Wednesday, November 16, 2011
The Weekest Links
UPDATE: As of 2012 Jan 18 I am migrating all of these posts to http://weekestlinks.blogspot.com/ I found them to be distracting from both the purpose and visual appeal of this blog. Sorry if you had linked to any.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Human Resources
I received an email from Human Resources the other day, because I chose not to fill out the race section of my employee profile. Below you can see the original email, and my response.
-----Original Message-----
From: XXXXXX XXXXXXX
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 5:21 PM
To: XXXXXX XXXXXXX
Subject: FW: Important HR Communication
XXXXXX is required by law to report the ethnicity of each of its employees to the federal government once per year. Currently, we have no record of your ethnicity on file and our reporting deadline is coming up. So that we can accurately report your ethnicity, please take a moment to indicate in a reply email the category(ies) relevant to you.
1 - White (Not Hispanic or Latino): A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.
2 - Black or African American (Not Hispanic or Latino): A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.
3 - Hispanic or Latino: A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race.
4 - Asian (Not Hispanic or Latino): A person having origins in any of the peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian Subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand and Vietnam.
5 - American Indian or Alaska Native (Not Hispanic or Latino): A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintain tribal affiliation of community attachment.
7 - Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (Not Hispanic or Latino): A person having origins in any of the peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
If you choose not to reply to this email, XXXXXX will still have to report your ethnicity to the government. To ensure the accuracy of that information, we ask for your assistance.
Thank you.
XXXXXX XXXXXXX Manager HR Operations
XXXXXX, XXXXXX XXXXXXX
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Aitken
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:02 AM
To: XXXXXX XXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Important HR Communication
Hello XXXXXX,
Thank you for your email. Unfortunately I will be unable to assist you. I do not recognize the distinction of race as described in your email to be a valid one; or to be based on any firm scientific basis. On my census form I put the term, "human" when asked for race. Any other distinction based on the region where people of a similar skin color lived before globalization (unless their descendants speak the Spanish language) is at best meaningless and more likely harmful to the creation of a unified and peaceful world. If you chose to misrepresent me to the federal government, by suggesting my identity is tied to skin tone rather than internal character that is your own decision. I understand that your are required to do so by law, and do not wish to cause you undue difficulty, however, I cannot with good conscience participate. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Philip Aitken
----------------------------------------
The names of both the person and company involved have been removed because I feel that not publishing information belonging to others should always be the default stance if it is irrelevant to the point you are making.
Friday, April 22, 2011
Flow Charts!
Flow charts are a good way of describing linear and recursive processes. They are also good for teaching logic, and once you understand them for humor. Below are some of the best ones for learning to read flow charts and then for understanding ideas. The people who made these flow charts are totally awesome and you should send them money, jewelery, coffee or chocolate.
http://xkcd.com/518/
http://thoughtcatalog.com/2011/how-to-have-a-rational-discussion/
http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-fraudulent-invention-debunkifier.html
http://shouldiworkforfree.com/
http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/index.php?date=011211
http://xkcd.com/518/
http://thoughtcatalog.com/2011/how-to-have-a-rational-discussion/
http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/the-fraudulent-invention-debunkifier.html
http://shouldiworkforfree.com/
http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/index.php?date=011211
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
I support Nadia Plesner
Danish artist Nadia Plesner has been sued for a sum of 5000 Euros a day for depicting what Louis Vuitton is calling an infringement of their intellectual property. You can read an unofficial English Translation of the Court Order here. (PDF)
Here is a copy of the work in question, with apologies to the artist.
Here is an image of the Bag, with no apologies whatsoever.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Names Matter.
Congrats to netflix for putting "creatures that defy evolution" and "the quantum activist" under faith and not science. Now we just have to work on Hulu removing "paranormal state" from the news and information section.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
The nature of discourse and argument Part 4
This should be able to stand alone, but you may want to check out parts one, two and three.
I decided to talk about some more of the thinking errors called fallacies; not because they are the most important thing, but because they are both a common impediment to good reasoning and easy to sum up. This does not mean that they are easy to spot, or to stop. Just that they are simple to explain and learning to avoid any or all of them will immediately lead to better thinking in a noticeable way. Learning the rules of good thinking that could help you avoid all fallacies, including those I am not going to list, is a longer if even more worthwhile process which will not be covered in this post. Instead this post is going to focus on some specific problems often found in direct debate or discussion particularly when it comes to politics, religion, and other belief systems.
