Mark

Dr. Seuss Goes to War

1 Comment / Politics / /

Dr. Seuss Went to War: A Catalog of Political Cartoons by Dr. Seuss : Dr. Seuss (Theodor Seuss Geisel, 1904-1991) is known best for his many brilliant children’s books, and he is not known as a political cartoonist, yet for two years (1941-1943) he was the chief editorial cartoonist for the New York newspaper PM, and he drew over 400 editorial cartoons. The cartoons range from the critical and cynical to the outright supportive, and, I must say, its a bit disturbing to recognize his unique style being put to use in such a way…

gods amongst mortals

Computers & Internet / /

Information gods is a series of articles written by Brad Wardell about those who know how to find and digest information quickly and effectively with the tools on the internet. They are “information gods”, and they are much more productive than the majority of people, who are still figuring out how to open attachments on an email (if they are on the net at all). The main thrust of the articles is that “the gap between information gods and information mortals grows wider every day. The tools for gathering information gets better. The amount of data available grows. And the experience they have in finding it and using it increases.” Its an interesting series, and its funny when you see info gods clash with info mortals in a debate. Guess who generally does better?

If you are not criticized, you may not be doing much.

Politics / /

Rumsfeld’s Rules by Donald Rumsfeld [PDF version]: 14 pages of bulleted wisdom that have kept Mr. Rumsfeld alive and well in the White House and on the Hill for three decades. He compiled it during his first stint as Secretary of Defence in the late 1970s. It gives some insight into the man, his actions, and the actions of others in similar positions (as well as some points about business, politics and life in general), though I’m sure there are plenty of people who’ll claim that the man isn’t following his own rules (to them I’d like to point out the last rule). It also highlights some of the broader attitudes of our governmental system and how it differs from other systems… Some examples:

  • Don’t accept the post or stay unless you have an understanding with the President that you’re free to tell him what you think “with the bark off” and you have the courage to do it.
  • In the execution of Presidential decisions work to be true to his views, in fact and tone.
  • Learn to say “I don’t know.” If used when appropriate, it will be often.
  • In our system leadership is by consent, not command…
  • Don’t divide the world into “them” and “us.” Avoid infatuation with or resentment of the press, the Congress, rivals, or opponents. Accept them as facts. They have their jobs and you have yours.
  • Don’t automatically obey Presidential directives if you disagree or if you suspect he hasn’t considered key aspects of the issue.
  • Let your family, staff, and friends know that you’re still the same person, despite all the publicity and notoriety that accompanies your position.
  • Most of the 50 or so invitations you receive each week come from people inviting the President’s Chief of Staff, not you. If you doubt that, ask your predecessor how many he received last week.
  • When you raise issues with the President, try to come away with both that decision and also a precedent. Pose issues so as to evoke broader policy guidance. This can help to answer a range of similar issues likely to arise later.
  • “Every government looking at the actions of another government and trying to explain them always exaggerates rationality and conspiracy, and underestimates incompetency and fortuity.” (Silberman’s Law of Diplomacy, U.S. Circuit Court Judge Laurence Silberman)
  • If you try to please everybody, somebody’s not going to like it.
  • “No plan survives contact with the enemy.” (Old military axiom)
  • “In unanimity there may well be either cowardice or uncritical thinking.” (Unknown)

I think you get the idea. Interesting stuff… (don’t forget to read the last rule:)

#!usr/bin/legal

Computers & Internet / /

Law School in a Nutshell, Part 1 by James Grimmelmann : Lawyers spend years learning to read and write legalese, and James makes a striking correlation between legal writing and a programming language.

To understand why legalese is so incomprehensible, think about it as the programming language Legal. It may have been clean and simple once, but that was before it suffered from a thousand years of feature creep and cut-and-paste coding. Sure, Legal is filled with bizzare keywords, strange syntax, and hideous redundancy, but what large piece of software isn’t? Underneath the layers of cruft, serious work is taking place.

