Friday, March 24, 2006

Belarus Crackdown!

Everybody expected Lukashenko to crack down sooner or later, and now he's done it.

Two questions remain: What (if anything) will the people of Belarus do now? What (if anything) will the West do now?

If the user comments to two posts on the Guardian site are any indication, there's a surprisingly strong -- or at least vocal -- constituency for the "Do Absolutely Nothing" position. My impression is that this notion is especially popular in the UK. I'm not sure why, exactly. It may be the simple desire to oppose anything it looks like Bush & Co. are for. A bit of dark muttering about "Bush... Blair... CIA..." and you're off the hook for anything, it seems. I'm genuinely curious, and I don't want to deal in cartoonish stereotypes here. I'm sure they mean well, and sincerely think they're doing the right thing. And I agree, not interfering in other countries' internal business is usually quite a fine thing. I wouldn't rank it the absolute highest goal, but in general it's a praiseworthy notion.

If you're really so disgusted at Bush and Blair, why do you keep giving them the power to determine what your own opinions will be? If Bush showed up in Minsk tomorrow and gave Lukashenko a big sloppy kiss, would that finally get your attention? Then will you suddenly start caring about Belarus? Is that really what it's going to take?

I also think I detect an undercurrent of Euroskepticism in the comments as well. During the ultimately successful protests in Ukraine, more than one commentator intimated that democracy in Ukraine inevitably meant another poor foundling on the EU's doorstep. Which is a rather venal and self-interested attitude, but one that's in some ways understandable. If you let Ukraine and Belarus in, you can't really keep Russia out permanently, and if you do that you've just expanded the EU's borders to China and the Pacific Ocean. Do all ex-Soviet republics have a seat waiting in Brussels? Is Tajikistan really a European country? And if you let all of them in, why not, say, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, or India?

But at the same time, it's hard to look at protesters in the squares of Minsk or Kiev and pretend they have nothing in common with their neighbors to the west. It's hard to look at them and not think of 1989, try as you might. It's hard to look at what Lukashenko's been up to the last 12 years and claim the protesters don't have a valid point. To argue for "noninterference" in this case is to argue that somehow the people of Belarus will somehow benefit if we just close our eyes, plug our ears, turn our backs, and let Lukashenko have at it.

A list of more Belarus links and info, in addition to those listed in my previous post:

  • This post at Gateway Pundit has pics and discussion about the crackdown.
  • Rush-Mush has numerous accounts from people on the ground in Minsk.
  • Tobias Ljunvall has a weekly blog about Belarus, posted every Sunday. A lot's happened since last Sunday, so the current post practically reads like ancient history.
  • This post at Babruisk (in Belarusian) has lots of pictures of the riot cops cracking down.
  • More news & discussion at Neeka's Backlog.
  • A post about a group of Belarusians' flashmob reaction to the state media.


Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Referredux




So here's another one of those posts where I celebrate the ineffable magic of the Next Blog button. Some of these are referrers: Someone, somewhere out there was clicking the magic button, visited one of these sites, and then showed up on my doorstep. Other ones are random blogs of interest I came across while using the magic button myself, which I've been known to indulge in now and then. As usual, ones I especially liked are in bold, although I'm too lazy to actually describe each blog this time around, so if you're curious why somebody got bolded, you'll have to go see for yourself, or not. I'll probably get tired of doing this sooner or later and stop. Or possibly I'll get so many visitors that it just becomes impossible to sort through. These pseudorandom referrals are a real minority of visitors anyway. Most are search engine hits, and I've also gotten a lot of blog-back visits to my "In Darkest Jesustan" post from a while back, since I linked to a Nation article down towards the bottom. I actually feel a bit bad about that; the title was far better than the actual post, which I think was something of a sour, ill-considered rant. So I think I may've left a few readers rather disappointed.

A fun thing about this sort of post is that you can make it as nonlinear as you like. When you update an existing blog entry, Blogspot often sends you a couple of new "Next Blog" people, so then you can go back, add those referrer pages, republish, and voila, even more visitors. And so on. It really gives you a nice illusion of control, or whatever.

Anyway, here's that list I was talking about, for better, or worse, or whatever:



BTW, the tropical fruit picture (which features several durians, among other things) isn't from any of these blogs, and quite honestly has nothing to do with this post whatsoever. I just thought the post needed a bit more color, is all.

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Viva Belarus


A few important links about the election protests in Belarus:

A disturbing trend I've noticed is that a lot of blogs from outside Belarus advocating democracy and human rights there have a distinctly conservative bent, while a lot of progressive blogs, and what some might call "liberal media" stories, take a more skeptical, and sometimes openly hostile, tone. Which is a huge disappointment. Maybe tomorrow I'll go into more depth speculating about why this is so, but in many cases it seems like the opposition stems from a base desire to oppose anything it looks like Bush is for. I'd argue this is a silly and childish reaction. Having visceral negative reactions to the chimp from Crawford is not the same thing as having a coherent policy of one's own. Are we supposed to walk away from the very notion of universal human rights, just because GWB occasionally mouths some insincere platitudes about countries he can't even find on a map? When he talks about civil liberties, he doesn't really mean it. Ever. Anywhere. So even if you do think it's smart to just be for the opposite of whatever Bush is for, you can't take his words as any kind of guide. Since when is the notion that protesters maybe shouldn't be massacred a controversial idea? How did that happen? Opposing Lukashenko doesn't mean you're signing up for George's next war or anything. And you're also not signing up to help impose vicious laissez-faire capitalism on Belarus, either. I personally don't care what sort of economic model they use. They can stick with classic Soviet central planning so far as I care, just so long as they hold free elections and respect human rights. That's not so farfetched; the former Soviet republic of Moldova is giving it a try right now. Whether it'll work is anyone's guess, but it's their decision to make. Economics are an internal matter, for the local voters to puzzle out. Censorship and election fraud, on the other hand, are everyone's business, and what GWB thinks about it is entirely irrelevant.

tags: .

Monday, March 20, 2006

Baby Pandas.... Awww....




If you don't like baby pandas, you're a bad person. You're probably a Republican, in fact. (Scroll down to see why.)

But you're a normal person, though, you'll enjoy these:

  • Tai Shan, the famous baby panda at the National Zoo in DC.
  • Hua Mei, born in 1999 at the San Diego Zoo.
  • A gallery of baby pandas at the Wolong Research Center in China.
  • And best of all, recent video from Wolong showing a bunch of baby pandas playing in the snow.
  • Want more? Of course you do. And Pandafans.org has just what you're looking for.
  • Can't make it to DC to visit Tai Shan, a.k.a. "Butterstick"? Thanks to the magic of the internet, you can at least visit Unrequited Narcissism and read about what it's like to be in the presence of HIs Roly-Polyness. Tai Shan for President!


