What force or reason would impel a person to take a gun and deliberately shoot helpless young children?
I suppose if you are God-fearing the answer is simpler - we didn't pray enough, so God stood aside while Evil caused the shooter to execute 26 innocent humans. It's ironic to hear the survivors' parents thanking God that their child was spared. How heartless that must sound to the relatives of the dead children that God did not protect.
The secular among us cannot be consoled by the simplistic explanations by religion. We don't believe that the shooter will burn for eternity in hell (much as that would be comforting to us), nor do we imagine 26 angel wings rising to spend eternity in paradise. It is pretty clear that the churches and temples of humans are empty and useless. No one is there to hear the supplications, songs and glory. Probably never has been.
Events like the shootings in Connecticut are proof that there is no divine intervention in the affairs of men.
It is pretty obvious that the deus ex machina allowing these mass killings is the access to weapons that are designed to shoot many rounds in a brief period of time. Call them semi-automatic or assault weapons - it is the same concept. These are not guns that are designed to shoot game or targets. They are weapons of warfare.
We have a gun problem in this country. The easy availability of guns and large quantities of ammunition is obviously a factor in the number of deaths. The idiotic interpretation of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution is that everyone is entitled to have guns period. Even if the congress mean't that everyone should have a rifle, it is doubtful that they envisioned a weapons technology more complex that a single shot musket.
Times have changed and so must the government's power to regulate weapons access in the name of public safety. I would support a repeal of the second amendment. I do not support a total ban on gun ownership.
Legitimate hunters and sportsmen would be licensed and permitted, but the weapons and ammo they could use would be highly controlled. Steel jacket, armor piercing, soft nose bullets, designed for killing people would be banned out side of military use. All semiautomatic pistols and rifles should be banned except for Military and Law Enforcement use.
Enforcement of such controls will not be popular with the gun-toting public. But I do not see another way to stem the frequency and brutality of murderous/suicidal crazoids armed with a gun that they should not have had access to. NRA fans have always been vigorously opposed to any restrictions on access to weapons less destructive than a bazooka. With over 10,000 gun deaths in the USA last year, we should probably label the enabling NRA as a terrorist organization.
12/17/2012
12/13/2012
The Government Should be Dissolved
All this posturing and drama over the threat of a government shutdown is just plain silly. Didn't voters think they were sending representatives to go down to Washington to keep things running, not to act like a bunch of schoolyard jerks arguing over who is more righteous.
The major parties are so polarized in their positions that they are unable to have a civil discussion. Call me cynical but it seems to me that the best explanation for this intransigence lies in the power of powerful lobbies that have pols in their pockets. Money elects politicians, citizens are just convenient tools, easily manipulated.
Think about it, why doesn't any administration republican or democrat do something about eliminating poverty? Why are our troops in Iraq when we have drug cartels on the border running drugs and poisoning our citizens, ruining people's lives, fostering robberies, kidnapping and general mayhem in our country.
How come banker crooks are allowed to virtually steal money in the form of exhorbitant fees using fine print instead of a gun..
We are headed towards the "Idiocracy" of Mike Judge's nightmare film.
While our leaders bicker over the tax rates of the top two percent of wage earners, the rest of the taxpayers are held hostage.
The major parties are so polarized in their positions that they are unable to have a civil discussion. Call me cynical but it seems to me that the best explanation for this intransigence lies in the power of powerful lobbies that have pols in their pockets. Money elects politicians, citizens are just convenient tools, easily manipulated.
Think about it, why doesn't any administration republican or democrat do something about eliminating poverty? Why are our troops in Iraq when we have drug cartels on the border running drugs and poisoning our citizens, ruining people's lives, fostering robberies, kidnapping and general mayhem in our country.
How come banker crooks are allowed to virtually steal money in the form of exhorbitant fees using fine print instead of a gun..
We are headed towards the "Idiocracy" of Mike Judge's nightmare film.
While our leaders bicker over the tax rates of the top two percent of wage earners, the rest of the taxpayers are held hostage.
11/21/2012
Simple Solutions
Now that the election is over and no one is really happy with the prospects of the next term, I am inspired to revive my campaign to be elected as Emperor of the USA -- a lifetime job. So here is my platform:
#1 I would decree a change
to the method of calculating interest on a loan. Use the same method banks use to pay interest
on savings, instead of loading all the interest charges up front. Banks still make money and people can afford
to borrow.
#2 I would get the Mafia to help run the Credit Card
companies. The practical way that loan
sharks handle collections is efficient and effective. Knowing that they would be getting a personal
visit from one of the Corleone agents would quickly reduce the number of
deadbeats and ID thieves. This would
lower the costs for those of you subjects who buy what you can afford and pay your
bills on a regular basis.
#3 How come it is called “price gouging” when gas stations
inflate prices to take advantage of demand, yet airlines are allowed to screw
the ticket buyers to a fare thee well? Why
is it called “torture” when suspects are detained and interrogated inhumanely,
yet airlines can force you to sit in a stalled plane for 8 hours?
It is time to
nationalize all airlines and institute a flat rate and eliminate traveler class
preference. All airline executives would
be forced to ride in the middle seat, with some un-bathed dude, sporting
dreadlocks, sitting in the seat front of them with the seat back tilted into
their confined space.
#4 Homeland security.
I would close all foreign bases and bring the troops home to guard our
borders, airports and inner cities. All
privately owned assault weapons will be confiscated and banned. Personal protection handguns would be allowed
for sane, upstanding citizens over the age of 55.
#5 Legalize Cell Phone Jamming devices. Public places and transportation vehicles
will install these devices, which breaks off any cell phone voice activity. Special waiting places will be assigned for
cell-phone talkers, smokers and also people who disdain normal standards of
personal hygiene. Bars and restaurants must
install Cell-Phone Booths to sequester the inconsiderate yakkers. The penalty for shooting cell phone abusers
will be reduced to a misdemeanor.
You have to admit that these policies would be a great start to a better society. I am open to other ideas. What are you thinking?
11/17/2012
Why the General Resigned
Some men are bearers
Of a yawning need
That mere success
Cannot fulfill.
A silent yearning in the mind waits
Like a virus until that day
When he hears like a siren
Her, calling his name.
She of smooth cheek,
A scent of bread and spice,
A curl of hair around a perfect lobe
A lilt in a dusky voice,
Her eyes wide with promise.
