Thursday, July 31, 2008
Breaking News!
Christina smashed her body into tiny bits! Well, OK, just one little bit. After a cycling incident she has a broken finger. The official state Christina news agency (Don't Call Me Chrissy!) reports that a complete imbecile was worried about the police doing cycling traffic stings at a junction and so slammed on the brakes thus smashing Christina's finger. Other reports that the express train that is Christina on a bicycle plowed through an innocent commuter are nothing but vicious lies and irresponsible scuttlebutt.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Bureaucracy Follow-Up
About a month ago I posted my frustrations about the silliness of excess bureacracy with regard to our plans to put a hot tub in a back yard to reward my wife for being fantastico! I outlined how the very process of rules based on fear rather than rules based on efficacy resulted in huge motivation to ignore the rules entirely. Here's the post, http://hopefulmuser.blogspot.com/2008/06/bureacracy.html
So, having now got a bid from a fully licensed contractor, with permits and the whole shebang, and a bid from a guy recommended by some friends I can tell you what the mark up is from bureacracy. The officially legitimate bid was almost exactly three times bigger than the illegitmate one (and more accurately met our needs, and took half as long to get, too).
So, having now got a bid from a fully licensed contractor, with permits and the whole shebang, and a bid from a guy recommended by some friends I can tell you what the mark up is from bureacracy. The officially legitimate bid was almost exactly three times bigger than the illegitmate one (and more accurately met our needs, and took half as long to get, too).
Monday, July 21, 2008
Global Warming, I'm Not That Worried
The biggest threat to humanity is global warming, but I don't think it's that much of a threat. This is because I believe that the responses of humanity to situations of danger are far more capable, rational, and speedy than most people think they are. The projections that people make with regard to global warming are over the course of decades, but people do poorly is estimating the changes in people and technology over decades.
If people around the world continue to produce greenhouse gases at the same rate they are presently (and if technology does not change the numbers are likely to go up rather than down) then global warming will be a nightmare situation in fifty years. But this seems to me to be enormously unlikely because there is huge motivation for technological improvement. For technological advances to happen there needs to be basic materials and techniques available and motivation for scientists to achieve breakthroughs. Well, the basic theories and techniques to provide alternative energy sources abound. We have the prototype, beginning technology for wind power, wave power, and nuclear power. But the big thing we have is the biological ability to alter organisms to produce alternate fuels. For example, hydrogen is a readily available resource, the waste product of the fuel is water, and it works just fine in present day technology (you can run your SUV on hydrogen with minimal changes to the vehicle). The problem with hydrogen is that it is such an excellent fuel that it combines with oxygen whenever possible to produce water. The trick in making hydrogen fuel is to seperate hydrogen from oxygen using less power than is produced in burning the fuel. Plants do complicated stuff of this sort all the time in photosynthesis, using sunlight to trigger a process that produces oxygen from carbon dioxide (and everyone knows that you can burn carbon with oxygen, that's just wood burning). So, a genetically designed organism may be able to use sunlight to produce hydrogen. Our future energy plants may be vast shallow pools under glass in the desert, gently bubblng hydrogen.
The second thing we have is motivation. The first motivation is the safety of humanity (and of the rest of the animal kingdom) but this is a motivation at a distance. The real motivation is that a technology solution would make the inventor trillions of dollars. The inventors of such advances would become richer than oil companies. If there's one thing that will get people with lots of money to invest in research, it's the prospect of having much, much more money as a result. Before global warming became a reality there was not a motivation for alternate fuels, there were cheap, easily obtainable fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) with supplies to last the world until 2080 at the earliest (oil would go first, there's no shortage of coal or natural gas). People would work out alternatives sometime in the future, perhaps starting in 2050 or so. But now people will choose alternative fuels over oil, even if it is somewhat more expensive at first. The result is large investment in research for alternative fuels.
The next worry is whether these alternatives will be invented in time. In order to make a difference there's going to have to be a major change in actual used technology within thirty years (and by then Portland, Oregon is going to have a meditteranean climate and millions of species will have died). People think this is a serious concern, but I think people have no idea how quckly this modern world is producing new technology. Take computers, for instance. Thirty years ago, in 1978, computers were essentially room-sized counting machines. Now there is a world-wide network and about one billion computers in people's homes. This isn't simply a case of making a useful device and selling it, this involves investment on a monumental scale, and a whole new segment of infrastructure. There are now fiber-optic cables running around the world running from house to house. And the power of the machines would be beyond most people dreams in the 80's. Remember your 64k personal computer? That's a k at the end, we now measure in g's. That's a million times bigger. A million.
And then finally, the reason why I'm writing this today is because I read this article which shows that although I have had this impression all along, there's now some evidence that I might be right. http://www.newsweek.com/id/140066 Basically it seems likely that within five years there will be an organism that provides fossil fuels that we can just keep burning in our cars, but will use co2 in its' production. This possibly will make the net effect of driving cars a reduction in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In ten years it might actually be true that the best way to reduce global warming will be to drive your car as much as possible, so that companies will have to match demand by producing more fuel. It is conceivable that in thirty years the problem will be that the process of driving cars will be removing co2 at a dangerously high rate.
