Roses are red.
Violets are turquoise.
Length is reduced,
but quality still stinks because what the hell rhymes with turquoise?
...and second half here.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
The Ethics of Belief by William K. Clifford
A business acquaintance I follow on Twitter posted that he often likes to reread William K. Clifford's essay The Ethics of Belief. The author, a mathematician by trade, originally published the essay in 1877.
Let's cut right to Clifford's point: "It is wrong always, everywhere, for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."
It is wrong to believe. Not to act. But simply to believe.
Without deep consideration this seems to draw from Socrates, "An unexamined life is not worth living." Certainly there's nothing ominous about trying to know and understand all you can about life and the world and then use that knowledge as the basis for taking action.
But Clifford spins things a little differently. "The question of right or wrong has to do with the origin of his belief, not the matter of it." Ethics depends on the thoughts not the actions which may result from them. Clifford using the example of theft to illustrate the true harm to society is not the loss of property but rather the disposition of the thief. The fact that a man has bad thoughts is more harmful to society than any action based on those bad thoughts. He clarifies this: "No one man's belief is in any case a private matter which concerns himself alone." In other words, your thoughts are part of the fabric of society and, by implication, a matter for public scrutiny.
Your thoughts are my business.
A practical concern cited is whether one has the time to scrutinize in long detail all the questions and factors of life to which the reply is "then he should have no time to believe."
You have no right to believe.
I have a few fundamental problems with Clifford. Although he addresses it in his essay, the implication that all things are knowable I find false. Even whether all things are knowable to a substantial degree is debatable. Whether study of an issue will lead all men to the same (presumably) correct conclusion is almost certainly false.
A large part of the problem here is that beliefs being tested are themselves qualitative leading certainly to lack of agreement. Consider these beliefs: abortion, capital punishment, taxes, religion, country music, and the designated hitter. Regardless of your belief, try to imagine a fully considered study. Upon what would it be based? Whether having the belief is good or bad? And what exactly do good and bad mean in this context?
Even in his own theft example, Clifford states the true problem is that a society of thieves is bad. But one might make the case that people who don't sufficiently protect their property deserve to have it stolen and one who is able to steal has demonstrated great skill. Clifford has chosen for us his desired outcome. Who will society get to decide on the one true belief? Just look at the chaos of having the DH in the AL but no DH in the NL. Who in the hell decided pitchers shouldn't hit?
Baseball levity aside, Clifford is using this argument to skewer religion. Because the existence of a higher power is untestable and discontinuous with our daily existence, because religion is foisted upon us by unknowing parents and perpetuated by unqualified clergy, and because even thinking these untested beliefs is a burden on society they should not be permitted.
Clifford (maybe because he's a mathematician) acts as though everything is 100% knowable leaving absolutely no mystery or uncertainty or flaw in life. It is that lack of certainty and the inevitability of error that makes life wonderfully worth living. Shades of gray.
Nothing in human existence is 100% knowable and belief fills that gap whether it's in the form of religion or politics (as if there's a difference) or art. Certainly examination makes life worth living. But that examination is my personal business - society can just deal with any resulting actions.
Let's cut right to Clifford's point: "It is wrong always, everywhere, for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."
It is wrong to believe. Not to act. But simply to believe.
Without deep consideration this seems to draw from Socrates, "An unexamined life is not worth living." Certainly there's nothing ominous about trying to know and understand all you can about life and the world and then use that knowledge as the basis for taking action.
But Clifford spins things a little differently. "The question of right or wrong has to do with the origin of his belief, not the matter of it." Ethics depends on the thoughts not the actions which may result from them. Clifford using the example of theft to illustrate the true harm to society is not the loss of property but rather the disposition of the thief. The fact that a man has bad thoughts is more harmful to society than any action based on those bad thoughts. He clarifies this: "No one man's belief is in any case a private matter which concerns himself alone." In other words, your thoughts are part of the fabric of society and, by implication, a matter for public scrutiny.
