel is for suckers

Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:23:27 GMT

Primer

One of the regrets I had on watching this film is that I had not done so earlier. Due to inexplicably poor film distribution in this country, Primer was only released in the last month on DVD here, and never got a run in the cinemas. This despite the fact that many of the films it beat out for the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance (including Garden State, The Woodsman and Napoleon Dynamite) were released here several months ago. Anyway, that's enough of my complaining. The reviews of this movie are a mixed bag from what I've seen, but personally I think it is one of the best and most inventive films I have watched in the last year.

The premise is, as you probably guessed from the title above, time travel. A couple of engineers, collaborating on backyard projects (someone at IMDb said they were error-checking devices), accidentally create a machine which allows a person to travel backwards in time. The film goes on to explore some of the various possibilities which the device will allow, but to its credit spends more time focussing on the shadowy morality of altering reality to suit oneself than examining paradoxes of time travel. I found it took a second watching to "get" a lot of the plot detail, and many people commenting at IMDb complained of poor sound quality and mumbling leading to missing key dialogue (the film was a first-time effort for writer/director Shane Carruth, and was shot on an extraordinarily low budget, which may explain some of this). However, I felt that this was one feature of the film that contributed to its feeling of authenticity and supported the fly-on-the-wall style. The dialogue tended to mimic real speech patterns and didn't follow the ghastly habit that Hollywood has of ruining interesting premises by dumbing the ideas down to the point where a slightly dim 5 year old can follow them.

In fact, even after a second watching many aspects of the plot are still not entirely clear to me, and I suspect that they would not be no matter how many times I watched the film, because the director intended this to happen. The timeline/s is/are linear but fragmented, in the sense that you are never quite sure whether....well let's not give away too much just yet. There are many (I hate to use the word) "twists" and the viewer is left feeling slightly disoriented by the end, and with many questions. Personally, I prefer to be left with questions than with answers myself, something that far too few films allow us now.

Parenthetically: The hype on the cover made much of the connection between this film and Donnie Darko, which also left the viewer with many questions, and Pi, which did have some stylistic similarities, or at least belonged in the same genre neighbourhood. I was reminded myself of the book The Man Who Folded Himself by David Gerrold (a sci-fi writer who wrote the "Tribbles" episode on the original Star Trek series). The nature of causality and what happens when time travel screws with it is a very interesting one, particularly when the time travel allows you to "double" yourself. Check it out if you get the chance - I may even write a post about it myself, if I get around to it...

Just wondering....

Thu, 13 Apr 2006 12:03:00 GMT

Is anyone else concerned about this at all?

Rice Calls for 'Strong Steps' Against Iran

I personally think there is cause for concern in the fact that any country enriches uranium for any use, whether that be power or WMD... however in the above article Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, is quoted as saying that the Bush administration "...should be extending non-aggression pledges rather than implied threats in order to weaken Iran's rationale for a nuclear weapons program." Which to me makes a lot of sense.

A sigh of relief...

Thu, 13 Apr 2006 11:07:41 GMT

Well, I have made it through to the end of the first term, and am still in one piece. I have to confess that there have been several times during the last ten weeks when I have felt pretty low about myself as a teacher . Mostly, of course, these are after a particularly difficult class or a stressful school event. However, on balance I would have to say that I have managed reasonably well (with room for improvement, of course). There have been frustrations - many students that I know were testing my boundaries, or were trying to distract everyone from their own lack of confidence, or lack of ability. There were many classes also that given the chance I would have tackled very differently, now that I know how they would turn out. However, that's what making mistakes is for, isn't it - next term will be better.

I have a lot to look forward to next term in addition to school - we are getting a new kitchen in a few weeks time, and will around the same time be changing service provider for phone, tv and internet (broadband at last!). Most importantly, though, in about 7 and a half weeks we await the arrival of Sophia's baby brother or sister (still not sure which). Apprehensive, elated, impatient? Yes, all of the above... I will write more about this shortly, this is the first time I have really felt like I could gather my thoughts on this enough to express myself. Weird, really, given I can usually blather on about all manner of crap without worrying too much about it - I guess it goes to show how important this is to me in comparison.

Hope everyone is getting a break over Easter, and it turns out a happy one...

The multiverse, or: How what we don't know can hurt us

Sat, 08 Apr 2006 13:00:38 GMT

The best guess at this point is that the universe we inhabit is for all intents and purposes infinite. In fact, some cosmologists hold varying conceptions of the actual (not imagined) existence of a 'multiverse', or an infinite set of all possible universes, of which ours is just one. Such a position reflects the philosophical stance of modal realism. Some of the consequences of this are interesting in a quirky way - for instance, there may be an identical copy of you about 10^10^29 metres (an inconceiveably large distance) away. Others are perhaps grander and more resonant with idealism - one states that all mathematically possible structures are actual, including those structures whose fundamental laws and states of being directly contradict our own. There are some, however, which are just a little scary...

