I don't necessarily want to repost repeatedly from metafilter but I thought, given the ideas in the last post, that I would share this.
Fear of the word 'nuclear' is a big problem. It shouldn't be. Nuclear is a great word.
"Waste" is a pretty bad word, but research is all that is needed.
We must be able to use the waste productively. It is what we do. Find uses for stuff.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
it's a whale fish
The Tyee, which I thought was solely an election blog, is actually not.
I looked at it today and found this article: 100 Mile Diet.
Premise, if you don't wish to read the article, is that the authors, a couple (I think) from Vancouver decided to only eat food grown in a 100 mile radius from their house. It was tough at times, but they got through it.
The main reason for this? Fossil fuel consumption. Eating foods grown miles away from you causes a large amount of pollution to be emitted by the trucks, trains and boats transporting the food. Okay, sounds good.
An important question, the question one always must ask, is what happens when everyone does it? It is all fine and dandy to have your own little project, to make a point (and it is a very good point), but I believe that it is untenable for the population at large if we maintain a need to have all of our food made for us.
Okay, so the problem is cost. We want the cheapest food possible. With economies of scale as they are, the cheapest food is often going to come from far away. With economies of scale, it is always going to be cheaper to have someone else produce your food than produce it yourself.
Cost is, in fact, always the problem. The 100 mile rule could be used for almost everything, but the economies of scale for electronics and furniture is huge. The problem is that the economies of scale for food is probably about the same. On the 100 mile diet blog they say that costs did skyrocket. And they hadn’t yet had to deal with the incredible demand put on the farmers that would ensue if we all chose to buy locally.
So, what is the problem? Our desire to be happy and the fact that this desire is so closely related to what we have/own. As much as people like to bandy about the idea that friends and family are the most important things a person can have (and that is true), it does not take into account the strain on said relationships that can result from needing to overwork, which is a very real problem if you remove economies of scale. (Although I have read recently that the high divorce rate now is related to the fact that people are so privileged now that they expect a happy marriage as opposed to the supportive marriage that existed up until most recently – with that in mind, family may become better when people have less because there will be more mutual (and necessary) support)
We can try to buy more locally, yes, (we can develop small economies of scale) but ultimately we need to develop better transportation methods, better fuels and better energy sources. While two young and unencumbered people may be able to do the 100 mile diet, I don’t think it tenable for the entire population.
I think food is much too cheap (most things are much too cheap) so it may be the case that, when true costs (i.e. the human suffering costs I referred to a few posts ago) are taken into account, that locally grown foods are more beneficial. Although I still think that, even if prices increased to allow foreign farmers (and all producers) a fair return, it will still be overall beneficial to have a world market. So, alternative energy is the key and maintaining a world market.
One thing I liked from the blog was this:
“A friend of ours has a theory that a night spent making jam–or in his case, perogies–with friends will always be better a time than the latest Hollywood blockbuster. We’re convinced.”
I am convinced too. Stupid movies. Although I finally bought The Wrong Guy. I think a few of my friends and I have definitely bonded over that.
I think I just experienced something of religious proportions.
I looked at it today and found this article: 100 Mile Diet.
Premise, if you don't wish to read the article, is that the authors, a couple (I think) from Vancouver decided to only eat food grown in a 100 mile radius from their house. It was tough at times, but they got through it.
The main reason for this? Fossil fuel consumption. Eating foods grown miles away from you causes a large amount of pollution to be emitted by the trucks, trains and boats transporting the food. Okay, sounds good.
An important question, the question one always must ask, is what happens when everyone does it? It is all fine and dandy to have your own little project, to make a point (and it is a very good point), but I believe that it is untenable for the population at large if we maintain a need to have all of our food made for us.
Okay, so the problem is cost. We want the cheapest food possible. With economies of scale as they are, the cheapest food is often going to come from far away. With economies of scale, it is always going to be cheaper to have someone else produce your food than produce it yourself.
Cost is, in fact, always the problem. The 100 mile rule could be used for almost everything, but the economies of scale for electronics and furniture is huge. The problem is that the economies of scale for food is probably about the same. On the 100 mile diet blog they say that costs did skyrocket. And they hadn’t yet had to deal with the incredible demand put on the farmers that would ensue if we all chose to buy locally.