Your thoughts are my business.
A practical concern cited is whether one has the time to scrutinize in long detail all the questions and factors of life to which the reply is "then he should have no time to believe."
You have no right to believe.
I have a few fundamental problems with Clifford. Although he addresses it in his essay, the implication that all things are knowable I find false. Even whether all things are knowable to a substantial degree is debatable. Whether study of an issue will lead all men to the same (presumably) correct conclusion is almost certainly false.
A large part of the problem here is that beliefs being tested are themselves qualitative leading certainly to lack of agreement. Consider these beliefs: abortion, capital punishment, taxes, religion, country music, and the designated hitter. Regardless of your belief, try to imagine a fully considered study. Upon what would it be based? Whether having the belief is good or bad? And what exactly do good and bad mean in this context?
Even in his own theft example, Clifford states the true problem is that a society of thieves is bad. But one might make the case that people who don't sufficiently protect their property deserve to have it stolen and one who is able to steal has demonstrated great skill. Clifford has chosen for us his desired outcome. Who will society get to decide on the one true belief? Just look at the chaos of having the DH in the AL but no DH in the NL. Who in the hell decided pitchers shouldn't hit?
Baseball levity aside, Clifford is using this argument to skewer religion. Because the existence of a higher power is untestable and discontinuous with our daily existence, because religion is foisted upon us by unknowing parents and perpetuated by unqualified clergy, and because even thinking these untested beliefs is a burden on society they should not be permitted.
Clifford (maybe because he's a mathematician) acts as though everything is 100% knowable leaving absolutely no mystery or uncertainty or flaw in life. It is that lack of certainty and the inevitability of error that makes life wonderfully worth living. Shades of gray.
Nothing in human existence is 100% knowable and belief fills that gap whether it's in the form of religion or politics (as if there's a difference) or art. Certainly examination makes life worth living. But that examination is my personal business - society can just deal with any resulting actions.
Love is grand.
Clayton Christensen's book The Innovator's Dilemma concerns itself with the idea of disruptive innovation, how a new entrant to the market can push out the incumbent. This independently created video illustrates the idea nicely.
Scale of the Universe 2 is an interactive visualization from the Planck Length to the size of the universe, kinda like the classic film Powers of 10.
Ambient music aficionados: check out Disquiet.
Electronica aficionados: check out the work of Jeffrey Plaide. "I am very interested in creating synthetic and electronic compositions, treatments and arrangements and using electronic music and visual synthesis techniques to realise complex and abstract concepts"
In case you missed it on Nat Geo, check out this brief video about 3D printing. Think Star Trek replicator.
125 living American and English writers chose the greatest books of all time. The top work of the 20th century is Nabokov's Lolita. (That does it. I'm reading it for the first time this week.) Faulkner's The Sound and The Fury came in at #7. Topping the 19th century is Tolstoy's Anna Karenina. Top 10 authors includes Shakespeare, Faulkner, Dickens, Dostoevsky, and more. Check it out - there's plenty to argue about.
Perhaps sci-fi reading is your cup of tea. Check out the list of the 100 top sci-fi books. At the top you'll find the usual suspects - Ender's Game and Dune.
Or maybe you prefer music to books. Check out this visualization of songs per artist in the top 500 rock songs of all time. (Beatles, Stones, Who, Zep, etc.)
Pennies in space. If you send a 1909 VDB cent (worth around $1,000) to Mars will it be worth more than the 1943 copper alloy cent ($1.7 million at auction)?
Aviation pr0n of the week: video of F-35B ship suitability testing.
I may have linked to this before but here it is again anyway: a fun little animation of Animator vs. Animation.
In case you missed it, Rango won the Annie Award for Best Animated Feature. All the results are included in this Cartoon Brew post.
Google thinks I'm a 25-34 year old male who's interested in music, law, and government. Google ain't too smart, is he? See what he thinks of you by searching for "Ads Preferences Manager."
