I smite thee! ...The Diary of Nod: November 2006

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Jesus was always so laid back

Check out the ad in the bottom right of the first page.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Protect Your Valuable Assets!

I used to do a lot of work from my living room couch and had to find various ways to keep my nuts cool and protected. The best I'd found was a kitchen cutting board, but it didn't bring my laptop high enough for wrist comfort. Enter: the CushTop accessory. Priced a bit high, it looked to me just like...a pillow. I've also used a pillow before, sitting cross-legged (which gives the height) with a pillow to absorb the heat. I could get an equivalent pillow (sans marketing gimmicks) for half the price; in fact, a lot of maternity wedge pillows would do just what's needed.

I'm an eco-terrorist!

I just sent an email to Sylvania Lighting that I won't be buying any more of their compact fluorescents until they fix a delay when switched on and until they use recyclable packaging. The irony of selling fluorescent lamps which are better for the environment (less product waste and energy used/wasted) in plastic packaging that just goes to a landfill...

Recycling around here is not easy; we switched trash companies to one that offered recycling but I have concerns that they've stopped since they changed trucks. I can't use them for cardboard recycling, it's more difficult to put it in a bag than to throw it in my trunk and drive it up to the county recycling center. If I'm doing that, I might as well do the rest since this trash company isn't cheap and hasn't treated my property well--they broke one of my trash cans almost immediately and then "replaced" it with one of theirs which broke a few months later. They haven't fixed or replaced that one, either.

Paper and cardboard and glass and plastic are pretty easy to recycle, compared to things like computer parts or fluorescent bulbs. Even going to Lamp Recycle doesn't yield anything direct. I already know I need to recycle, I need someone to tell me where and to do it for no (or little) cost.

Sunday, November 12, 2006

For Paul Graham, It's All About The Benjamins

In his essay, Mind the Gap, Paul Graham argues that the increasing disparity of income and wealth is a positive force, keeping the pace with widening levels of productivity. To Paul, wealth is an indication that what you do is of greater value to society and that value will lead to greater advancement for society, thereby increasing their ability to produce and gain wealth.

While that is true in some cases, he dismisses out of hand arguments against this universal statement. Wealth, as is relates to income, rises as society values your worth, as it relates to money. 100%. However, the value of a person's work is not wholly dependent upon what people will pay for it.

Capitalist societies often place monetary values in direct contrast to societal value--while the market may allow for the average baseball player to make 72 times as much as the average worker, what they offer society is not inherently 72 times more valuable. Baseball offers a diversion and that diversion is far less necessary or productive than a teacher, a firefighter, a police officer, or a soldier. These professions all have artificially low monetary values because they are usually paid by the government; even in private practice, it is extremely rare for anyone in these professions to make significantly more than their public counterparts. Further examples extend beyond the limits of my hard drive.

Separately, Paul limits to "a few", the amount of corruption and exploitation within governments and corporations. As we have seen in the last few years, businesses (and the governments partnered with them) will happily rape their customers to get a buck. Society is told that gasoline prices tripled because of supply problems due to acts of God and foreign wars, yet the companies selling that gasoline turn record profits. Governments hand out contracts to private industries without oversight or competition, but this is in no way related to previous or future employment of government officials. While many would argue this corruption and exploitation is no greater now than before, it is distinctly more blatant and runs contrary to Paul's statements.

And though the quality of life that the "middle class" enjoys today far exceeds that of 50 or 100 years ago, Paul creates a red herring in arguing that it's "absolute poverty you want to avoid, not relative poverty". By
that statement, we should all be exceedingly happy that we don't live in the third world. Relative poverty is a concern when the technology exists to improve that situation; definitely, a new "relative" poverty would be created, but why allow any kind of poverty that we can cure--isn't it better to advance society as far as it can go? We would have improved the situation of many to produce and thereby improved productivity of us all.

Isn't that what Paul wants?

Mine is not an argument over whether or not the work is "honorable" or "meaningful" or other subjective characteristics, only that money is not and never will be the sole definition of the societal worth of a person. An individual may offer society far more in terms of advancement without getting anything in return--many of our largest leaps forward have come from servants who worked diligently for the benefit of all even at the expense of themselves.

Money is not the only motivator and as such is not the only measure.

Paul is very right that work should be rewarded; it is ironic that he argues one should not be paid extra for painting his house with a toothbrush when, in discussing the extravagances some take to demonstrate their wealth, he gives the example of automobiles made by hand rather than machine. In that case, the effort is exactly what is being rewarded even though an inferior product may be produced.

People require incentives to excel. That so many people have viewed money as the only incentive is distressing and culminates with a poorer society in every other respect: happiness, culture, education, love. Many artists have died in the gutter because no one appreciated their worth until long after their bodies withered, but those artists chose to continue in their pursuits even when they lacked monetary wealth. They found compensation in something else and that should not be discounted and ignored.

It's never only been about money and we should fight any attempt to reduce it to such.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Modest Change: No more television.

My life is far more cluttered than I want it to be, so I'm going to begin instituting modest change: No more television.

When I get home from work after 2AM, I tend to turn on the television and surf a bit, watch some news, public access, maybe a movie. Because my laptop lacked wireless to work in the living room, I've been relegated to my office which lacks a DVD or VHS player. Similarly in the morning when I'm checking email. Yet the time I've spent watching television (or trying to watch television) was highly unrewarding. I quit.