I decided to talk about some more of the thinking errors called fallacies; not because they are the most important thing, but because they are both a common impediment to good reasoning and easy to sum up. This does not mean that they are easy to spot, or to stop. Just that they are simple to explain and learning to avoid any or all of them will immediately lead to better thinking in a noticeable way. Learning the rules of good thinking that could help you avoid all fallacies, including those I am not going to list, is a longer if even more worthwhile process which will not be covered in this post. Instead this post is going to focus on some specific problems often found in direct debate or discussion particularly when it comes to politics, religion, and other belief systems.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
No. The problem is it's bullshit
Originally this was going to be a critique and color commentary on a Huffington post article about astrology. And then this article came along, and I remembered that belief does in deed affect behaviour.
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/02/astrology-is-science---in-indi.html
Astrology is the idea that arbitrary visual arrangements of stars can influence people based on the position they are viewed to be in at the time of that persons birth.
Virginia Bell writing for the Huffington Post posted there article linked to here on the 19th of January 2011. I have decided to respond as an effort in speaking with restraint when confronted with the hot and steamy* realm that is astrology.
"The economy has tanked, the housing market has collapsed and the environment is being compromised. And now some astronomer in Minnesota is telling us that our astrological signs have changed and we're not who we thought we were."
Well actually I think the point that Dr. Kunkle (link) was making is that we are who we are stars not withstanding. But maybe that is to much benefit of the doubt.
To quote Dorothy Parker, "What fresh hell is this?" Fear not: Although the world is indeed shaky, your astrological sign, unlike your retirement fund, is perfectly secure.
"Because we're just making the shit we tell you up anyway"
There are different branches of astrology, a fact that astronomer Parke Kunkle failed to make clear in the interview he gave to the Star Tribune. Western astrologers use the tropical zodiac, which begins on the day of the vernal equinox and follows the seasons, not the constellations. It is true that the Earth wobbles and the constellations have shifted 23 degrees, but since Western astrology is not based on the constellations, it remains unchanged.
Not based on the constellations? What exactly is Scorpio or Virgo? They are constellations. You should probably just apologize to everyone you have taken money off of for this so far.
What Professor Kunkle is referring to is known as Eastern, or sidereal, astrology, which follows those famous constellations. For instance, Vedic astrology, the kind practiced in India and other parts of the world, is sidereal. If you consult a Vedic astrologer, then your sign indeed may have changed, but this knowledge has been around for hundreds of years. Sidereal astrologers already use these so-called "new dates."
This story about our signs changing, as well as the "discovery" of a 13th sign Ophiuchus, is nothing new; it surfaces every few years and is recycled by the media. What's different this time is the massive attention it has received. New York astrologer Shelley Ackerman made an excellent point on Fox News in reminding us that during this go-around, the story was fueled by the social networking sites, which caused it to spread like wildfire.
The real issue is that astrology is in the news at all despite never doing anything news worthy, oh well there was the Zodiac killer so I take that back.
Professor Kunkle's information, or rather misinformation, has definitely hit a nerve. Yet, is it possible, unbeknownst to him, that he has wobbled into something buried deep in the collective consciousness? He may have been wrong about our signs changing, but on another level, don't we all need to change? We can't continue to treat the Earth or each other in the same way and expect the planet to survive. Could the planets and the signs hold the key? Messages often come from strange quarters.
Yes his misinformation about the changing of what stars are overhead during what times of year. Oh wait that part is true. Was it that he didn't wade neck deep and upside-down into the pseudoscientific practices of fortune telling while presenting a neat little tidbit. I imagine that doesn't really matter much.
From an astrological perspective, something big is brewing, as several major planets are poised to change signs over the next few months. Both Jupiter and Uranus are about to bolt into fiery Aries; Neptune and Chiron will soon enter sensitive Pisces. These distant planets move slowly. Changing signs around the same time signals that there's new energy and consciousness entering the world. Aries and Pisces couldn't be more different, and yet together, they offer us a new way of being in the world. Aries is ego, action and aggression; Pisces is associated with forgiveness and healing. The challenges we face in the world today require us to be fully integrated. Being a warrior is not enough, nor is merely being spiritual; we must put our spiritual principals and practices into conscious action.
From an astrological perspective.... Then she talks about the motion of the planets and what that means. Listen Virginia, I am afraid you are going to have to show your work. Astrology has never been demonstrated to work or be true in any way. Not to mention that earlier you said that astrology had nothing to do with the constellations why then should it have something to do with the planets?