I'm still trying to get my head around the work of artist Mark Bradford so this interview with him in ArtSlant was helpful. He describes his art as rundown and rough around the edges. Any beauty is a "two-fer", something extra you get for free. (Most artists will tell you that striving for beauty is the first step on the path to aesthetics and then decoration.)
Pro Football Focus has more information than the heartiest fan can absorb. For example, which cornerback gives quarterbacks the highest rating when they throw against him? (San Diego's Quentin Jammer.) You can probably guess who's on the other end of that spectrum.
Do you donate to Goodwill? Do you claim the donations on your taxes? Did you know Goodwill's website has a donation valuation guide? Neither did I.
In 1979 an 11 year old fan created his own graphic novel (aka comic book) version of Alien. He's now releasing it online one page per day. Were you that big of a fan?
This list of 11 things you didn't know about the world includes the initial theorization of black holes in 1783. (Not included in this list - what women want.)
This article about cars of the future is obviously a hoax because flying cars aren't mentioned even once.
Tips for programming in C.
You call that searching? Try Jewgle.
Divorce is a hundred grand. ~John Waters.
Scale of the Universe 2 is an interactive visualization from the Planck Length to the size of the universe, kinda like the classic film Powers of 10.
 |
| Today's Smile is a hypnotic animation. Watch it here or read about it here. |
Electronica aficionados: check out the work of Jeffrey Plaide. "I am very interested in creating synthetic and electronic compositions, treatments and arrangements and using electronic music and visual synthesis techniques to realise complex and abstract concepts"
In case you missed it on Nat Geo, check out this brief video about 3D printing. Think Star Trek replicator.
 |
| Worldmap of countries driving on the right (red) or wrong (blue). This and 13 other geography facts can be found here. |
Perhaps sci-fi reading is your cup of tea. Check out the list of the 100 top sci-fi books. At the top you'll find the usual suspects - Ender's Game and Dune.
Or maybe you prefer music to books. Check out this visualization of songs per artist in the top 500 rock songs of all time. (Beatles, Stones, Who, Zep, etc.)
 |
| Which is more genius? Robert Rauschenburg's Erased de Kooning Drawing 1953 or STAR.ME's Redraw de Kooning's Erased Work? |
Aviation pr0n of the week: video of F-35B ship suitability testing.
 |
| This close up is only part of a delicious illustrated map of Italy and its foods. |
In case you missed it, Rango won the Annie Award for Best Animated Feature. All the results are included in this Cartoon Brew post.
Google thinks I'm a 25-34 year old male who's interested in music, law, and government. Google ain't too smart, is he? See what he thinks of you by searching for "Ads Preferences Manager."
 |
| With Valentine's Day just around the corner, who can resist Brief Jerky, edible underwear you can make yourself. |
Pro Football Focus has more information than the heartiest fan can absorb. For example, which cornerback gives quarterbacks the highest rating when they throw against him? (San Diego's Quentin Jammer.) You can probably guess who's on the other end of that spectrum.
 |
| Do your coworkers hang their kids' art in their office? Now you can mock it mercilessly at I Am Better Than Your Kids. |
In 1979 an 11 year old fan created his own graphic novel (aka comic book) version of Alien. He's now releasing it online one page per day. Were you that big of a fan?
 |
| There's still time for a last minute appointment before Valentine's Day. source |
This article about cars of the future is obviously a hoax because flying cars aren't mentioned even once.
 |
| Nobody puts my poop in a corner. See how it all ends here. |
You call that searching? Try Jewgle.
 |
| I. Must. Have. It. from Jack in the Box |
Divorce is a hundred grand. ~John Waters.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
15 Minutes: General Curtis LeMay and the Countdown to Nuclear Annihilation by L. Douglas Keeney
L. Douglas Keeney's 15 Minutes is an excellent Cold War history from the perspective of the Strategic Air Command (SAC), the organization led by General LeMay. The title refers to the amount of time given to SAC to get its bombers in the air in the event of an incoming attack by the Soviet Union.
