Ok, now what?
Wow, no comments and only 900 or so views in the past 7 years, and only 2 spams. So why continue? Probably the same reason someone puts a message in a bottle, and sends it off on a journey at sea - maybe someone will read it. . . . . The difference is, here, it is possible to know if your stuff actually gets looked at - well sort of; anyway.
Apparently, none of the stuff I put here is relevant to anyone's interest.
My other blog, has lots of comments and has only been up for several years - but its totally relevant to other's interests even if they don't know me. So here we have it. If you happen to be a person who is reclusive, or maybe somewhat shy, or maybe just busy and you really don't "know" anyone then nobody gives a *!@$#@ about you. Its like the rest of society is saying: if you don't want to initiate and push yourself on others then you must be a self centered, spoiled, attention whore. But, hey, lots of people hit up my other blog and say nothing to me, but sure spend time reading the information I have provided for free, now if that's not self centered then what?
Have you ever had this happen:
You're at the food market and someone chooses to try to strike up a conversation with you. What do you do? Depending on where you live, most people will just give the cold shoulder and refuse to engage. The problem is that there will always be that thought "What is this person after"? If you're a guy and another guy does that you will probably assume he is gay. If you are a woman and a guy does that you will probably assume he is "after" something. If you are a guy and a woman does that you may assume she is "after" something. Now if you are a woman and another woman does that you may assume that she is trying to one-up you. Hang-ups and misconceptions - maybe . . . . Sadly there is a lot of truth to those scenarios. What if we could have a world where there would be no pre-conceived notions and every social interaction was actually what it seemed to be, and there were no hidden self-indulgent motives. Gawd, life would be easy then. You could say what you mean and mean what you say. Naahhhh, that makes too much sense. It seems as though, we, as adults, have the neurotic need to make life complicated, stressful, confusing, painful, fearful and at times, meaningless.
Yet another rant
Ok, time for another long-winded musing. Have you ever read a news story (like the ones about the "horrifying runaway
Prius" reports that have hit the airwaves and
internet lately) and found it so far off from the truth that it was just screaming out for a comment - only to find that there is no place for comments, or the place to comment is so hidden that few can find it? Probably you have, they are all over.
Faux news is really good at this little trick. Then, there are the comment spaces where 3 or 4 people have an argument about something that is totally off topic or so inane than you wonder how the people even learned to type, and they go on for several days with hundreds of posts? I have read the ones about the Prius. Some of them are so stupid they are funny. . . people who obviously know nothing about electronics making comments that would make an apprentice electronics tech laugh, people who claim to be engineers making comments about electronic parts and circuits that are so far off its not even funny. Ok enough.
Faux news, ABC, and all you r. murdoch subsidiary ceo's , your tactics suck. This is the internet, you don't own it and you never will. Your supposed-subtle-yet-obviously-lame attempts at mind control only work on sheep people. And hiring shills to post crap is also so obvious it is funny. Now just get outta here and go sit at the retirement home with rupert and enjoy your ugliness together, leave the rest of us alone. Got it?
how long do we have?
As we continue to pollute our environment how long will it be until we (humans as a species) kill ourselves off? How much will it take to make this earth so toxic to human life that we either die, or live in miserable conditions? Can we go on for 1000 years, 100 years 10 years? What are we leaving future generations? These are questions most people don't want to answer. One thing is for sure, I am damn sick and tired of hearing the characteristic bs from hedonistic pigs that we have nothing to worry about. They use the same science that is telling us we need to make changes to justify their greed by showing "proof" that there really is no problem with pollution. Give me a freakin' break. GOD! what is wrong with these jerks. If there is any history to be read years from now these jackasses will be viewed with contempt for sure. Just hope that some future civilization finds a way to bring these idiots back to life and punish them.
how many more
and they never listen
I stood screaming
the message of wrongs
I had seen with my eyes -
Peace signs. Burning monks.
Dead students.
Guardsmen they were
defending the peace
in the west
and in the east.
They think I'm crazy,
an ole man gone nuts.
I wasn't really there
when it happened.
Be quiet they whispered
you don't know
you can't know
you're not like us,
we can see for ourselves with our own eyes
they are clear and bright.
We don't need yours
they are old and slow -
and its true, I know.
We don't want to hear
the unbearable sorrow
of which you speak;
its of your time not ours.
Again bombs explode,
again bullets pierce young eyes
that are clear and bright.
They can see for themselves.
And they never listen.
Now i will go -
they can see
for themselves.
i stand screaming.
......Dave T June 2005
what is freedom
Freedom
Tempest or gentle breeze
She alone chooses
Playful child
Unencumbered by some concern
Of where she may sojourn
To arrive and depart
In any season
With no violence incurred
For the sails of youth
Collect their life
Preserving the essence
Of renewal unfettered
As it must be
With no measure applied
No prevarication
Freedom is
Our precious entity
......Dave T November 2004
Thought Criminal
"Free speech" is gone. It is understandable that there are reasonable limits - a person can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater without dire consequences but the paranoia and fear that exists now is insane and nothing like the obvious problem of the theater full of people. Whatever a person says here will be stored somewhere. If someone says things that people in power do not like and consider threatening, they will be watched if their statements are found in a search. Certain things people may say will get them arreseted and thrown in jail. When I went to gradeschool in the 50s we were taught that we lived in a free country. . . and I believed it. My father and mother both fought in WWII, my uncle was killed in WWII, I am a vietnam era vet, and so is my brother. Still, the wrong words will get me on a "watch list" or arrested. If I question the President - I am branded as "unpatriotic". There is confusion between the concept of "President", and the "Presidency". These concepts have been bastardized by zealous politicians. The president is a person, questioning that person's judegment is not questioning the nation or the nation's governmental system or society or rule of law. Look, its my freakin job to question the President - its everyone's job to question the President and all authority exercised by others - and make changes in a civilized, nonviolent dialogue. That is the basis of a representitive democracy. I thought we lived in one. Never in my wildest nightmares did I think this country would be in this situation - after all we have been through. Somebody, please wake me up! Until then I must watch very closely what I say. Even if I am only expressing my feelings and have no intention whatsoever of acting on them it makes no difference. Big Brother IS watching us now. What's next, the thought police . . . count on it.