However, this doesn't mean that real problems aren't happening now. Species are disappearing, people are starving, we are losing things that we may never see again. So, I am very confident about this problem being solved, but until then I will keep doing what I'm doing. Our car has 70 miles on it this month, we drive less than 3,000 miles a year. We don't have an air conditioner, and we wear sweaters inside during the winter. An energy policy is the third most important factor in my voting decisions (the first two are not killing people, and healing everybody, usually called foreign policy and health care). So, do what you can now, but don't worry too much about the future, it'll be OK sooner than you expect.
If people around the world continue to produce greenhouse gases at the same rate they are presently (and if technology does not change the numbers are likely to go up rather than down) then global warming will be a nightmare situation in fifty years. But this seems to me to be enormously unlikely because there is huge motivation for technological improvement. For technological advances to happen there needs to be basic materials and techniques available and motivation for scientists to achieve breakthroughs. Well, the basic theories and techniques to provide alternative energy sources abound. We have the prototype, beginning technology for wind power, wave power, and nuclear power. But the big thing we have is the biological ability to alter organisms to produce alternate fuels. For example, hydrogen is a readily available resource, the waste product of the fuel is water, and it works just fine in present day technology (you can run your SUV on hydrogen with minimal changes to the vehicle). The problem with hydrogen is that it is such an excellent fuel that it combines with oxygen whenever possible to produce water. The trick in making hydrogen fuel is to seperate hydrogen from oxygen using less power than is produced in burning the fuel. Plants do complicated stuff of this sort all the time in photosynthesis, using sunlight to trigger a process that produces oxygen from carbon dioxide (and everyone knows that you can burn carbon with oxygen, that's just wood burning). So, a genetically designed organism may be able to use sunlight to produce hydrogen. Our future energy plants may be vast shallow pools under glass in the desert, gently bubblng hydrogen.
The second thing we have is motivation. The first motivation is the safety of humanity (and of the rest of the animal kingdom) but this is a motivation at a distance. The real motivation is that a technology solution would make the inventor trillions of dollars. The inventors of such advances would become richer than oil companies. If there's one thing that will get people with lots of money to invest in research, it's the prospect of having much, much more money as a result. Before global warming became a reality there was not a motivation for alternate fuels, there were cheap, easily obtainable fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) with supplies to last the world until 2080 at the earliest (oil would go first, there's no shortage of coal or natural gas). People would work out alternatives sometime in the future, perhaps starting in 2050 or so. But now people will choose alternative fuels over oil, even if it is somewhat more expensive at first. The result is large investment in research for alternative fuels.
The next worry is whether these alternatives will be invented in time. In order to make a difference there's going to have to be a major change in actual used technology within thirty years (and by then Portland, Oregon is going to have a meditteranean climate and millions of species will have died). People think this is a serious concern, but I think people have no idea how quckly this modern world is producing new technology. Take computers, for instance. Thirty years ago, in 1978, computers were essentially room-sized counting machines. Now there is a world-wide network and about one billion computers in people's homes. This isn't simply a case of making a useful device and selling it, this involves investment on a monumental scale, and a whole new segment of infrastructure. There are now fiber-optic cables running around the world running from house to house. And the power of the machines would be beyond most people dreams in the 80's. Remember your 64k personal computer? That's a k at the end, we now measure in g's. That's a million times bigger. A million.
And then finally, the reason why I'm writing this today is because I read this article which shows that although I have had this impression all along, there's now some evidence that I might be right. http://www.newsweek.com/id/140066 Basically it seems likely that within five years there will be an organism that provides fossil fuels that we can just keep burning in our cars, but will use co2 in its' production. This possibly will make the net effect of driving cars a reduction in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In ten years it might actually be true that the best way to reduce global warming will be to drive your car as much as possible, so that companies will have to match demand by producing more fuel. It is conceivable that in thirty years the problem will be that the process of driving cars will be removing co2 at a dangerously high rate.
However, this doesn't mean that real problems aren't happening now. Species are disappearing, people are starving, we are losing things that we may never see again. So, I am very confident about this problem being solved, but until then I will keep doing what I'm doing. Our car has 70 miles on it this month, we drive less than 3,000 miles a year. We don't have an air conditioner, and we wear sweaters inside during the winter. An energy policy is the third most important factor in my voting decisions (the first two are not killing people, and healing everybody, usually called foreign policy and health care). So, do what you can now, but don't worry too much about the future, it'll be OK sooner than you expect.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Face of Evil Update.
It's three months since my last post about Larry, The Face of Evil. Larry is now seven months old and weighs nearly sixty pounds. Basically we are expecting him to end up as a small, black wolf. Larry is a pretty well trained wolf, he'll sit, stay, come, leave etc. as long as it is worth it to him, which seems to be most of the time. His general attitude is one of intense friendliness, he loves everyone immediately and unquestioningly, and he loves them intensely and physically. This is fine about 60% of the time, but I am collecting good data on the prevalence of dog phobia.Larry now sleeps through the night, or at least doesn't bound through the house leaving a deafening racket of destruction in his wake. No, now Larry is generally quiet except for chewing on something quietly. If you have never tried to sleep with the sound of chewing somewhere in the dark, I don't recommend it. There's something about the sound of chewing in the dark that produces questions. "What is being chewed?" is a common one. "Why can't I stop listening?" is another. "Should I get up and check?" is the bad one as it leads to thought and debate. Then there's always the primitive ape portion of my brain that screams, "Something with big teeth is chewing on something somewhere out there!!"
I wondered three months ago if I would love Larry by now. The answer s "No." I feel responsible for him, I have some affection for him, he's a good dog. But love is not what I feel. Larry has increased my stress, my workload, certainly the amount of anger I feel. Often he is simply a living chore. But other times it is most pleasant to walk around in the sunshine with a dog scampering about at one's feet. It's getting better, the battle of wills in our conditioning of each other is going the right way (as far as I can tell, TFOE's schemes are deep and subtle) and in another two years Larry will probably be a great dog that I can really appreciate. Two years.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Dreams
Last week my mother asked me if I have any dreams. I had to think about that for a while. Now literally I have dreams at night, but I rarely remember them at the moment, which is probably a good thing overall. Apparently my unconscious doesn't have anything vitally mportant to say to me just now. But do I have the life dreams, the aspirations that are commonly thought to be the point of life. The american dream is to have a dream and then realize it.
What I have are hypothetical situations. Should I win the lottery and have millions of dollars I have a number of pre-made plans from which to select. In fact, the main reason why my wife and I spend the $5 a month on tickets is to ad the spice of possible reality to these dreams. We don't for a minute think we will win, but the possibility is worth $5 a month in that these dreams have a chance (a vanishingly small chance) of happening. But I don't this counts as a dream. These aren't lifelong ambitions towards which I intend to work.
The final category that comes close to dreams are little images I have of possible futures not involving massive strokes of luck. I have a picture of myself sitting on a creaky, weathered rocking chair on a porch looking out over a beach. Things are quiet and peaceful, it's a picture of contentment. Another picture is of a mountain meadow with a few sheep and a dog, smoke curling gently out of a hobbit hole. These seem to suggest some yearning for peace and quiet, away from the demands of people. As my life goes on I find that this is happening more and more. People around can't be relied upon to stay the same, to be the same people, to interact in the same ways. As such I am finding more and more that it's nice to have some social interaction with people, but my friendships have become more superficial, more distant.
However, my third and last image of a dream for the future is myself in an irish pub as an old, crusty guy, playing the tunes and singing the songs with young and old alike.
What I have are hypothetical situations. Should I win the lottery and have millions of dollars I have a number of pre-made plans from which to select. In fact, the main reason why my wife and I spend the $5 a month on tickets is to ad the spice of possible reality to these dreams. We don't for a minute think we will win, but the possibility is worth $5 a month in that these dreams have a chance (a vanishingly small chance) of happening. But I don't this counts as a dream. These aren't lifelong ambitions towards which I intend to work.
The final category that comes close to dreams are little images I have of possible futures not involving massive strokes of luck. I have a picture of myself sitting on a creaky, weathered rocking chair on a porch looking out over a beach. Things are quiet and peaceful, it's a picture of contentment. Another picture is of a mountain meadow with a few sheep and a dog, smoke curling gently out of a hobbit hole. These seem to suggest some yearning for peace and quiet, away from the demands of people. As my life goes on I find that this is happening more and more. People around can't be relied upon to stay the same, to be the same people, to interact in the same ways. As such I am finding more and more that it's nice to have some social interaction with people, but my friendships have become more superficial, more distant.
However, my third and last image of a dream for the future is myself in an irish pub as an old, crusty guy, playing the tunes and singing the songs with young and old alike.
Monday, July 7, 2008
War.
I'm against it. Here's why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGwUrmNI6wY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG48Ftsr3OI&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EZwnDVsbgWc&feature=related
My sweetheart, don't click on the links, I don't like you to be sad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGwUrmNI6wY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG48Ftsr3OI&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EZwnDVsbgWc&feature=related
My sweetheart, don't click on the links, I don't like you to be sad.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.
There it is, right in front of you. Today is beautiful, special, unique. Within today is everything you need for bliss. But just like you cannot see the beautiful flower if your lens is not focused, you cannot see heaven in this moment without adjusting the focus of your mind. So, slow down, relax, be grateful, and notice the beauty, the love. The whole world smiles at you if you take the time to notice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)