Semi-obligatory lame panda joke:

A panda enters a cafe, orders and devours a sandwich, draws a pistol, fires a few shots and then heads for the door. "Why?" asks the bewildered waiter. The panda tosses him a badly punctuated wildlife manual and says: "I'm a panda. Look it up." The waiter reads the relevant entry: "Panda: Large black and white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."


Updated: A few reasons why Republicans hate pandas so much:

  1. Pandas come from Red China. The whole cuteness thing is a commie plot against America. Anybody who likes pandas is helping the commies, and at the very least ought to be wiretapped. Without a warrant, naturally.
  2. The tree-huggers love pandas, and it's essential to always do the opposite of whatever the tree-huggers are doing, no matter what.
  3. Pandas are endangered, and the eternal Republican creed is "Kick 'em when they're down".
  4. Even if they weren't endangered, they're still cute and fuzzy, the antithesis of everything Republicans believe in. Liking any kind of animal is a weakness of character, kind of like Bill Bennett and his gambling addiction. But if you're going to do it, you should at least stick to good Republican animals, like rats and tapeworms.
  5. They apparently don't taste good, it's illegal to shoot them or otherwise turn them into trophies, you can't train them to do demeaning stunts, it's even illegal to wrestle them. There's apparently no way at all to test your fragile masculinity against them, so what good are they?
  6. This story has a picture of Bill Clinton posing with a Panda. Case closed!!!
  7. They're part-black and part-white, which is intolerable. If members of the master race (i.e. polar bears) get the urge to sow a little wild oats now and then, they need to show some discretion, like good ol' Strom Thurmond. Pandas are an embarrassing and very private matter, and it's the height of tackiness to even talk about 'em.
  8. If the free market, in its infinite wisdom, decrees that pandas need to be chopped up as aphrodisiacs or turned into tacky souvenirs or something, it's automatically a wonderful thing, and nobody has any right to interfere. What are you, some kind of communist? Oh, right, we already answered that one.
  9. Pandas aren't mentioned anywhere in the Bible, which puts them into the same dubious category as Klingons and unicorns. It's possible that Satan put them here to confuse the faithful.
  10. Or possibly they don't exist at all Have you ever seen one in person? No? Clearly there's a liberal media conspiracy here just begging to be uncovered.
  11. If God did create pandas (hypothetically speaking, of course), and he'd wanted us to like them he would have put them right here in the Good Ole USA, instead of on some other godforsaken continent full of foreigners.
  12. Assuming that other continent even exists. China isn't mentioned in the Bible either. Clearly this whole "Asia" thing was dreamed up by those evil liberals to fill a huge gap in their so-called "globe" of the "round Earth". Everybody knows our own continent is the biggest and the best. Anybody who believes in Asia and says it's bigger obviously just hates freedom. The same goes for Africa, btw.
  13. Certain notorious liberal scientists use the panda's so-called "thumb" as an argument for their sick theory of evolution. Why do they hate America?
  14. Pandas just might be hiding WMDs -- they've so far refused to prove to our satisfaction that they don't -- so the only patriotic course of action is to do 'em in and destroy their habitat, just in case.


tags:

Three Years On

We didn't go to Portland's big Iraq protest on Sunday, but we had a front row seat. We found a cozy table at a restaurant on the route of the march, and settled in to watch. It took over an hour for all the marchers to file by. It was great to see that kind of turnout.

Of course, protesting the war is mostly a symbolic exercise, given the Busheviks' unlimited scorn for public opinion. There's absolutely nothing anybody outside the beltway can do to convince them to do anything differently. But then, efforts to censure or impeach the guy are basically just symbolic, too. Nothing's going to change, nothing's going to be different as a result, but sometimes it just has to be attempted anyway, just on the principle of the thing.

Realistically speaking, we're stuck with George and his cronies until January 2009, and we're stuck with his war for at least that long. I'm starting to think that their "exit strategy" is to try to leave the Iraq war on autopilot for the next few years, and dump it all in the next president's lap. That way (they may be hoping) somebody else gets to take all the blame for losing.

After all, according to Our Leaders, we've got three long years of remarkable progress in Iraq under our belts now, and things are just getting better and better every day. In fact, Uncle Dick still insists that his promises that we'd be greeted as liberators, and that the insurgents were on their last legs about a year ago, were "basically accurate and reflect reality".

However, even the beltway punditocracy is witnessing a few recriminations over Iraq. Of course this won't translate into doing anything differently next time around. When we start ramping up for a war in Iran, or Syria, or Venezuela, they'll set their skepticism aside again and go back to the same naive rah-rah-go-team reaction we saw with Iraq.

We can speculate all we like about why Bush & Co. really started this war, and why so much of the public backed him for so long. In the end I'm not sure we'll ever really know. And whether it was originally about oil, or WMDs, or "transforming" the middle east, or getting revenge for 9/11, or wallowing in WWII nostalgia, or bringing about the Rapture, the question facing us now is the same: Ok, so now what?

Yesterday the Oregonian ran what it presented as two opposing viewpoints on the war. One, from the neocon Max Boot, argued that the war isn't actually a big deal in terms of money spent or lives lost. The implication is that we can just stay the course indefinitely, do nothing different, and it'll all be ok. The other viewpoint, by retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, argues that the best strategy now would actually be to send more troops, and institute a draft if necessary. On top of those guest columns, the Oregonian's ever-reptilian David Reinhard chimes in with one of his usual hatchet jobs, attacking anyone who doesn't love the war or who won't pretend it's going great. I guess we're supposed to come away thinking that these three pieces represent the full spectrum of public opinion about the war. Or at least that subset of public opinion that the media considers "responsible". Somehow, to the media, "responsible" opinion always means "pro-war". Here's a blurb bashing the Oregonian for yesterday's odd editorial choices. And here's an interesting column arguing the case for an immediate withdrawal. I'm not sure I agree with the argument in its entirety, but it does make a convincing case that our continued presence in Iraq is not helping matters one bit.