Should the Electoral college be modified or abolished ?
To consider this in an intelligent way consider how many people actually vote in an election in each state . . . a very complicated consideration. Take a look at the gov't stats if you really want to see how complicated it gets. How about the national voter turn out history in the past 40 years? Directly from the government records the best we have had in the past 40 years is 63 percent in 2000 of
registered voters and 63 percent of
voting age turnout in 1960. Do we live in a Democracy? Does the constitution specify that we live in a "direct democracy". No. We live in a representative democracy, a "republic". These two words are almost interchangeable. Do not confuse republic with "republicans" or the republican party. They are completely different. Today the republican party is probably closer to a hegemonic oligarchy run by aristocrats that it is to a republic. The same may also be true of the democratic party. Do not confuse it with "democracy". The electoral college was intended to prevent tyranny of mob_like rule caused by an ill informed perhaps uneducated public. At the time of the writing of the constitution this was a very real concern and still is, as long as the public remains ill-infomed and uneducated, or mis-informed. The news media can be guilty of mis-information either for financial gains or because of inept reporting, and this could cause people to vote in a very unresponsible way. But how many people actually vote? At best 63 percent. at worst 36 percent (in 1990). This constitutes the tyranny of the minority, precisely what most people want to avoid? Can the electoral college help this ?
If people are not voting because they feel like their vote does not count then the electoral college is adding to the problem by its very existence. My sources here:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/voting.htm#trend (voter turnout)
http://www.eac.gov/election_resources/htmlto5.htm (government records of turnout)
http://www.eac.gov/election_survey_2004/statedata/StateLevelSummary.htm (gov't records 2004)
http://elections.gmu.edu/turnout_rates_graph.htm (Dr. Michael McDonald)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul226.html ("hands off the electoral college")
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/faq.html#history (reasons for electoral college)
More later. . .
open source infringes on microsoft patents
Are these people from the evil empire serious? The next thing you know they will say they have a patent on the quadratic formula, addition, subtraction, for loops, while loops, if then statments, TCPIP, all forms of email, all forms of word processing, books, the printing press, pencils, RF communications, morse code, all number systems, and most of the languages of the world, what the hell lets just say all things known to mankind are now the property of MS. My point is, they have reached the point where they have become ludicrous, and I would laugh were they not also treacherous. MS copied most of what they supposedly developed. Read the book: "The Making of Microsoft" ISBN 1-55958-071-2 if you really want to know how much code they copied and how much they wrote; and how many people's lives got destroyed in the process. The two kids who started ms were from the wealthiest part of Washington state and were among the very few elite who had access to a computer. In the beginning of software development nearly everything was "open source" They used code they got from this open source community of the time and modified it to run differently, then eventually patented the code and made millions off or their (and nameless others) work. To be fair, most of ms $ should be redistributed among all of the programmers who came before them. Those who wrote C and C++ and Fortran, and Basic. Remember DR Dos? Anyone who has really looked into this can tell you how much bs this company pulls. They already tried this "we did it first" crap through the lame mouthpiece of SCO and their phony FUD . . . any one remember Mr McBride and his asinine song and dance? . The courts put that scam to rest and SCO's stock is now worth less that $1 per share. Somebody, please just make monkey boy and his dancing minions go away.
Bats: Cats, windmills and other hazards
The ignorance of many people who spew forth right-wing scripts they assimilate from their fearless oil-company-executive-trained leaders' rants on any form of energy that they cannot control is downright scary. The current debate on the "horrific mind-numbing impacts" of wind power on the environment is a good example. Bats and birds are reportedly being "killed off in horrific numbers by the huge whirling, deady, razor sharp blades of these monstrous machines." In their lemming-like scurrying to the cliff, these sheep-people seem to avoid the obvious fact that human activity will have some impact on the environment regardless of what we do, and most improvements are not perfect. The media-hyped reporter's foray of the scientist from Berkeley who's study found that ethanol puts slightly more ozone in the atmosphere than gasoline is a good example of the spread of fear, uncertanty and doubt. This report conveniently fails to mention that ethanol is carbon neutral and puts less particulate matter into the air than petro-fuels and helps us avoid dependence on energy from parts of the world where we are now not welcome.
There are studies that will show the harm that other types of electrical power generation have on birds and bats; and those that show how much of an improvement windmills are to our environment by lowering the overall impact we have as a result of their use. These are ignored. Simply showing the pros and cons of windmills is far to narrow and not a complete enough picture. For example how do the emissions of coal fired power plants effect bats, and people? How do salmon and bats connect in the web of life? (this we have already studied extensively - salmon have an enormous impact on the forest ecosystem and hydroelectric power generation has not helped them) How many bats are killed each year by coal mining operations? When we flood another valley, like the Hetch Hetchy was flooded (now used for water supply) in the early 20th century without consideration for the destruction it caused, or build a dam like the Elwa dam in Washington state (now being removed) for a power generation utility, how many bats will be killed? Where do bats live? In open fields on windy slopes (with the windmills) where there are no insects for them to eat? In the studies, where bats are attracted by the ultrasonic and electromagnetic emissions of wind turbines do those involved in the study import the bats to the location to "see" if they will seek out the windmills? When all of this is taken into consideration, the viability of windmills can be shown to be far greater than what the skeptics would have people believe.
