LIBERTY: FREETALKLIVE has a great interview with Loretta Nall

Tuesday, June 6, 2006

The boys at ftl really hit the bulls eye with this interview.

Loretta Nall is Libertarian candidate for Governor of Alabama. She describes how she changed the focus of a whole debate about the War on Drugs. 

I especially like her quip about having the two candidates for Sheriff "by the gonads" in front of a live audience. They reversed their positions on the War on Drugs within minutes of promising to "eradicate" drugs! 

It is a race issue (i.e., more blacks get imprisoned for drugs than rich white boys and girls). It's a class issue (i.e., rich people hire lawyers; poor people take plea bargains). It's a crime issue (i.e., violent criminals fight over turf like in Prohibition Days and drugs are so expensive that addicts commit crimes to get them). It's a fact of life issue (i.e., the rate of drug addiction hasn't changed over eons). It's a freedom issue (i.e., the Fourth Amendment is trampled by the drug warriors). 

And, I could go on and on. Listen to her on the interview clip. Review some of the FACTS about the drug war. And tell me that it isn't a joke! We've lost. What we are doing doesn't work and can't work. So let's try something new. Liberty!

Now I don't want everyone to be a drug addict. But, clearly that doesn't happen. If we put our energies into understanding, rehab, and finding the "cure", then we would be far better off.

If what we are doing doesn't work, then how can doing more of the same work any better. It's like visiting LA or Chicago and trying to use a map of NYC to get around. Even a child would say, that's dumb. Why is this any different? We have a map (i.e., the War on Drugs) that doesn't work. Let's try a new map (i.e. cure versus prohibition).

It didn't work in the Twenties, it doesn't work now! 

A 


TECH: “MOZY” the auto backup service didn’t. Why?

Tuesday, June 6, 2006

Once again this week, MOZY is signalling that it hasn't abcked up in week. Why? It's had ample opportunities. So, there clearly is something that I'll have to report to beta test hq. Hmm. How did this get through alpha? 


TURKEY: What email do you use? … … Never your employers!

Monday, June 5, 2006

I recently heard of a colleague being let go.

I'm not sure if he was stripped searched and marched out of the building. BUT, that was a common occurrence on Wall Street.

There they were always trying to prevent brokers from taking their "book" home. The book was their customer list with all the details. That book was essential to a broker getting a new job and bringing all his old clients with him. The Old Firm would believe that those customers were "theirs". It was entertaining to watch the squabble. The "rules" said that the departing broker couldn't tell "his" customers on the old firm's time or phone about the change. So the first thing the broker did, when they departed or were thrown out, was to contact all the old clients to get them to move their accounts to the new firm with the broker. Great fun.

I got to know some of these characters. One old coot had a large supply of carbon paper. If he wrote anything, he'd make a carbon copy and "file" it in his briefcase. Each night, home it would go. When they nuked him, as they eventually did to anyone who was too successful or too unsuccessful, I know that they lost EVERY single one of his clients. They were convinced he was hacked into their computer system. To lose every single one was extraordinary.

About a decade later, I ran into him and he laughed as he told me he had a room at home where he had carefully filed and indexed every page.

And, he said he was still doing it. If they ever stopped producing carbon paper, then he said he'd retire.

OK what's the point for all us turkeys?

Don't EVER use your employer's email for networking activities. You can be cut off. With free gmail accounts galore, there is no reason to do it.

This colleague, now departed, used his corporate email and now I can't reach him.

Don't make that mistake. If you have, fix it!

 

 


WRITING: Never heard of “the tomato effect”?

Monday, June 5, 2006

The Tomato Effect

(1) A term asserted to be used in medicine menaing the rejection of effective medical treatments because they conflict with currently accepted medical theories.

(2) It is reported that the tomato was not eaten in the US until 1820 because it was beleived to poisonous. This even though Europeans had been eating tomatoes for years with no ill effects.

(3) A movie exploring the possibility of foul play in the death of doctor practicing "Environmental Medicine". (See http://www.rabble-rouser.com/about.html)


ALUM: JASPER BASEBALL LOSES IN REGIONAL FINAL

Monday, June 5, 2006

http://www.gojaspers.com/article.cfm?doc_id=6845

***Begin Quote***

Lincoln, Neb. (June 4, 2006) – Miami completed a three-game sweep of the NCAA Lincoln Regional field to capture its 10th straight win in regional play and its 13th consecutive regional title with an 10-4 victory over upstart Manhattan at Hawks Field on Sunday evening. Manhattan ends its season with a 34-23 record. 

***End Quote***

Well done to those men!

Considering that Jack only slays every giant in fairy tales, this is a heroic effort. They did put a few of those giant state skoolz in their place along the way. The gnat can be annoying.

Well done. 


LIBERTY: Gubmint enforcing cellphone while driving ban … … FUGETABOUTIT !

Monday, June 5, 2006

http://techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20060602/0151254

***Begin Quote***

most people seem to ignore such {cell phone} bans anyway 

***End Quote***

Forget the government trying to force people not to use cell phones when driving. (Don't get me started on government.)