The book is a linear chronology beginning with the waning days of World War II and the first use of atomic weapons and ends in 1991 when SAC was dissolved. SAC was created as a bomber and tanker force with the mission to deliver nuclear weapons in response to an attack on the U.S. by an adversary. In the beginning SAC didn't even control the weapons - those were maintained by the AEC, the Atomic Energy Commission. At its peak, SAC was as complete a force as you could imagine with its own intelligence, early warning, tankers, bombers, missiles, bases, and certainly an esprit de corps. (As an example, and for those who don't want to read the book, I highly recommend the movie Strategic Air Command starring Jimmy Stewart.)
The chapters are organized around pivotal events in SAC's chronology and each chapter consists of compact, almost newsy stories, of various incidents and personalities. This makes for a very easy read without sacrificing facts or interest.
Topics covered include the aircraft (B-36, B-47, B-52, B-58), the testing (with emphasis on the Castle Bravo test where the actual yield of 15 megatons vastly exceeded expectations and therefore caught everyone off guard with deadly results), the weapons, the missiles, the men, the strategy - it goes on and on. There are discussions of various nuclear weapon accidents where bombs were dropped, burned, crashed, and sometimes not recovered. There's the SIOP, single integrated operational plan, for targeting adversaries, Chrome Dome missions, and the two-man rule. And there's an emphasis on the Texas Towers and how the desire for a little more warning time for an incoming low-level attack from the Atlantic ended with the death of 28 men. (For those who prefer movies, I'll suggest 1964's Fail Safe starring Henry Fonda for a good tale of bombing the Soviets. I could've suggested Dr. Strangelove which is great, but everyone's seen that. Right?)
My interest in the Cold War and nuclear weapons has been extensively self-documented. I was born right around the time when SAC's use of aircraft peaked. After that, missiles grew into their predominant platform. I'm too young to have participated in any "duck and cover" drills in school. But my friends and I did play in a big field called the Nike Site - not for the shoe but rather for the Nike surface-to-air missile system deployed to defend the U.S. from incoming Soviet bombers and ICBMs. At the time I never thought too hard about what that big concrete bunker on the edge of our field had been for.
I remember a couple of years ago telling a younger co-worker that the DFW Metroplex would've been devastated by Soviet nuclear missiles if the Cold War had gotten hot. I thought she was going to pass out. (You can check out this target map of the U.S. It's probably more qualitative than factual but it doesn't seem unreasonable.)
Consider this. At the end of 1963 SAC had 922 bombers and tankers and 426 missiles on alert. Of those aircraft, I bet around 50-100 fully-armed bombers were in the air at all times. In total, the SIOP alert forces had 2,071 delivery vehicles with 3,976 megatons of explosive force.
Keeney's 15 Minutes is a great history of the Strategic Air Command. I recommend it strongly to anyone interested in history or aviation.
Just a few websites that provide additional information on topics covered in the book:
The book is a linear chronology beginning with the waning days of World War II and the first use of atomic weapons and ends in 1991 when SAC was dissolved. SAC was created as a bomber and tanker force with the mission to deliver nuclear weapons in response to an attack on the U.S. by an adversary. In the beginning SAC didn't even control the weapons - those were maintained by the AEC, the Atomic Energy Commission. At its peak, SAC was as complete a force as you could imagine with its own intelligence, early warning, tankers, bombers, missiles, bases, and certainly an esprit de corps. (As an example, and for those who don't want to read the book, I highly recommend the movie Strategic Air Command starring Jimmy Stewart.)
The chapters are organized around pivotal events in SAC's chronology and each chapter consists of compact, almost newsy stories, of various incidents and personalities. This makes for a very easy read without sacrificing facts or interest.