Utterly succumbed,
He thinks only of stroking
That smooth cheek.
Others may think him crazy
To forfeit everything for those brief,
Eternal moments of madness.
He appears contrite
But he does not feel sorry.
He had no choice.
Yesterday the ex-General and ex-CIA chief David Petraeus testified in closed session about the attack on the US ambassador in Libya last September 11th, which killed 4 Americans.
Conservative Republicans have been trying to make a big stinking issue out of the Benghazi attack and subsequent misinformation which was reported to the public.
McCain and others have suggested that the story that was presented to US mainstream media -- that the attacks grew spontaneously out of protests against an anti-Muslim video -- was a politically motivated plot to hide the truth. Talk show pundits allege that the government wanted to suppress any data that might suggest Al Qaeda was behind the attack. The purpose was to fluff-up Obama's reputation as a successful warrior against terrorism.
The foolishness of this accusation is obvious. It assumes that the Obama administration would rather be seen as ineptly under-staffing the embassy with protection from a rabble of random protesters than to acknowledge that Al Qaeda was behind the Sept 11 attack. But seizing on any opportunity to embarrass Obama, critics -- including Mitt Romney -- could not wait to make it seem like a dastardly plot to insulate Obama from blame in an evil plan to mis-inform the citizens. They irresponsibly leaked details of the attack, which would only serve to compromise intelligence sources and hinder the subsequent investigation.
Now, we hear that the general has testified that the CIA knew it was a terrorist attack within a day or so after the killings, but withheld the info to protect their informational assets, and not to tip-off Al Qaeda that they were watching them. This seems credible to me.
I have often heard that "The simpler explanation is more likely to be true than a complex one."
In this case, we see that the State Department decision to understaff the Embassy resulted in an un-necessary loss of life and destruction of property. The simplest explanation: government bureaucracy and ineptitude allowed the situation to get out of control.
The subsequent politicizing of the event by conservatives is unworthy of people who call themselves patriots.
Conservative Republicans have been trying to make a big stinking issue out of the Benghazi attack and subsequent misinformation which was reported to the public.
McCain and others have suggested that the story that was presented to US mainstream media -- that the attacks grew spontaneously out of protests against an anti-Muslim video -- was a politically motivated plot to hide the truth. Talk show pundits allege that the government wanted to suppress any data that might suggest Al Qaeda was behind the attack. The purpose was to fluff-up Obama's reputation as a successful warrior against terrorism.
The foolishness of this accusation is obvious. It assumes that the Obama administration would rather be seen as ineptly under-staffing the embassy with protection from a rabble of random protesters than to acknowledge that Al Qaeda was behind the Sept 11 attack. But seizing on any opportunity to embarrass Obama, critics -- including Mitt Romney -- could not wait to make it seem like a dastardly plot to insulate Obama from blame in an evil plan to mis-inform the citizens. They irresponsibly leaked details of the attack, which would only serve to compromise intelligence sources and hinder the subsequent investigation.
Now, we hear that the general has testified that the CIA knew it was a terrorist attack within a day or so after the killings, but withheld the info to protect their informational assets, and not to tip-off Al Qaeda that they were watching them. This seems credible to me.
I have often heard that "The simpler explanation is more likely to be true than a complex one."
In this case, we see that the State Department decision to understaff the Embassy resulted in an un-necessary loss of life and destruction of property. The simplest explanation: government bureaucracy and ineptitude allowed the situation to get out of control.
The subsequent politicizing of the event by conservatives is unworthy of people who call themselves patriots.
11/03/2012
Losing Focus
Is it just me, or does anyone else think football players wearing pink shoes is the silliest expression of "support" imaginable?
What has football got to do with any disease? And why does breast cancer evoke more visible support than lung cancer or colon cancer? Or dementia, which is the disease of aging football players?
The whole Breast Cancer Awareness theme thing just strikes me as absurd. Is anyone NOT aware of breast cancer? Has anyone been helped by all this awareness?
If the money that has been spent on pink apparel went into research, instead of spent on all all this feelgood "awareness" stuff, a cure might be closer to reality.
10/31/2012
The Zen of Grill Assembly
"How hard can it be?" may seem at first like a Buddhist koan, and I know from experience that the gods who like to smack down the dreams of prideful mortals often have a way of answering that query with a resounding "very."
Still, you think to yourself, they sell millions of gas grills online and other people seem to be able put them together, it must be easy enough that a guy of average intelligence and pluck can be successful.
Because I always read the manual first, the next thing I did was to read the manual.
The tool list was simple, but I added an essential item that the engineers had omitted: a beer bottle opener.
I was impressed with the clarity of instructions and the organized and labelled packets of screws and washers. All the parts needed to assemble the "A" process were in a bag labelled "A"
The instructions were mostly graphic illustrations, probably designed for verbally challenged individuals. What about those of us that are graphically challenged?
So it took a few hours, but I am very pleased with the results. If I can do it, so can you!
Simple Rules
1. Read the manual.
2. Get the right tools.
3. Have at least 2 beers in fridge, preferably a six-pack.
4. Put the mother together
5 Grill something.
Still, you think to yourself, they sell millions of gas grills online and other people seem to be able put them together, it must be easy enough that a guy of average intelligence and pluck can be successful.
Well, I was right about that. But first lets recap.
I had decided on the Weber 3 burner Spirit E-310
I bought it online at Home Depot for $499 plus tax, free shipping.
I figured it would be a challenge; but, what the hell, I have plenty of time. It might even be fun.
When it arrived via UPS, I apologized to the driver as she wrangled the large (135 lb) box off the truck onto a two wheeler. I unpacked the parts and instructions and set everything out on the screen porch.