For the rest of the article, James goes page by page and takes you through the intricacies and minutiae of a legale brief (for Eldred v. Ashcroft). Its only the first part, but its informative and well written. Another interesting note, as commented at the bottom of the page:

If “$plain_text = $file_key ^ $xor_block” seems unapproachable, consider what those not trained in the language of legal citation would make of “111 F.Supp.2d 294, 326 (S.D.N.Y. 2000).” Each is meaningless to those unfamiliar with the language; but each is more precise and compact for those who do understand than would be an English narrative equivalent. — James S. Tyre, Programmers’ & Academics’ Amici Brief in “MPAA v. 2600” Case

Updates: Part II and Part III

Torpedo in the Water!

Movies / /

The First Annual Torpedo Awards over at filmfodder is an interesting read. The award “honors” a film performance by an actor or actress that is so bad it keeps a good movie from being a great movie, hence “torpedoing” it. They’ve done a decent job of it, picking out most of the obvious ones (such as Sofia Coppola in “The Godfather III”, The entire leading cast of “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”, Denise Richards in “The World is Not Enough”, or my personal favourite Jeremy London in “Mallrats” – that guy couldn’t deliver Smith’s brilliant dialogue for shit) and making a few controversial but debateable choices (such as Jack Nicholson in “The Shining”, Quentin Tarantino in “Pulp Fiction”, or, perhaps not so controversial, Mark Hamill in “Star Wars”). The only glaring ommission I can see (and I’m notoriously bad at picking stuff like this) is Edward Furlong in “Terminator 2”. That whole crackly-voiced whiny-ass punk kid routine got real annoying real fast. Of course, there were other problems with T2, and you’re supposed to look only at the performance not the role, but I think that movie could have been a lot better had it not been for little Eddy’s performance… I’m sure there are lots of others – anyone want to give it a shot?

Saturn Ascends

Culture / /

James Grimmelmann has revitalized the Laboratorium. He started blogging again, and since I mostly missed out on it last time, that makes me happy because its a pleasure to read his stuff. For the past year or so, he’s been experimenting with various forms of writing and new web tools (that dam twiki-web thing that doesn’t seem to work all that well) but has largely neglected the site with updates coming only spuratically. It looks as if he’s going to stick to it this time, though (which is more than I could say for myself!) Do yourself a favour and check him out.

The “return of saturn,” is a popular theme derived from astrology and is often used in literature (among other art, such as music) as a symbol for a period of change in a person’s life. Metaphorically speaking, you could say that James’ Saturn is returning. I’m not sure how old he is, but this may even be true in the asrological sense, not that it would really matter. In any case, I was thinking about that idea when I came across James’ revision, so that’s why I named the post “Saturn Ascends”. And you know how much I love cataloging lifes little footnotes…

Footnotes from Beyond the Zero, part III

Arts & Letters / /

This is yet another in what will likely be a long series of posts cataloging some of the interesting little footnotes I’ve been making while reading Thomas Pynchon’s novel, Gravity’s Rainbow. The prose is beautiful and thick with historical references, and so when I come upon a particularly interesting passage or historical tidbit, I note it here. See also: [part I | part II]

  • Rundstedt offensive : Gerd von Rundstedt (1875-1953) was one of Adolf Hitler’s most respected military leaders in World War II. In 1944, this German field marshal directed the Ardennes offensive (most famous for the Battle of the Bulge). General Dwight D. Eisenhower called him the ablest of the German generals of World War II.
  • Pierre Janet : A psychologist and neurologist, Janet was influential in bringing about in France and the United States a connection between academic psychology and the clinical treatment of mental illnesses. He stressed psychological factors in hypnosis and contributed to the modern concept of mental and emotional disorders involving anxiety, phobias, and other abnormal behaviour.
  • German Communist Party (KPD) : After WWI, some socialists and communists began to form more radical groups. In December, 1918, a group of radicals established the German Communist Party (KPD). One of the more influential leaders of this revolution, Rosa Luxemburg who was executed in an attempt to cull the rebellion, is referenced in the book quite a bit. Throughout the 1920s the KPD was very much under the influence of Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Germany’s KPD became the largest Communist Party outside the Soviet Union and was fairly successful in elections until Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party came to power, at which point the KPD was banned and its leaders imprisoned.
  • A nice quote: “Yet who can presume to say what the War wants, so vast and aloof it is… so absentee.
  • Another quote: “…look at the forms of capitalist expression. Pornographies: pornographies of love, erotic love, Christian love, boy-and-his-dog, pornographies of sunsets, pornographies of killing, and pornographies of deduction — ahh that sigh when we guess the murderer — all these novels, these films and songs they lull us with, they’re approaches, more comfortable and less so, to that Absolute Comfort.”
  • One of Pynchon’s interesting talents is his ability to sum up a character with a single sentence: “He has, had, this way of removing all the excitement from things with a few words. Not even well-chosen words: he’s that way by instinct.” I’ve known people like that, and I knew everything I needed to know about this character from reading this one sentence.

