In fact, the industry I currently work in thrives on a feedback loop.
Even though English is not the most widely spoken language in the world, the industries and markets it is used in are all highly influential and strategically important.
For instance, because many, if not all web standards and Internet-based communications were designed in the English-speaking world, in order to jump into the game, you really need to learn a bit of English. The same can be said for the sciences and various fields of engineering (i.e., most of the basic and applied research in these specialties are published in English). Wikipedia has a good entry explaining the positive feedback loop and why English will probably continue to dominate and grow (yey for my livelihood!).
I mention this because I came across a recent piece from The Economist discussing political segregation and neighborhoods, here is the money quote:
“We now live in a giant feedback loop,” says Mr Bishop, “hearing our own thoughts about what’s right and wrong bounced back to us by the television shows we watch, the newspapers and books we read, the blogs we visit online, the sermons we hear and the neighbourhoods we live in.”
If there is one thing that I do not miss in my life and times in Texas it is residents that have all the tools and access to information, yet only look at certain material that they agree with. I am hardly saying I’m the picture perfect example of cosmopolitan thinking (which of course, I am), but let’s look at an easy example: Christian fundamentalists.
Many of them (at least the ones I was familiar with), only read books written by fundamentalists. Only watch movies and tv shows that are Christianized or music that is blessed by various I-Heart-Jesus groups. Many conversations are entirely unoriginal as they are merely reverberations within an echo chamber.
I should point out that there is absolutely nothing wrong with hanging out or talking to like-minded individuals. Nor am I favor of criminalizing this kind of selective or discriminatory behavior (i.e., if you don’t want to hang out with non-Fundamentalists, go for it). But as noted in that piece in The Economist, much of the mantra devolves into petty group-think.
And fundamentalists are hardly the only group that can be identified and faulted for creating self-fulfilling feedback loops. I’ve met so many hippies out here that personify all of the pot-head stereotypes and unsurprisingly, they all hang out with one another and reinforce that lifestyle.
Again, feedback loops are neither inherently good nor bad but as The Economist notes, when taken to the extreme they have the potential to become violently divisive (or in virtual-space as seen in games like World of Warcraft: the Horde versus the Alliance…). Yankees/Dodgers, Star Trek/Star Wars, Lakers/Celtics, Tyson/five-year olds.
Even at the grocery stores here in azn land, you cannot escape products and isles erratically labeled “organic.”
It really makes one wonder, is everything on the other isles and in other packages… inorganic? Up until this past decade, have we all just been eating tofu-ish matter (and soylent green)?
Speaking of spin marketing, here is The O’Reilly Factor re-spun into 60 seconds:
Someone finally had the balls to tell environmentalists to shove their anti-nuclear power bellicosity.
My favorite print mag lists 10 ways to be more green, most of which require taking action opposite of what hippie Luddites extol.
Of those listed I particularly liked farming forests, accepting genetic engineering, living in cities and of course, nukes. All of them are fairly well-written and filled with a number of interesting studies.
The other green revolution
A quick point regarding genetically modified crops. Nearly all of the food the developed world currently eats is genetically modified in some manner or other and I don’t mean artificially concocted in labs.
Fruits and vegetables have naturally evolved over the course of thousands of years adapting to new climates and geographic locales. However, since the advent of agriculture, humans have cultivated them to meet our own needs. For instance, the domestication of the banana began in SE Asia several thousand years ago and continues today.
Unfortunately much of the sensationalism today surrounds what could happen if some researchers design a hybrid that includes the genes that people are allergic to. This in itself is not a bad thing either unless they refuse to tell others about it (they aren’t transparent which amounts to fraud). But this does not seem to have occurred.
If anything, various consumer groups (plus you and I) have continually tested and studied the produce over the last 30 years and haven’t found much to be alarmed at. As a matter of fact, farmers have been artificially selecting, breeding and splicing flora for centuries without anyone turning into Frankenstein (in fact, we have all gotten a lot sexier looking compared to our ancestors).
The easiest example of this: think of the local orchid down the road where seedless watermelons are grown. These farmers of course are super evil because they figured out how to cross the chromosomes of different seeds to create everyone’s favorite summer fruit (I still have a dozen or so small watermelons growing inside of me because I swallowed seeds as a kid).
As far as the accidents or deaths that have occurred most involve packaging errors (toxic seepage) at the manufacturing level or adverse effects to the fertilizers used — not by the new foods themselves.
