Unintentional Hilarity

I’ve often wondered about those Grandmothers you see in the stands at NBA games, dancing and singing along to the blaring sounds of the Village People classic YMCA. Do those sweet old ladies really understand what the song’s lyrics are all about? And if they did, would they really be singing along?

The NBA’s Milwaukee Busks have a dance team, composed of attractive young women, known as Energee.

Not to be outdone, a group of older local resident have started performing at Bucks games. Their “team name”?  I’m not making this up:

Most Milwaukee Bucks fans are familiar with the “Energee” dance team, which performs several times during every game, but what about the “Seniorgee” dance team?

Word of the Day: Procrustean

Procrustean

adjective

Marked by arbitrary ruthlessness and disregard for special or extenuating circumstances.

In Greek myth, Procrustes was a son of Poseidon with a stronghold on Mount Korydallos, on the sacred way between Athens and Eleusis. There, he had an iron bed in which he invited every passer-by to spend the night, and where he set to work on them with his smith’s hammer, to stretch them to fit. In later tellings, if the guest proved too tall, Procrustes would amputate the excess length; nobody ever fit the bed exactly because secretly Procrustes had two beds. Procrustes continued his reign of terror until he was captured by Theseus, travelling to Athens along the sacred way, who “fitted” Procrustes to his own bed.

Procrustean is a useful word to describe many of the “mandatory minimum”, “zero-tolerance” policies of modern-day American institutions. A grade-school that suspends a nine year old for carrying a tiny plastic raygun in violation of its “zero tolerance” policies is an example of “procrustean” policy run amok.

Eyes in the Skies (On the Prize)

I read a story on the Huffington Post last week, in reference to an Israeli reconnaisance drone. The author made the claim that these UAVs could “allow their operators to read a name badge 40,000 feet below, at night.”

I’ve had a passing interest in the science of astronomy and optics for some time, and a little back-of-the envelope mathematics told me that this was absolutely impossible. (See my HuffPo comment for more details.) The short answer is that in order to see, and read, half in high letters from eight miles away requires a lens far bigger than could be carried in a single-engined aircraft.

No 48" telescope lens here...

What was interesting was that the author of the HuffPo article actually followed up my comment – acknowledging the correctness of my math, while assuring me that his source for the information was indeed qualified. He went on to speculate that maybe the secret military technology had moved beyond what was believed possible by civilian scientists. (It couldn’t possibly have done so.)

A little more research into the Israeli IAI Heron reveals a couple of potential motives for this “unintentional on purpose” sort of misinformation: The maker of this UAV is actively engaged in selling it to a variety of foreign governments, including India, Turkey, France and Australia.

The physics regarding what an optical surveillance system can, and cannot, do are extremely well established. And while the precise capabilities of advanced military hardware are usually closely held secrets – foreign military establishments employ multitudes of technically smart people who are just as capable of separating the hyperbole from the possible. So its unlikely that the Israelis put out the “read a nametag from the stratosphere” story to fool anyone in the Iranian military.

The Israeli company that makes the Heron has released a series of YouTube videos of the drone, complete with catchy upbeat musical scores. And while these videos don’t make the exact claim about reading nametags, the purpose is pretty clear: They want avergae military tech enthusiasts to become enamored with the drone’s technology. Making it that much easier for military procurement people in say, Australia or France, to justify their purchase. The actualy technological impossibility of reading nametags from miles away notwithstanding.

UAVs have become a huge business in the years since 9/11. There are a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, while spy satellites are very good at locating and identifying military targets (a parked armored division, an airbase, a chemical weapons facility) – they aren’t very good at spying on terrorists. (Two guys talking in a car. A couple of huts in the desert.) And secondly, a spy satellite costs hundreds of millions of dollars to put into service. And sometimes they don’t work at all. An Israel-made drone, bought off the shelf for a few million, suddenly looks like a bargain.

A Dark Cloud

Virtually of of northern Europe is landbound – with almost all commercial air traffic grounded – due to the eruption of a volcano in Iceland.

The name of this volcano: Eyjafjallajokull is but one of the problems. Its virtually unpronounceable by anybody not fluent in Icelandic. (ay-yah-FYAH’-plah-yer-kuh-duhl) is how it is listed on most news web sites. On the other hand the wikipedia page  for the wretched thing provides a sound file that ends with a sort of hissing click that really doesn’t sound anything like you’d expect. I pity the poor news readers who have to deal with it. It makes Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seem as simple as Tom Jones.

President Obama has just had to cancel his trip to Poland to attend the funeral of late Polish President Lech Kaczyński. All airfields in poland are closed because of the cloud of glass-filled ash. It would, theoretically, have been possible for the President to fly to some point outside the affected area, and then travel overland to Poland. Not the sort of thing the Secret Service would agree to. German Chancellor Angela Merkel was reported returning to Germany via an armored convoy from Italy. (The last time I recall that term being used to refer to Germans for a very long time indeed.)

The risks posed to aircraft flying through volcanic plumes is not new. A British Airways 747 flying near Mount Galunggung in Indonesia in 1982 suddenly suffered complete engine failure of all four powerplants. The aircraft was able to glide to a lower altitude and restart the engines – although one later failed again. The plane managed to make a controlled emergency landing in Jakarta.

The problems encountered by the British Airways flight (Flight 9) in 1982 ought to give anybody pause before suggesting that the closure of European airspace is in any way an over reaction. Because the plane was flying at night, and the volcanic ash did not show up on airborne radar, the crew literally had no idea there was any problem until the engines stopped working, literally with two or three minutes of each other.

Under examination it was found that the glass particles in the volcanic ash cloud entered the engine combustion chambers, where the high heat caused it melt, adhering to the sides. It was only as the plane descended, with the engines not running, that the molten glass solidified and enough broke off the it was possible to restart the engines. Engine damage wasn’t the only problem: The aircraft windshield was essentially sandblasted, as were the aircraft landing lights – making landing difficult and taxing impossible. Furthermore it was found that the fuel onboard had been contaminated by ash drawn into the fuel tanks via the pressurization ports.

This weekend Europeans are doing their best to deal with the situation: taking taxi rides, train trips, and ferry journeys to get home. For a few days it will be an inconvenience – but manageable.

The concern is what happens if the volcano continues to erupt for weeks or months? This is far from a remote possibility.

Air travel between North America and Europe will, on some level, still be possible. But it may involve flying to Spain or North Africa – and then relying on ground transportation to take you north to London or Berlin.

Slacker-Luddites of the World Unite! You have nothing to lose…

You knew it was coming.

The first day the iPad went on retail sale in the United States, some fools took handheld videocam footage of themselves destroying this piece of technology. (Gizmodo story)

There strikes me as something very sad about this story.

Its not as if these kids hated the iPad itself – after all they clearly had just bought three of them, leaving us with definite impression that they’d take the survivors home with them to play with and enjoy. And it certainly isn’t as if they destroyed the iPad to make a political statement. Its not as if the iPad threatens their jobs or way of life.

No, they destroyed the iPad in search of their few seconds of Internet fame. (Andy Warhol’s famous fifteen minutes has since been downsized to a comfortable fifteen seconds – about all I could stomach, and all that was necessary to watch of their youTube video.)

Artifacts of technological wonder get destroyed all the time. A Formula One car spins out of control. A rocket blows up on the launch pad. A Las Vegas casino is collapsed by a controlled demolition. But these destructions have a point. Our engineers will learn from the  failures, making our cars and rockets of the future better. And the land cleared by the fallen casino will make way for something larger and splashier.

Have our youth become so detached from the wonder of the making things as to treat the work of others with such utter disrespect? One cannot but suspect that if any of these cretins had ever spent a week struggling to come up with the absolute perfect engineering solution to a difficult problem they would have not been so quick to pull out the baseball bat.

In my opinion, Gizmodo – and the other leading gadget sites – should consider a moratorium on these pointless destruction of new technology stories. They achieve nothing, other than encouraging future vandalism.

Where have you gone, Jack Ryan?

Its been a few years since Tom Clancy has released a complete novel. And almost as long since I’ve read any of his work. I pretty much gave up after suffering through Red Rabbit (to date the only book I’ve ever actually thrown away) and I remember recoiling in disgust at The Teeth of the Tiger – in which a group of young American patriots go on a murder spree through the capitals of Europe, joyriding in Ferraris and Porsches financed through insider-trading profiteering enabled by a massive quasi-Governmental wiretapping operation. (Oh, and those are the good guys.)

I’d read Rainbow Six not long after it was first published back in 1998, and while not as engaging as some of Clancy’s earlier work – I didn’t recall it being that bad.

I was wrong. Its appalling.

Consider the premise: A group of liberal environmentalists plan to wipe out the entire population of the earth through a genetically-mutated virus, distributed via aerosol sprayed cooling systems at the Sydney Olympic Games. Along the way this group manages to finance random acts of terrorism, including graphic child murder – as well as a virus-testing program that sweeps both homeless alcholics and dim-witted legal secretaries into a secret clinic where they are free to drink and fornicate. Their medical overseers plying them with copious amounts of narcotics and plague viruses. Really.

Clancy is tiresomely repetitive, and boringly cliched in his portrayals. In the Clancy-world people fall into three groups: Military/Cops/Spies/Medical Personnel (apart from medical personnel who are also environmentalists- see above) – all hardworking heroic patriots. Group two: Environmentalists/Discovery Channel/NPR viewers/former KGB operatives/ and random dim-witted ex-Baader-Meinhoff gang members: Vicious, child murdering psychopaths. And lastly, the general population: dim-witted patsies, who rely on a secret army of spies, torturers and murderers to keep them safe from the other group of spies, torturers and murderers.

I hear that Clancy is working on another novel. (Read about it on his blog, in between comments about the quality of the whisky he’s drinking these days.) The strange thing is, I can’t ever remember a serious journalist ever asking Mr Clancy if he ever felt any responsibility for the idea floated in his 1994 book Debt of Honor: You know, the one which ends with a crazed extremist crashing his plane into a landmark American building, killing thousands in the process.

Cheat Sheets

Sarah Palin has been on the national stage for a year and a half now, and she seems no closer to bringing her Aw-shucks political diva act to a close. In fact, she seems more energized than ever.

Like a lot of people, I was hoping that she’d take the drubbing McCain-Palin got in ’08 to heart, and go back to Alaska where the damage she could do to our nation would be decidedly limited. Obviously, we don’t always get what we want. But as the Rolling Stones tell us – sometimes you get what you need.

When Palin got the nod from John McCain in 2008 she was clearly unqualified to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency. She had virtually no significant political experience (not that Obama had a hugely long resume in that regard either..) – but most troubling, she very clearly lacked the intellectual chops to take on almost any national office.

Holding an office like Governor would have given Palin, at a minimum, two years to “hit the books” on issues of national and international importance. To finally craft, and master, a worldview that she could present to potential voters in the run up to the 2012 elections. She could use the time to choose and build a team of experts to manage her campaign strategy and message.  Americans are not particularly demanding of their Presidential candidates intellects. Adlai Stevenson, probably for all time, gave “the smart guy” a whiff of political nerdiness. But with that said, Palin’s performance during the campaign was so head-slappingly awful that one had to be either delusional or truly moronic to think that she’d make a good President.

Palin didn’t do that. She reminds me a lot of the worst sort of clients management consultants deal with: those who are so bad, they just don’t realize how badly they need help. So instead of keeping quiet, she has kept herself in the news: A badly reviewed ghostwritten book. A puzzling “quitting” of the Governors office. A self-defeating public fight with the father of her grandchild. A gig on Fox News. And a paid speech at the Tea Party convention.

This endless barrage of quests for attention ought to tell us something about Sarah Palin: She’s desperate for attention. Most probably because, at heart, she lacks self-confidence. She knows, in her heart, that she isn’t as smart as Obama. She ought to know she isn’t as smart as McCain, Romney, Pawlenty, or just about any other national politician.

The Tea Party speech probably won’t be the final nail in Palin’s political coffin. But, factually dubious talking points aside, the biggest tip-off to her eventual doom has to be the handwritten crib notes on her palm. They tell me that whoever is making decisions for Sarah Palin, Inc. doesn’t have a clue. If Palin had referred to index cards for her notes – that would have looked, if not necessarily “Presidential.”

Instead, she came across looking like exactly what she is: the failing student who hasn’t done her homework.

Dear New York Times

Spend any time (and I really don’t recommend this) watching Fox News or wading through the cesspool that is the conservative blogosphere, and you’ll detect a palpable Schadenfreude when it comes to the financial struggles of old-world media. And chief among the targets of that right-wing glee has to be the New York Times.

The Grey Lady of American journalism, our national newspaper of record, with at this point, precisely zero credible competitors, finds itself ten years into the third millenium in a strange position. It has, by dint of its undoubtedly superior writers, research, and journalistic standards carved out a place on the web as the most visited newspaper site in the world. A site that has, for at least the last two or three years, been totally free of any sort of paywall. And yet in the last quarter, the Times managed to lose $25 million in the third quarter of 2009.

Now, losting $25 million in a quarter doesn’t mean the company is going to fold up and disappear anytime soon. (A closer look at the Times financials reveals they actually threw off almost  $90 million in cash in that quarter. Much of the loss is attributable to depreciation in the value of some of their non-core assets.) But obviously the company cannot continue indefinitely losing money. How then is the Times going to remedy the situation?