I'm starting to think that partition is unavoidable, and the only way to mitigate the civil war is to do it sooner rather than later. It didn't have to be this way. It wasn't always inevitable, any more than the partition of Yugoslavia was inevitable in 1989. Perhaps it could've been prevented before the cycle of violence really got rolling, but it's too late for that now. Really I don't see why this is often considered a worst-case scenario. Iraq as it exists is a purely artificial entity, with borders drawn to suit the needs of 1920s colonialists. You can't simply draw lines on a map without any regard to the people who live there, and expect the inhabitants to automatically feel they all have something in common. Throughout the history of Iraq, it's been argued that a "strong hand" is required to hold the country together, be it a colonial power, king, military dictator, religious dictator, or something else. And if our experience there so far is any guide, that conventional wisdom may actually be true. If so, and the only workable alternatives are partition or dictatorship, splitting the country into thirds seems like the lesser of two evils, as ugly as it would be at the outset. That is, assuming that we have any right, or any power, to shape how events unfold in Iraq anymore, and I'm not convinced that we do, or ever really did.

Updated: Did I toldja so, or did I toldja so? Today (3/21), our Glorious Leader let it be known that we'll have troops in Iraq for at least another 3 years, so that it'll be the next president's mess to clean up -- and hopefully take all the blame for. And we already knew that the next president gets to inherit GWB's unsustainable budget deficits, too. Is this the Busheviks' new master plan? Steer us straight at an iceberg, hop overboard in a nice cushy lifeboat at the last minute, and let the rest of us figure out what to do next? Niiiice.

tags:

Friday, March 17, 2006

bush/rug


This was originally a second copy of "No Name" (below), which inexplicably got posted twice. That seemed kind of useless, so I figured I'd do a gut-n-stuff job on it, and here's the result. A whole post about GWB's precious rug, which I've mentioned in passing once already. It just doesn't stop being funny. It's kind of weird how rare really good anti-GWB cheap shots are. Usually when George does something boneheaded, thousands of innocent people die. That tends to sap all the enjoyment right out of the thing.

First off, a pic of Bush's dog standing on the carpet, artfully cropped so we can't see what the hind end is doing.

Here's a site where you can buy a genuine Oval Office Rug, so you can pretend like you're just like Our Glorious Leader.

Here's a very different rug, which the poster says "accurately conveys how my stomach feels whenever President Bush appears on television.".

George says his wife is responsible for the rug. Go here to giggle over references to "Laura's rug". It's... just... too... easy....

Another story about that damn rug. The thing you really shouldn't miss here, though, is at the end of the article. Seems that for three years now, the violence in Iraq has always just been a "recent surge in violence". You could see this as a conspiracy within the mainstream media. But I'm happy to chalk this one up to incompetence on the media's part. Incompetence, plus lots of sheer laziness. Copy editors who chide you for trading in cliches and hackneyed phrases are a thing of the past, I'm afraid. After you've been a reporter for a year or two and haven't gotten your Pulitzer yet, I expect you come to realize that you get paid exactly the same if you do the absolute bare minimum of work, churn out a certain number of words of complete dreck, take everything you're told at face value, ask no tough questions, do no research, and provide no context or analysis. You get paid the same either way, and this is by far the path of least resistance. You get done quicker, and you can be out of your room and down in the hotel bar in record time. Which is the key thing, of course.

Oh, and here's a funny non-rug bit titled "Bush Gets New Speechwriter".

Enjoy!

No Name


I couldn't think of a good title for this post, so instead I picked a rather stupid one. But not a completely meaningless one, as you'll see below

Here's an image of a distinctly double-helix-shaped nebula near the center of our galaxy, taken by the Spitzer Space Telescope. There's two ways to look at this. Normal people like me just go "cool" and wonder how it got that way, while the inhabitants of conservative never-neverland just froth at the mouth about a conspiracy of evil liberal scientists making the whole thing up. Ok, I haven't actually seen them do that yet, but it stands to reason.

And here's the latest weird extrasolar planet, which (according to researchers) is a huge ball of ice with a mass roughly that of Neptune. Here's a link to the researchers' paper, for those who prefer original sources. It occurs to me that, until quite recently, the Earth was actually the largest known solid object in the unverse. Since the Earth's the largest (known) solid planet in our solar system, and we were unaware of any bigger ones elsewhere, so there you go. I mean, this is not counting bizarre stuff like neutron stars, and even they're smaller if you're just going strictly by diameter.

An article at Tom's Hardware discussing one of the greatest movies of all time, TRON, including a long interview with the director.

Two previous articles of mine discussed (or possibly just babbled about) the weird world of transfinite ordinals. You'll probably want to read those first, that or just skip this item, because it probably won't make sense otherwise. I had just a couple more tidbits I wanted to pass along. The mysterious Church-Kleene ordinal, or w1CK, was discussed in connection with Turing machines, as the limit where all recursion finally runs out of steam. Which is part of the story, but it turns out that the same number is also the first example of something called an admissible ordinal. Which is an intriguingly positive-sounding name, since the Turing machine discussion made w1CK sound like a frustrating barrier, not something "admissible". It turns out the name just derives from these ordinals' connection with admissible sets, something I'm still hazy on. But w1CK is just the first one (after w, anyway), and the sequence goes on endlessly from there. And "admissibility" is by no means the strongest ordinal property. Here's a well-written paper I ran across, giving an overview of the esoteric and difficult field of proof theory. It even has a few diagrams, which may be really helpful for people trying to understand the subject. Beyond the admissibles, several additional types of ordinal are discussed, each a sort of recursive ordinal equivalent to a variety of large cardinal. Recursively inaccessible, Mahlo, and supercompact ordinals all make an appearance. The paper offers the names iota_0, mu_0, and kappa_0 for the first ordinal of each variety, adding to the already-rich, exotic bestiary of incredibly huge numbers "out there". Here's another paper that uses mu_0.

Ok, switching gears completely, here are two humor blogs I came across recently: Smile of the Day and Jokes & Humor Online.

A few new animal species to report: , a new grasshopper in Malaysia; , a shark in the Sea of Cortez, and , a.k.a. the Scott Bar salamander, which is about to lose its California habitat to logging. Seems that once the state realized it was a new, separate species, they decided that meant the state's raft of regulations protecting previously-known salamander species didn't apply anymore, and P. asupak habitat was fair game for clearcutting. Now there's a choice bit of self-serving "logic" for ya. Some photos here -- see 'em while you can...

And finally we get to the bit where I explain the title of this post. Here's the official website for No Name, a boy band from Montenegro (WP article here), in the Balkans. They were going to be Serbia-Montenegro's official Eurovision 2006 entry, but the choice spawned a huge controversy, complete with inter-republic ethnic tensions, and now the country's sending nobody at all. Did I mention Montenegro's thinking about seceding? They'll be voting on May 21st. However that turns out, I just hope we don't end up with yet another Balkan war to sort out. Back when Milosevic ran the show in Yugoslavia, I kept hoping Montenegro would secede, since I figured it was the only way to escape a dictatorship that showed no signs of weakening. They always seemed to be right on the verge of seceding, but they never quite did. Now I don't know what to think about the whole thing anymore.

tags:

Thursday, March 16, 2006

Kiwaidagain


As your Unofficial Kiwaida Headquarters, I have a few more Kiwa hirsuta links to pass along, in addition to the existing list I've compiled, ever so painstakingly. (Also, here's my original post where I first mentioned the creature.)

