Duane Gran’s log of thoughts

If you run a blog, take a survey from the nice folks at MIT.

They’ve got used to freedom, so why do Russians still hunger for the USSR?

Yet there is a discernible nostalgia for the terrible simplifications of the old days. In a poll conducted in 2003, the Russian Centre for Public Opinion found that 53 per cent of Russians still regard Stalin as a “great” leader. The explanation is not far to seek. The collapse of Communism has meant not just greater freedom but also widening inequality and a dramatic decline in average living standards.

I wouldn’t call Stalin great, nor would I describe the results of his regime as positive, but it doesn’t surprise me that Russians long for the past. They endured a twisted form of Socialism and now they endure a likewise maligned Capitalist environment. Purists on both ends can argue about whether they achieved either, but no one can dispute they’ve done badly at both.

Flight Suits

For decades, the old fashioned have lamented the way young people - and now most people - dress for air travel. The advent of more stringent security measures in the nearly four years since the 9/11 attacks might have been expected to usher in a return to formal dressing, as a way of appearing respectable and drawing less scrutiny. But in fact the opposite seems to have happened.

I think it is a bit of a stretch to blame security policies for poor choice of clothing on flights, as I witnessed the decline of flight decorum well before terrorism became a household word. I’m in the minority when I dress in what I consider appropriate clothing for a public space, but I understand how many people are opting for loose-fitting shoes. Every time I fly a plane it makes me upset at the state of rail travel in America. Dressing well is a means to putting my mind in a better place to endure the indignities of security measures.

Portrait of a Textile Worker: art quilt project by Terese Agnew

One day while shopping in a department store I noticed huge signs everywhere — Calvin Klein, Liz Claiborne, Kathy Lee and so on. They were all proper names. I’d recently met two garment workers and realized that by contrast, their identity was rarely thought of and often deliberately hidden. That anonymity could be undone by assembling a view of one worker using the well-known names on apparel she produced.

While a small part of the overall struggle, projects like this raise interesting questions about the invisibility of the poor.

A Daily Progress article discusses a grassroots initiative by C’ville Rail to extend the Virginia Railway Express from Manassas to Charlottesville. Currently Amtrak services the area, but it stops infrequently and the line is more of a pass-through service, which means that it is often crowded, which speaks to demand for more rail service.

I plan on getting involved and encourage others in Central Virginia to participate as well.

In related news, a Washington Post article details some budget cuts to Amtrak which threaten its sustainability.

Amtrak would have to end all of its cross-country routes, service between Chicago and New Orleans and the Auto Train to Florida under big cuts in taxpayer subsidies approved Wednesday by a House subcommittee.

While I understand that some routes may not be practical, I certainly hope that we can apply some pressure on lawmakers to renew some of the funding for Amtrak.

Update: This is being covered on cvillenews.com as well.

The US House of Representatives approved a constitutional amendment that would prohibit flag burning and the like. From the article:

The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.”

Given patriotic sentiment as of late, it is expected to pass in the Senate. My personal view is that the amendment raises a serious question about the sacred nature of the flag. After all, how can one desecrate something unless it is sacred? Additionally, what exactly is “the flag?” Is it anything depicting the symbol, from that which flies on flag pole to that which is used in newspaper advertising and cheap renditions on magnets?

I’ve long felt a sense of ire toward people who leave flags out over night (unlit), wear the flag on clothing, let it become dirty, or even fly it tattered on their auto. These all seem disrespectful, but to each their own.

I have no intentions of burning a flag or any such behavior, nor do I think it is an appropriate form of protest, but I agree with Representative Jerrold Nadler when he recently said, “If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents.”

Update: Check out a humorous and insightful article from John Scalzi to illustrate the complexities in defining just what is meant by “the Flag.”

Peak Oil Presentation in the US Congress by Roscoe Bartlett

What is the current U.S. status? We have only 2 percent, between 2 and 3 percent, not really known for certain, but approximately 2 percent of the known reserves of oil. We use 25 percent of the world’s oil. By the way, we have about 8 percent of the world production. What that means is if we have only 2 percent of the reserves and 8 percent of the production, that means we are real good at pumping oil, does it not? That means we are pumping our reserves at roughly four times faster than the rest of the world. That means that this 2 percent will not stay 2 percent by and by because we are so good at pumping oil, we are going to be down to 1 percent of the known reserves in the world and we will still be using about 25 percent of the world’s oil.