Putting the culture back into the ag
Incidentally, the university I attended is one of the larger agriculture schools in the country (both in terms of physical size and research volume). The “farmers” at A&M spend a lot of time doing cell cloning and gene manipulation to create some bad ass veggies, like onions that contain all of the betakarotene of carrots and are also naturally resistant to various bugs and diseases.
In fact, back in the summer of ‘04 I met Leonard Pike the scientist behind the famed 1015 onion and the BetaSweet carrot. He discussed these developments at length and currently works in a series of buildings you might mistake as your stereotypical biology lab, complete with vials, tubes and genetic markers hanging on the wall.
Does it taste like chicken?
Which brings us to in vitro meat — meat that can be grown in petri dishes. This little guy has been in the news lately because PETA is actually doing something productive by offering a $1 million award to someone that can create synthetic meat that looks, tastes and digests just like the natural variety. Not a new idea, but certainly laudable for the possible hygienically safe, mass produced meat that could be available at super low prices.
And speaking of automated production, vertical farming uses skyscrapers as an alternative form of farm ground. It is yet another area entrepreneurs are looking to capitalize on (i.e., installing hydroponics stations on each floor and harvesting plants or even in vitro meat). It’s a win-win for those concerned about buying local produce due to “food miles” — thus in the words of Sir Mix-a-Lot: jump on it.
This is in response to a similarly titled post from a friend of mine, Bob Murphy. Before I proceed I should mention that we both go way back, almost 7 years and I have him to thank for helping me out with a number of questions I have regarding economic phenomenon. Most recently this includes several questions in my interview with Peter Schiff as well as my previous article on Petrodollars and Inflation.
However, this post is not necessarily directed at him, but rather is an excuse to close a number of tabs I have open in my browser.
To get started, be sure to read Bob’s post about why ID is scientific. I posted a comment at the bottom and have been meaning to respond to the rebuttal.
Better yet, be sure to read through the issues he raises in these three sequential threads (123)
He made the following comment in reply to me:
Good question, but I’m going to punt on it. I haven’t kept up with this stuff since I really got into it about 3 years ago. So the obvious stuff: Cataloguing ever more examples of “irreducibly complex” features of organisms. E.g. if there were compelling neo-Darwinian stories for everything except the human iris, then that would be one thing. But if there are tons and tons of cases where the biologists have to say, “Well, maybe some day we’ll come up with an explanation. You can’t prove that we won’t!” then the case for the neo-Darwinian story is weaker and weaker.
As luck would have it, a brand new video was made that quickly discusses the evolution of the vertebrate eye. Furthermore the wiki entry on the evolution of the eye is extremely comprehensive.
While I am not an optometrist I do believe this material makes a convincing case for natural selection.
Furthermore, if you have a chance be sure to watch Chapter 8 of the excellent video, Judgement Day, which dramatizes the Dover decision.
When ID supporter Michael Behe was on the hot seat in Dover he made his case regarding bacteria flagellum (see the transcript of the video here). His is the lead proponent of the theory of irreducible complexity which essentially says certain organelles are too complex to have evolved from one step to another because there is no evolutionary need to produce the intermediary steps.
However, he was rebuffed at the hearing by David Derosier, the very scientist he tried to quote as supporting his theory. Derosier is still an active expert in the bacteria flagellum field (which is obviously gigantic and super sexy). In the documentary he noted that in fact the little mechanical tail that whips back and forth probably evolved from the rod found in Yersinia pestis, the same little guy that caused the Bubonic Plague.
In fact, the rod has all of the foundational underpinnings that the flagellum currently uses! QED Derosier.
As far as evidence piling up in support of “irreducible complexity” it appears this is untrue too. For instance the clotting system found in mammals that fish lack is something Behe suggests is IC. Yet, based on nearly two decades of research by Russell Doolittle, this again appears to be incorrect.
The hits keep coming
While this post is hardly designed to be entirely comprehensive of the issues discussed, I’d like to throw one more errata into the ring.
It seems that our friend Mr. Generic Lizard appears to be capable of evolving on new homesteads. On an island in the Adriatic, five wall lizards evolved to a point where their digestive systems and heads changed dramatically due to copious amounts of flora it could fearlessly gobble up (… I know, genocide! is what Ben Stein will cry).
Another point from Bob that I’d like to counter is this:
E.g. physicists can use experiments to try to determine the charge on an electron. But it goes beyond the boundaries of science to ask why the charge should be that, and not some other number.
Last week I quipped back, ‘I don’t think that modern-day speciation would somehow unravel because fossil hunters digging through geographic strata are unable to detail exactly why a positron has a mass of 511 KeV.’