Instead, I'll use this as an incentive to finish my MythTV setup--I'd had plans to build a MythTV system and use my laptop as the display, streaming live television or recorded programs. While this might mean I watch television again, it will be on my terms and I will choose what I want to watch and when.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

I'm a Georgia Voter

I voted today. In a strange mix of "the devil I know" and "incumbency is the root of corruption", I voted primarily Democratic with the occasional Republican to break entrenched criminality. In most cases, I know that the Republican candidate was a mix of policies I disagree with and personality I despise. I can't support anyone who believes our most important task is to invade the bedroom with the courts, the courts with the church, the church with the politician.

I voted today. Even though I lamented yesterday that our government does not support those who fall in the line of duty, I voted against a referendum to eliminate property taxes upon the (un-remarried) surviving spouse of a police officer or fire fighter. While the intent is very worthwhile, the law is overreaching and removing it once it's codified is more difficult than starting fresh and writing a fair law. The rule would encourage the surviving spouse to not remarry, has no sunset provision nor income restrictions. As I stated before, the government does not bear sole responsibility for caring for the individual, only giving that individual the means and opportunity to care for himself. Eliminating taxes of any kind would be a great benefit but should not last until the death of the surviving spouse! A graduated scale, slowly decreasing the tax exemption over a fixed number of years or as dependents entered adulthood, is far more responsible. Capping the exemption at a certain value, limiting it to certain income levels, reducing the benefit over time...all of these help ensure that the benefit is targeted best to those who need it without showering gifts upon those who don't.

I voted today. I wish I could feel better about it. After watching the HBO documentary Hacking Democracy, enthusiasm is difficult to find. My innocence is gone, my hope that there was anything standing in the way of complete usurpation of democracy. It isn't ignorance which keeps society from seeing this possibility, it's delusion. The very idea is so frightening that they refuse to contemplate it. If the election, all elections, everywhere, could be rigged...

I voted today. I don't believe that all elections are yet rigged, if only because of the scale required. It is both my responsibility and my right and I will exercise it, if only in defiance to those who would poison the well of self-determination. And tomorrow, when I look upon those who have gained or retained power through corruption and perversion, I must step forward and speak out against the evil that festers in the darkness of naiveté and fear. If the majority would trade to their master their rights for comfort then we must fill that role. We can no longer allow the manipulators to rule because we believe in the ideal more than the reality. The end cannot justify the means but if the means are inevitable, then it is only the end that can be changed.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Thank You for Smoking: I cannot praise this film enough.

This is one of the best films I've seen come out of the last twenty years of Hollywood schlock.

It's a testament to the quality of the script that so many brilliant actors attached themselves to a film that cost $7.5 million to make (chump change in modern productions). Aaron Eckhart owns this movie--he is the life and soul of Nick Naylor and brings every character around him into the world. Talents such as Rob Lowe and Sam Eliot hold pivotal roles but little screen time, in the true sense of what a supporting actor is supposed to be.

Nick Naylor should be despised for his defense of an industry which deliberately addicts children and lies to the populace. But you won't. You'll love him for his honesty and intellect and the conviction that everyone deserves a defense, even tobacco companies. This is a movie which will make you think and should be discussed with other passionate, intelligent people.

9 out of 10: Proof that comedies can go toe to toe with overwrought dramatic headliners and win.

[This was originally written as a review for IMDB.]

Honey over vinegar

Fast Company has a brief article about Lewis Black and the poor customer service that gives him material.

Private donations assist families of Iraq servicemen

I was reading today about The Fallen Patriot Fund, a project of Mark Cuban's foundation. The object of the fund is to raise and distribute moneys to the families of servicemen killed or seriously wounded in Iraq. As I read the front page story, I became impassioned about it and thought about how much money I could send to these fa--Wait a minute. Why the fuck do we need private donations to care for the families of servicemen killed in action? How can it be argued that this is not the responsibility of our government? I feel as repulsed by this as every time I'm called up to donate to some fund for police or fire--if you put your life on the line to protect others on orders from the government, that government has the duty to stand by your family and care for them if you cannot. It doesn't have to be fancy; losing a husband or a father or a wife or a mother does not excuse the rest of the family from their own responsibility in caring for themselves, but the government needs to step up and provide the best opportunity for that family to do so.

We, as citizens of this democracy, cannot be negligent and allow this role to be filled only through private donations, through whatever means may (or may not) be available in a time of need. Whether fire-fighter, police officer, soldier or other public servant who endangers their life at our request, their family should be cared for by all of us, not only the willing donations.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

People say I'm a Republican hater.

Exactly. I hate lying, cheating and stealing. I don't want a government which lines the pockets of a favored few with money from the many. I don't want a government comprised of individuals too cowardly to put themselves at risk defending our country but enthusiastic about sending others to do so. I don't want a government which believes we should return to the "good old days" when men beat their wives and minorities were lynched with impunity, where rights were only guaranteed to white men, where people who wanted change were spied upon and ostricized.

The Democratic party, for all of its many faults, is far more progressive and is working positively toward change and preserving the advances we've already made. No party nor individual is perfect, so you must choose what is best, sometimes from the worst.

I smite thee! ...The Diary of Nod