At the risk of being labeled a “chicken little” for giving a damn about the problem, we need a wake up call. Bartlett isn’t trying to fan flames. He is trying to raise awareness that we can’t drill our way out of the problem, nor can we expect to continue with such high levels of consumption. I’ve read some horror stories about Peak Oil, including reviews of One Long Emergency which paint a gloomy picture of the post oil-rich world.

I tend to believe that reality lies somewhere between blithe optimism, which says that humanity will innovate its way out of the problem, and downright cynicism which says that the whole of western capitalism will be brought to its knees. Most likely I think that the things we take for granted, such as frequent commutes and affordable plastic products, will be challenged gradually through rising prices. There will be time for most people to adjust, and unfortunately, for those who will be hurt most by the transition, the time will do little to aid them. If the predictions hold true, a lifestyle more like what we see in Europe may become a necessary reality.

This won’t bother me, but I can’t help but think that some of the doomsday predictions — going so far as predicting the demise of suburbia — are far fetched and self-serving to an audience that hopes that constricted supply of oil may transform America into a European utopia. I’ll confess a certain amount of enchantment with the idea, but the better part of my reason says that America won’t go quietly into the night. When quitting cold turkey one is likely to exhibit some desperate behavior, so war over oil and water is almost inevitable unless Liberals can reconfigure the culture wars around social justice instead of selfishness.

In my opinion this is what is really at stake. How can we ween ourselves from the oil windfall of the past one hundred years without behaving like junkies and hurting our neighbors in the process. Strap in folks, because it isn’t going to be pretty.

An MS article summarizes some key points of NBC Dateline investigation into the labor practices of factories in Bangladesh. They went undercover to discover labor practices that border on slave labor, even by the lax standards in Asia. The worst part is that America’s largest company, walmart, promotes such abuse and degradation. From the article:

When we were undercover as Hansen Fashions, an executive told us that he wanted to pay higher wages, but he claims Wal-Mart wouldn’t agree to pay even a penny more per garment.

Executive: “A few years back, I told Wal-Mart, “Give me one cents more a piece, one cent. I will use that money for these poor people.” He says, ‘No, give us two cents less.’”

Walmart responded:

Wal-Mart declined to be interviewed on camera, but in e-mails to Dateline the company says: “We strongly believe that our business… and the wages and benefits we provide have helped improve the lives of many thousands of workers in many parts of the world.”

The ability of the human mind to rationalize injustice is unbounded.

I just got back from a weekend in Washington DC to attend a baby shower (well, not me, but you know what I mean) and to visit with a few people. Having lived there for three years you would think that I understood the place, but I always see it with new eyes when I go back. On the whole I love the area and feel a certain energy from it all, but I was left with the following reflections.

• Having walked the shops of Georgetown, it is a wonder that anyone can dress well in the city. I caught the clothes bug after leaving, so I saw some old shops with new eyes. Many of the Italian shops along Wisconsin Avenue give Italy a bad name. Que Mala! There must be another section of the city where diplomats and politicos can dress with confidence, but all I saw were cheaply made clothing for club outings.
• Traffic was surprisingly light. Maybe I have just come to expect the worst, but I zipped around pretty easily this time.
• There is something in the air or the water that seems to draw conversation into materialistic or work-related topics. Maybe everyone is weary of the same old political debates by the weekend, but I found it fatiguing at times. I’m all the more convinced that it is rude dinner conversation to discuss the price of things, especially when it is done to exclaim one’s super hero status for affording the unaffordable. Places like Washington are the source for that oft-said phrase, “conspicuous consumption.”
• Food was great, but service was spotty. Oh well, you can’t have it all, unless you are in Italy.

Why don’t we do it in the road?

In Suzhou, the traffic rules are simple. “There are no rules,” as one local told me. A city of 2.2 million people, Suzhou has 500,000 cars and 900,000 bicycles, not to mention hundreds of pedicabs, mopeds and assorted, quainter forms of transportation. Drivers of all modes pay little attention to the few traffic signals and weave wildly from one side of the street to another. Defying survival instincts, pedestrians have to barge between oncoming cars to cross the roads.

But here’s the catch: During the 10 days I spent in Suzhou last fall, I didn’t see a single accident. Really, not a single one. Nor was there any of the road rage one might expect given the anarchy that passes for traffic policy. And despite the obvious advantages that accrue to cars because of their size, no single transportation mode dominates the streets. On the contrary, the urban arterials are a communal mix of automobiles, cyclists, pedestrians, and small businesses such as inner-tube repairmen that set up shop directly in the right-of-way.