"It's easy to prove Kunkle wrong or to poke fun at astrology, but we don't learn anything by doing that." If we're so afraid of giving up our astrological signs, maybe we should examine our attachments. We're all addicted to something, both as a nation and as individuals: money, power, oil, plastic, sugar, carbs -- the list goes on and on. And what about this 13th sign that suspiciously sounds like the uninvited 13th fairy godmother in tales like "Sleeping Beauty"? What is it that we need to wake up to? Extravagant Jupiter and that maverick Uranus are hanging out together in the sky; they offer us a unique opportunity to expand our mind and absorb new information.
It's easy to.... Did we not learn anything by this poking fun? We learned that what stars are out at night are different from what they used to be, and we learned about the mechanism that caused it. Already of more value then astrology has served, ever. Then a rambling metaphor mistaken for potential insight. Magical thinking relies on magic to work. Magic doesn't work.
Perhaps an astrological makeover is not such a bad idea. A little flirtation with another sign won't cause your partner to leave (unless he or she is a Scorpio), and it's certainly cheaper than investing in a new wardrobe or a facelift. Unlike plastic surgery, if you don't like the result, you can go back to the way you were. Aquarius would benefit from Capricorn's determination; Sagittarius could teach Capricorns to have more faith and enthusiasm. I'm a stubborn Taurus; my idea of change is switching from a scone to a muffin. But I need to learn to take more risks, something Aries excels at.
Blah blah blah this is bullshit
As an astronomer, Kunkle was probably trying to debunk astrology. Instead, he created tremendous interest. Folks have been communicating about it via Twitter and Facebook, searching the web for their horoscopes and putting their astrologers on speed dial. And the media is having a field day. Suddenly people who didn't know their sun from their moon are bantering around terms like tropical, sidereal and Vedic. Astrology has gotten more hits on the Internet than Sarah Palin and Lady Gaga! Kunkle's information may be misleading, but the attention, even the controversy, astrology has received is priceless.
He may have been trying to debunk it, or he may have realized that one way to get real information into peoples heads is to latch on to the lies already there. Sidereal is a term from astronomy, oh drat can't have people learning about that. Sure the attention is good for the practice of taking money off of suckers, why wouldn't it be. But you are missing the point, this wasn't a debunking. It did however point out some silly aspects to the practice.
*hot and steamy should be read as bullshit and not sexy in this case.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/14/new-astrological-dates-parke-kunkle-stunned-by-attention_n_809187.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-shostak/time-for-astrology-to-sig_b_809550.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gahl-eden-sasson/astrology-myths-debunk_b_809465.html
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/02/astrology-is-science---in-indi.html
Astrology is the idea that arbitrary visual arrangements of stars can influence people based on the position they are viewed to be in at the time of that persons birth.
Virginia Bell writing for the Huffington Post posted there article linked to here on the 19th of January 2011. I have decided to respond as an effort in speaking with restraint when confronted with the hot and steamy* realm that is astrology.
"The economy has tanked, the housing market has collapsed and the environment is being compromised. And now some astronomer in Minnesota is telling us that our astrological signs have changed and we're not who we thought we were."
Well actually I think the point that Dr. Kunkle (link) was making is that we are who we are stars not withstanding. But maybe that is to much benefit of the doubt.
To quote Dorothy Parker, "What fresh hell is this?" Fear not: Although the world is indeed shaky, your astrological sign, unlike your retirement fund, is perfectly secure.
"Because we're just making the shit we tell you up anyway"
There are different branches of astrology, a fact that astronomer Parke Kunkle failed to make clear in the interview he gave to the Star Tribune. Western astrologers use the tropical zodiac, which begins on the day of the vernal equinox and follows the seasons, not the constellations. It is true that the Earth wobbles and the constellations have shifted 23 degrees, but since Western astrology is not based on the constellations, it remains unchanged.
Not based on the constellations? What exactly is Scorpio or Virgo? They are constellations. You should probably just apologize to everyone you have taken money off of for this so far.
What Professor Kunkle is referring to is known as Eastern, or sidereal, astrology, which follows those famous constellations. For instance, Vedic astrology, the kind practiced in India and other parts of the world, is sidereal. If you consult a Vedic astrologer, then your sign indeed may have changed, but this knowledge has been around for hundreds of years. Sidereal astrologers already use these so-called "new dates."