Suppose for a moment that somewhere out there amidst the infinite possibilities, there is a community of beings (let's call them the Others) who, like us, are self-aware. They are, however, a long way ahead of us in terms of technology. As a result, the Others developed the capacity to build self-aware beings some time ago - in fact not only have they been busily building them, they have also created enormous virtual worlds for them to inhabit, and have been observing this inhabitation for quite some time now. Whenever one of these beings behaves in a way which for whatever reason is unsatisfactory, the Others simply erase it, or remove it from the virtual environment. God only knows what would qualify as unsatisfactory.

So if we accept the hypothesis of the multiverse above, then there is an actualisation out there somewhere of this imaginary scenario. In other words, the Others are not just an interesting diversion, they are real in an objective sense. And why should this scare us at all? Because there does exist the very real possibility that we are the beings under observation (Of course I use the royal we here...;)). Not that I think such a scenario could ever be verified unless the Others choose to reveal themselves directly, but if you take this idea seriously you could never really be sure that your behaviour is not putting you at risk of immediate erasure.

Well there's a cheery thought... if you like the idea of living in a simulation and want some pointers on how to avoid getting yourself erased, try having a look here...

The importance of being earnest

Sun, 02 Apr 2006 10:40:28 GMT

Thinking about the meaning of life and other mysteries...one of the central tenets of my belief system is that life has meaning, above and beyond the drudgery of getting to work on time, making sure we have turned off the stove, paid our taxes (did I mention I used to work for our tax department?), saving up for a comfortable retirement, the list goes on... this is not a religious conviction (as you have probably gathered by now ), but it is a conviction nonetheless...

It is fashionable today to be cynical, in the modern sense of the word, to prefer to be thought clever than sincere, to reject the search for meaning because it gets in the way of the search for power, or comfort, or influence. Earlier today I read a post on searching for meaning, which struck a chord with my own thought. Security is important, but we ignore the call of our heart at our peril. It is probably very uncool of me to say things like this, to not mask my true feelings, but there is a need for truth and beauty in the world. If we lose these, we have lost the greater part of our humanity.

Keep searching...

The EGG

Sat, 01 Apr 2006 14:14:49 GMT

I wasn't sure which category to place this under at first...

It is an interesting phenomenon that most people (my assumption) would agree with the statement that there is such a thing as consciousness. And yet, it is something completely intangible, a quality people possess that defies our ability to measure it directly. We can assess consciousness of individuals simply by observing their speech, their actions and reactions. It is something that we see as being completely internal, so if someone is deeply affected emotionally or intellectually by an event, we can know this only by their outward revelation.

The Global Consciousness Project is an attempt to view this idea from a different perspective - what if consciousness was a real and measurable force, which effected real and measurable change in the world?

The science behind the idea is not really complicated - the idea is that the consciousness of many people, by an as-yet undiscovered mechanism, reduces entropy, or in other words, enforces structure on the universe. This can be measured by analysis of data gathered from a large number of random number generators. The hypothesis (or at least part of it), is that during moments where events have occurred which affect large numbers of people, the resulting qualitative change in their consciousness will result in a (statistically significant) loss of randomness in the numbers these generators produce. Constantly monitoring these produces the ElectroGaiaGram (EGG) which should then reveal these momentary anomalies.

Personally, I'm not sure that there is any substance to it, just yet. But it is an intriguing idea - I think I will keep an eye on it...

Good and Evil

Fri, 31 Mar 2006 13:30:31 GMT

I saw an interesting idea raised on Way of the Mind recently, and rather than comment there, as it was posted a while ago, I thought I might muse a little on it here. The idea of Good vs Evil – I have mentioned in past entries here that one of the problems with speaking of these concepts is that it is not easy to define either of them in an objective way.

What is good? Most people would acknowledge their understanding of what the word “good” means. Almost from birth, we are told either that we are or we should be good boys and good girls. Usually this means “well-behaved” or compliant with the wishes of people in authority. But as we grow older, we come to appreciate a different meaning – one that implies certain things are to be desired more than others. These things are good. Certain things are desired not to be – these are bad. And still others are viewed with horror or disgust by people, who describe them as “evil”.

The problem with these ideas is this: the implication contained in the use of these terms, given the authority they carry, is that they are universal, objective truths. Something that I describe as good has this goodness as an intrinsic quality, a moral stamp of approval (incidentally, this is related to why it is a bad idea to tell children they are good or bad boys or girls – you never know what idea they will carry with them through life). But we all know as thinking adults that what one person describes as good will be described by another as bad, or even evil. Sometimes, what a person describes as good one day will be seen by the same person as bad a week later. For example, sunny weather is generally acknowledged as a “good” thing for beachgoers, but too much is “bad” for farmers.

So is there any objective test we can apply to something to see whether or not it is good? Some people, viewing some concept or other (God, life, peace, harmony, love) as primary, contend that any event, thought or action which promotes this concept is good and any which promotes the negation or the opposite of this concept is bad, or even evil. Sounds reasonable…right? Only trouble is, whether or not you can tell which is which…

More to come shortly.