This is not the first time I’ve been confronted with this situation. Another friend of mine, Libertarian Jackass (yea, he used to run that popular blog) posted a comment here over three years ago (I never forget!):
This is ridiculous. Even IF you can explain how Chemical X mixes with Chemical Y to produce XYX, you STILL can’t explain why it must be so. Even if you can explain why the sky is blue, why must it be blue? You’ll still never be able to answer those questions…
In retrospect, my response to him was retarded. However, I do believe there are natural explanations for this phenomenon. For instance, diffuse sky radiation is the reason why the sky is blue.
Furthermore, as I mentioned to Bob, the underlying question of “why do certain particles have certain charges” does not in any manner change the explanatory power of biological evolution. Just because a biologist may be currently unable to explain a particular cellular activity or engineering process does not mean that a top-down designer is the creator.
In addition, ignoring all of biology for a minute, what does ID have to say for astronomy? I know what Hugh Ross thinks, but he’s an OEC. And this is an area that I consider myself fairly well-informed and believe that ID has zero explanation for. The fine-tuning argument is entirely backwards. The reason why bacteria, let alone humanity was able to thrive on this rock was not because of some miraculous supernaturalism, but rather because every bit of life adapted to every extreme condition threw at it.
It’s the same reason I doubt there is any complex quasi-intelligent life anywhere in this galaxy: it is very difficult, near impossible for life to survive and evolve to our relatively complex conditions. Miracle, no. Testable, yes.
And for those who have seen Expelled, every one of the cases in which Stein states someone was fired over academic freedom was absolutely wrong. Not one person lost their job or was denied tenureship for their advocacy of ID.
As I mentioned to Bob, from all accounts it appears that with Expelled, the advocates of ID wasted a perfectly good opportunity to educate the masses with regards to the science of ID. Instead they focused on sensational politics, personalities and academia. What about testable or duplicatable explanations?
While walking through Samsung Plaza yesterday in Seohyeon, my friend and I were bothered by some theology students.
Last year I mentioned that there is a large base of evangelical christians here in Korea and that they arguably waste their English skills harassing foreigners.
While I am not promoting censorship or some kind retaliatory action against this activity, it is nothing short of annoying salesmanship — or as business guru Seth Godin calls it: interruption marketing. And the only reason it is tolerated is because it is shrouded behind a multi-billion person identity group.
For example, my British friend and I were just about the only foreigners in the modern, extremely busy courtyard and were walking to an empty table when two well-groomed Korean men with perfect English interrupted our day to sell us religion.
Here is the dialogue:
Korean man: “Hi, I am a theology student that needs help filling out a survey, could you assist me with this?”
My friend: “Not really, no.”
Korean man: “Are you a Christian?”
My friend: “No.”
Korean man: “So you don’t read the bible?”
My friend: “No.”
Korean man: “Don’t you know the bible is the word of god?”
My friend: “God does not exist.”
Korean man: “Don’t you believe human life is fragile? You could be walking across the street and get killed by a car.”
My friend: “Sure, that is a danger. But you don’t have the solution to that.”
Korean man: “What about asteroids, comets and meteorites? They can kill you at any instant. Doesn’t that worry you?”
My friend: “Not really.”
Korean man: “Don’t you know you are living in sin?”
My friend: “Good-bye.”
At that point my friend and I walked into a convenience store and bought a couple of drinks, sat down at the table and laughed about the whole incident.
I am seriously not making up the part about the seminary student asking us about cosmological phenomenon blowing us up.
This 45-second sales pitch can be summarized along the following: he was trying to reach out to real, seemingly uncontrollable fears in order to sell us phony insurance. And then guilt us for not wanting to join his club.
His insurance method is hardly new or novel. Furthermore, it is no different than the sales pitch used by countless theologians representing hundreds of religions and belief systems.
Seriously, it was no different than someone trying to peddle magnetic rocks or dowsing rods. And a question for the self-righteous members of the evangelical movement: why is this presentation and marketing strategy laudable and someone doing the same thing under a different name (e.g., Islam) wrong?
Would you not be annoyed if a group of Muslims or Pastafarians interrupted your day, without your personal permission, to tell you why you are evil and risk dying at any time? If yes, than I implore you not to financially support anyone that uses this technique to sell their wares (e.g., most missionaries, street preachers).