When I was in Rome earlier this year I witnessed a similar phenomenon. As crazy as it sounds, it actually works. Probably the thing I like the most about it is that it recognizes that public spaces are for transportation, not necessarily built for one mode of transport. I can’t begin to tell how many times I’ve been “informed” by motorists that me and my bike aren’t permitted on their roads.

Update (19 April 2006): See a wonderful video of a street in India for an example of vehicle, bike and pedestrian traffic merging and co-mingling. The chaos is disturbing and enlightening all at once.

Folks in the media business are wringing their hands over why the film Cinderella Man is doing badly in theaters. Because I’m a willing outcast, having no cell phone or TV, I rarely understand these things, but I’m giddy with joy to have a reasonable explanation.

A month ago I made my obligatory pilgrimage to the movie house to see Star Wars episode 3. Thereupon I learned that they are now showing advertisements ahead of the feature (egads!) but the mainstay of previews remain. This gives procrastinators some extra time, and I suppose it is better to have them annoy me during a preview than the movie. One preview looked pretty interesting and inspiring, even if they did lift some ideas out of the Rocky franchise, but then it happened… after all the build up and good vibes the movie-announcer-guy concluded the trailer by saying, in the low voice only announcer-guy can do, “Cinderella Man.”

The audience, myself included, laughed. It wasn’t one of those, “woo, that is funny, I think I’ll go see that” laughs. It was a “look at the gimp over there, let’s go throw stones at him” laugh. At this point I knew that the film would be a flop no matter what.

But why? Why, oh why must it fail? Quite simply, films live or die based on Monday morning water cooler (or foosball, if you will) conversations. Someone comes up and says, “Hey Bob, how was your weekend?” Like hell if you are going to admit to seeing a movie called Cinderella Man. “Nothing much, John, but I did mow the lawn”, you reply. There it is, folks. If no one will admit to seeing the movie it doesn’t stand a chance.

Update (18 May 2006): I eventually saw the film on video, and I’m eating a healthy plate of crow. The movie was actually very well done and illustrated the hardship of the Great Depression with sensitivity and grace.

Secret life of the OpenSolaris code

A cursory search through the code [for OpenSolaris] revealed almost a complete lack of commonly-used profanity. This is in contrast with other examples such as the leaked Windows 2000 code and the Linux kernel project — which are famous in coding circles for the number of rude words programmers have included in an adult-rated effort to describe how a particular portion of the code works.

While I’ve been a Sun fan for years, having run the Solaris Central site between 1988 and 2003, this cracks me up. Someone should put together a code metric on LoP - Lines of Profanity.

It isn’t every day that find my inspiration in The American Conservative but I’m impressed by an article entitled Fear Factories by Matthew Scully. Liberals should read it so that they understand that Conservatives are thoughtful and well-meaning people. Conservatives should read it to understand a new and compelling argument on what has traditionally been a Liberal cause. The ethics of industrial farming is an issue where we can find common ground.

The entire article is quotable and well-written, but I want to draw out a portion that spoke to me:

We know man as he is, not only the rational creature but also, as Socrates told us, the rationalizing creature, with a knack for finding an angle, an excuse, and a euphemism. Whether it’s the pornographer who thinks himself a free-speech champion or the abortionist who looks in the mirror and sees a reproductive health-care services provider, conservatives are familiar with the type.

So we should not be all that surprised when told that these very same capacities are often at work in the things that people do to animals—and all the more so in our $125 billion a year livestock industry. The human mind, especially when there is money to be had, can manufacture grand excuses for the exploitation of other human beings. How much easier it is for people to excuse the wrongs done to lowly animals.

….

Yet when corporate farmers need barbed wire around their Family Farms and Happy Valleys and laws to prohibit outsiders from taking photographs (as is the case in two states) and still other laws to exempt farm animals from the definition of “animals” as covered in federal and state cruelty statues, something is amiss. And if conservatives do nothing else about any other animal issue, we should attend at least to the factory farms, where the suffering is immense and we are all asked to be complicit.

Scully calls for a Humane Farming Act to address the maladies he describes in his article and his recent book, Dominion. I don’t find any references to this in the legislative record, but I certainly think it is worth our while to consider it.

House panel OKs big cuts in public broadcast funding

In addition, the subcommittee acted to eliminate within two years all federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — which passes federal funds to public broadcasters — starting with a 25 percent reduction for next year, from $400 million to $300 million.

How is that we can afford to spend one billion dollars a week on war but we can’t afford half a billion dollars annually on public programming that teaches kids to read? If you feel strongly about this, check for a representative on the House Appropriations Committee. Additionally, you can use a form mailer, courtesy of Common Cause, to express your concern.

