Thoughts for the day.

I object to any kind of doctrine – regardless of whatever positive messages surround it – that ultimately compel the believer to take actions that place of the value of a person or people over another.

I object to any kind of doctrine that causes the believer to suspend acceptance of reality by shutting down the ability to observe, to think, to learn, and to act.

This is not the same as caring for one’s family. That is based on love (which are based on my beliefs, yes), but from a broader and more general standpoint, I’m legally accountable for their actions, and am bound by the law to value them over others by taking care of them, to a certain age.

I'd like to think this largely reconciles with my assertion of secular humanism, but am not completely sure.

Quote of the day - 03-26-2011

"Local-organic is the gold standard."

More here - http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_22627.cfm

Runner-up quote -

"Unfortunately, "less toxic" is a dangerously relative term!"

Violence in hockey and the demise of the NHL.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/02/21/concussion-hockey-sports-marcel-dionne.html

Seriously, don't people ever learn?

Look, I'm not saying the NHL game was pretty, nor is it for the meek. Hockey is a physical sport, there's no doubt about it.

But the fighting, the headshots, and more importantly the deliberate intent to injure - how has that ended up being part of the game; and more importantly, why is it so 'staunchly' defended?

Getting the puck in the net (and using the stick as a tool to accomplish that) is apparently no longer as important as 'getting back' or 'getting even', or 'teaching them a lesson'.

You'll find the majority of people who defend it call it 'The Code'. I call it Thriving of the Goons.

If you want to know how the NHL regressed from being a sport played by professionals whose desire was to win the big prize -the Stanley Cup -  to 'Gladiators on Ice', look to two events which reinforce this ingrained concept of the 'The Code' or the rights of the idiotic -

1. 1967 Expansion - acceptance of the Goon.

In 1967, the NHL expanded beyond six teams. During this time and thereafter, there was a significant increase in fighting, brawling, headshots, and deliberate intents to injure. Why?

According the NHL's own audit of the situation, although there were only six teams, the quality of play was considered quite high. The expansion to include additional teams not only introduced the league to new cities, but added a new groups players that were less-skilled. In order to effectively compete with the already-established style of play, these new players relied on goon-style tactics (fighting/brawling, headshots/high-sticking, and a deliberate attempt to injure). Consequently the overall quality of the game decreased. Along with this audit, came an tacit acceptance of this decline from the NHL.

The problem today, is that generation - and subsequent generations since - have reinforced this style of play to such an extent, that it is now the standard for the NHL. As easy as one could to blame this entirely on the players, the bottom-line responsibility for this occurring lies with the NHL itself for initially and subsequently accepting this new style of play as the standard.

So where did this acceptance come from?

2. Televised Hockey across North America - the demand for ratings and revenue and the encouragement of the Goon.

The fact is, watching hockey (or any sport for that matter) is a form of entertainment. And anytime or any way large entities that are businesses like the NHL, the broadcasters, or the corporations that now own the teams; feel they can increase their rate-of-return on their investment, the better for them.

Great goals scored, great saves, that sort of thing isn't deemed 'sellable'. These entities don't think that's worth getting people to buy more beer, buy more shirts, yell at the top of their lungs (though you know those things to help that pesky little thing called winning the game).

But fights, headshots, injuries - that attract lots of attention. That generates controversy. And I think these entities' minds, attention fills seats with people who love this kind of entertainment and hence generates revenue and allows them to maintain control over the game.

(Never mind the fact that off the ice of an NHL rink, doing those kinds of things are usually considered assault and battery in most places in the US and Canada).

In a sense, it's as if the NHL is deliberately sanctioning mindlessness, violence, and stupidity in the name of revenue and control.

And with hockey, it's less about the television per se (that really only helps the broadcasters and the advertisers). It's all about attracting enough attention from televised controversies to fill as many seats in the arenas. So what if those people like fighting over actual hockey? I have a theory most of these goon-lovers find the actual game boring, which is why they feel the need to drink.

We have Don Cherry and Hockey Night In Canada to largely thank for constantly encouraging and growing this mentality across Canada, and the US. It's no surprise, they are both owned by the CBC, and the goal for them is revenue.

So what is the result today?

In professional sports like baseball and soccer, the concept of a goon doesn't really exist. You don't win those games by beating up the other team. But somehow that isn't the case with NHL hockey.