While I do not wish him or others like him any ill will, I think it is a complete waste to prey on the fears of the uneducated and believe it would be a better, less annoying approach to simply try to be my friend first before condemning me to hell. Perhaps that is why many Mormons are such god damn successful businessmen… because they don’t come across as assholes most of the time. But then again, they aren’t real christians, right? They’re a cult because they marry their cousins — an arrangement which went out of style centuries ago.
A couple years ago I discussed the world of artificial land creation/reclamation. One of the motivating reasons behind creating your own land is to quote Borat, you get to be the king of the castle.
I mentioned that one of the endeavors being organized involved a (equatorial-based) seasteading group.
It was being spearheaded by Patri Freidman, an engineer at Google (and grandson of Milton Friedman). At the time I didn’t think it would go past the drawing board and shot Patri an email to see what the status was. He cordially replied that it was taking baby steps towards a more public expansion a couple years down the road… and that he would keep me abreast of new developments.
And surprisingly, guess what I just found in my inbox?
Today the Seasteading Institute officially launched. And it has received $500,000 in seed money from Peter Thiel (the co-founder of Paypal and VC behind Facebook).
I for one welcome this concept and wish them the best of luck.
With desalination and solar power, it is conceivable that a group of hardworking, creative individuals could tie together something as simple as barges along the equator. The equator, which is not necessarily the first or only location SI is looking at, is ideal for several reasons.
First, it is located in the doldrums and as a result, very few storms pass over the area. In fact, only one hurricane/typhoon in recorded history (Vamei) has ever meandered near the equator. And based on satellite measurements, waves typically range no greater than 3-5 meters in height. Thus, if the location is placed in international waters (200 miles) the structures should be able to outlast most of what mother nature throws at it without having to worry about climate being diverted by land masses.
Second, the equator receives more daylight year round than any other spot on Earth. Therefore, inhabitants can use solar panels to effectively power electrical equipment including desalination machines and hydroponics stations. While the quantity may be impractical to rely on as a cash export, it could provide most of the caloric intake for the residents.
Third, if placed around -120 E, the community would be in the same time zone as the West coast, such as LA or Seattle. As a result, they are conveniently available to provide tax-free outsourcing services such as web or software development. This is an idea that was tossed around by a couple of firms, one of which (SeaCode) wanted to anchor a cruise ship off the coast of California and fill it with programmers who would be paid tax-free for their labor.
As a libertarian this appeals to me on many levels as well, however a small word of caution. Even as the logistics appear to be conquerable, one factor that will always remain a variable are blue-water navies such as those operated by the US or the UK.
Operating gambling websites like Antingua does or hosting adult material like Sealand did has incurred the wrath of politicians that unfortunately enough, control carrier-based task forces.
But then again, this assumes a cynical sort of realpolitik, something that never occurs in reality, right?
As the saying goes, if there is a will, there is a way. And I think Patri has both. After all, if large oil platforms are designed to be nearly self-sufficient why couldn’t other usable designs be concocted and implemented?
Several weeks ago serial entrepreneur Jason Calcanis put together a list of do’s and don’ts for starting up a company. Several of his points set off a huge firestorm in the echo chamber that is the blogosphere.
One of the followups that I did find of interest was a note from Robert Scoble who suggested that every entrepreneur should read: “The No Asshole Rule.”
While there are several different types of Young Earth Creationists (e.g., AiG, CMI, Discovery) many of them have attacked methods for dating the earth and cosmos at ages longer than several thousand years. Typically they demonize carbon-14 and other radioisotopic dating methods.
Using astronomy as a setting, what energy source are most of the unmanned space probes that zoom across the inner solar system powered by?
Do they use solar energy? Do they use big Energizer bunnies? Do they use dope?
In a nutshell, the heat produced from these decaying isotopes (typically Plutonium 238) is converted into electricity and stored in batteries. There are no smoke, mirrors or boogiemen involved in this process.
And as seen with these probes, the rate of decay matches up to the predicted limits and as a result some of the probes will become completely silent in the next decade.
Numbers and nincompoops
Pu-238 has a half-life of 87.7 years, a phenomenon that has been observed and tested numerous times.
Using similar testable, observable methods Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5730 years and is commonly used to date objects younger than 40,000 years.
Potassium-Argon dating has an extremely long half-life and is usually used to date minerals older than 100,000 years.
And the best part about all of these elements, if you do not believe or simply disagree with the ages found by the researchers, you can conduct your own tests.
The same thing cannot be said about supernatural phenomenon, which, by definition, are not natural and therefore not testable.