Topics covered include the aircraft (B-36, B-47, B-52, B-58), the testing (with emphasis on the Castle Bravo test where the actual yield of 15 megatons vastly exceeded expectations and therefore caught everyone off guard with deadly results), the weapons, the missiles, the men, the strategy - it goes on and on. There are discussions of various nuclear weapon accidents where bombs were dropped, burned, crashed, and sometimes not recovered. There's the SIOP, single integrated operational plan, for targeting adversaries, Chrome Dome missions, and the two-man rule. And there's an emphasis on the Texas Towers and how the desire for a little more warning time for an incoming low-level attack from the Atlantic ended with the death of 28 men. (For those who prefer movies, I'll suggest 1964's Fail Safe starring Henry Fonda for a good tale of bombing the Soviets. I could've suggested Dr. Strangelove which is great, but everyone's seen that. Right?)
My interest in the Cold War and nuclear weapons has been extensively self-documented. I was born right around the time when SAC's use of aircraft peaked. After that, missiles grew into their predominant platform. I'm too young to have participated in any "duck and cover" drills in school. But my friends and I did play in a big field called the Nike Site - not for the shoe but rather for the Nike surface-to-air missile system deployed to defend the U.S. from incoming Soviet bombers and ICBMs. At the time I never thought too hard about what that big concrete bunker on the edge of our field had been for.
I remember a couple of years ago telling a younger co-worker that the DFW Metroplex would've been devastated by Soviet nuclear missiles if the Cold War had gotten hot. I thought she was going to pass out. (You can check out this target map of the U.S. It's probably more qualitative than factual but it doesn't seem unreasonable.)
Consider this. At the end of 1963 SAC had 922 bombers and tankers and 426 missiles on alert. Of those aircraft, I bet around 50-100 fully-armed bombers were in the air at all times. In total, the SIOP alert forces had 2,071 delivery vehicles with 3,976 megatons of explosive force.
Keeney's 15 Minutes is a great history of the Strategic Air Command. I recommend it strongly to anyone interested in history or aviation.
Just a few websites that provide additional information on topics covered in the book:
- On 01 Sep 1952 a tornado struck Fort Worth's Carswell Air Force Base damaging many of its B-36 bombers.
- Website of the now-defunct 7th Bomb Wing B-36 Association (nice photo gallery)
- Film documentary of 1952's Operation Ivy nuclear tests (1 hour)
- The USAF Texas Tower Association
- The Nike Historical Society (watch the 30 minute movie)
- The B-47 Stratojet Association
- A B-58 Hustler website
- SiloWorld, a website dedicated to ICBMs
We promise according to our hopes...
If you enjoy music and like intelligent discussions about music, check out wajobu.com.
This review of Philip Glass isn't exactly favorable when it ends with "But he is less craftsman than musical trucker, tirelessly eating up the road." Drink yourself from the Glass with Koyaanisquatsi.
Did all you Rush fans geek out on 01 Feb 2012 (2.1.12) with your favorite tunes from Rush's 2112 album?
I like the last lines of this review of Writers and Their Books, another look at paper and ink versus e-books. "If our books are our second bodies, dissolution is inevitable. What is hard to imagine is a future in which we have no bodies at all."
Why do half of incoming engineering majors fail to graduate with an engineering degree? If I read this NYT article correctly it's because incoming students are all hyped-up on engineering because they've been told there's a shortage of engineers and engineers make lots of money. However, after beginning their college careers they find out that engineering is hard and takes a lot of work. So they're either lazy or stupid and change majors. Another interesting factoid: all students appear to have gotten lazier as the average study time per week has dropped from 40 hours (1961) to 27 hours (2003).
Warning: This video contains hardcore software nerd humor. Your enjoyment will likely be much much less than the audience's.
Just a little Formula 1 racing history.
This still baffles me. In Argentina, a country known for its fantastic beef, all steaks are cooked bien cocido (well done). Fortunately, the flavor of the grass-fed beef doesn't suffer. Argentinians find the typical American medium or medium rare steak to be uncooked.