Because I always read the manual first, the next thing I did was to read the manual.The tool list was simple, but I added an essential item that the engineers had omitted: a beer bottle opener.
 |
| Letsee now, |
The instructions were mostly graphic illustrations, probably designed for verbally challenged individuals. What about those of us that are graphically challenged?
 |
| Starting to look like a grill |
After a while, things start to take shape. I am impressed with the solid engineering. I still need to get it outside, so I save the cover and grills for last so it will be easier to take down the step to the patio.
 |
| Ready to take outside to add heavy parts |
 |
| Ta Da! |
 |
| Honey, get the steaks out! |
Simple Rules
1. Read the manual.
2. Get the right tools.
3. Have at least 2 beers in fridge, preferably a six-pack.
4. Put the mother together
5 Grill something.
10/11/2012
Seasonal Thoughts
Autumn
Today is typical of the interval
the period between summer and winter
In the northeast
Sun slanting from the south
Illuminating falling pine needles
Cloudless blue and gusty skies
Rattling shoals of maple leaves that can't
make up their minds which way to scatter
Now swirling down the driveway
and then darting up the street
a school of fish fleeing a predator
I survey the remains of the garden:
The recent rains and winds have
bent the stalks of tall marigolds into submission,
orange and yellow blossoms shriveled and dead in the slanted sun
Frost blackened stems of basil beg to be pulled-up and
thrown on the heap
My gaze turns to that brown patch of earth
looking like a newly dug grave
because of some unknown rot
that turned the fruits gray and mooshy
I had to yank the tomato vines last week
in frustration and throw them in the trash
-- not the compost heap so as not
to contaminate next year's crop
I sit for a long time on the teak bench,
unwarmed by the weak sun
Hoping to gather the strength
to face another winter
How many has it been? How many yet to be?
I try to envision another hopeful spring
but the image is blurry and lacking in color.
Today is typical of the interval
the period between summer and winter
In the northeast
Sun slanting from the south
Illuminating falling pine needles
Cloudless blue and gusty skies
Rattling shoals of maple leaves that can't
make up their minds which way to scatter
Now swirling down the driveway
and then darting up the street
a school of fish fleeing a predator
I survey the remains of the garden:
The recent rains and winds have
bent the stalks of tall marigolds into submission,
orange and yellow blossoms shriveled and dead in the slanted sun
Frost blackened stems of basil beg to be pulled-up and
thrown on the heap
My gaze turns to that brown patch of earth
looking like a newly dug grave
because of some unknown rot
that turned the fruits gray and mooshy
I had to yank the tomato vines last week
in frustration and throw them in the trash
-- not the compost heap so as not
to contaminate next year's crop
I sit for a long time on the teak bench,
unwarmed by the weak sun
Hoping to gather the strength
to face another winter
How many has it been? How many yet to be?
I try to envision another hopeful spring
but the image is blurry and lacking in color.
9/24/2012
Why I am Giving-Up Sunday Night Football
It's not just that The Patriots lost the game to Baltimore on a last-minute field goal. It's not because of replacement referees calling phantom penalties. And since I am retired, I do not have to get up for work on a Monday morning, so it isn't because the game - which takes 3 plus hours - requires viewers to stay up until midnight or later.
No, gentle readers, the reason I am giving-up Sunday Night Football is because the games are no longer interesting enough to justify the time spent watching them. Granted there are often moments when the contests are exciting, even thrilling to football fans, but these moments are few.
I blame it on the greed of networks and players and management, which have combined to deliver to TV viewers an empty spectacle of hype and players and coaches mainly standing around or lying on the ground. These scenes of inactivity are punctuated by an astounding number of commercial breaks, or sideline interviews with know-nothing announcer chicks asking empty-headed questions to bored coaches and players. In my humble opinion the games would be much more interesting if the showed more close-ups on the agreeably buxom, scantily-clad cheerleaders, instead of shots of Al Michaels and the other guy in the booth.
Big money has turned what once was an enjoyable past-time into a hard slog. Money driven disputes over contracts have given us inexperienced officials, which has contributed to a general lack of confidence in the fairness of penalty flags. Both Patriot losses came directly from bogus penalty calls, which clearly affected the outcome of the games. And last night's winning field goal did not look "in" to almost everyone who watched it. But the NFL has warned coaches and announcers not to remark on the ineptness of referees. We might as well be living in Russia. Clearly, no one who is getting paid gives a crap about the integrity of sport or fairness.
You already know how I feel about commercial interruptions, which destroy the sense of flow in a sporting event on TV. It is not enough for them to make us look at advertising all over the walls and playing fields and in the skies, we are assailed by advertising messages it seems every other play, sometimes they will call a referee's time-out forcing a commercial break in the game.
I have had enough. Sunday nights, from now on, I'll be clicking over to Masterpiece Theater on PBS.
No, gentle readers, the reason I am giving-up Sunday Night Football is because the games are no longer interesting enough to justify the time spent watching them. Granted there are often moments when the contests are exciting, even thrilling to football fans, but these moments are few.
I blame it on the greed of networks and players and management, which have combined to deliver to TV viewers an empty spectacle of hype and players and coaches mainly standing around or lying on the ground. These scenes of inactivity are punctuated by an astounding number of commercial breaks, or sideline interviews with know-nothing announcer chicks asking empty-headed questions to bored coaches and players. In my humble opinion the games would be much more interesting if the showed more close-ups on the agreeably buxom, scantily-clad cheerleaders, instead of shots of Al Michaels and the other guy in the booth.
Big money has turned what once was an enjoyable past-time into a hard slog. Money driven disputes over contracts have given us inexperienced officials, which has contributed to a general lack of confidence in the fairness of penalty flags. Both Patriot losses came directly from bogus penalty calls, which clearly affected the outcome of the games. And last night's winning field goal did not look "in" to almost everyone who watched it. But the NFL has warned coaches and announcers not to remark on the ineptness of referees. We might as well be living in Russia. Clearly, no one who is getting paid gives a crap about the integrity of sport or fairness.
You already know how I feel about commercial interruptions, which destroy the sense of flow in a sporting event on TV. It is not enough for them to make us look at advertising all over the walls and playing fields and in the skies, we are assailed by advertising messages it seems every other play, sometimes they will call a referee's time-out forcing a commercial break in the game.
I have had enough. Sunday nights, from now on, I'll be clicking over to Masterpiece Theater on PBS.
8/27/2012
Notes from the Lagging Edge
God help me. Now the cat has a new smartphone. I told him that he couldn't afford it, but he went and got one anyhow. He says, "All the other cats have one. Why can't I have one. I want to be cool, too."He says he got a good deal on an iPhone 4. He's already downloaded an ringtone that sounds like a small rodent trying to escape.
He's already staring to behave like the other addicted smartphone users you know. Whenever he enters a room, he puts it on the floor in front of him so he wont - god forbid - miss an incoming email message or tweet. If you say something like "I wonder if I should go fishing tomorrow..." he is tapping away, checking the weather and tide tables for you, making you look at the display.
This is the thing about people with new gadgets: they make you to look at them. Those of us who are un-enamored by technology toys cannot understand why squinting at a tiny screen is so enchanting. "I feel so connected, now," he purrs, after entering the password for our wireless router. "I don't need the computer anymore. Did you know I can deposit checks with this thing?" I decided not to remind him that he does not have a bank account, nor does he receive any checks. "Who gets checks these days?" I mumble.
But the point is lost on him, enthralled as he is - because his gadget has empowered him beyond all reason. He can now do stuff that he would never even think of doing. How did he exist before angry birds? Who even dreamed of playing solitaire on their phone? I despair over the irony: he is more connected to the cloud, and more dis-connected from the household. He is spared the awkwardness of polite conversation. His ego is defined my the newness of his device. I taunt him by speculating that the reason that he got a good deal is because everyone else is waiting for the iPhone5 to come out. Cruel, but fun.
OK kitty, I am happy that you can look up all the local restaurants within three blocks. Yes, it is truly impressive that your smartphone can be used as a compass or a flash light or a magnifying glass --stuff we all need everyday, I'm sure.
Ok, now put it away and let's talk.
8/20/2012
Bring 'Em Home
The two parties are engaged in a furious battle for undecided so-called independent voters in November. Both are accusing the other's plan as bad for America.
The Republicans are claiming that Obama care will cut billions from medicare, implying that the cuts would be chopping services to elders. The intent as I understand it is to reduce the administrative costs. So this is intentionally misleading.
I have no doubts about the costs hidden in the thousands of pages of gobbledygook that was declared law through a loophole and not via a majority vote (which I find outrageous). I just wish there was an unbiased source that could be consulted to tell the truth about each side's programs, benefits vs costs.
The Ryan budget will cut spending in social programs but would INCREASE the military spending at a time when most Americans want to REDUCE military costs. I think most voters, even seniors realize that the medicare and other "entitlements" need to be controlled, lest the US go the way of Greece, California et al.
Seniors could favor a proposal that does not directly affect them, but not if it does not require equal cuts in the military budget, which most people believe is bloated and wasteful. Ron Paul was right on this issue, and anyone who claims to be a constitutionalist would have to agree with him. Lord knows we could use a bit more domestic security on those borders and inner city neighborhoods. Bring em all home.
The Republicans are claiming that Obama care will cut billions from medicare, implying that the cuts would be chopping services to elders. The intent as I understand it is to reduce the administrative costs. So this is intentionally misleading.
I have no doubts about the costs hidden in the thousands of pages of gobbledygook that was declared law through a loophole and not via a majority vote (which I find outrageous). I just wish there was an unbiased source that could be consulted to tell the truth about each side's programs, benefits vs costs.
The Ryan budget will cut spending in social programs but would INCREASE the military spending at a time when most Americans want to REDUCE military costs. I think most voters, even seniors realize that the medicare and other "entitlements" need to be controlled, lest the US go the way of Greece, California et al.
Seniors could favor a proposal that does not directly affect them, but not if it does not require equal cuts in the military budget, which most people believe is bloated and wasteful. Ron Paul was right on this issue, and anyone who claims to be a constitutionalist would have to agree with him. Lord knows we could use a bit more domestic security on those borders and inner city neighborhoods. Bring em all home.
8/16/2012
Testing Geezers
My observation: the quality of driving has decreased in recent years correlating to the increase of gadgets in the car - especially phones, GPS, and visual data centers - all these distractions at 70 mph escalates the probability of mayhem.
I recently participated in a test at a prestigious local university, to examine the effect of distractions by voice- activated gadgets on senior drivers while behind the wheel. The target age group was 60-69. I was given a series of tests by a pretty young scientist wearing a low cut blouse that emphasized the perkiness of her ample bosom. I guess this is standard office (and lab) garb for young folks these days. She explained that the extensive questions and problems were designed to establish a base line for emotional and physical state, and to assess cognitive ability. There were the usual questions about health and wellness, and some easy problems like drawing a clock face with the time set to ten past two. The there were some tougher cognitive tests such as recalling a series of random words in a list, or a sequence of numbers. Despite the (admittedly pleasant) distractions of my interrogator's cleavage, I did pretty well on these tests.
The second part of the test was actually on the highway in a specially outfitted car that recorded everything from my blood pressure and heartbeat to the movement of my eyes. Cameras and sensors could detect whether I was looking straight ahead, at the console or the mirrors. They also recorded everything I said in answer to questions. A human being, a nice young fellow, sat in the back seat. The driving part took about 2 hours with me driving from Cambridge to Milford and back via main highways (I93, I495). During the two hour drive I was presented with challenges such as programming the GPS to a specific address via voice commands, and finding a specific station on the radio, also via voice commands. Also I made a few test phone calls with hands free mobile phone. Every now and then the recorded voice instructions would present me with a cognitive challenge, similar to the test above, where the voice would say a series of random numbers and I was to recall the number one or two places back in the list. This is hard to do sitting at a desk across from an attractive scientist; it is really hard when you are in thick traffic driving 70 miles per hour. Needless to say I did not do so well under real rush hour driving conditions.
Brad, the monitor who was riding with me was not allowed to talk to me except to clarify instructions or test related topics. He resisted my urge to engage in small talk. ( I can't help it; if someone else is in the car with me, it is natural to want to chit chat. Do you live around here? How do you like your job? How did you get into this line of work? ) The only thing I found out was that he was a mechanical engineer.
At the end, they thanked me, and paid me a small honorarium for my time and willingness to be a lab animal.
I very much hope the results of such tests are helpful to the design of cars and devices for future drivers. The chief problem that I experienced is that even though you can input search values with a voice command (eg "Find previous address"), the device responds with a list of possible hits via a screen, so you are still forced to look away from the road for a second.
At 60 MPH a lot of things can happen during the brief time you are not looking at the road. One of the losses we experience as we age is the ability to multi-task (which really means switching the focus of attention very rapidly). This places geezers at increased risk correlating to the level of distractions in the car.
Clearly, distractions for drivers are nothing new, nor are they the exclusive province of older drivers. About 15 years ago, I rear-ended a Subaru that had stopped for a traffic light. We were crawling along in rush hour traffic. I had heard a joke on the radio and was jotting down the punch line on a pad on paper on my knee, when the Subaru stopped for the changing light. It was a small accident, but I learned how even a moment of distraction can make a costly difference, even at 10mph. Ironically, I can't remember that joke.
My experience confirms my belief that after age 65, drivers who have had several accidents and ALL drivers over 70 should be re-tested on the road every four years. I would also support adding a cognitive test to all drivers being retested. There also needs to be tighter monitoring of people with medical conditions that might impair their ability to drive safely.
The incorporation of ever more sophisticated gadgets into autos is inevitable. It will be a huge design challenge to make them safe for the aging driver population.
I recently participated in a test at a prestigious local university, to examine the effect of distractions by voice- activated gadgets on senior drivers while behind the wheel. The target age group was 60-69. I was given a series of tests by a pretty young scientist wearing a low cut blouse that emphasized the perkiness of her ample bosom. I guess this is standard office (and lab) garb for young folks these days. She explained that the extensive questions and problems were designed to establish a base line for emotional and physical state, and to assess cognitive ability. There were the usual questions about health and wellness, and some easy problems like drawing a clock face with the time set to ten past two. The there were some tougher cognitive tests such as recalling a series of random words in a list, or a sequence of numbers. Despite the (admittedly pleasant) distractions of my interrogator's cleavage, I did pretty well on these tests.
The second part of the test was actually on the highway in a specially outfitted car that recorded everything from my blood pressure and heartbeat to the movement of my eyes. Cameras and sensors could detect whether I was looking straight ahead, at the console or the mirrors. They also recorded everything I said in answer to questions. A human being, a nice young fellow, sat in the back seat. The driving part took about 2 hours with me driving from Cambridge to Milford and back via main highways (I93, I495). During the two hour drive I was presented with challenges such as programming the GPS to a specific address via voice commands, and finding a specific station on the radio, also via voice commands. Also I made a few test phone calls with hands free mobile phone. Every now and then the recorded voice instructions would present me with a cognitive challenge, similar to the test above, where the voice would say a series of random numbers and I was to recall the number one or two places back in the list. This is hard to do sitting at a desk across from an attractive scientist; it is really hard when you are in thick traffic driving 70 miles per hour. Needless to say I did not do so well under real rush hour driving conditions.
Brad, the monitor who was riding with me was not allowed to talk to me except to clarify instructions or test related topics. He resisted my urge to engage in small talk. ( I can't help it; if someone else is in the car with me, it is natural to want to chit chat. Do you live around here? How do you like your job? How did you get into this line of work? ) The only thing I found out was that he was a mechanical engineer.
At the end, they thanked me, and paid me a small honorarium for my time and willingness to be a lab animal.
I very much hope the results of such tests are helpful to the design of cars and devices for future drivers. The chief problem that I experienced is that even though you can input search values with a voice command (eg "Find previous address"), the device responds with a list of possible hits via a screen, so you are still forced to look away from the road for a second.
At 60 MPH a lot of things can happen during the brief time you are not looking at the road. One of the losses we experience as we age is the ability to multi-task (which really means switching the focus of attention very rapidly). This places geezers at increased risk correlating to the level of distractions in the car.
Clearly, distractions for drivers are nothing new, nor are they the exclusive province of older drivers. About 15 years ago, I rear-ended a Subaru that had stopped for a traffic light. We were crawling along in rush hour traffic. I had heard a joke on the radio and was jotting down the punch line on a pad on paper on my knee, when the Subaru stopped for the changing light. It was a small accident, but I learned how even a moment of distraction can make a costly difference, even at 10mph. Ironically, I can't remember that joke.
My experience confirms my belief that after age 65, drivers who have had several accidents and ALL drivers over 70 should be re-tested on the road every four years. I would also support adding a cognitive test to all drivers being retested. There also needs to be tighter monitoring of people with medical conditions that might impair their ability to drive safely.
The incorporation of ever more sophisticated gadgets into autos is inevitable. It will be a huge design challenge to make them safe for the aging driver population.
8/04/2012
"You Didn't Win That"
The Olympic coverage reminds us how politicized everything in our lives has become. We do not celebrate the achievements of foreign athletes or teams. Medal tallies by country are fodder for bar room and coffee shop discussions. Everyone wants the US to be "Number One" even though the other athletes might have performed better.
Peggy Noonan in WSJ Op-Ed recounts the remark of a friend, watching Michael Phelps winning another gold medal.
I'm thinking, "How about that Michael Phelps. He's a fast swimmer. Lucky for him that he got so much help from his parents who sacrificed time and money so he could get coaching and a place to swim every day during his youth. Most people with athletic promise aren't that fortunate. He personally worked hard and deserves the glory for his excellent performance; I'm sure he is thankful to those who supported him over the years. He couldn't have done it without them "
Peggy Noonan in WSJ Op-Ed recounts the remark of a friend, watching Michael Phelps winning another gold medal.
"How about that Michael Phelps? But let's remember he didn't win all those medals, someone else did. After all, he and I swam in public pools, built by state employees using tax dollars. He got training from the USOC, and ate food grown by the Department of Agriculture. He should play fair and share his medals with people like me, who can barely keep my head above water, let alone swim."At first it seems a clever riposte to the oft-repeated Obama sound-bite that has had conservative pundits all in a twitter ("You didn't build that."). But after some consideration, I think this is, ironically, illustrative of the truth behind Obama's un-cropped remarks. He was not saying that successful businessmen did not earn their success, rather, he stressed that no one accomplishes anything entirely on their own. If you accomplished something you benefited from an education, a supportive infrastructure, previous research...much of which were funded by your fellow taxpayers. The sentiment is unpopular with ego-maniacal CEO's who think they are gods who deserve 50 times more pie than any of the other team members.
I'm thinking, "How about that Michael Phelps. He's a fast swimmer. Lucky for him that he got so much help from his parents who sacrificed time and money so he could get coaching and a place to swim every day during his youth. Most people with athletic promise aren't that fortunate. He personally worked hard and deserves the glory for his excellent performance; I'm sure he is thankful to those who supported him over the years. He couldn't have done it without them "
8/03/2012
Idiots in the Breakdown Lane
Here in Massachusetts, during "rush hours" it is perfectly legal to drive in the breakdown lane on certain (posted) roads. This counter-intuitive use of the BREAKDOWN lane often mystifies out-of-state travelers who may find themselves experiencing a mechanical problem or flat tire. It is not uncommon for some unfortunate family on a road trip to be wiped-out by a sleepy commuter who was anxious to get to work,barreling down the breakdown lane at 60 or 70 mph.