So, what is the problem? Our desire to be happy and the fact that this desire is so closely related to what we have/own. As much as people like to bandy about the idea that friends and family are the most important things a person can have (and that is true), it does not take into account the strain on said relationships that can result from needing to overwork, which is a very real problem if you remove economies of scale. (Although I have read recently that the high divorce rate now is related to the fact that people are so privileged now that they expect a happy marriage as opposed to the supportive marriage that existed up until most recently – with that in mind, family may become better when people have less because there will be more mutual (and necessary) support)
We can try to buy more locally, yes, (we can develop small economies of scale) but ultimately we need to develop better transportation methods, better fuels and better energy sources. While two young and unencumbered people may be able to do the 100 mile diet, I don’t think it tenable for the entire population.
I think food is much too cheap (most things are much too cheap) so it may be the case that, when true costs (i.e. the human suffering costs I referred to a few posts ago) are taken into account, that locally grown foods are more beneficial. Although I still think that, even if prices increased to allow foreign farmers (and all producers) a fair return, it will still be overall beneficial to have a world market. So, alternative energy is the key and maintaining a world market.
One thing I liked from the blog was this:
“A friend of ours has a theory that a night spent making jam–or in his case, perogies–with friends will always be better a time than the latest Hollywood blockbuster. We’re convinced.”
I am convinced too. Stupid movies. Although I finally bought The Wrong Guy. I think a few of my friends and I have definitely bonded over that.
I think I just experienced something of religious proportions.
Saturday, April 22, 2006
i love it when people move
last night was semi-debaucherous.
jungle theme keg party at the paper tree.
I picked up a fake fur coat and a lion toy. As I was tearing apart the toy to make myself a mask I discovered electronics. The thing was wired. It played music (jungle music) and roared while moving its mouth. I was the king of the party. I assume.
I also scored sweet roller skates. montreal a go go.
jungle theme keg party at the paper tree.
I picked up a fake fur coat and a lion toy. As I was tearing apart the toy to make myself a mask I discovered electronics. The thing was wired. It played music (jungle music) and roared while moving its mouth. I was the king of the party. I assume.
I also scored sweet roller skates. montreal a go go.
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
terrible prejudice
wow, did I underestimate myspace.
I considered it a disgusting cesspit, where pre-teens went to hide away all their scavenged animated gifs and emo music, where shitty bands went to harp about their unoriginal audio excrement, where 33 year old perverts grasping on to their fading youth went to chat up anything younger.
to some extent this is all probably true, but what I failed to see were the good parts.
as I perused this afternoon, I took the following path (myspace name in brackets):
myself (immutabler) > mercedes (mercedesisawesome) > raf (raf_is_awesome) > some unknown (massinha). It was at this last "space" where I found out about a launch party at club lambi (on St. Laurent).
Why is this important?
because my only goal in montreal is to go to as many art shows / magazine launches / product lauches as possible.
I don't want to pay for one drink in montreal. I want all of my alcohol, for 4 straight months, to be paid for by someone else.
And myspace is going to make this happen. I owe myspace a (free) drink and an apology.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
oh yeah.
so, when I was much younger, I had a small problem with really bad music taste ...
anyway, as I was going through some friends' myspace sites I found something posted by papat: an Aqua video.
I thought I would share also.
don't say I never do anything for you.
edit: godfre brings up a good point. I do like centipede now. don't listen to it. just know it exists.
edit2: fuck that, listen to it. All seven are here.
anyway, as I was going through some friends' myspace sites I found something posted by papat: an Aqua video.
I thought I would share also.
don't say I never do anything for you.
edit: godfre brings up a good point. I do like centipede now. don't listen to it. just know it exists.
edit2: fuck that, listen to it. All seven are here.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
and now for something completely different ...
Dogging:
"Dogging is a predominantly British activity that involves outdoor exhibitionism in car-parks, wooded areas and the like. The term dogging originated in the early Seventies to describe men who spied on couples having sex outdoors. These men would 'dog' the couples' every move in an effort to watch them. When the swinging scene discovered that open-air sex has its own special thrill they began meeting in car-parks, and the doggers found a new and rich supply of voyeuristic fun. Moreover, the doggers soon realised that these couples were actively encouraging them to watch, even performing for them, and sometimes allowing them to join in."