Note: again, the reason why the field of astronomy can be a powerful ally in dealing with creationists is that it cannot be blocked. Anyone can access it each evening with just a few rudimentary tools. And it happens that in this case, you can launch those tools into space and receive measurements through an odd means: by not receiving signals due to a lack of radiative mass.
More than 10 years ago, back in 9th grade, I was in instigator of sorts.
I was raised under the belief that Young Earth Creationism was the way, the truth, and the light. And in biology class I was flustered that my teacher only spent time discussing the theory of evolution.
So, believing that my views were being persecuted by this “evil secularism,” I had voiced my concern to my mom who in turn discussed it with the principal. He in turn spoke with the biology teacher who was asked to carefully explain to the class that we should all keep an open, skeptical mind about all observable phenomenon.
At the time I remember giving her the evil eye and wrote down anything contentious she might say. But to her credit, she was very passionate about teaching the material and was quite accommodating to any questions.
It would take another 4 years before I came around to recognize my own religious-oriented views were short-sighted and just plain wrong and thus, the teacher is certainly one person I’d like to bump into again to discuss my own evolution.
I mention this because the creationist movement recently put together a new film by Ben Stein called Expelled. In watching the preview the audience is left with the impression that there is an evil conspiracy to root academia of religion, deism and alternate creation stories.
Its writers also suggest that there is a huge ideological battle, a methodological rift in the biological sciences — one that natural selection and traditional science is incapable of explaining. Furthermore, Stein et al suggest a super new paradigm called Intelligent Design is more than capable for explaining the natural phenomenon we see today.
While I’ll hold off judgment until I have a chance to see it myself, I would like to point out several germane issues.
First, as the NY Times and millions of blogs noted, the producer of the movie expelled biologist PZ Myers from the public screening of the film, despite the fact that PZ was in the actual movie and had legitimate tickets. Talk about ironic.
Second, as documented by NOVA and heard in the recent Kitzmiller case, intelligent design is nothing more than a repackaged name of creationism. This case allowed the ID movement to showcase its best arguments to the world yet it offers no testable framework and to paraphrase the judge: is religion not science. The 2007 PBS documentary about this issue is concise and to the point, plus it is available for free and can be viewed online: Judgement Day, Intelligent Design on Trial
Third, even the Templeton Foundation, which awards huge monetary awards to researchers to reconcile religion and science has still not received any proposals for actual ID research.
Lastly, several acquaintances refuse to believe transitional fossils exist. So, here are a couple of quick videos showing the various fossils we do know of right now. And if you still aren’t sold on dynamism, the organized church has been around 2000 years — I think it is only fare if we gave paleontologists a few more years to collect more skeletons.
After all, just imagine the early astronomers in the 17th century trying to explain the light-year.
[Note: and as sad as it is to admit, as a teenager I even emphasized that theory of evolution it was "just a theory" -- like it is merely a hunch. That is a dumb argument because the definition of theory in science is different than the way laymen use it. Gravitation is "just" a theory as is pathology and well, every scientific framework. Testability is the key ingredient that evolution has and ID does not.]
I’ve done telemarketing and door-to-door sales in my past. I am glad that I have never come across this insane lady:
As my buddy Ray says, “with crazy bitches like her in mind news stories where something ‘ends in violence’ make much more sense.” For example, “A routine donut purchase ends in tragedy.”
Peter Lynch aptly suggested that the easiest and perhaps most profitable way to jump into the stock market was to “invest in what you know.”
I follow the tech industry, it’s what I know.
However, unfortunately during the credit crunch and continued dollar devaluation, major portions of the industry will be hard hit with lower demand. And as TechCrunch recently noted, start-ups and venture capital firms are being hit hard with liquidity issues: 20% of Valley Startups Can’t Get to their Cash.
And because the Fed continues to lower rates, the dollar will continue to lose value relative to other currencies. Thus, anyone holding dollar-denominated assets will end up as net losers each and every day. In fact, over the past 6 weeks, the dollar has reached a new low against the Euro, the Pound and even Gold.
With that said, there are still profitable diversification strategies that can put you in the black over the next few years.
The following is a list of financial experts I recommend if for no other reason than the fact that they understand how monetary and fiscal policies can negatively effect the value of your assets:
Jim Rogers - he’s spent years traveling the world (see “Adventure Capitalist“), doesn’t trust the Fed devaluing the dollar and is thus bullish on commodities, oil and precious metals. See his recent interview on CNBC and the other books he has written.