The state police do not like the use of Breakdown Lanes (BL) for travel. The initial case for opening-up the BL was to spread out the pressure of traffic to another lane, but any fool can see that you are just deferring the logjam to another location ahead where the traffic needs to merge again. unsurprisingly, it has proven ineffective as a deterrence to traffic tie-ups; we still have virtual gridlock on all major highways during rush hour. Furthermore the use of the BL as a TL blocks the free access of emergency vehicles to get to accident sites.
A sensible implementation of this exception would be
1) The maximum speed limit in Breakdown Lanes is 30mph. (The BL should not be used as a Passing Lane)
2) Vehicles stopped in breakdown lane are assumed to be unable to travel and you must go around them slowly.
3) Vehicles exiting from Travel Lane have right-of-way at exits. BL drivers must yield.
The idiots who typically drive 70 mph in the Breakdown lane probably cause more accidents and near misses than the statistics reveal.
The state police do not like the use of Breakdown Lanes (BL) for travel. The initial case for opening-up the BL was to spread out the pressure of traffic to another lane, but any fool can see that you are just deferring the logjam to another location ahead where the traffic needs to merge again. unsurprisingly, it has proven ineffective as a deterrence to traffic tie-ups; we still have virtual gridlock on all major highways during rush hour. Furthermore the use of the BL as a TL blocks the free access of emergency vehicles to get to accident sites.A sensible implementation of this exception would be
1) The maximum speed limit in Breakdown Lanes is 30mph. (The BL should not be used as a Passing Lane)
2) Vehicles stopped in breakdown lane are assumed to be unable to travel and you must go around them slowly.
3) Vehicles exiting from Travel Lane have right-of-way at exits. BL drivers must yield.
The idiots who typically drive 70 mph in the Breakdown lane probably cause more accidents and near misses than the statistics reveal.
8/02/2012
Perfect Iced Tea
People are always asking me how I make such perfect Iced Tea. It's really easy and quick, and I don't mind sharing the secret. Here's what you do:
1. Bring 6 cups of water to a boil. I use a saucepan.
2. Remove from heat and add 7 tea bags*
3. Steep for EXACTLY ten minutes, (Use a timer) stirring the bags around every few minutes to release flavor.
4. When timer dings remove tea bags.
5. Let sit on counter another 30 minutes or so to cool (do not put in fridge or add any ice yet)
6. Pour into container, using funnel (I use a 59oz plastic juice container), and add another cup of cold water. This makes a total of 7 cups of ice tea.
Now you can store in fridge until you need it, or leave on counter.
======
* you can substitute one or two flavored tea bags (lemon, berry, mint, etc) for added zing.
Cloudy tea is caused by cooling the tea too quickly (eg putting it on ice while still hot)
If you have cloudy tea you can fix it by heating it up and then allowing it to cool slowly. This is why "sun tea" is never cloudy.
For stronger tea, add another teabag or two to but 1 bag per cup seems strong enough to me.
This is so easy and it takes only a few minutes while you are doing other kitchen chores.
Your Welcome
1. Bring 6 cups of water to a boil. I use a saucepan.2. Remove from heat and add 7 tea bags*
3. Steep for EXACTLY ten minutes, (Use a timer) stirring the bags around every few minutes to release flavor.
4. When timer dings remove tea bags.
5. Let sit on counter another 30 minutes or so to cool (do not put in fridge or add any ice yet)
6. Pour into container, using funnel (I use a 59oz plastic juice container), and add another cup of cold water. This makes a total of 7 cups of ice tea.
Now you can store in fridge until you need it, or leave on counter.
======
* you can substitute one or two flavored tea bags (lemon, berry, mint, etc) for added zing.
Cloudy tea is caused by cooling the tea too quickly (eg putting it on ice while still hot)
If you have cloudy tea you can fix it by heating it up and then allowing it to cool slowly. This is why "sun tea" is never cloudy.
For stronger tea, add another teabag or two to but 1 bag per cup seems strong enough to me.
Your Welcome
8/01/2012
Olympic Yawn
There seems to be a general positive buzz over the Summer Olympics being held in London. The quadrennial congregation that supposedly pits the best athletes in the world against each other is a big deal. I genuinely would love to be excited about the competition but I find the whole thing to be a way over-commercialized and over commented upon. And the politicization of the results, focusing on medal counts by country sullies the air around the awards podium. The commentators will just not shut-up. In one race, Michael Phelps was lagging slightly in his lane, and the color commentator started wondering if Michael's career was over, finally out of steam, past his prime, tired and beaten. A few laps later Phelps had made up the slack and won the race. The yakker said, "I take back everything I just said." So, exactly why did we need your "expert" bloviation?
I don't like watching swimming anyhow; it is about at uneventful as a competition can get: bang, splash, splash,splash, turn, splash, splash, splash, etc.... And the gold medal winner is a mere .34 seconds ahead of the silver. I don't believe that a five minute swim should be decided by a fraction of a second; I think it should be considered a tie, since silver and bronze medal awardees are consoled as "losers".
In fact, I do not like watching gymnastics either, especially the pommel horse and the balance beam. These events just leave me cold. The scoring of gymnastics is subjective. The kids who go to Olympics spend their lives preparing these difficult stunts, and most of them go home in tears because of one stumble or mis-step. I don't like watching their disappointment. (One hopes they will eventually find a successful career working at Cirque du Soleil, because there is precious little use for these skills outside of unpaid athletic competition events)
Some "sports" clearly do not belong in the Olympics. Beach Volleyball comes to mind, Badminton, synchronized swimming, Water Polo, and Ping Pong, to name a few. I do not deny that some of these activities demand athletic skills and may even be fun to watch for some viewers, but to my mind they do not rise to the level of Olympic competition.
I prefer to watch team sports, where there is a discreet score, with points expressed in whole numbers. A goal, a run, a basket, etc. Or individual competition where points are measured by KO's or Bulls-eyes.
So, perhaps I am out of sync with the popular definition of sports/entertainment, again. It's not all negative, I enjoy watching the events with the mute button clicked, and I usually fall into a sweet slumber by the third lap. I do not care who wins.
I don't like watching swimming anyhow; it is about at uneventful as a competition can get: bang, splash, splash,splash, turn, splash, splash, splash, etc.... And the gold medal winner is a mere .34 seconds ahead of the silver. I don't believe that a five minute swim should be decided by a fraction of a second; I think it should be considered a tie, since silver and bronze medal awardees are consoled as "losers".
In fact, I do not like watching gymnastics either, especially the pommel horse and the balance beam. These events just leave me cold. The scoring of gymnastics is subjective. The kids who go to Olympics spend their lives preparing these difficult stunts, and most of them go home in tears because of one stumble or mis-step. I don't like watching their disappointment. (One hopes they will eventually find a successful career working at Cirque du Soleil, because there is precious little use for these skills outside of unpaid athletic competition events)
Some "sports" clearly do not belong in the Olympics. Beach Volleyball comes to mind, Badminton, synchronized swimming, Water Polo, and Ping Pong, to name a few. I do not deny that some of these activities demand athletic skills and may even be fun to watch for some viewers, but to my mind they do not rise to the level of Olympic competition.
I prefer to watch team sports, where there is a discreet score, with points expressed in whole numbers. A goal, a run, a basket, etc. Or individual competition where points are measured by KO's or Bulls-eyes.
So, perhaps I am out of sync with the popular definition of sports/entertainment, again. It's not all negative, I enjoy watching the events with the mute button clicked, and I usually fall into a sweet slumber by the third lap. I do not care who wins.
7/11/2012
Another Silly Management Trick
A local software company, FreeCause has decided that all its 60 employees need to learn to write code.
The company president, Michael Jaconi (who, not surprisingly, is a mere 29 years old), explains that forcing sales and accounting people to learn how to write code will help bridge the communication gap between non technical and technical employees. Bridging communication gaps sounds like a laudable goal, but trying to turn salespeople into programmers sounds like a bad idea.
Jaconi says he modeled the idea after learning about a Japanese company that decreed that all workers should learn English.
Asking everyone in the company to learn programming is somewhat analogous to asking every player and locker room attendant on a football team to learn to kick field goals so they can better appreciate the starting Kicker.
Rather than expressing appreciation for the unique contributions and skills of individual team players, the FreeCause approach would seem to encourage competition between weak performers to develop secondary skills. How is this a good thing?
In the Japanese example, English was being taught as a means of improving communications with the external environment. The FreeCause approach hopes to make meetings shorter by eliminating silly technical questions. I totally agree with a goal of shorter meetings, but I question the approach if it is aimed at reducing interaction between team members.
Full disclosure, I never earned a dollar writing software code. I tried COBOL back in the good old days, thinking that it would be good for me as a systems analyst to appreciate how difficult it is to do. I did find it hard, but it was hard in a tedious way, not really difficult. I did learn that it takes a certain way of thinking - a detailed and patient mind set to write computer code. These seemed to include my weakest attributes, so I concentrated my efforts at understanding business functionality and processes (which the techies tended to be weak or uninterested in). By being the "front man" for the applications development group I carved-out a role that used my skills and aptitude and thus made my humble contribution as a valued team member.
I've always believed that the people who create the product are the most important people in the company (and should be treated like gods). But the folks in accounting keep the lights on, and they should be valued for their contributions and encouraged to focus on doing their jobs, not to be messing around with JavaScript.
The company president, Michael Jaconi (who, not surprisingly, is a mere 29 years old), explains that forcing sales and accounting people to learn how to write code will help bridge the communication gap between non technical and technical employees. Bridging communication gaps sounds like a laudable goal, but trying to turn salespeople into programmers sounds like a bad idea.
Jaconi says he modeled the idea after learning about a Japanese company that decreed that all workers should learn English.
Asking everyone in the company to learn programming is somewhat analogous to asking every player and locker room attendant on a football team to learn to kick field goals so they can better appreciate the starting Kicker.
Rather than expressing appreciation for the unique contributions and skills of individual team players, the FreeCause approach would seem to encourage competition between weak performers to develop secondary skills. How is this a good thing?
In the Japanese example, English was being taught as a means of improving communications with the external environment. The FreeCause approach hopes to make meetings shorter by eliminating silly technical questions. I totally agree with a goal of shorter meetings, but I question the approach if it is aimed at reducing interaction between team members.
Full disclosure, I never earned a dollar writing software code. I tried COBOL back in the good old days, thinking that it would be good for me as a systems analyst to appreciate how difficult it is to do. I did find it hard, but it was hard in a tedious way, not really difficult. I did learn that it takes a certain way of thinking - a detailed and patient mind set to write computer code. These seemed to include my weakest attributes, so I concentrated my efforts at understanding business functionality and processes (which the techies tended to be weak or uninterested in). By being the "front man" for the applications development group I carved-out a role that used my skills and aptitude and thus made my humble contribution as a valued team member.
I've always believed that the people who create the product are the most important people in the company (and should be treated like gods). But the folks in accounting keep the lights on, and they should be valued for their contributions and encouraged to focus on doing their jobs, not to be messing around with JavaScript.
6/29/2012
The Decision
Well, everyone was shocked yesterday when the Supremes let Obamacare stand as a law. The biggest surprise was the Roberts joined the majority to deny conservatives an expected win. There is a lot of gnashing of conservative teeth and high-fiving of progressives today as the pundits try to assess the effect on the November elections.
My theory is that Roberts diabolically re-defined the penalty for not being insured as a "tax" to stick Obama with the onus of instituting a new TAX, despite the President's earlier protestations that the penalty assessment was "definitely not a tax".
Figuring that almost everyone hates taxes - especially during tough times - Roberts calculates that ship Obama will be sunk in the election. Thus, Republicans will take over both houses and the Oval Office and procede to repeal a law which the majority of Americans do not want.
No one in Massachusetts will benefit from this law, but we will all find that our costs for healthcare will be jacked-up to cover the costs of implementing the behemoth bill that almost no one has read in its entirety.
I have a problem with the focus of the challenge. I do not question the constitutionality of a government mandate - there are plenty of those already in force, controlling our right to drive, own guns, engage in commerce, who we can rent to, who we can hire...
My challenge is the back door parliamentary trick that passed the law in the first place, without the sufficient majority of votes. Why didn't the Supreme Court take a look at that process?
Stolen Valor
As further evidence that there is something wrong with the current Supreme Court, they also released a ruling that it's ok to lie about your past and claim honors that you are not entitled to. They are willing to limit free speech when it comes to shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater, but not to constrain the free speech of liars who claim titles and honors that were not earned.
My respect for the SCOTUS has been diminished by these decisions. Lucky for them that they are not subject to election.
My theory is that Roberts diabolically re-defined the penalty for not being insured as a "tax" to stick Obama with the onus of instituting a new TAX, despite the President's earlier protestations that the penalty assessment was "definitely not a tax".
Figuring that almost everyone hates taxes - especially during tough times - Roberts calculates that ship Obama will be sunk in the election. Thus, Republicans will take over both houses and the Oval Office and procede to repeal a law which the majority of Americans do not want.
No one in Massachusetts will benefit from this law, but we will all find that our costs for healthcare will be jacked-up to cover the costs of implementing the behemoth bill that almost no one has read in its entirety.
I have a problem with the focus of the challenge. I do not question the constitutionality of a government mandate - there are plenty of those already in force, controlling our right to drive, own guns, engage in commerce, who we can rent to, who we can hire...
My challenge is the back door parliamentary trick that passed the law in the first place, without the sufficient majority of votes. Why didn't the Supreme Court take a look at that process?
Stolen Valor
As further evidence that there is something wrong with the current Supreme Court, they also released a ruling that it's ok to lie about your past and claim honors that you are not entitled to. They are willing to limit free speech when it comes to shouting "Fire" in a crowded theater, but not to constrain the free speech of liars who claim titles and honors that were not earned.
My respect for the SCOTUS has been diminished by these decisions. Lucky for them that they are not subject to election.
6/21/2012
Stupid Marketing Tricks
Most companies should fire their Relationship Marketing Director. I am referring to a cadre of young, smart, gen-x-ers who majored in Marketing at college, and then scored their job because they had 800 friends on Facebook. They are so plugged-in to their smart ass phones that they have developed a tin ear to the complaints of their victims - er customers.
These over connected wireless e-terrorists are a plague, they pump out content to you like a fire hydrant spewing water.
Relationship Marketing is another new technology that is fundamentally not understood, and therefore mis-used by the people who manage it. These purveyors are so enthralled with the idea that they can reach zillions of eyes for small money, that they think nothing of wasting your time with daily sendings. It costs virtually nothing to gather the emails of victims, er customers and send them something every day. One company called Avenue that sells big size clothes to fat chicks somehow got my email address. Now, no matter what I do I cannot get off their mailing list. Avenue sends at least one annoying sale alert every day. Someone at that company is probably taking credit for any online sales, citing the quality of their vast mailing list.
But I suspect many others, like me, eventually figure out how to make unwanted mail go directly to spam blocker. It's aggravating to have some stranger lurking in the shadows and confronting me whenever I check my mailbox. It is plain and simple junk mail and it goes quickly into the trashcan, just like snail mail.
Avenue.com has no way of knowing how many good addresses they have because they fail to clean-up the list. This is just one company. I have similar problems with Dockers, Staples and a bevvy of others that I have on my blocked list.
Even worse are the Facebook pages. I had to "hide" all "updates" from my favorite beer company (Sierra Nevada) because they posted some inane and irrelevant un-entertaining thing every day. Facebook does not have a convenient way of de-friending the companies if you have "liked." their Page. [update: you CAN get them off your wall; just go to their page and "unlike" them]. It would be ok to post something once a week or so, but this yammering every day is just aggravating.
GM recently announced that they were stopping their Facebook ads because they were not getting results. Maybe other companies will soon realize that most of the FB subscribers just want a free space to connect, but develop a blind eye to ads.
Here are a few suggestions to Relationship Marketers, not that you asked...
1. Do not e-mail every day. No matter how much they love your product, you just don't have enough pertinent content to keep getting their attention every day. Realize that multiple mailings punish those who responded to your initial ad. Be respectful of those who give you their e-mail address.
2. Maintain your database. Remove those who have requested removal. Do not sell those emails to other affiliated parties. Getting spammed by a company that you asked to remove you is infuriating. Do you need negative mentions on Facebook?
3. Asking prospects to "Like" you on FB is a sure way to get them to hate and hide you, if you post every day. If you do that most people will hide you and unsubscribe from your posts and you will never know.
4. Take me off your list.
Other than this I have no strong feelings on the matter.
These over connected wireless e-terrorists are a plague, they pump out content to you like a fire hydrant spewing water.
Relationship Marketing is another new technology that is fundamentally not understood, and therefore mis-used by the people who manage it. These purveyors are so enthralled with the idea that they can reach zillions of eyes for small money, that they think nothing of wasting your time with daily sendings. It costs virtually nothing to gather the emails of victims, er customers and send them something every day. One company called Avenue that sells big size clothes to fat chicks somehow got my email address. Now, no matter what I do I cannot get off their mailing list. Avenue sends at least one annoying sale alert every day. Someone at that company is probably taking credit for any online sales, citing the quality of their vast mailing list.
But I suspect many others, like me, eventually figure out how to make unwanted mail go directly to spam blocker. It's aggravating to have some stranger lurking in the shadows and confronting me whenever I check my mailbox. It is plain and simple junk mail and it goes quickly into the trashcan, just like snail mail.
Avenue.com has no way of knowing how many good addresses they have because they fail to clean-up the list. This is just one company. I have similar problems with Dockers, Staples and a bevvy of others that I have on my blocked list.
Even worse are the Facebook pages. I had to "hide" all "updates" from my favorite beer company (Sierra Nevada) because they posted some inane and irrelevant un-entertaining thing every day. Facebook does not have a convenient way of de-friending the companies if you have "liked." their Page. [update: you CAN get them off your wall; just go to their page and "unlike" them]. It would be ok to post something once a week or so, but this yammering every day is just aggravating.
GM recently announced that they were stopping their Facebook ads because they were not getting results. Maybe other companies will soon realize that most of the FB subscribers just want a free space to connect, but develop a blind eye to ads.
Here are a few suggestions to Relationship Marketers, not that you asked...
1. Do not e-mail every day. No matter how much they love your product, you just don't have enough pertinent content to keep getting their attention every day. Realize that multiple mailings punish those who responded to your initial ad. Be respectful of those who give you their e-mail address.
2. Maintain your database. Remove those who have requested removal. Do not sell those emails to other affiliated parties. Getting spammed by a company that you asked to remove you is infuriating. Do you need negative mentions on Facebook?
3. Asking prospects to "Like" you on FB is a sure way to get them to hate and hide you, if you post every day. If you do that most people will hide you and unsubscribe from your posts and you will never know.
4. Take me off your list.
Other than this I have no strong feelings on the matter.
6/16/2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)