Those crazy brits. Let's emulate perverts!
from the faqs:
"If you went to a nature area or car park and found it fenced off, it's likely a response to too much dogging activity in that area, causing complaints about noise, traffic, trash and general naughtiness."
oh, that's the reason. too much trash.
Monday, April 10, 2006
where art thou?
So, a while back, I went to a presentation by one Romeo Dallaire who was the commander of the UN force in Rwanda.
Wikipedia says "His actions are credited with directly saving the lives of 20,000 Tutsis. There is speculation that Dallaire's forces deliberately sabotaged equipment to slow their UN-mandated withdrawal from the combat zone."
Wikipedia also says "At home, Dallaire was medically released from the Canadian Armed Forces on April 22, 2000, suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. At the time of his retirement he held the rank of lieutenant-general. Blaming himself for the failures of the mission, he began a spiral into depression, culminating on June 20, 2000, when he was rushed to hospital after being found under a park bench in Hull, Quebec. He was intoxicated and suffering from a reaction with his prescription anti-depressants, and the mixture almost put him into a coma."
When he came to talk to us, we had heard that his previous speeches were extremely emotions and that he was going to tone it down. We had heard almost correctly. The basic speech was one on leadership and was relatively basic. But it was during his frequent anecdotes, exclusively introduced with “let me give you an example,” that were the most shocking.
The two that I remember best:
The Rwandan army was recruiting children to fight. A UN army troop came across a church which, surprising, held a number of living tutsis. As the army went into the church to rescue the survivors, a number of child fighters appeared and opened fire. The commander had to decide then and there whether to order his soldiers to return fire. He did.
Dallaire used this story as an example for planning ahead. Like, the commander should already have known that he might encounter child soldiers and should have known whether to fire back or not. He should not have been making that decision on the field. Okay, that is a pretty heavy example for planning ahead.
The second story was also about planning ahead. Apparently, rape is used as an act of war, more to intimidate the opposing side than to get any pleasure. After raping whole villages the women, usually dead but sometimes barely alive, would be thrown into pits. Occasionaly, UN troops would come across these pits and find the dead and dying women. The first time it happened, the commander had to radio back to Dallaire to ask whether the soldiers should just move along (the women were going to die regardless) or to jump in the whole and comfort the women as they died. The HIV rate is incredibly high and the soldiers would be putting themselves at very high risk of exposure by jumping in the pit.
Dallaire said before he could make a decision, the commander called back to say it was inconsequential because the Canadian soldiers had already jumped in (afterwards, Dallaire asked all the commanders of the countries that had sent troops to Rwanda – all said that they would just move on except Canada, the Netherlands and Guyana.)
Those were the anecdotes. Now for analysis:
It was obviously terrible over there. The UN tried to help (Dallaire did not blame the UN in his speech, in fact he specifically removed blame from them - he blamed countries for not sending their mandated troops and mainly the US) but public opinion was not pro-intervention (because of Somalia).
What this comes down to, according to Dallaire said, is feelings of relative worth. As crazy as it seems, 900,000 foreigners may not be worth, according to public opinions, the lives of a few of your own citizens.
In fact, from wikipedia:
“Dallaire ordered ten Belgian soldiers (whom he considered his best men) to protect the new prime minister, Agathe Uwilingiyimana. The soldiers were intercepted by Hutu extremists and taken hostage, after which Madame Agathe and her husband were killed. Later that day, the Belgian soldiers were found brutally murdered. Belgium was outraged that Dallaire had put its soldiers in such danger, and promptly withdrew its forces.”
Belgium withdrew its forces?
This is a really important topic, because this relative worth thing comes up constantly. The excess of energy we use, the toxic waste we ship to china, the farmed food we consume. All of it makes our lives a little better and make the lives of foreigners and the lives of our future generations (pseudo-foreigners – they don’t live here yet) much worse. This is not as immediately drastic as not sending troops to save lives, but it will have the same effect.
The more passive murder we can work on, and hopefully will, although I certainly like my creature comforts. The more active murder we have to deal with.