Talking about The Shipwrecked

Mon, 27 Mar 2006 11:14:42 GMT

Quite simply, I am amazed by this story, and I think you should have a look at it. There are a lot of good writers out there in these spaces, but IMHO Lili Gabor would be one of the most interesting and original I have seen. Not to mention the fact that she manages to do it in two languages...

The Shipwrecked

Unbundle already!

Mon, 27 Mar 2006 10:51:28 GMT

So the Government has repeated its claim that we still don't have the broadband access we need - Govt mind still open on better broadband

Which doesn't change the fact that this same government could have fixed the whole problem in one foul swoop when the issue of unbundling was initially raised. I still have a dial-up account, which is a pain and means that I often can't get to do a lot of stuff that other people can do on the internet. I can't play a lot of games (probably a good thing), I can't download movies (definitely a good thing), but the thing which really pisses me off about dial-up, and the thing that is increasingly going to be a problem for business, is the sheer inconvenience. Really, it is just sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo slow that it just shuts off many options for both personal and business users. But we just cannot afford broadband - or what the corporate monster Telecom inadequately describes as broadband (according to them, anything from 250kbps upwards qualifies). Basically they (Telecom) have been overcharging since day 1 for this service, and because they control the access to the infrastructure, they control the price. Noone, with the possible exception of Telstra, has been able to do anything about it, because the network has been in Telecom's hands - now it's time for the government to do what they should have done years ago and stop allowing Telecom to call the shots.

Viva la revolucion!

A thought on reality and change

Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:45:31 GMT

An alternative view of our place in the universe - are we passengers or drivers?

Mystery Train of Thought

How not to answer a trig question

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:48:23 GMT

The universe is an illusion

Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:42:41 GMT

The following is an extension of a thought I had while talking about the impossibility of change. Zeno and Parmenides imagined an interval divided up infinitely, so that any motion at all would require the traversal of an infinite number of intervals within a finite period. The contradiction they saw in this was that the notion of performing an infinite number of tasks (disregarding the fact that the tasks get progressively shorter as they are completed) would require an infinite amount of time, as each task takes some time to perform.

[Aside: Even the advent of the differential calculus has not managed to resolve this issue completely. Many people who have studied calculus have been inclined to merely state that the limit of the lengths of the interval as we approach infinity is 0, and that the infinite sum therefore converges, meaning that the sum of the times taken is actually finite. The notions of limits and convergence, once they were placed on a rigorous analytical foundation, seemed to satisfy most mathematicians, but many philosophers still maintain that there is a problem with performing an infinite number of tasks, regardless of how long they take.]

So Zeno after deriving this contradiction concluded that motion, and with it all change, was illusory. Just for a moment, consider what the universe would actually be like if this was true. We see change occurring because we believe the universe works that way - we are trained to think in terms of cause and effect. What if in fact there is no such thing as a cause or an effect? What if everything we believe to be the case in the world we "know" is simply a rationalisation?

For example: I felt like a cup of coffee just now, so I got up and switched the kettle on. Everything I have ever experienced up until now has conditioned me to think that this action of mine is the reason for the water inside the kettle boiling. An alternative explanation for this is that the water did not in fact boil at all. I did not even get up - I just thought I did.

Now I'm not trying to rip off the Matrix here. I'm just imagining a situation in which we do not have the free will we think we do. We do not have the power to change the universe, the world or the channel on the TV not because these things don't exist, but because there is no change. We see change because we want to see it, because we want to be powerful and to make a difference in the world. The world, however, was always going to be the way it is right now, right now. Everything we see around us has always been and always will be completely predetermined, down to our own "actions", and their "consequences".

Now imagine that one day you discover a time machine. This machine will transport you forwards in time as far as you want to go. The great thing from the perspective of someone living in a predetermined universe is that there can be no paradoxes created by travelling in time - because you were always meant to discover the time machine. You were always meant to do anything you end up doing. And that is also the problem with this universe - in the sense that the powerful being is the one who controls its own destiny and position, we are completely powerless. If we are to travel in time, and wish to, for instance, prevent a great tragedy, we are completely powerless to actually decide whether or not we will do this. If we are meant to do it, we will. If we are not, we won't.

I don't know about you, but I like calling the shots.

Is there a fox?

Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:45:45 GMT

I picked this up on Way of the Mind recently, just thought I should do my bit also and get this out there. If you have concerns about security when you are browsing the Internet, and if you think Internet Explorer could perhaps be improved *snigger* , well there is an alternative. Mozilla Firefox is a browser which performs better, faster and more securely than IE. I have been running Firefox for about a year now, and I have to say it is better than IE in almost every way. I still use IE for those sites that need it, for instance MSN games needs to be accessed with IE, but I much prefer the fox to the tortoise.

The reason I mention it now is that there is a new version out (actually it's been out for a while now), which I have just installed myself. Check it out, and enjoy.