Doug Casey - like Rogers he has lived and worked in dozens of countries, looking for profitable ventures to take part in. For further reading visit his archives at EscapeArtist and LewRockwell.com.
Peter Schiff - see my interview with him here. He accurately predicted the housing bubble, credit crunch, decline of the dollar, rise of gold/oil and a slew of other financial metrics. Namely because he fully understands how the Fed distorts financial markets through open-market operations (e.g., change in the interest rates). In addition, Schiff’s own investment firm also looks for global, non-dollarized ventures to invest in. You can read some of his opeds at Safe Haven.
DealBreaker - is an extremely popular financial blog that was founded and run by John Carney who happens to be a fan of free-market everything and is also critical of Fed manipulation and bank bailouts. His brother, Tim, recently wrote an interesting book on these topic as well. Also, you’ll like DB if for no other reason than it helps keep you up to speed with the lingo used in that industry.
Paul Kedrosky - in the past he has worked as a venture capitalist and financial analyst. He operates a popular blog and always has some interesting insights (I’ve either quoted him or used his info in a number of my own articles: 123). While he may not be a libertarian or free-market purist like most of the others listed above, he is contrarian in his own way (and travels too).
If you’re interested in seeing what dollar doomsayers are investing in, here is a recent thread discussing individual portfolios.
And lastly, here is a very interesting debate between Peter Schiff and Art Laffer (namesake of the Laffer Curve). It should be noted that the debate is 18 months old. Laffer certainly looks like an idiot now:
I could be completely wrong, but some friends and family members were wondering why I don’t think the PRC will swim across the straits in September.
- 2009 Deaflympics will be hosted in Taipei
- 2009 World Games will be hosted in Kaohsiung
- 2010 World’s Fair will be hosted in Shanghai
- 2010 Asian Games will be hosted in Guangzhou
- Dozens of other international expos, tournaments and festivals will take place between large cities across the Straits throughout the next several years (who can look past the 2009 International Wine Expo hosted in Taipei?)
There is an old parable attributed to Frederic Bastiat which states that when goods and services do not cross borders, armies will. One of the underlying reasons for why this observation typically holds true is that businesses and patrons can pressure the political class and military brass to be more diplomatic in negotiating with foreign states.
As Hollywood films portray each year, if voluntary cultural exchange continually takes place, even superficial friendships and relationships can illicit a strong desire to protect the life and limb of others.
Why?
Because at the end of the day, the owner of a foreign business does not want his building destroyed or employees sent off to the refugee camps.
And just as the PRC has come under scrutiny for its recent crackdown of protests in Tibet, any similar encroachment on Taiwan’s turf would amount to a huge media circus and an outcry from some of the largest, influential companies in the world (namely semiconductor firms).
And in terms of politics and sporting events, there are several examples of how these tournaments have been thrust into the spotlight. For example, in response to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan the West boycotted the 1980 Olympics hosted in Moscow. Likewise, the Soviet-bloc boycotted the 1984 hosted in Los Angeles. (Not to mention the politically charged 1936 games in Berlin or the 1974 Munich hostage crisis)
Changing their tune
Based on the results of the 2008 legislative election, the pro-independence movement were swept into minority status. This in turn has given momentum to the reunification politicos (primarily the KMT) which is believed to be a shoe in for the presidential election in 6 days.
One of the current theories that has gained traction with coworkers, expats and Taiwanese nationals I have met in the last few months here in Kaohsiung is that when the KMT comes back into power, they will ultimately create a blueprint for political reunification along the lines employed by Hong Kong and Macao.
This is ironic in part because 60 years ago Chiang Kai-shek (”Cash My Check“) and others involved with the creation of the KMT were opposed to a PRC-led China. Must be the fluoride in the water…
Shooting satellites
I have mentioned elsewhere that the PRC does not appear to have the military capability to defeat Taiwan or the US in a conventional warfare (primarily because of the analysis by professor Geoffrey Forden: 123).
However, seeing as the current neoconservative administration has bled the US economy to a standstill and overcommitted its imperial armies, the next administration may be unable to properly fund or field a rested and fully-equipped naval task force necessary to counter the PRC in the straits — which by treaty, the US government has pledged to protect. [Note: this is an odd occurrence if for nothing other than the fact that the US government spends more than $1 trillion on the military budget, or the combined total of every other military budget by a nation-state. Be sure to also read "Why the US has really gone broke" by Chalmers Johnson]
And one last twist. Remember the brouhaha back in April of 2001 between the US spy plane that crashed into the Chinese jet fighter? Guess what the American’s were trying to locate and study?