How about a simple solution?

Insurance companies shouldn't have to cover the cost of your accident if it's found you're on the phone at the time of the accident, or were on just prior to.

Simple and elegant?

I know that if I got that letter from my insurance company it would make an impression on me.

Think of it: insurance company lawyers would be sure to enforce that provision. They'd be on it far better than any "state revenue collection" agent (aka cop) — after all we know that with gubamint, it's all about revenue from radar traps, rather than safety.

I bet that "simple change" would change behavior.

IMHO


RANT: If Lincoln had powerpoint at Gettysburg … then what?

Sunday, June 4, 2006

http://www.norvig.com/Gettysburg/


LIBERTY: The Constitution as an excuse instead of a restraint

Sunday, June 4, 2006

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese284.html

Original Intent
by Charley Reese
***Begin Quote***

They would be disturbed at how we have allowed politicians and judges to turn the Constitution into an excuse instead of a restraint.
***End Quote***

(1) Return the foreign policy to not meddling in the affairs of others. 

(2) Disband the standing army and decommission the myriad of TLAs with guns and "police power".

(3) Return sovereignty to the states.

(4) Return to U.S. senators that are selected by the state legislatures.

(5) Eliminate any federal mandate on the states (i.e., one man one vote).

(6) A party should be Constitutionally limited from a majority in the Congress when the hold the Presidency. (Not sure how to word that one?)

(7) Federal judge could be impeached by the legislature of the state in which he sat.

(8) Federal government, as an agent of the states, can only pass laws about the states not citizens of those states.

(9) No federal involvement in education, welfare, medical care, foreign aid and domestic pork-barrel projects. 

I can live with that! I'm voting Charlie for President. We'll sort out the details later!


TURKEY: “Why bother networking … …

Sunday, June 4, 2006

http://ripples.typepad.com/ripples/2006/06/networking_made.html

***Begin Quote***

Why bother networking if it doesn't extend your network of friends?
 
***End Quote***

On this chilly morning as I sit and reflectively blog, I'd pontificate that "networking" is very different than "friendship".

As an injineer that has to have a taxonomy for everything, one has: spouses (high value / low maintenance if you pick right),relatives (thankfully not a greatly expanding number requiring loans, gifts, and high maintenance / low return); in laws (enough said); friends (great joys); acquaintances (casual contact); fellow bloggers (who tell you that your full of soup as needed); coworkers (limited to the lifespan of your corporate life); and service  people (usually nice people you meet along the way who do stuff for you). There's a formula for everything. And, we take two parts of this and one part of that to make shazaam.

[Note the careful attention to the engineering rule of thumb five plus or minus two. (1) spouses; (2) relatives; (3) in laws; (4) friends; (5) acquaintances; (6) fellow bloggers; (7); coworkers; (8)service people. Oops! Ok combine relatives and in laws! And it now fits the rule. As I was saying: Note the careful attention to the engineering rule of thumb five plus or minus two. (1) spouses; (2) relatives and in laws; (3) friends; (4) acquaintances; (5) fellow bloggers; (6) coworkers; (7)service people. An injineer can always make the observed data fit the predetermined answer. Why do you think tuition is higher, the math is harder, and the wages better?]

Seriously, maybe networking contacts can become friends and acquaintances. Maybe that is what one needs to do. Convert the business of networking into "making friends and influencing people". I'm not so sure. But I'll take it under advisement. Till then, networking contacts don't fit into my paradigm cause it breaks the rule of five.

Maybe I need some new rules?
[FOOTNOTE: The rule of five says that people don't understand or remember things that are fewer than 3 (insufficient distinctions) and greater than 7 (too many choices). So engineers always try to ensure that stuff conforms to that rule. Next week's lesson: Why bridges don't usually fail or multiplying the right answer by ten just to be safe! That's why you don't have to worry about following a 9.5 ton truck on a one ton bridge … usually!]


TECH: “OUTLOOK” does a “LOOKOUT”

Sunday, June 4, 2006

Most interesting.

This morning a routine email out to my isp started failing.  OK, no big deal. Often stuff has to try more than once to get out. After the third try, it was time to look into it. The message was "needs authentication". Huh? I haven't changed anything in my email accounts since I abandoned a spammy email address and created a new one. But that was a while ago. OK! Let's debug. Can we do the Outlook Lookout test account? Hmmm, everything works EXCEPT the send. OK, let's look at the email address. Looks good. Other settings? Hmmm, the outbound "needs authentication" box is unchecked. That's not right. Check it. Test it. OK. Send mail. OK. Hmm so how did that box get unchecked. Ghosts? The wicked witch of the west. Or just Outlook donning it persona of Lookout and making life interesting for the poor dumb user. And, people wonder why I want to leave Microsoft? At least, an open source vendor would be interested in my problem. Or at least feign interest if I was a donor. Heck, the beta software guys actually respond. Sigh!