And of course, the only way to fight fire is with more fire. So teams 'combat' goons by hiring more goons (pretty neat way to perpetuate a monopoly, eh?).

Is it working? Is the NHL as popular compared to other professional sports?

I'd say no.

What's it going to take for the NHL to realize how self-destructive this is not only for the players, but for itself?

What's it going to take to get fans to stop the bloodlust and return to demanding that NHL hockey become a game again, and not a boxing match on skates?
Death perhaps?

Perhaps the answer may lie not with the adult fans, but parents who choose to no longer involve their children in this madness.

I think by then, it'll be too late for the NHL.

Changes, progress, people deciding their future ...

... and yet here in America, nothing much changes if at all.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–2011_Middle_East_and_North_Africa_protests

Why is that?

I find it ironic that in countries Americans don't deem as 'democratic' change in political leadership is happening and being driven by it's people (whether it's for the better is a different discussion), but such change doesn't seem to occur here.

The shitty things people do to each other ...

.. often times occurs in the name of the law and is somewhat graphic.



I'm not going to begin to figure what the dynamic is that leads a group of adults (trained law enforcement officials no less) to either beat up a 15-year old suspect, and/or particpate in covering it up. Honestly I don't know where to begin.

More information here - http://act.colorofchange.org/sign/houstonpd?akid=1896.1200954.QSaITl&rd=1&t=2

My Dream Rock Band

Like a lot of people who've performed rock music on stage or in the studio, I've always wondered what it would be like to play in a band with all of my idols.

 

To that end, here's my dream band -

• Drums John Bonham
• Bass Tom Hamilton
• Rhythm Guitar James Hetfield
• Lead Guitar Slash
• Piano Elton John
• Keyboard Tony Banks
• Lead Vocals Jim Morrison
• Backing Vocals Bon Scott

The consequence of inadequate testing

• Wasted money?
• Lost time?
• Damage to individual civil liberties?
• Harassment?

How about all of them and more?!

Well it's all here -

The SPOT program is yet another example of the TSA’s rush to adopt new procedures and technologies without adequate testing and without including privacy and civil liberties safeguards. The GAO found that the TSA launched the SPOT program without first validating the scientific basis for the program and despite substantial disagreement within the scientific community about the effectiveness of these behavioral monitoring techniques.

Hit's the spot - doesn't it?

Quote of the day - 02-12-2011

"When a Republican says, "We have no other choice," what he means is "Because I would never in a million years tax the rich instead." "

Indeed - look at these right-wing US State Governors - what fucking cowards.

Why? Go here to see - http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/calling-out-national-guard-gop-govern

American Education - the result of private interest influence.

I've always believed in the idea that the most important thing an individual can do for themselves - and those they care about - is to live for themselves.

And I don't mean that in a 'selfish' or hedonistic way.

I mean don't let others do your observing, learning, thinking, and doing for you. And don't do that to others.

Those two sentences in a nutshell are I think the most important lessons one can ever impart on one's kids, or future generations for that matter. Being able to do those things objectively, rationally and humanely; as well as directing it towards positive ends, are the bests chances that society has a whole for surviving, thriving, and evolving in a positive way.

Okay, enough of the liberalish happy talk.

The best place to encourage that in kids, is in their education.

That being said, look at this quote to get a sense of where that is heading - at least in this country -

All children should have access to a good public school. And public schools should be run by officials who answer to the voters. Gates, Broad, and Walton answer to no one. Tax payers still fund more than 99 percent of the cost of K–12 education. Private foundations should not be setting public policy for them. Private money should not be producing what amounts to false advertising for a faulty product. The imperious overreaching of the Big Three undermines democracy just as surely as it damages public education.

It never fails to amaze me how often times, things that fuck up society, often times are not individuals, but rather non-individual entities, like corporations. Or in this case, institutions like those referred to above.

Anyways, read it here - http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=3781, as well as here - http://www.prwatch.org/node/9917.

While I don't have all the answers, one has to start somewhere. I figure the best place is observing and understanding where our educational future is going.

I have to say, right now, it doesn't look good.

Hot Dogs.

Yesterday evening, I came home and found a magazine that contained an article about the ‘best hot dogs in America!’

Okay.