The PRC navy operates several destroyers that employ the Russian-built SS-N-22 Sunburn anti-ship missile which is capable of destroying nearly any vessel in any surface fleet. Guess where one of the ships was located relative to the spy plane? [As an aside, be sure to read Gary Brecher's finest: 12. More on cross-strait wargames: 12].
With all of this said, I still am bullish on a peaceful coexistence for the near-future and recently wrote about this in “The Vatican Still Recognizes Them, Right?” In the words of Lew Rockwell, commerce and trade can ultimately trump the state. And in 2007 alone, cross-strait trade grew 16% to more than $100 billion.
That’s a whole lot of entrepreneurs, salarymen, and stockholders to piss off.
Five months ago I mentioned that David Ditzel, cofounder of Transmeta and chip engineer extraordinaire, was looking to invest/develop in a new chip design.
This past week it looks like he’s settled down with a little company called Intel.
If it weren’t for a looming recession, I might be a bit more bullish on the cool gadgets he’ll be able to bring to market.
As a side note, you might be interested in the debate between rasterization and ray tracing that pits Intel against discrete GPU makers like Nvidia. For instance, see the latest shot by the chief scientist at Nvidia over at PC Perspective.
Many of the expats and Westernized asians that I am friends with keep up with North American politics, primarily the US presidential race.
Back in Texas there were very few instances that the topic of politics was broached at a bar (at least the cool ones I visited). However, in both Seoul and Kaohsiung many of the headline issues are openly discussed by non-citizens. For instance, the owner of the local Belgium pub that I frequently visit is quite the news junkie. As are most of his patrons. You should hear them talk about the Taiwanese independence movement…
Anyways, most of the expats I’ve met along the way have all pretty much have a hard on for Che Guevara and other “lovable” socialists. And in the current election if they are not pulling for Nader or Gore they’re quite the Obama fans.
I mention this because about the only two or three economic issues that we all agree on are: against maintaining an empire, anti-(corporate) welfare, and anti-central banks. [note: my own thoughts are over at the Mises blog.]
However out of all 20 or so presidential candidates from this past year, there were only two iconoclastic congressman from both sides of the political isle that also represented the views from above: Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. And the weirdest thing is that I’ve met a couple expats that seemed up-to-speed about these two guys, lauding their positions over pitchers of beer.
And as luck would have it, both recently won in the primaries and will remain curmudgeons in the House. Thus, giving foreign observers like my Belgium friend another reason to enjoy watching CSPAN.
One of the few television shows that broadcasts most of its material in English is the National Geographic channel (very similar to Discovery and Animal Planet).
Last night I was flipping between it and that incredibly awesome Sandra Bullock film: The Net.
Anyways, this episode on NG dealt with sexual selection in the age of cosmetic surgery. While I’m not saying you shouldn’t go under the knife, the researchers noted that because plastic surgeons alter us to look super sexy, the ugly genes are still passed on. (see: professor Randy Thornhill of the University of New Mexico in “An In-depth Look into Sexual Attractiveness in Humans”)
For instance, while not everyone in LA with fake boobs fell off the ugly tree, the secondary sexual traits (like big lips and mammaries) send a false positive to men. Because nature has trained us men to look at certain body parts for strong and healthy partners, the beauty is literally skin deep. As a result, the guys that end up fathering children with these unnatural beauties could ultimately create a generation of uglier than normal kids.
While cosmetic surgeons will certainly be able to tune their progeny up to snuff, everyone is going to have to wait until genetic engineers figure out a way to replace the fugly parts of the genome with the fantabulous.
Note: if you are debating whether or not to spend money to look extra sexy, I’d err on the side of sexiness. Jameson might be fake but she’s definitely not ugly.
Whether you like it or not, Wikipedia has become entrenched in many peoples lives.
Even many of the expats I meet throughout my globe trotting adventures are quite fond of it. In fact, in the event that we are wrong about something my friends and I often joke that we’ll just log in and change the entry.
This typical involves something drastic, like deleting the entire entry for Taiwan (because you know, it doesn’t technically exist).
And unsurprisingly The Onion explains the urge to modify the mundane with a probably-true story.
Someone posted a remark in the last post about the Namdaemun gate fire. The guy was mad that I made a couple of jokes about what probably happened. While I shouldn’t have to defend the humor industry I would like to point out that I was right.
It turns out that a 69 drunk man was responsible for the fire. In fact, the same guy set fire to a palace a few years back too.