Laser. Guided. Bullets.
Slate proposes five changes to the keyboard.
Beer drinkers: check out Cans of the Month from Rusty Cans. Beer-gamer combo fans: check out this BioShock themed home brew called Brow Sweat.
Interested in carpentry? Being a lookout? A journalist? How about pistol marksmanship? Our military has a manual for all of that and more.
If you have $75,000 (shipping extra) burning a hole in your pocket get on over to eBay and bid on NASA's vehicle power interface used for testing the Hubble Space Telescope.
Take 3 minutes to enjoy this animated history of aviation.
This film from 1930 demonstrates various types of mechanical device movements. Or you can watch pencils being sharpened.
Believe it or not, I found one online site this week that I simply won't include here. Even I have standards. Low, but standards nonetheless.
...and perform according to our fears. ~François de la Rochefoucauld
This review of Philip Glass isn't exactly favorable when it ends with "But he is less craftsman than musical trucker, tirelessly eating up the road." Drink yourself from the Glass with Koyaanisquatsi.
 |
| I've found the source of my headaches. |
I like the last lines of this review of Writers and Their Books, another look at paper and ink versus e-books. "If our books are our second bodies, dissolution is inevitable. What is hard to imagine is a future in which we have no bodies at all."
 |
| Where ham comes from. More specifically Prosciutto di Parma. |
Warning: This video contains hardcore software nerd humor. Your enjoyment will likely be much much less than the audience's.
Just a little Formula 1 racing history.
 |
| Just in time for Valentine's Day - the Pupeko anti-aging mouthpiece |
Laser. Guided. Bullets.
Slate proposes five changes to the keyboard.
- Get rid of CAPS LOCK. [I'm OK with that.]
- Add an em-dash. [If you don't know the difference between a hyphen, a minus sign, an em-dash, and an en-dash then you probably won't care about this one. I know I don't.]
- Put the ! and the ? on the same key. [Don't get this one at all.]
- Create a new button with @ and .com. [Not worth it.]
- Get rid of Insert. [Agree. I've never used it intentionally but often unintentionally to my chagrin.]
Beer drinkers: check out Cans of the Month from Rusty Cans. Beer-gamer combo fans: check out this BioShock themed home brew called Brow Sweat.
 |
| I've seen a lot of weird stuff on teh interwebs but this blog post about the market for boneless pork rectums pegs the weird scale. Oddly, this is on a blog about statistics. |
If you have $75,000 (shipping extra) burning a hole in your pocket get on over to eBay and bid on NASA's vehicle power interface used for testing the Hubble Space Telescope.
Take 3 minutes to enjoy this animated history of aviation.
This film from 1930 demonstrates various types of mechanical device movements. Or you can watch pencils being sharpened.
 |
| A newly discovered contemporary copy of Mona Lisa (right) may help scholars learn more about the original (left). |
...and perform according to our fears. ~François de la Rochefoucauld
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Robopocalypse by Daniel H. Wilson
I know what you're thinking. Robopocalypse? Really? I know. It sounds cheesy. I thought the same thing when I picked it out. But it was late and the library had already made their "last call" announcement and it looked new so I took it.
Author Daniel H. Wilson has a Ph.D. in robotics from Carnegie Mellon and an academic pedigree that allows him to write intelligently about his subject matter. Imagine a near future when all our computerized gadgets are turned against us by a computer that is not just super intelligent - it has become sentient. This, of course, is one of the commonly cited doomsday scenarios that will end human life on Earth. Wilson is able to turn this concept into a plot that doesn't sound too farfetched.
The novel follows the exploits of several widely dispersed (Oklahoma, Afghanistan, England, Japan) people or groups of people as they fight their own battles versus the machines. Wilson crafts several interesting scenarios as the robots begin to evolve into forms more well suited to killing humans than the simple household robots and automated cars that started the war.