BTW, today's image is the same Kiwa pic you've seen everywhere, except rotated 180 degrees. I'm left-handed. What can I say?

  • Here's the official news release from MBARI.
  • A blogger from Canada says I may never SNORKEL AGAIN.
  • From a post titled "Cutie pie Kiwa": I want a Kiwa of my own!! I can dress her up and try all kinds of hairstyles on her. She'd be like a Crustacean Barbie!
  • Another blogger asks "What does a lobster in drag taste like?". A: "Chicken. I bet it tastes like chicken."
  • The Waffling Anglican speculates: "Or perhaps it is trying to imitate a mammal to avoid being eaten during Lent." That hadn't occurred to me, but now that I think about it, I rather like the idea of a religious practice causing an evolutionary selection pressure. What would Pat Robertson have to say about that, I wonder?
  • Be sure to read the user comments at Swim at Your Own Risk ...
  • ...The Irish Trojan's Blog...
  • ...and Mo-Licious.
  • Pink Porcupette describes it as "a cross between a tick and a blonde gorilla". Yeah, I can see that. Although in tick terms, it's alarmingly huge. Yikes!
  • Another blogger sees it as a cross between a tick and a gibbon.
  • Angry and Sloppy calls it a "crabster". To me, that sounds like an appetizer at Applebee's, some sort of extruded, deep-fried, unidentifiable seafood nodule, slathered in a cheeselike sauce. Someday I'll write about my one and only trip to Applebee's, but right now the trauma is still too fresh.
  • A post titled "OMFG HAIRY LOBSTER", subtitled "Hairy Lobsters will Rule the Earth". So now, when the worst inevitably happens, you can't go around pretending you weren't warned.
  • Two posts from people who like the "crustacean goddess" angle of the story.
  • Univeral Hub links to a number of other good Kiwa stories.
  • My Life As A Bus lumps poor lil' Kiwa in with things like 3 headed frogs and 6 legged lambs (pics of both included), which I think is just a tad unfair. The kiwaida is supposed to look like that, after all.

Who Wants Ice Cream?


[A nice picture of Santiago de Chile and the Andes -- thanks to Marce for sending me the link. Some more images of the city here. Not related to the rest of this post, but I just wanted to pass it along anyway.]

I was going to rant about Ted Kulongoski today, but I'm not in a sufficiently sour mood to really pull it off. I mean, by all accounts he's a very nice man. Kind to animals, a friend to all, always has the very best of intentions, and all that. When he goes to Iraq with other state governors, he makes sure they all have ice cream cones. So he's definitely every kid's ideal grandpa. That much is clear. But governor? I've never figured out why he wanted the governor's chair. Maybe just to collect the whole set, I dunno. All I know is that whenever I see the guy on TV, bumbling around cluelessly in yet another goofy publicity stunt, I end up shouting out "Who wants ice cream?". Which I realize isn't very good of me, considering what an impeccably nice person he is.

Also, he's a much better bowler than I am. I have to give him that.

In the end, he'll probably get reelected regardless, following a somewhat close shave in the May primary. The R's will undoubtedly nominate yet another cross-burnin' Jesustani knuckle-dragger, maybe even Mannix again (but only because Sizemore isn't running), and Teddy will slink back into office as the lesser of two evils, with much emphasis on lesser. Which is the usual way D's eke out victories here. But hey, we're a minor-league state. We don't have a deep talent pool to draw from.

So anyway, like I said, I'm not going to go off on a rant about Mr. Nice Guy today, not at all. Instead, here are a few random fun tidbits, some of which I found on ORblogs, others not.


  • Some examples of a photographic technique known as tilt shift, which lets you take a real photo and make it look like a fake model. Freeeaky...
  • Speaking of, uh, fake models, here's a tidbit about Jessica Simpson's snub of GWB. By doing this, she's taking a far stronger stand than oh, say, Ted, for example. But no ranting, sorry. I mean it.
  • The American Cheese Society is having their convention in Portland in late July. Who wants cheese? I want cheese. Mmm.... Cheeeeese......
  • As if we needed more evidence why hockey is the One True Sport, the local minor-league team in Las Vegas will be handing out Cheney-spoofing "hunting vests" that read "Don't Shoot, I'm Human".
  • A fun new reason to move to the Netherlands.
  • The latest NASA research on the , because it's been days since I've tried to antagonize creationists, and it never stops being fun.
  • A post singing the praises of Portland's Tanner Springs Park. I couldn't disagree more. As far as I can tell, the main reason the park's supposed to be so wonderful is because of all the endless committee meetings it's made possible. The aging boomers of the Pearl would never admit to this, but I really think the park is a sign of their collective slide into cranky geezerdom, a chance for people without lawns to say "Get off my lawn, you !$%& kids!".
  • The latest news about lovelorn rhesus monkeys in China. Because everybody loves monkeys, right? I bet ol' Teddy takes a principled stand in favor of monkeys, at least the ones the focus groups like. This is easy for Ted because we don't have any monkeys here, and therefore we have no rich anti-monkey lobbyists to appease. Oh, wait. No ranting, I forgot. Sorry. I mean it.


big mass-o-tags:

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Pictures of Herons



A slideshow of various heron photos I've taken over the years. The original post -- from wayyy back in the mists of time, before I even had a Flickr account or had taken any photos of herons -- follows...




Brief little post this time. Here are a couple pics of Oregon's favorite small fierce prehistoric creature. (No, not Kevin Mannix, silly, he's nobody's favorite, if the last couple elections are any guide.) Plus one picture of beer.

tags:

Note to Self

I don't normally blog about work. Mostly because it's not exactly a thrilling subject for most people. And I'm not really one for gossiping and complaining about coworkers, even if there was any juicy gossip going around or anything legit to complain about, neither of which are the case.

This was going to be a longish rant about various things I don't enjoy about Unix programming, but it was promped by one pesky bug, and I'll just stick with that one for the time being.