I should note that I hardly think of myself as an expert on Korea, but I’d like to think that I gained a bit of knowledge of its culture, including its darker side (e.g., business men passed out and vomiting all over the place in public and no one stops because it is so common place).
This topic is tangentially related to DreamWorks in the graphics department. That image of the gate burning was fairly intense, up there with some high-quality CGI flicks.
And to update my previous post about Pixar and rendering capabilities, I recently came across how Shrek the Third was rendered.
Some numbers:
3000 servers
20 million CPU render hours compared to 10 million for number II and 5 million for the original movie
Adroit polymath Michael Shermer had a chance to discuss his new book at Google recently. While you might not agree with everything he says, he raises some interesting points regarding evolutionary biology, technology and why humans began to trade thousands of years ago.
Over the past few years I have discussed the half-truths that proponents of publicly-financed stadiums promote in their press releases. [See: 123]
I currently live in a city of 1.5 million that is set to host the World Games next year. The various sporting events are sanctioned by the official Olympic committee as it is used as a proving ground for new Olympic events in the future.
While one of the stipulations of hosting the World Games involves not constructing new stadiums (the facilities already have to exist), somehow that message was mistranslated to the politicos here.
A couple blocks away from my school I can see the construction crews walk around on the scaffolding of a new taxpayer-financed stadium. While the ballyhooed Solar Stadium is relatively “green,” I can think of a million other useful things that could be done with that money, including: give it back to the taxpayer.
Yesterday, in an op-ed with The Philadelphia Inquirer professor Rick Eckstein makes the case for why building stadiums never generates the revenue promised by its proponents:
There’s only one problem with this scenario. It’s not true. Never has been. They do come, but cities are not saved. Over the past two decades, academic research has generated literally hundreds of articles and books empirically challenging the alleged economic wonders of new stadiums, even when they’re part of larger development schemes. I have been studying and writing about publicly financed stadiums for more than 10 years and cannot name a single stadium project that has delivered on its original grandiose economic promises, although they do bring benefits to team owners, sports leagues and sometimes players.
There are many reasons why this same song and dance plays out. Arguably the number one reason is that only privately financed endeavors have the incentive to design and develop an enterprise that is profitable.
On the other hand, government construction projects do not have to be effecient or even profitable because they are financed by faceless taxpayers who are typically disenfranchised and unable to reverse the political tide.
For the record, while I enjoy watching and participating in athletic events, I don’t think it is fair to use taxpayer funds for - anything in general - let alone entertainment purposes.
If the political class is going to dole out the dishonest revenues on public projects, how about filling in the potholes on Fumin, Yucheng, Mingcheng or Boai? Or investing in dust-blocking barriers that can be placed around construction zones? Or actually completing the metro? What point is there of hosting tens of thousands of tourists and athletes when the surrounding infrastructure falls apart under the current load?
For more on sport subsidies, see the following Cato publications: 123 (all in pdf).
Someone finally had the balls to tell environmentalists to shove their anti-nuclear power bellicosity.
If anything, various consumer groups (plus you and I) have continually tested and studied the produce over the last 30 years and haven’t found much to be alarmed at. As a matter of fact, farmers have been artificially selecting, breeding and splicing flora for centuries without anyone turning into Frankenstein (in fact, we have all gotten a lot sexier looking compared to our ancestors).
Putting the culture back into the ag
Does it taste like chicken?
This is in response to a similarly titled post from a friend of mine, 
However, he was rebuffed at the hearing by David Derosier, the very scientist he tried to quote as supporting his theory. Derosier is still an active expert in the bacteria flagellum field (which is obviously gigantic and super sexy). In the documentary he noted that in fact the little mechanical tail that whips back and forth probably evolved from the rod found in 
While walking through 
A couple years ago I 
Second, the equator receives more daylight year round than any other spot on Earth. Therefore, inhabitants can use solar panels to effectively power electrical equipment including desalination machines and 
While there are several different types of Young Earth Creationists (e.g., 
More than 10 years ago, back in 9th grade, I was in instigator of sorts.
Peter Lynch aptly suggested that the easiest and perhaps most profitable way to jump into the stock market was to “invest in what you know.”
I could be completely wrong, but some friends and family members were wondering why I don’t think the PRC will swim across the straits in September.
Why?
Shooting satellites
One of the few television shows that broadcasts most of its material in English is the 
Over the past few years I have discussed the half-truths that proponents of publicly-financed stadiums promote in their press releases. [See: