Month: January 2008

quote of the day

The Vietnam War is now as far in the past as the Second World War was at the beginning of the Vietnam War…. I therefore declare 2008 to be officially The Year That We No Longer Have The 1960s To Blame.

The Vietnam War is now as far in the past as the Second World War was at the beginning of the Vietnam War. There has, basically, been at least one complete political and cultural generation turned over since the 1960s. I therefore declare 2008 to be officially The Year That We No Longer Have The 1960s To Blame.

[From Crooked Timber » » Closing the books ]

here’s an idea

I think that there is far too much work done in the world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous, and that what needs to be preached in modern industrial countries is quite different from what always has been preached.

…When you consider that non-native populations only arrived here in the last 150 years, that’s impressive — to take a species that dates back to before the continents we know today even existed, that survived the glacial periods, volcanoes, all of that, and almost wipe them out in a few generations.

I think that there is far too much work done in the world, that immense harm is caused by the belief that work is virtuous, and that what needs to be preached in modern industrial countries is quite different from what always has been preached.

Bertrand Russell, In Praise of Idleness.

(link) [From I think that there is far too much work done in…]

In the course of reading King of Fish and some of the end-of-year round ups, I think this is the kernel of a new belief system, perhaps not so new. I am struck by the themes of specialization and efficiency in the this book, but in many other places as well. Specialization breeds efficiency: after all, if you do the same thing all day, odds are you’ll get better at it. But better almost almost means more, especially in resource extraction, as we see in so many things. But the example of the salmon is interesting and maddening because it has been obvious for 1000 years or more that it is possible to overfish or otherwise wreck the stock of fish. But in a mixture of the Tragedy of the Commons and a lot of sheer stupidity, people did the wrong things anyway.
What more could you want than a healthy, protein rich food source that comes to you, for its own reasons, but on a reliable timetable and in quantities sufficient to feed an enormous amount of people if managed properly? But when people do nothing but fish and take as much as they can, rather than what they need or can use, they throw the system out of balance. So the once-prodigious stocks in northern Europe were wiped out (in all but Iceland and some parts of Scotland) and the Pacific species have been on the verge for most of the last century. When you consider that non-native populations only arrived here in the last 150 years, that’s impressive — to take a species that dates back to before the continents we know today even existed, that survived the glacial periods, volcanoes, all of that, and almost wipe them out in a few generations.
What’s especially appalling is how people react to plenty. Where in a few years they may be hard-pressed to find any fish at all, there was a time when they can take them of the river with pitchforks and use them as manure. They were too cheap to sell, but in a few short years, they were to rare to find. And this happened in Europe, then in the Northeast and Maritimes, and it’s still happening here in the Northwest.

Outstanding.

More meditations on this perhaps.

Major Andrew Olmsted, KIA Iraq 1/3/07

Andrew Olmsted, who also posted here as G’Kar, was killed yesterday in Iraq. Andy gave me a post to publish in the event of his death; the last revisions to it were made in July.

Andrew Olmsted, who also posted here as G’Kar, was killed yesterday in Iraq. Andy gave me a post to publish in the event of his death; the last revisions to it were made in July.

[From Obsidian Wings: Andy Olmsted]

My feeble words here and here. The official confirmation.

links for 2008-01-04

the silly season begins

Republicans: Huckabee 34% Romney 25% Thompson 14% [From 9:39 ] Hmm, so Huckabee beat Romney like a rented mule…. Is 14% enough to keep him in it, or will exit the field and throw his support to McCain?

Dems:
Senator Barack Obama : 36.68%
Senator John Edwards : 30.24%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 29.99%

Republicans:
Huckabee 34%
Romney 25%
Thompson 14%
[From 9:39]

Hmm, so Huckabee beat Romney like a rented mule. And Obama and Edwards both beat Hillary. Interesting. And what’s Thompson doing in 3rd place? Is 14% enough to keep him in it, or will exit the field and throw his support to McCain?

recycled quote of the day

“Books…are like lobster shells, we surround ourselves with ’em, then we grow out of ’em and leave ’em behind, as evidence of our earlier stages of development.” [From Dorothy L.

“Books…are like lobster shells, we surround ourselves with ’em, then we grow out of ’em and leave ’em behind, as evidence of our earlier stages of development.” [From Dorothy L. Sayers]

state of the world

2000+ sq ft house on a large lot, 2 cars (or one per driver, whichever is greater), hot and cold running everything, this is all going to look like an aberration of the worst kind in years to come.

…Find a way to replace as many of the internal combustion power sources as possible with electric or hybrid power (either engineer drop-in replacements or buy back vehicles that meet certain criteria).

What is going to amuse our bouches now?

[From The WELL: Bruce Sterling: State of the World, 2008]

This would be interesting to contribute to, but the tone of some of the comments is frustrating. There’s some hand-wringing about “why didn’t we switch away from fossil fuels in the late 60s?” I reply to that with, did you? There’s a weird vibe of “I want to be independent and unique but I want everyone to do it my way.”

So the economics, the USA-centric stuff is the kind of stuff that keeps the wingnutosphere in material. But the larger scale comment is interesting. My favorite quote: lifestyles of the rich and famous doesn’t scale. But the reality is that lifestyles of the middle-class, as we define it here in the US, doesn’t either. 2000+ sq ft house on a large lot, 2 cars (or one per driver, whichever is greater), hot and cold running everything, this is all going to look like an aberration of the worst kind in years to come. Land is finite (except in the Netherlands) and the energy we use is finite, by definition — that’s why we refer to the other kind as sustainable. It means that what we’re doing isn’t.

It seems more and more likely that the only way out of this, in the short term, is some kind of space program for energy.

  • Find a way to replace as many of the internal combustion power sources as possible with electric or hybrid power (either engineer drop-in replacements or buy back vehicles that meet certain criteria). I favor option a, as b would reward people who made poor choices in the first place.
  • Get PV arrays on every flat, south-facing surface.
  • Capture and store heat from the sun to heat the water we bathe and wash in.
  • Re-regulate trucking and get rail working again. Replace short-haul air travel with train or green coach travel (hybrid buses that use electricity for freeway driving and switch to biodiesel on surface streets).
  • Dismantle the byzantine farm subsidy arrangement (sugar subsidies that impoverish 3rd world farmers? paying farmers who can’t eat their corn, as it’s not food-grade) and do away with industrial farming with it’s excessive of petroleum inputs.

Add your own ideas below. I’m sure the business community would complain that all of this is too hard and unfair. Evidently, they don’t teach that what is a challenge to one is an opportunity to another. Seriously, this country put a man on the moon 2 years short of the challenge issues by JFK with technology we can’t imagine trying to use today. And this challenge, without the great unknowns of space travel, is <whine>too ha-a-a-a-r-d</whine>? Please.

links for 2008-01-03

bonus quote of the day

No matter what they tell you, an MBA is not essential for landing or handling a good business job. The chief “skill” you’ll come away by your degree is a diploma, and a network of indebted friends in business.

No matter what they tell you, an MBA is not essential for landing or handling a good business job. The chief “skill” you’ll come away by your degree is a diploma, and a network of indebted friends in business. The latter is actually useful. [From The Personal MBA]