The "Note to Self" of the title is this: It's bad for one singleton object to rely on a pointer to another singleton object, thus relying on the hope that the second will be around for the entire lifetime of the first object, and then some. If you do decide to do this, at the very least don't use object #1 while the app is cleaning up and exiting as the result of an exit() call. And if you abolutely have to do that, at least don't have multiple threads running at the time. Otherwise you'll quite possibly stumble into the same situation I did recently. Thread #1 wants to use singleton #1, which performs some filesystem utility stuff. Unfortunately, we've gotten a SIGTERM just now, and thread #2 is in the middle of an exit() call. As part of that, global and static objects get destructed in some unknowable compiler or machine defined order that the books all warn you to never, ever rely upon. Thread #2 destructs singleton #2, which would be fine if singleton #1 didn't subsequently try to use a pointer to singleton #2. Pure virtual function call, yada yada yada, SIGABRT, core dumped. Feh.

At least that's what I've been able to reconstruct from core files sent to us by a surly user. At least I can take pride in the fact that not one line of the offending code was written by me. It would've never occurred to me to write it that way.

I don't have my Antipatterns book handy to verify this, but an unidentified coworker seems to have discovered a brand new one. Yikes.

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Oregon Coral. Honest!


Don't laugh, it's true. We really do have actual corals right here in Oregon. A couple of months back, I made a brief mention of the little-known world of cold deep-sea corals (although most of the post is about baby porcupines, which we have here too, btw). I was watching an HD nature show about tropical coral reefs in Indonesia the other night, and I got to wondering a bit about what (if anything) we've got closer to home.

There's surprisingly little information on the net about coldwater corals, possibly because they aren't easily accessible to recreational divers or PBS documentary teams. This is a real shame, since they're being extensively damaged by indiscriminate bottom trawling, and a large part of the world's deep coral habitat may be gone before we know much at all about it. This isn't intended to be some sort of "blah blah rainforest, blah blah concerned celebrities, blah blah organic tofu" harangue, though. Primarily I just want to point out that deep coral is interesting, it looks cool, and it's here. Just check it out, and then make an informed decision about whether we ought to wipe the stuff out or not. That's all I'm sayin'.

So here are some useful links I've come across:

Two academic papers about Oregon corals:

Conservation and management implications of deep-sea coral and fishing effort distributions in the Northeast Pacific Ocean
Habitat-forming deep-sea corals in the Northeast Pacific Ocean



WSU-Vancouver has a large image archive, although it really helps to know your taxonomy if you're looking for anything specific. If you (like me) need to brush up on that a little, the Wikipedia coral article is useful. The pic shown above is from this archive. It's a gorgonian, listed under subclass Octocorralia.

Some other links:

  • Some general info about Threatened NE Pacific marine habitats.
  • A proposed act of congress to protect deep-sea corals. I'm not holding my breath on this one. Nobody's making money off deep-sea corals, therefore there aren't any bribes to be had, therefore Congress won't act.
  • Not exactly a coral link, but I came across this while I was, uh, trawling the web. So I guess this counts as "bycatch" or something. Here's SlugSite, a page featuring nudibranchs (i.e. sea slugs), including the ever-popular Opisthobranch of the Week feature.

More info & links when I come across 'em.

tags:

followup

I've recently gotten a number of search engine hits from people looking for political blogs about Singapore. They ended up here because of a single flippant comment I made drawing an analogy between Dubai and Singapore. That post was about Dubai and the ports deal, not Singapore, and the analogy was supposed to be unflattering.

The number of hits I got made me a little curious. It turns out that there's an election coming up later this year, and even though it's not expected to be a fair election by international standards, the opposition's still hoping to finally (and against all odds) win a significant number of legislative seats. The ruling party's had a near-monopoly since independence, so this would be a real political earthquake if it happened. And the stakes are higher than just who runs a small island in SE Asia for the next four years. Dictators around the world have tended to see Singapore as a sort of pole star, a successful alternative to Western-style democracy. It'd be great to be able to turn that around and show that despotism always loses out eventually.

So now I feel guilty about just dissing the place out of hand the way I did. I don't claim to be an expert on the intricacies of local politics over there, but here are a few Singapore political blogs and blog entries I came across:



I naturally have no idea who was looking for political blogs about Singapore, whether they're curious citizens or government censors. If it's the latter, and they decide to ban this blog in Singapore, I'll take it as a mark of pride, and a sign I must be doing something right.

While I'm at it, here are a couple blogs and blog entries about Dubai. I haven't changed my mind about the ports deal or anything, but I also don't think it's healthy to see anywhere or anyone solely in cartoonish, stereotypical terms.





And now, more "Next Blog" pseudorandomness:

Monday, March 13, 2006

In Darkest Jesustan

The theocrats are on the march again.

Here are two more news articles by distant out-of-state fundies who want to tell us all how to live. The Southern Baptists and the "Focus on the Family" clowns would both like to order us around in the matter of physician-assisted suicide. They're hundreds of miles away and have almost nothing in common with us, but that's never stopped them before. Adverse Supreme Court rulings don't stop them, and basic common decency doesn't stop them. And if the voters stop them, they'll just ramp up on establishing a theocracy, so they don't have to pay attention to those pesky voters anymore. Think I'm joking? Here's a recent poll of South Dakotans about the state's recent near-total abortion ban. The public does not approve, but inconvenient little details like that don't matter any more, not when you alone possess the Absolute Truth and know exactly how everyone ought to live. As of right now, SD residents still have access to detailed abortion info on the net. It'll be interesting to see whether the state tries to crack down on that as well.

We aren't quite ready for a theocracy yet here in Oregon, but the state legislature in Missouri is seriously thinking it over. Since they're half a continent away, not here, and not next door, I almost wish they'd go through with it, just for the sheer spectacle of the thing. I doubt they've thought this far, but it's obvious that mandating a generic "Christianity" is going to be a real problem. Sooner or later you're going to have to come up with a strict legal definition of who is a real Christian and who isn't. Otherwise, pragmatic unbelievers could simply proclaim themselves Unitarians and continue on as before. Which clearly is not what the bill's sponsors have in mind. The usual suspects will no doubt be excluded right off the bat: Unitarians, Mormons, Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and so forth. Because you certainly don't want any of them conducting your mandatory school prayers. And the Baptists and Methodists and Pentecostals can't possibly all be right, and we sure can't have the schools teaching a false (and therefore Satanic) religion, so the government will need to pick one, and enforce it ruthlessly. And even then, you need to constantly be on guard against rogue Baptist (for example) ministers who stray from the state's approved theological guidelines. Otherwise, the term "Baptist" would rapidly become meaningless, and we can't have that. You'll most likely require a sort of Baptist pope, or at least a college of cardinals, who call all the shots and whose word is Law. And if his/their word is Law, having a separate governor, legislature, or court system would be basically pointless.