My friend Jon Cooper writes in his blog, “We are failing the “Rwanda Test”. In response to well-documented ethnic cleansing, resulting in massive human suffering and mortality, the response of the UN and the international community has been appallingly, comprehensively impotent. The AU Peace and Security Council has the “The preparedness of the Government the Sudan to accept the deployment of a UN operation in Darfur” as its first condition for a UN deployment. Given the active role of Omar Bashir’s government in instigating and perpetuating the massacre, it is unlikely this condition can be met any time soon.”
He also writes, “Even as thousands die every day, we bow to sovereignty.” He thinks, and perhaps rightly so, that this is more a policy thing, a problem dictated by laws and mandates. I think it is much worse. I think that our inability to care about those not directly linked to us is going to be our downfall. This is all economics. Externalities are not being taking into account. The suffering of other people is a big fucking externality.
Read Jon’s post.
Wikipedia says "His actions are credited with directly saving the lives of 20,000 Tutsis. There is speculation that Dallaire's forces deliberately sabotaged equipment to slow their UN-mandated withdrawal from the combat zone."
Wikipedia also says "At home, Dallaire was medically released from the Canadian Armed Forces on April 22, 2000, suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. At the time of his retirement he held the rank of lieutenant-general. Blaming himself for the failures of the mission, he began a spiral into depression, culminating on June 20, 2000, when he was rushed to hospital after being found under a park bench in Hull, Quebec. He was intoxicated and suffering from a reaction with his prescription anti-depressants, and the mixture almost put him into a coma."
When he came to talk to us, we had heard that his previous speeches were extremely emotions and that he was going to tone it down. We had heard almost correctly. The basic speech was one on leadership and was relatively basic. But it was during his frequent anecdotes, exclusively introduced with “let me give you an example,” that were the most shocking.
The two that I remember best:
The Rwandan army was recruiting children to fight. A UN army troop came across a church which, surprising, held a number of living tutsis. As the army went into the church to rescue the survivors, a number of child fighters appeared and opened fire. The commander had to decide then and there whether to order his soldiers to return fire. He did.
Dallaire used this story as an example for planning ahead. Like, the commander should already have known that he might encounter child soldiers and should have known whether to fire back or not. He should not have been making that decision on the field. Okay, that is a pretty heavy example for planning ahead.
The second story was also about planning ahead. Apparently, rape is used as an act of war, more to intimidate the opposing side than to get any pleasure. After raping whole villages the women, usually dead but sometimes barely alive, would be thrown into pits. Occasionaly, UN troops would come across these pits and find the dead and dying women. The first time it happened, the commander had to radio back to Dallaire to ask whether the soldiers should just move along (the women were going to die regardless) or to jump in the whole and comfort the women as they died. The HIV rate is incredibly high and the soldiers would be putting themselves at very high risk of exposure by jumping in the pit.
Dallaire said before he could make a decision, the commander called back to say it was inconsequential because the Canadian soldiers had already jumped in (afterwards, Dallaire asked all the commanders of the countries that had sent troops to Rwanda – all said that they would just move on except Canada, the Netherlands and Guyana.)
Those were the anecdotes. Now for analysis:
It was obviously terrible over there. The UN tried to help (Dallaire did not blame the UN in his speech, in fact he specifically removed blame from them - he blamed countries for not sending their mandated troops and mainly the US) but public opinion was not pro-intervention (because of Somalia).
What this comes down to, according to Dallaire said, is feelings of relative worth. As crazy as it seems, 900,000 foreigners may not be worth, according to public opinions, the lives of a few of your own citizens.
In fact, from wikipedia:
“Dallaire ordered ten Belgian soldiers (whom he considered his best men) to protect the new prime minister, Agathe Uwilingiyimana. The soldiers were intercepted by Hutu extremists and taken hostage, after which Madame Agathe and her husband were killed. Later that day, the Belgian soldiers were found brutally murdered. Belgium was outraged that Dallaire had put its soldiers in such danger, and promptly withdrew its forces.”
Belgium withdrew its forces?