Update (6/24/05): According to a Washington Post article, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to renew funding for CPB.

Just a friendly reminder to vote in the primary today if you live in Virginia.

You find out some peculiar things when you google search on your name. In my case, about three pages inward I found a suspicious attribution to me. Here is the link (with obligitory nofollow tagging). The page includes audio and other nastiness — you are forewarned if you are curious.

I’m not vain enough to think that I’m a household name, but my name is unique enough that I don’t want it diluted with some crass marketing attribution, especially for a dubious service. Therefore, I wanted to share this public service message to clarify that I have nothing to do with the “power of you” network and that I don’t endorse their services. I’ve left notice with them to have my name removed, or to clarify the city of residence for the person who endorses the product.

Update (7/20/05): After several polite requests, the offending party has de-listed me as an endorsing party. In fact, it seems that the whole page is down and there are no more traces of this mess.

Bolivian protesters have taken over seven oil feilds, reminiscent of the past water rebellion. The parallels are striking, as in both cases the public interest in oil and water were sold off to private multinationals, at the behest of the International Monetary Fund. Opinions vary, but in any peasant uprising there are marxist and capitalist viewpoints. The latter link addresses more general issues of Latin America’s recent rejection of neoliberalism.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes for the peasants to be branded as terrorists. If their voices are heard we find a different story altogether:

“It’s true that indigenous peoples are a threat, from the point of view of the political and economic powers- that-be. They see us as terrorists, but we aren’t, because our struggle is open, legal and legitimate,” said Ricardo Díaz, an indigenous lawmaker with the leftist Movement Towards Socialism (MAS), the strongest opposition party in Bolivia.

Indeed, MAS poses a threat to international capitalism, but it shouldn’t be such a controversial notion that Bolivians should own and direct the purpose of their natural resources. That may not sit well with foreign interests, but it is the right move for Bolivia.

Yesterday I had a surreal experience, as I tuned my radio into the AM band — away from my familiar NPR and BBC stations. I’m astonished at the stuff I heard and the litany of right-wing noise. The only thing more scary than Lars Larson and Sean Hannity are the disciples who call in. In less than a half hour I discovered that people like me hate America, don’t support the troops and should be deported. Naturally all of these are patently false, but several things gave me pause for thought:

• When a caller confronted the radio personality on the lunacy of something, said talk show host responded with a critique of former President Clinton.
• Time gaps between dialog, commercials and about everything are meticulously controlled. It actually caused me some fatigue and I yearned for a pause. Are they afraid that someone may turn the dial if there is a one second pause?
• The advertisements between the content (provided that you don’t think of the content as a right-wing ad in the first place) were mostly for speed reading courses, predatory loan schemes and various riff-raff. Possibly the worst was an ad for Rush Limbaugh, proclaiming, “If he doesn’t talk about it, you don’t need to know about it.” Really, that is what it said.

This reminds of a time last year when I stumbled upon a country music station and caught “the news”, which amounted to little more than a summary of a high school football game and a veiled advertisement for an auto dealer. I’m curious if the AM radio listeners make a similar sojourn into FM-land and are disturbed by NPR and BBC. I can only hope so.

Last week we found out the identity of Deep Throat and this week Apple announces that they are switching to the Intel processor. Hell hath frozen over, or something like that. As a long time mac user I have thoughts of trepidation, but I hope I’m wrong.

My biggest concern is that Apple may usher in DRM-enabled processors along with the benefits conferred by this transition. I’m not a data thief (lingering college tracks, but cut me some slack) so I prefer to not be treated as one, or dealing with technology that makes it annoying to use digital materials. While I expect that this annoyance would come for Windows users I anticipated that Apple was something of an ally on this front. Maybe they will remain so, but Intel and the paranoia of the media publishers is much larger than Apple.

In general I feel a tad stodgy about the whole situation. My machine is pretty darn fast already. Previous transitions on the Mac platform delivered obvious benefit for the trouble. This one feels like only trouble, but I’m probably wrong.

A Washington Post article gives some detail about an FBI software project that fell apart. A item caught my attention.

By March 2004, the FBI had “identified 400 problems but did not share them with SAIC because it did not want the contractor to think these were the only issues remaining,” the report says.

When critical information is withheld from the producers of software, failure should be no surprise. One of the keys to building good software is tightening the feedback loop between the development group and the stake holders. It is surprisingly easy to build the wrong solution, especially when bugs are hidden.