But the scenarios are part of the problem. They're too widely dispersed in space and time (the war spans over 2 years) to maintain pacing and interest. It also leaves very little time for introspection and rich character development. Lots of characters die. I really didn't care. Several potentially interesting subplots are virtually untouched. What exactly makes a robot self-aware and alive? What is Archos, the leader of the robots, thinking? What's the rationale for the actions he takes? What's he gonna do when all the people are dead?
Where Wilson falls short is the dialog. I often thought to myself "No one talks like that." He also takes certain liberties to keep the novel moving that involve characters being able to figure out what's happening way too quickly. Like on the first day of the uprising when all the robotic things start attacking their former human masters, too many characters are able to surmise within 24 hours that this is a global coordinated event instead of just some local, and perhaps accidental, disaster.
One reviewer compared Wilson's Robopocalypse to Michael Crichton's Andromeda Strain. Even accounting for my personal fondness for Andromeda, that's a bit of a stretch. Andromeda Strain is a great novel and a great movie (the original). Robopocalypse isn't quite there yet. On the other hand, Crichton's later work like Prey may be a more apt comparison because he doesn't write novels as much as he cranks out screenplays on an 8th grade level. Sorry - didn't mean for this to devolve into Crichton bashing.
Wilson's Robopocalypse was an enjoyable, albeit light, sci-fi experience.
Author Daniel H. Wilson has a Ph.D. in robotics from Carnegie Mellon and an academic pedigree that allows him to write intelligently about his subject matter. Imagine a near future when all our computerized gadgets are turned against us by a computer that is not just super intelligent - it has become sentient. This, of course, is one of the commonly cited doomsday scenarios that will end human life on Earth. Wilson is able to turn this concept into a plot that doesn't sound too farfetched.
The novel follows the exploits of several widely dispersed (Oklahoma, Afghanistan, England, Japan) people or groups of people as they fight their own battles versus the machines. Wilson crafts several interesting scenarios as the robots begin to evolve into forms more well suited to killing humans than the simple household robots and automated cars that started the war.
But the scenarios are part of the problem. They're too widely dispersed in space and time (the war spans over 2 years) to maintain pacing and interest. It also leaves very little time for introspection and rich character development. Lots of characters die. I really didn't care. Several potentially interesting subplots are virtually untouched. What exactly makes a robot self-aware and alive? What is Archos, the leader of the robots, thinking? What's the rationale for the actions he takes? What's he gonna do when all the people are dead?
Where Wilson falls short is the dialog. I often thought to myself "No one talks like that." He also takes certain liberties to keep the novel moving that involve characters being able to figure out what's happening way too quickly. Like on the first day of the uprising when all the robotic things start attacking their former human masters, too many characters are able to surmise within 24 hours that this is a global coordinated event instead of just some local, and perhaps accidental, disaster.
One reviewer compared Wilson's Robopocalypse to Michael Crichton's Andromeda Strain. Even accounting for my personal fondness for Andromeda, that's a bit of a stretch. Andromeda Strain is a great novel and a great movie (the original). Robopocalypse isn't quite there yet. On the other hand, Crichton's later work like Prey may be a more apt comparison because he doesn't write novels as much as he cranks out screenplays on an 8th grade level. Sorry - didn't mean for this to devolve into Crichton bashing.
Wilson's Robopocalypse was an enjoyable, albeit light, sci-fi experience.
If you judge a fish by its ability to fly...
Here's a great 1-minute video animation that visualizes classical music as a roller-coaster.
Beer mavens: the sky is falling! Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) endangers micro brewer. (You know, the natural gas isn't just gonna jump out of the ground.)
Do you lie awake at night wondering why eπi = -1? Science to the rescue.