This is a really important topic, because this relative worth thing comes up constantly. The excess of energy we use, the toxic waste we ship to china, the farmed food we consume. All of it makes our lives a little better and make the lives of foreigners and the lives of our future generations (pseudo-foreigners – they don’t live here yet) much worse. This is not as immediately drastic as not sending troops to save lives, but it will have the same effect.
The more passive murder we can work on, and hopefully will, although I certainly like my creature comforts. The more active murder we have to deal with.
My friend Jon Cooper writes in his blog, “We are failing the “Rwanda Test”. In response to well-documented ethnic cleansing, resulting in massive human suffering and mortality, the response of the UN and the international community has been appallingly, comprehensively impotent. The AU Peace and Security Council has the “The preparedness of the Government the Sudan to accept the deployment of a UN operation in Darfur” as its first condition for a UN deployment. Given the active role of Omar Bashir’s government in instigating and perpetuating the massacre, it is unlikely this condition can be met any time soon.”
He also writes, “Even as thousands die every day, we bow to sovereignty.” He thinks, and perhaps rightly so, that this is more a policy thing, a problem dictated by laws and mandates. I think it is much worse. I think that our inability to care about those not directly linked to us is going to be our downfall. This is all economics. Externalities are not being taking into account. The suffering of other people is a big fucking externality.
Read Jon’s post.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Monday, April 03, 2006
nyp1
it is very early monday morning and I am sitting in the toronto bus terminal after just having a long conversation with a older irish homeless drug addict who would not admit that he was not going back to ireland as soon as he got his passport from ottawa. I am somewhat confused as to whether he is in denial or has his story down so well that it just feels wrong to deviate from it. He was intelligent and obviously missed ireland. i wonder how he ended up here.
last night I was in NY. Nicholls and I planned a mini-vacation and met up. We could not have picked a better weekend. The sun was out and the weather was gorgeous the entire weekend (well, except for one rained-out patio breakfast which, in all fairness, we were willing to endure). We stayed at Sahm's place on an amazing street called St. Mark's. It was so quintessentially community. We would sit outside on the fire escape, basking in the sun, and just watch the multitude of people and types do their thing.
It was a high school reunion with Colin, Mike, Francey, Sahm and I (and both Dan Otero and Gilbert Nye were on the cell phone at some point in the weekend). It is relatively unusual to have such a close high school clase, I think. Most people seemed to have hated high school.
So, what did we do? It can be summed up succinctly with the word consumption. We ate and drank a lot. Colin noted that ovens in NY are usually used for storage.
Friday's festivities started out at 3:00 with margaritas at a small mexican place across from S's with C, F and M. They had 2-for-1 drinks, so we had 4 each. By 4:00, the conversation had turned to sex. F noted that it was way to early to be having that conversation. Somehow that initial drinking binge lasted until 4 in the morning. We went to a back room bar where a minor celebrity was in an even more back room. I tried to convince a girl that we could get in if she came with me. We continued on to a japanese themed bar where we worked really hard to get a seat in an somewhat coveted area and the onto Francey's work where it was decided that the full plates of food on the table next to us were probably up for grabs. They were not. We determined this when the owners came back from the bathroom to find their food on our table. Francey brought us a lot of alcohol. Silly francey. Onto a bar where we apparently met Sahm's girlfriend and colin and i realised that we were too good for other people. This is where my recollections end. According to sahm, after a few more bars, we ended up back at his house where he and I ate ice cream and watched porn. I am skeptical but know it could be true.
Next day. Hangover. Breakfast outside fails. We hold off starting to drink until 6 when we have retardly expensive margaritas at a terrible place called Senor Swankys. We are surrounded by drunk jocks. We realised we are in the middle of a giant Greenwich Village pub crawl. We try to join but it is too late, so we just drink in the same bars. Back to Sahm's. We head out around midnight after taking in 8th and Ocean. TV is terrible.
To a small bar where I force mike to do a whisky drink keg stand. I forget that he is tall and ungainly. People are kicked. We leave. We find a matress which entertains us for at least 10 minutes. It entertains everyone around us. I find my own personal bar. There were actually attractive single ladies sitting at the bar drinking just waiting to be picked up, picked up. I decided that it would be my local if I ever moved to the city. Then to the final bar of the night, where I ended up pouring B52s because the bartendress did not understand layering. Talked to Sahm's girlfriend for hours. Walked home. No porn.
Next day was the best. The whole crew met up, ostensibly to go furniture shopping, but francey, mike, colin and I took the soccer ball and disk into central park. We wandered for hours looking for green space. It doesn't exist so we improvised. When an uncaught throw hit a lady in the head, we knew it was time to leave. Whole Foods in the rotunda and then a walk home. We didn't go to any museums, any special shows. In fact, the weekend was pretty ordinary, but there is just so much life.
Still, I couldn't live there. No green space, no outdoor soccer. I would go nuts.
last night I was in NY. Nicholls and I planned a mini-vacation and met up. We could not have picked a better weekend. The sun was out and the weather was gorgeous the entire weekend (well, except for one rained-out patio breakfast which, in all fairness, we were willing to endure). We stayed at Sahm's place on an amazing street called St. Mark's. It was so quintessentially community. We would sit outside on the fire escape, basking in the sun, and just watch the multitude of people and types do their thing.
It was a high school reunion with Colin, Mike, Francey, Sahm and I (and both Dan Otero and Gilbert Nye were on the cell phone at some point in the weekend). It is relatively unusual to have such a close high school clase, I think. Most people seemed to have hated high school.
So, what did we do? It can be summed up succinctly with the word consumption. We ate and drank a lot. Colin noted that ovens in NY are usually used for storage.
Friday's festivities started out at 3:00 with margaritas at a small mexican place across from S's with C, F and M. They had 2-for-1 drinks, so we had 4 each. By 4:00, the conversation had turned to sex. F noted that it was way to early to be having that conversation. Somehow that initial drinking binge lasted until 4 in the morning. We went to a back room bar where a minor celebrity was in an even more back room. I tried to convince a girl that we could get in if she came with me. We continued on to a japanese themed bar where we worked really hard to get a seat in an somewhat coveted area and the onto Francey's work where it was decided that the full plates of food on the table next to us were probably up for grabs. They were not. We determined this when the owners came back from the bathroom to find their food on our table. Francey brought us a lot of alcohol. Silly francey. Onto a bar where we apparently met Sahm's girlfriend and colin and i realised that we were too good for other people. This is where my recollections end. According to sahm, after a few more bars, we ended up back at his house where he and I ate ice cream and watched porn. I am skeptical but know it could be true.
Next day. Hangover. Breakfast outside fails. We hold off starting to drink until 6 when we have retardly expensive margaritas at a terrible place called Senor Swankys. We are surrounded by drunk jocks. We realised we are in the middle of a giant Greenwich Village pub crawl. We try to join but it is too late, so we just drink in the same bars. Back to Sahm's. We head out around midnight after taking in 8th and Ocean. TV is terrible.
To a small bar where I force mike to do a whisky drink keg stand. I forget that he is tall and ungainly. People are kicked. We leave. We find a matress which entertains us for at least 10 minutes. It entertains everyone around us. I find my own personal bar. There were actually attractive single ladies sitting at the bar drinking just waiting to be picked up, picked up. I decided that it would be my local if I ever moved to the city. Then to the final bar of the night, where I ended up pouring B52s because the bartendress did not understand layering. Talked to Sahm's girlfriend for hours. Walked home. No porn.
Next day was the best. The whole crew met up, ostensibly to go furniture shopping, but francey, mike, colin and I took the soccer ball and disk into central park. We wandered for hours looking for green space. It doesn't exist so we improvised. When an uncaught throw hit a lady in the head, we knew it was time to leave. Whole Foods in the rotunda and then a walk home. We didn't go to any museums, any special shows. In fact, the weekend was pretty ordinary, but there is just so much life.
Still, I couldn't live there. No green space, no outdoor soccer. I would go nuts.
posturing
after some agressive posturing on my part about how I was going to purchase expensive new york clothing to allow me to lord over my more provincial friends, my natural impecunious nature resulted in the purchase of only 1 item of clothing: a single, small, white, $3, "I heart NY" t-shirt. I will never wear it, but whimsy got the best of me.
the slogan is apparently registered. so don't go around saying that you heart new york without a good team of lawyers.
the slogan is apparently registered. so don't go around saying that you heart new york without a good team of lawyers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)