Normally I don’t try to pay attention to such things – who the fuck wants to hear the ramblings of a bunch of overweight fatsos talking about the joys of a meat product likely made of animal internal organs - as well as those clean assholes - wrapped in a bun likely loaded with tons of high-fructose corn syrup - but something (okay likely psychological marketing on the part of the magazine publisher) compelled me to read the article.

What a waste of time that was.

For starters, all the pictures of the hot dogs looked like a sausage, a bun, and like each reviewer threw up on them to ‘dress them’.

Secondly not a single mention was made of the condiment ketchup. To me, this is a revealing trait. It shows what snobs these people really are.

Now I’ll be the first to admit that eating meat with something sweet isn’t always very appealing. Okay one exception is sweet and sour spare ribs, but that’s it!

But there’s something to be said about ketchup. Yes it’s sweet, but often times I find it provides a nice balance to the injected flavor the sausage usually have in the hot dog. For me it’s very similar to why I have ketchup on a hamburger.

Things like relish are usually way too sweet and too strong in flavor such that it overwhelms.

Maybe I’ll try mustard along with ketchup on my next hot dog.

But cheese? Raspberry mayonnaise?

No thank you.

Consolidation of the media – 21st Century media outlet to be absorbed by 20th Century has-been.

RIP Huffington Post – to be bought by AOL.

And you thought your day started out well.

I really like(d) Huffington Post. They had everything – bloggers, journalists, and the best part was the commenting.

However, I started seeing some bad signs – the increased controlled comment moderation, the partnerships with various traditional media (AP, MSNBC) hiring of traditional establishment media figures (Howard Fineman).

And now this … bought out by a washed up, spun-off, has-been company that Time-Warner ate up and puked back out (i.e. ‘spun off’).

So sad.

This person sums it up -

I stick to my original thoughts that this will dilute the HuffPost brand, represent a loss of independence in an already overly-corporatized media landscape and finally; why bother? Huffington does not need the money. The whole point of being Huffington is that you don’t need the money so you can speak your mind.


Not anymore.

Well what do you know? We are all getting fatter.

And here I thought it was just a theory that I thought we were all getting heavier.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/215711.php
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2810%2962038-7/fulltext

Findings


In 2008, age-standardised mean total cholesterol worldwide was 4·64 mmol/L (95% uncertainty interval 4·51—4·76) for men and 4·76 mmol/L (4·62—4·91) for women. Globally, mean total cholesterol changed little between 1980 and 2008, falling by less than 0·1 mmol/L per decade in men and women. Total cholesterol fell in the high-income region consisting of Australasia, North America, and western Europe, and in central and eastern Europe; the regional declines were about 0·2 mmol/L per decade for both sexes, with posterior probabilities of these being true declines 0·99 or greater. Mean total cholesterol increased in east and southeast Asia and Pacific by 0·08 mmol/L per decade (−0·06 to 0·22, posterior probability=0·86) in men and 0·09 mmol/L per decade (−0·07 to 0·26, posterior probability=0·86) in women. Despite converging trends, serum total cholesterol in 2008 was highest in the high-income region consisting of Australasia, North America, and western Europe; the regional mean was 5·24 mmol/L (5·08—5·39) for men and 5·23 mmol/L (5·03—5·43) for women. It was lowest in sub-Saharan Africa at 4·08 mmol/L (3·82—4·34) for men and 4·27 mmol/L (3·99—4·56) for women.

Internet Crackdown in Eqypt? Thank the know-how from the good people at Boeing!

That is, thank the Boeing-owned Narus that is.

http://act2.freepress.net/go/1989?akid=2263.9645701.VvzSVj&t=7

Okay, to be fair, they are not the only one who uses Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technology -

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_62125.shtml

In addition to Narus, there are a number of companies, including many others in the United States, that produce and traffic in similar spying and control technology. This list of DPI providers includes Zeugma Systems (Canada), Camiant (USA), Procera Networks (USA), Allot (Israel), Ixia (USA), AdvancedIO (Canada) and Sandvine (Canada), among others.

These companies typically partner with Internet Service Providers to insert DPI along the main arteries of the Web. All Net traffic in and out of Iran, for example, travels through one portal -- the Telecommunications Company of Iran -- which facilitates the use of DPI.
When commercial network operators use DPI, the privacy of Internet users is compromised. But in government hands, the use of DPI can crush dissent and lead to human rights violations.

I wonder if such technology hasn't already been used to hunt down the Wikileaks folks?