Lest you think science is all about flashy mathematical proofs, it's good to know that in these days of obsessive multi-tasking and short attention spans science is also taking a very long view of some fundamental issues. Just like the owl who determined that it takes 3 licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop (young children - you should just Google that), an 80+ year experiment shows that it takes pitch (a tar-like substance) that long to produce 9 drops. The pitch drop experiment at the University of Queensland set out to demonstrate that things that act like solids in some circumstances act like liquids in others. This behavior is less esoteric than you think. Ever notice how Silly Putty will slowly drip like chewing gum but if you jerk on it with both hands it will snap? That's an example of strain rate behavior - when the strain is low the material acts like a liquid. When the strain is high it acts like a solid.
You've probably never seen Newton's laws of motion as delightfully animated as in this video.
This may be as close to a Monty Python reunion as we can expect. Terry Jones will direct Absolutely Anything, a "sci-fi farce," with former Python members voicing the characters.
While doing my regular reading at Allure's Daily Beauty Reporter blog, I came across this doozy: should perfume be banned in public? Of course, the answer is "no." But if this law survives New Hampshire's legislature I'm gonna lobby for a ban on saggy pants, tongue piercings, comb-overs, and coffee breath.
There's no need to ban exposed nose hairs now that we have CHOLOLI, an web-based service for anonymously policing those with exposed nostril follicles.
Find out who's using all teh interwebs with this real-time internet traffic monitor from Akamai.
Oral sex may cause more oral cancer in men than smoking. (Seems kinda obvious - oral sex, oral cancer, duh.)
A North Carolina inmate is believe to have smuggled a .38 caliber revolver into jail concealed in his rectum. Silent but deadly? Protection against prison rape? Fell on it after slipping in the shower? Gives new meaning to "stick up?" Explosive diarrhea?
...it will spend the rest of its life believing it's stupid. ~Albert Einstein (paraphrased)
 |
| Ellsworth Kelly, Red, Dark Blue, Dark Green, 1986. Is it painting, sculpture or installation? Perhaps it's better to think of it as Line, Shape, Color. |
 |
| See if you can tell whether the painting is by artist or ape. I fear taking tests like this but got them all right (this time). |
Lest you think science is all about flashy mathematical proofs, it's good to know that in these days of obsessive multi-tasking and short attention spans science is also taking a very long view of some fundamental issues. Just like the owl who determined that it takes 3 licks to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop (young children - you should just Google that), an 80+ year experiment shows that it takes pitch (a tar-like substance) that long to produce 9 drops. The pitch drop experiment at the University of Queensland set out to demonstrate that things that act like solids in some circumstances act like liquids in others. This behavior is less esoteric than you think. Ever notice how Silly Putty will slowly drip like chewing gum but if you jerk on it with both hands it will snap? That's an example of strain rate behavior - when the strain is low the material acts like a liquid. When the strain is high it acts like a solid.
 |
| In addition to leering men, what exactly are the dangers of wearing high heels? Science to the rescue! |
This may be as close to a Monty Python reunion as we can expect. Terry Jones will direct Absolutely Anything, a "sci-fi farce," with former Python members voicing the characters.
 |
| B-17G Flying Fortress - just because |
 |
| Are there fundamental laws of cooking? Yes, the first of which is that I shouldn't do it. The second law says that good food pairings share the same underlying molecular components. For example, shrimp and Parmesan cheese share 1-penten-3-ol. |
There's no need to ban exposed nose hairs now that we have CHOLOLI, an web-based service for anonymously policing those with exposed nostril follicles.
 |
| Does this look like multiplication to you? Me neither. But watch this video and prepare to think. |
 |
| Astronomy pr0n: NASA's latest high resolution satellite image of the earth: Blue Marble |
A North Carolina inmate is believe to have smuggled a .38 caliber revolver into jail concealed in his rectum. Silent but deadly? Protection against prison rape? Fell on it after slipping in the shower? Gives new meaning to "stick up?" Explosive diarrhea?
...it will spend the rest of its life believing it's stupid. ~Albert Einstein (paraphrased)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