That does it for this installment of Footnotes from Beyond the Zero. For more riveting info: [part I | part II]

Kryptonian Love Problems

1 Comment / Culture / /

Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex by Larry Niven : A funny and very graphic (you were warned) description of the physiological problems Superman would face if he were to attempt to procreate. Niven is best known for his Science Fiction novels, most notably Ringworld (and its sequels), but he shows a biting sense of humour in this essay… Also, as an interesting side note, the influence of this article can be witnessed in Kevin Smith’s Mallrats:

Brodie: It’s impossible, Lois could never have Superman’s baby. Do you think her fallopian tubes could handle his sperm? I guarantee he blows a load like a shotgun, right through her back. What about her womb, you think it’s strong enough to carry his child?

TS: Sure, why not?

Brodie: He’s an alien for Christssake. His Kryptonian biological makeup is enhanced by Earth’s yellow sun. If Lois gets a tan the kid could kick right through her stomach. Only someone like Wonderwoman has a strong enough uterus to carry his kid. The only way he could bang regular chicks is with a Kryptonite condom, but that would kill him.

When compared to Niven’s article, the only new thing is the kryptonite condom bit, but its funny nonetheless… Still, Niven’s article is great…[thanks to Jim Miller]

Spy Games

Security & Intelligence / /

Working with the CIA by Garrett Jones : An interesting and informative article written by a retired case officer for the CIA. His stated goal is to provide insight into the working relationship between the military and the CIA. Basically, what it comes down to is communication: The CIA doesn’t understand enough about the Military and its operations, and, conversely, the Military doesn’t understand enough about the CIA and its operations. Good, effective communication is essential. In the course of explaining the ins-and-outs of the profession, Jones illuminates some of the unique logistical challenges of the profession, as well as some of the “pretty strange people” you meet when recruiting intelligence “assets”:

Before everything else, human assets are recruited because they have access to secret information that can be obtained in no other manner. This means that not only may the asset not be a nice person, it also means he was not selected because he was brave, smart, or particularly hard-working.

…

Thus, by definition, the best assets are pretty strange people. The case officers handling these assets normally develop a fairly complicated relationship with their assets, becoming everything from father confessor to morale booster, from disciplinarian to best buddy. Like sausages and laws, if you have a queasy stomach, you don’t want to see the case officer-asset relationship up close.

As usual, crappy movies and video games have given us the wrong idea about the intelligence community… Spies aren’t super-commandos or James Bond-like secret agents, they are mostly just repeating what they’ve heard from people or what has come across their desk. They do not react favourably to being asked to do something new and strange. Additionally, Jones notes that “existing CIA stations were not established in order to support your mission, and existing CIA human assets were not originally recruited to support your mission”. What this means is that intelligence is slow, and that there will be a lot of frustration and anxiety before the situation improves. Again, its a fascinating article, and well worth the read. [found via the Punchstack]

Amateur

Movies / /

The internet has given voice to many an amateur, and usually, the term “amateur” is appropriate. But in some cases, the quantity and quality of material produced renders the term meaningless. James Berardinelli has been reviewing films on the internet for years, and he does so more consistantly and thouroughly than many professional film critics. In a certain sense, he is anything but an “amateur”. Take this recent review of My Big Fat Greek Wedding. With one line he completely sums up my feelings about the movie:

Watching this movie is like eating cotton candy – there’s a lot of sweetness and not much substance, but it’s a joy to consume while it lasts.

That line is just so dead-on that it’s almost scary. Unlike a lot of web gems, Mr. Berardinelli actually has achieved a certain amount of recognition, from people like me to big name film critics like Roger Ebert, and it is well deserved, too.