This story about our signs changing, as well as the "discovery" of a 13th sign Ophiuchus, is nothing new; it surfaces every few years and is recycled by the media. What's different this time is the massive attention it has received. New York astrologer Shelley Ackerman made an excellent point on Fox News in reminding us that during this go-around, the story was fueled by the social networking sites, which caused it to spread like wildfire.
The real issue is that astrology is in the news at all despite never doing anything news worthy, oh well there was the Zodiac killer so I take that back.
Professor Kunkle's information, or rather misinformation, has definitely hit a nerve. Yet, is it possible, unbeknownst to him, that he has wobbled into something buried deep in the collective consciousness? He may have been wrong about our signs changing, but on another level, don't we all need to change? We can't continue to treat the Earth or each other in the same way and expect the planet to survive. Could the planets and the signs hold the key? Messages often come from strange quarters.
Yes his misinformation about the changing of what stars are overhead during what times of year. Oh wait that part is true. Was it that he didn't wade neck deep and upside-down into the pseudoscientific practices of fortune telling while presenting a neat little tidbit. I imagine that doesn't really matter much.
From an astrological perspective, something big is brewing, as several major planets are poised to change signs over the next few months. Both Jupiter and Uranus are about to bolt into fiery Aries; Neptune and Chiron will soon enter sensitive Pisces. These distant planets move slowly. Changing signs around the same time signals that there's new energy and consciousness entering the world. Aries and Pisces couldn't be more different, and yet together, they offer us a new way of being in the world. Aries is ego, action and aggression; Pisces is associated with forgiveness and healing. The challenges we face in the world today require us to be fully integrated. Being a warrior is not enough, nor is merely being spiritual; we must put our spiritual principals and practices into conscious action.
From an astrological perspective.... Then she talks about the motion of the planets and what that means. Listen Virginia, I am afraid you are going to have to show your work. Astrology has never been demonstrated to work or be true in any way. Not to mention that earlier you said that astrology had nothing to do with the constellations why then should it have something to do with the planets?
"It's easy to prove Kunkle wrong or to poke fun at astrology, but we don't learn anything by doing that." If we're so afraid of giving up our astrological signs, maybe we should examine our attachments. We're all addicted to something, both as a nation and as individuals: money, power, oil, plastic, sugar, carbs -- the list goes on and on. And what about this 13th sign that suspiciously sounds like the uninvited 13th fairy godmother in tales like "Sleeping Beauty"? What is it that we need to wake up to? Extravagant Jupiter and that maverick Uranus are hanging out together in the sky; they offer us a unique opportunity to expand our mind and absorb new information.
It's easy to.... Did we not learn anything by this poking fun? We learned that what stars are out at night are different from what they used to be, and we learned about the mechanism that caused it. Already of more value then astrology has served, ever. Then a rambling metaphor mistaken for potential insight. Magical thinking relies on magic to work. Magic doesn't work.
Perhaps an astrological makeover is not such a bad idea. A little flirtation with another sign won't cause your partner to leave (unless he or she is a Scorpio), and it's certainly cheaper than investing in a new wardrobe or a facelift. Unlike plastic surgery, if you don't like the result, you can go back to the way you were. Aquarius would benefit from Capricorn's determination; Sagittarius could teach Capricorns to have more faith and enthusiasm. I'm a stubborn Taurus; my idea of change is switching from a scone to a muffin. But I need to learn to take more risks, something Aries excels at.
Blah blah blah this is bullshit
As an astronomer, Kunkle was probably trying to debunk astrology. Instead, he created tremendous interest. Folks have been communicating about it via Twitter and Facebook, searching the web for their horoscopes and putting their astrologers on speed dial. And the media is having a field day. Suddenly people who didn't know their sun from their moon are bantering around terms like tropical, sidereal and Vedic. Astrology has gotten more hits on the Internet than Sarah Palin and Lady Gaga! Kunkle's information may be misleading, but the attention, even the controversy, astrology has received is priceless.
He may have been trying to debunk it, or he may have realized that one way to get real information into peoples heads is to latch on to the lies already there. Sidereal is a term from astronomy, oh drat can't have people learning about that. Sure the attention is good for the practice of taking money off of suckers, why wouldn't it be. But you are missing the point, this wasn't a debunking. It did however point out some silly aspects to the practice.
*hot and steamy should be read as bullshit and not sexy in this case.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/14/new-astrological-dates-parke-kunkle-stunned-by-attention_n_809187.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-shostak/time-for-astrology-to-sig_b_809550.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gahl-eden-sasson/astrology-myths-debunk_b_809465.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)