I can’t answer that question. If I had the gold-plated answer to newspaper’s financial problems, I wrap it up in a shiny business plan and sell it to a bunch of investment bankers.

But I will say this: The NY Times is the most prestigous newspaper in the world. I pay 75 cents a day for my local newspaper – buying it from a box near my favorite coffee shop. That paper probably provides me about 10 minutes of actual news reading. Roughly five minutes on local stories – and the rest on national and international. But those “non-local” stories – almost all of them I’ve already seen on the Times website. Columns by Tom Friedman or Maureen Dowd show up a day or two after they’ve been published in the Times. Most of the “value” I get out of my local paper is the (laughably easy) crossword, a couple of other puzzles, and reading the comics. The “news value” I get from the local paper is close to zero. But I willingly pay almost a buck a day for the convenience of a paper to hold n my hand as I sip my coffee and fill out the crossword.

Dear NY Times: We love you, we need you. Figure out a way to get that 75 cents a day from me, and the millions like me.

Eating their own dogfood. Believing their own bullshit..

Jon Stewart appeared on the Bill O’Reilly show last night.

O’Reilly is, of all the Fox news opinionators, probably the least offensive. Which isn’t saying much. But the thing that is most interesting about this interview is the fact that O’Reilly obviously believes that Fox News really is “fair and balanced.”

I would struggle to believe that any objective analysis of Fox News would support this conclusion. But it is quite instructive to me: the people at Fox literally believe their own bullshit.

And that is part of the entire narrative when it comes to the right-wing noise machine. They literally believe the lies they been telling themselves (and the rest of the fools that listen to them) for so long. It goes a long way to explain the complete breakdown in journalistic standards with these organizations. They literally would believe anything negative about President Obama, any Democratic politician, or any “liberal” or “progressive” organization. Which is why the right-wing blogosphere jumped all over the O’Keefe/ACORN story. And why they are so slow to recognize the criminality of O’Keefe’s attempt to infiltrate Lousiana Sen. Landrieu’s office.

The first criteria for any journalistic organization or reporter is objectivity. Just the facts, ma’am.

Its quite illuminating to see that the originator of the “no-spin zone” – is actually the biggest “spinner” of them all. Fair and balanced is unfair and slanted. War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and truth is Lies. Can these really be far behind?

Gloomy Economics – Pt II

For the purposes of this discussion, lets us (somewhat arbitrarily) date the beginning of the US modern economic history to the inaugruation of Franklin Roosevelt as President in 1933. Not that the nineteenth century battles over the Free Coinage of Silver or the First and Second Bank of the United States aren’t important – but by the early 1930s these issues had pretty much been settled.

In 1933 the Federal Budget of the United States was approximately $4.6 billion, with revenue of just under $2 billion – leaving a (then considered terrible) deficit of $2.6 billion. Of the Federal budget, Defense constituted $1.4 billion – of which more than half ($700 million) was spent on Veterans – mainly pensions and benefits to veterans of the First World War. Of the remaining $600 or billion in current defense spending, the greatest share went to the Navy.

The US Army, by way of contrast, was a relatively tiny force. With approximately 200,000 men (and they were almost all men) in uniform in 1933, the US Army ranked considerably below Greece or Czechoslovakia in military firepower.  But of course, in 1933, the USA really didn’t need much in the way of a large standing army. The navy (plus two conveniently wide oceans) would keep any potential aggressors at bay. And the US was sufficiently large, and well supplied with natural resources, to have much to fear from a maritime embargo.

The first two four years of Roosevelt’s Presidency were marked mainly by an attempt to prevent the total social collapse of the US as a nation. When we worry about unemployment today (around 10%) we need to keep in mind the 30% of the Great Depression. And while we pity homeowners stuck with underwater mortgages, we’re still a lot better off than the savers who lost everything when their banks failed in those pre-FDIC days.

One little-known episode of the Great Depression was the Bonus March of 1932. Some 17,000 Veterans of WWI, along with their families, marched on Washington and demanded that certificates entitling them to a cash payment be paid early (the certificates had a maturity date of 1945.) President Hoover ended up ordering the Army to remove the marchers – which they promptly did, resorting to bayonets, tanks, and a primitive teargas containing arsenic. The oepration was commanded by then Army Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur. His deputy was (later President) Dwight Eisenhower, and the cavalry charge that rousted the bonus marchers was led by George Patton. (See, I told you how small and clubby the pre-war Army was..) Reading about these events, from the benefit of almost eighty years of hindsight, one can only wonder what Fox News would make of such events.