Sure, let them do that. And once they've done that, and other states in that part of the country have done the same thing, let them all secede, and good riddance to them. Let them have their Jesustan, so far as I'm concerned, just so long as they leave us blue-state folks alone. At minimum, this would mean making sure they don't have the bomb, because they can't be trusted with it, any more than the Taliban could be trusted with it. Splitting things up might be tough, but at least they won't fight us for custody over the Bill of Rights. That much is pretty clear.

I wonder what our spineless Democratic politicans would do if that ever happened. They're so used to being squishy and spineless and following the hard-right R's around pathetically bleating "Me too! Me too!" all the time. They've got no strategy other than figure out what conservative R's are for, and postion themselves a full 3% different to either side. And they're always in a headlong rush away from their base, because somebody told them it looks "statesmanlike" that way. Without R's around to model themselves on, our current D's would be completely lost. Look at the current controversy about the attempt to censure GWB over his domestic spying campaign. His approval ratings are in the dumpster, and the wiretap program looks to be about as unconstitutional as they come, but still they're terrified to stand up and criticize the guy. And they still -- for some reason -- expect to do well this November, even though the polls haven't shown a big groundswell of support for Democratic candidates. Here's a clue: If party X is unpopular, and you want to beat them in the next election, your first step ought to be to stop modeling yourself on them. Otherwise you'll be as unpopular as they are. If Democrats really want to win in 2006 (and I'm not convinced they do), they'll need a crash course in how to look and act like winners between now and then. I'm not holding out a lot of hope about that.

On a somewhat lighter and more surreal note, check out this article about GWB and his precious Oval Office rug. I don't know why he bothers. I sure wouldn't buy a carpet from the guy.

Updated:

  • Regarding the burgeoning censure-the-bastard-already movement, permit me to direct your attention to a good article over at Vichy Democrats.
  • Also, see this good post about fundie elitists over at Preemptive Karma.
  • The Nation has a great article up about the censure controversy, and the dismissive reaction it's gotten among the beltway insider community.
  • And you may have seen the recent Doonesbury about "situational science" already, but here it is anyway.


Updated II: Sandra Day O'Connor uses the 'D' word, where 'D' = "dictatorship". The US media's studiously ignoring this story, but here's an account at The Guardian.

Updated III: A scary example of the sort of thing that gets published, in this allegedly modern day and age, in local newspapers right here in the Pacific Northwest. A columnist for the Kitsap Peninsula Business Journal argues, with a straight face, that slavery was God's will. This is the same Kitsap Peninsula that's home to the big Trident nuclear sub base at Bangor, and the big navy base at Bremerton. What was I just saying about not letting the Jesustanis have the bomb?

Updated IV: A few bits of theocracy news, this time from Florida. The first item involves Katherine Harris. Yes, that Katherine Harris. An article about Rev. Kennedy and his ideas, for those who aren't familiar with the guy. And then there's the creepy guy from Domino's Pizza, and his plan to start an 100%-pure-Catholic-or-else town near Naples, FL. Oh, and the state has its own legion of nutty creationists as well.

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Give 'em what they want...

The net is a strange place. Ok, technically it isn't a place at all, but it's strange. The latest example is the Furry Lobster Meme. I mean, I assume it's a meme (assuming I understand the whole "meme" thing), because a remarkable number of people have arrived here looking for info about Kiwaida, the new family of crustacea I wrote about a few days ago. Far more than I would have expected, especially since I haven't gotten a single visitor looking for choice Laonastes tidbits.

Updated: Here's another Kiwa post of mine from a few days after this one. Enjoy!

So since everybody seems to be showing up here anyway, I guess I'll appoint myself Your Unofficial Kiwaida Headquarters, and pass along a few quotable Furry Lobster Links (TM) for your zoological enjoyment.


  • Ma planète actually links here for all your Kiwaida needs, so obviously this item comes first in the list. Thanks for the link!
  • The above item also points readers at a Greenpeace blog. Be sure to follow the "blobfish" link if you want to see something really weird. Don't be eating anything when you look, though. I'm serious.
  • Here's the original source material, the researchers' paper [PDF] about the creature. It's a bit technical for non-specialists, but there are several more pics of the creature, including closeups of the "fur", and in situ pics of the little beasties crawling around on the ocean floor.
  • BadmintonStamps comments "The real question now is whether the blind albino dinner for two will receive fair treatment in a prejudiced market. Higher-ups at the notoriously close-minded Red Lobster restaurant chain were already rumored to be the ones applying pressure on the scientific community to assign the creature a non-lobster classification. If Kiwaida Poppers aren't on the menu come summer, you can chalk it up as just one more sad reminder that our nation still isn't nearly as color-blind as we'd like to think."
  • At onepotmeal: "Now that I know about furry lobsters, other lobsters just seem so plain. Also cool, that there is a goddess of crustaceans."
  • Another blogger remarks: "I wonder now, if the Polynesian resort in Disneyworld will put a big painting of this "goddess" up on the lobby wall...heheheh..."
  • 7610 has this to say: "Don't worry though, it's only about 6 inches long. Well, this Kiwaida anyway.". True enough, but the one that attacks Tokyo will be much, much larger.
  • In that spirit, here's a post titled "Attack Of The Blind Albino Yeti Crabs!".
  • Another post, this one titled "Blinged Out Lobster is Pimp of the Sea". Which you have to admit is a truly vivid image.
  • The discovery was not entirely unexpected. At least one blogger sort of predicted it over a week before it was announced.
  • Yet another blogger goes a step further and speculates that he may have accidentally created the new creature.
  • That may or may not be true. A blogger from Lynchburg, VA wonders if there may be a connection with French nuclear testing in the South Pacific.
  • This page is not strictly a kiwaida page, it's a page of current science stories put together by the Wisconsin State Science Teachers. So I figured it was worth passing along.
  • Another blogger notes a striking resemblance I'd completely missed: "First of all, I think that a better name for the lobster might have referred to the fact that it looks like it's wearing leg warmers--is this some throwback to the 1980s? I feel ilke it should also be wearing a headband, an off-the-shoulder t, and be carrying around a Walkman listening to Cindi Lauper.".
  • More than one person has made this same connection. Here's someone's MySpace profile, in which both Kiwaida and Laonastes (and also Madonna) are pictured against a Nagel-print background. Wow.
  • Uber_technica sees it as a sign of the apocalypse. And let me suggest that this and the 80's-retro hypothesis are compatible, and may both be correct simultaneously.
  • Another blog draws what I think is a comic book analogy, which is entirely lost on me. But perhaps you'll enjoy it more than I did, so here ya go.
  • Kiwa hirsuta features in a poem at Watermelon Moon, and is described as "a dazzling brooch only Phyllis Diller could wear".
  • Again, more than one blogger draws this conclusion. The Chaotic Mind includes a pic of Phyllis Diller for comparison. Yikes!
  • Junktopia , on the other hand, says "To me Kiwa Hirsuta looks like an H.R. Giger creation.".
  • The fuzzy lil' crustacean's inspiring more than just poetry. Here's a Kiwaida stuffed animal someone's created. I think there's a definite market for these.
  • Non Compos Mentis also talks about lobster plush toys. It seems like word hasn't gotten out about the toys in the previous item, which just goes to show -- yet again -- why my services are desperately required, in my self-appointed role as Kiwaida information clearinghouse.
  • Just to show how evenhanded I am, here's a rival site aggregating Kiwa hirsuta stories. Mine's better, though. Everybody knows that.
  • Another pic, this time of a bunch of Kiwaidas in all the colors of the rainbow. Groovy, man. One visitor comments: OH MY GOD! i can't stop fantasizing about the yeti crab. i'm writing a short story called micro knights where the yeti crab assists in folding space time because of the hairs on their claws that reacts to bacteria so that they can survive by the toxic vents in deep water...THX! such inspiration!!!.
  • Seibei Industries has the usual photo, plus a photo of a "regular" albino lobster. What you really want to look at here is the user comments. Here's one:

    my friend and i are obsessed with the lobster thing. i want it to reach out and hold me with it’s fuzzy arms and mitten claws.

    i drew a picture of my friend with it -
    click here to see it.

  • A song about furry lobsters, although it's actually about sea otters, not our furry lobsters.
  • Ballpoint Wren speculates about the cullinary possibilities: "I'm certain the scientists who discovered this character also lost their appetites when they realized what garlic butter would do to all that blonde hair.". I dunno, myself. Garlic butter can work wonders. Given a sufficient amount of garlic butter, bricks are delicious, for example.
  • Many Bells Down also expresses alarm about all that sheer hirsuteness: I’m not sure I’d be so keen on getting meat out of those pinchers! I hate it when there’s hair in my food. ".
  • Others are much more enthusiastic. A lobster afficionado at Jawbone Radio says "Get some drawn butter!".
  • A user comment at the previous item points readers at a more technical article at Practical Fishkeeping, which indicates that Kiwaida is a hydrothermal vent organism, and thus would be toxic, or at least really sulfury and disgusting, if you tried to eat one. Alas. And yet, there are a lot of things that are inedible unless prepared just the right way, like manioc, or rhubarb, or pufferfish. So don't give up all hope. There may still be a way, if you care. I actually don't, myself. I don't even like plain old "bald" lobster, and the evidence doesn't suggest the new beastie would be an improvement. It's hairy and all sulfury and brimstone-ish. If, hypothetically speaking, Dick Cheney wore a toupee, and you were to eat it, it would probably taste a lot like a Kiwaida.


While searching for Kiwaida stuff, I came across a couple of tidbits about Polyrhachis sokolova, a newly-discovered species of aquatic ant. Yes, you read that right. It's an ant that can swim. The original ABC (where A=Australian) story is here. Zoiks!


On a mostly-unrelated note, people have also showed up here due to one recent, very brief, passing mention of the B-movie actress Julie Strain (a pic here). These Cyclotram guests came here seeking knowledge (of a sort) and presumably went away empty-handed, since the post as a whole was about something else entirely. I actually feel a little guilty about that, like I'm being a bad host or something. So here are a couple of reviews I found of one of her most recent films, Exterminator City, by rumour_man and Dr. Gore. Reviewers on Netflix were rather stingy with their praise, a couple of them calling it the absolute worst movie they'd ever seen. That kind of talk always intrigues me, so the thing's in my queue now. I've seen a lot of atrociously poor movies, and I'm hard to impress. So we'll see how this baby stacks up. So to speak.

tags:

Double Schadenfreude

Gentle Reader(s), we're gathered here to day to celebrate bad things happening to a couple of bad people.. Perhaps that's not the noblest of impulses, but let's be honest. They both earned what they got.

Our first schadenfreudee is a certain Mr. Claude Allen, until quite recently GWB's domestic policy adviser, one-time aide to Jesse Helms, and professional fundie nutcase. He's been arrested for running a classic grift job against his local Target store. What you do is buy a bunch of merchandise, take it out to your car, go back in the store with your receipt, fill your cart with identical merchandise, and "return" it for a full refund. At Target, no less. It's not surprising that a Bushoid would turn out to be a crook. But an incompetent, small-time crook? That's just really sad. I mean, I'm not saying it would be better if they'd all go back to running elaborate arms-for-hostages schemes, but ripping off your neighborhood discount store is in a weird way an affront to the dignity of your office. If that's the best crime you can come up with, it's clear you never belonged in DC in the first place.

So two points about Claude Allen:

First, the thing that makes this a fun story (besides the pathetic and pedestrian nature of the crime), is the hypocrisy. From the Sunday Times story about the arrest:

At the time of his departure Washington insiders speculated that Allen, a staunch evangelical conservative, was leaving because he was unhappy military chaplains were being forced to conduct non-denominational services. In a previous job at the health department he was an advocate of abstinence-only Aids prevention programmes.

As a health administrator in Virginia he once blocked welfare payments to a rape victim who wanted an abortion. In 2003 Bush nominated Allen as a federal appeals court judge, but he was rejected by Democrats who unearthed an old statement he had once made disparaging “queers”.

See also the longer profile of Allen by the Washington Post, with a photo of Allen standing with Bush and Rove.

What we have here is conservative "morality" in a nutshell. On one hand, absolutely rigid rules about sex and so-called "culture of life" issues, strictly enforced by unlimited government intrusion into citizens' private lives. On the other, a far more nuanced and forgiving stance on a lot of other things, like "thou shalt not kill", "thou shalt not bear false witness", and of course stealing. Suddenly they see all sorts of grey areas and loopholes everywhere, so that (for example) neither war nor capital punishment have any negative moral aspect at all to them. And if you have to lie to get your war started, apparently that's peachy keen too, since it proves you're a strong, tough leader, or something. Just so long as you don't fool around with any interns. That's far, far worse.

Second point, GWB's reaction to the arrest is rather telling. From the Telegraph story:

Mr Bush said: "If the allegations are true, Claude Allen did not tell my chief of staff and legal counsel the truth, and that's deeply disappointing.

"If the allegations are true, something went wrong in Claude Allen's life, and that is really sad."

So let me get this straight: The stealing itself is just a sign that "something went wrong" in the guy's life, which in itself is certainly no big deal. The real sin here, the real thing all right-thinking Americans should be outraged over, is Allen's unforgivable lapse in personal loyalty to the president. The moment he knew he was in legal trouble, he apparently ought to have told Karl & Rupert so they could've come up with some idiotic spindoctoring and a plan to manage the media. Blame it all on Hillary Clinton or something, since the specifics don't really matter anyway, and they certainly never have to be true. But instead, Allen selfishly focused on saving his own skin, even though a truly loyal Republican's every waking moment is supposed be slavishly devoted to adoring thoughts about the Glorious Leader. Bush can't quite say he never knew the guy (a la Abramoff), but his cold, distant remarks are about the next closest thing. Now it's possible Allen may never work inside the beltway again. Which would be fine with me, quite honestly. Good riddance.


The second schadenfreudee got his in an even more dramatic and final way. I'm talking, of course, about Slobodan Milosevic, who died miserable and alone in a foreign prison, while on trial for war crimes. Some people have argued it's a big disappointment because he hadn't been convicted or sentenced yet. And yes, that would've been nice, of course, but in the end it would've been mostly a symbolic victory. There's nothing a civilized society could do that could adequately punish him for his actions, so a conviction would ultimately be disappointing as well, no matter what the sentence. In the end, what matters is that he's gone, not one more person will die on his orders, and he lived just long enough to see all his dreams die. He's gone, and the world's a better place for it. That should count for something. And if we're really lucky, next it'll be Pinochet's turn, and maybe Mugabe after that.


tags:

Friday, March 10, 2006

This post unintentionally left blank...

Origami Backlash


In this age of the 24 hour news cycle, it's a bit late for me to be poking fun at Microsoft's new "Origami" initiative (a.k.a. UMPC). The negative reviews are already pouring in. But this picture was just too perfect. (Here's some more origami dinos.) It's just yet another MS attempt to shoehorn a full version of Windows, or something superficially close to it, into a small(ish) form factor, and convince everybody it's just the coolest thing ever. If it's not a clunky touchscreen laptop running WinXP, it's a clunky PDA running WinCE. Look, It's Windows. It doesn't scale down very well. PDA users don't want to navigate through five levels of start menu just to do anything useful. Everybody keeps explaining this, but Microsoft isn't listening. Whenever they announce they've discovered an unsuspected new market niche, the world just rolls its eyes. (AutoPC, anyone?) Which is all fine, really. I'd hate to see MS dominate and crush any new markets.

I could be wrong, of course. Maybe there's a huge legion of people out there who've been secretly carrying real bricks around all day, unbeknownst to me and for reasons of their own, and they'll all jump at the chance to upgrade to an electronic model. Could be, I guess. Or maybe hardcore Star Trek fans will decide they look like something Captain Picard would've lugged around circa 1988 and have to buy one for their very own. Who knows? One thing, though. If you're going to do one of those "viral marketing" stunts where you get the media to hype your ultra-mysterious upcoming announcement, it's best if the product itself isn't a big, obvious disappointment. I haven't seen so much hype since the Segway.

I was going to write a little transition here, comparing MS to the Bush administration, but I don't actually dislike Microsoft that much. The analogy seemed a bit forced anyway. So let's all just agree that a transition just happened, and we're talking about politics for a moment. Just for a moment, though, and only because I wanted to pass along today's crop of political blog entries I liked, including ones from panopticonman, To the point, Republicans for Satan, and Building a Pyramid.

Other stuff I figured I'd braindump while I'm at it:

  • Everything sounds better in French. Including this post about the latest Cassini discoveries, titled Encélade le magnifique
  • I was looking for any more info about that interesting mp3 of Iranian music I mentioned a few posts back, but I think this isn't the same person as before. Interesting site, though: Peyman and his Tonbak.
  • An article at James Randi's site about yet another con artist preying on gullible religious people. (Originally found on Y! SCOX)
  • It'll be a while before the new mars orbiter's really open for business, but here are a couple of navigational images from during the approach to Mars, to tide you over, or whatever.
  • And a Portland food blog I came across, ExtraMSG.com. One point, though, regarding the top story. As much as I like hummus (to the despair of certain people), I have to admit it doesn't photograph well. So maybe you'll want to skip that part and go directly to the chocolate. Sahagun gets a mention, along with a number of local chocolatiers I haven't quite gotten to yet. Now I think I'll have to make that a new personal goal. Mmmm.... chocolate....


cyclotram post #100



And I'm keeping this one short. Sometimes pictures say a thousand words. Other times there's just a single perfect word, and it's enough.

tags:

It's nail-bitin' time again...

The shiny new Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is supposed to arrive in Mars orbit today. SpaceflightNow has their usual minute-by-minute status page, so anyone who doesn't mind a little temporary high blood pressure can follow along.

Maybe I'm just being cynical here, but I have to wonder whether the word "Reconnaissance" in the name was the key to getting budgetary approval. It's hard to imagine a name that'd be a safer bet, given the Bushies' well-known inclinations. "Mars Petroleum Explorer", anyone? Or maybe a "Mars BibleBot 1", to look for evidence of Noah's flood on Mars, and convert the heathen Martians (if they exist) into good churchgoing Southern Baptists.

Anyway, while we're waiting, here are a couple of perspectives on yesterday's big Enceladus announcement. The Christian Science Monitor has a piece titled "Water discovery vs. NASA budget cuts". I had a few words to say about GWB's budget cuts myself a couple of days ago. And the Sydney Morning Herald has an article "Does it contain new forms of life or just a few old geysers?" (what is it with these long titles?)

It's quite a cool discovery, although (as usual) it wasn't entirely unexpected. The moon orbits within the "E ring", a faint, diffuse band of ice crystals. The leading theory for many years has been that the ice was coming from the moon somehow. And the twin Voyagers in the early 80's showed that much of the moon's surface looks relatively fresh and uncratered, which is usually taken to mean that some sort of crater-erasing geological process has occurred there, possibly on an ongoing basis. You put two and two together, and geysers don't seem that outlandish of an idea. So as cool as this is, it's really a confirmation of an existing hypothesis, not a startling and unexpected new revelation.

As an alternate form of stress relief, here are two more beer blogs I came across yesterday: Appellation Beer and Making Homemade Wine & Beer. There's also a current beer article over at Prague Style, which isn't at all surprising given what I've heard about the city. More surprising is another blog's post about Taybeh Beer, the only beer currently brewed in the Palestinian territories. Don't miss the directions to the brewery, complete with army checkpoints and everything. And just last year, the town of Taybeh celebrated its very first Oktoberfest. Huh. Who would've thought?


technorati tags: