I learned 4 new things yesterday:
Phosphoric acid (H3PO4) removes iron oxide (Fe2O3).
Common soda contains phosphoric acid.
Contrary to popular belief, or whatever belief there is, the phosphoric acid in soda is far too dilute to react with the ammonia in Windex. Or, they don't react at all.
It takes a while to boil soda down to get a more concentrated phosphoric acid.
You know... chemistry is actually interesting when it becomes practical.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Another Lame Editorial
I am tipping the hat here to Jared Wheeler. He keeps serving up material that is just too good.
After reading this article, I hoped for the periodical's sake that it was an editorial, but even then, I think this article should be embarrassing to the paper.
Okay, so Mr. Weinstein, here's the deal: the job market is riper for STEM graduates than liberal arts majors. Maybe, it's an overreach of the state's power for it to actually monetarily favor one program over another, but let's face the facts, if we are talking about jobs and economic growth, anthropology and the arts can't hold a candle to engineering, computer science, and other applied sciences and maths. It's not that the liberal arts aren't worth studying... they just don't pay you back in cold hard cash as well as studying the sciences and mathematics.
The governor was talking about jobs. But, Mr. Weinstein has to create some underlying motives to make his article more interesting. And so, Rick Scott is really trying to squelch free thought and progressive education, whereby students are nurtured to challenge established social norms and stand up for equality... Oh, those racist Tea Partiers!
After reading this article, I hoped for the periodical's sake that it was an editorial, but even then, I think this article should be embarrassing to the paper.
Okay, so Mr. Weinstein, here's the deal: the job market is riper for STEM graduates than liberal arts majors. Maybe, it's an overreach of the state's power for it to actually monetarily favor one program over another, but let's face the facts, if we are talking about jobs and economic growth, anthropology and the arts can't hold a candle to engineering, computer science, and other applied sciences and maths. It's not that the liberal arts aren't worth studying... they just don't pay you back in cold hard cash as well as studying the sciences and mathematics.
The governor was talking about jobs. But, Mr. Weinstein has to create some underlying motives to make his article more interesting. And so, Rick Scott is really trying to squelch free thought and progressive education, whereby students are nurtured to challenge established social norms and stand up for equality... Oh, those racist Tea Partiers!
Saturday, October 8, 2011
MSNBC vs. Hermain Cain
This video makes for an interesting watch. Lawrence O'Donnell does a pretty good job trying to get Herman Cain to look bad or make a statement that he would regret, but seriously I think the MSNBC host just caused Herman Cain to shine brighter.
Although Cain gives a few answers that seem to dance around the questions, he largely hits O'Donnell's questions right on and also attacks the reasoning that O'Donnell seems to be using in his questions. This candidate makes O'Donnell look like an idiot... it's too funny.
Although Cain gives a few answers that seem to dance around the questions, he largely hits O'Donnell's questions right on and also attacks the reasoning that O'Donnell seems to be using in his questions. This candidate makes O'Donnell look like an idiot... it's too funny.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Two Monitors
Just updating the world... I officially have a dual monitor setup. It's amazing how handy a second one proves to be. I can't see how I got along with only one before this.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Who Can Write?
I find myself pondering a question on the eve of trying out for the LeTourneau Yellow Jacket. Specifically, I intend to become a freelance writer for them. I have a problem though... the school newspaper is so bad, do I want to associate myself with them?
Don't get me wrong. I am not that pompous. I simply wonder that if by writing for the Yellow Jacket I will also become one of those school paper writers who are quietly dismissed and pitied as oblivious and amateur writers (oblivious to their amateurishness). Or, maybe that thought was unique to my mind.
Why do I hate reading the articles in the school newspaper so much?
I think it's because they sound just as if the writer were there talking to you. This may be a desirable attribute to some when they are consuming reading material, but if I want this, I can just go talk to someone. When I want to read about things at LeTourneau, I want to read poetry!
Oh, it's LeTourneau...
Don't get me wrong. I am not that pompous. I simply wonder that if by writing for the Yellow Jacket I will also become one of those school paper writers who are quietly dismissed and pitied as oblivious and amateur writers (oblivious to their amateurishness). Or, maybe that thought was unique to my mind.
Why do I hate reading the articles in the school newspaper so much?
I think it's because they sound just as if the writer were there talking to you. This may be a desirable attribute to some when they are consuming reading material, but if I want this, I can just go talk to someone. When I want to read about things at LeTourneau, I want to read poetry!
Oh, it's LeTourneau...
Sunday, September 4, 2011
The IQ of LeTu just bumped up a few notches.
I have renewed hope for the state of LeTourneau students. I can even say there is a bastion of cynicism on campus, above and beyond myself, that is.
Sunday, I got a chance to read a well-written paper by an honors student from cohort '10. This little essay was questioning the legitimacy of some Peterson material in a Biblical Literature class.
Thursday, I had a wonderful time at supper with a number of the Davis 1 community, the new Honors cohort this year.
Friday, I observed some of the trappings and floor life of this new Honors floor on Davis 1. I was fairly impressed by what I saw, and a little bit jealous.
This last Sunday (yesterday, technically speaking), I had one of the most stimulating conversations with fellow LeTourneau students that I have ever partaken of. You don't just have that kind of a conversation... you partake of it. And, thus I discovered another one among a handful of cynics on campus.
Sunday, I got a chance to read a well-written paper by an honors student from cohort '10. This little essay was questioning the legitimacy of some Peterson material in a Biblical Literature class.
Thursday, I had a wonderful time at supper with a number of the Davis 1 community, the new Honors cohort this year.
Friday, I observed some of the trappings and floor life of this new Honors floor on Davis 1. I was fairly impressed by what I saw, and a little bit jealous.
This last Sunday (yesterday, technically speaking), I had one of the most stimulating conversations with fellow LeTourneau students that I have ever partaken of. You don't just have that kind of a conversation... you partake of it. And, thus I discovered another one among a handful of cynics on campus.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
A Checklist
Today, I...
1. Survived my second day in Engineering Project Management class. My team turned in our project roles, and I am now the Project Manager.
2. Sat through a seminar given by a visiting Ph.D. who was being considered for the LeTourneau Chemistry/Physics department. I discovered that I knew nothing of multiscale coupling and nanometer physics before the seminar, and now I understand possibly two vague ideas about the subject.
3. Survived frisbee golf out in almost 100 degree weather for over an hour.
4. Tripped a breaker in my apartment when I was performing an electrical experiment... *ahem* I mean testing something out.
And, I feel like I have done almost nothing all day. Honestly, this is the slowest start to a semester I have ever had.
1. Survived my second day in Engineering Project Management class. My team turned in our project roles, and I am now the Project Manager.
2. Sat through a seminar given by a visiting Ph.D. who was being considered for the LeTourneau Chemistry/Physics department. I discovered that I knew nothing of multiscale coupling and nanometer physics before the seminar, and now I understand possibly two vague ideas about the subject.
3. Survived frisbee golf out in almost 100 degree weather for over an hour.
4. Tripped a breaker in my apartment when I was performing an electrical experiment... *ahem* I mean testing something out.
And, I feel like I have done almost nothing all day. Honestly, this is the slowest start to a semester I have ever had.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Rain, rain, rain... you know the rest.
Of the 4 days I have been in Longview Texas, it has rained 3 of those days. I conclude that Longview is a rainy location OR it is abnormally rainy in Longview for this time of year.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
America's Sterling Monetary System
The debt limit talks/arguments/rabid war in Congress has been amusing, disturbing, and frustrating to say the least. But, I've been thinking... this whole concept of needing to raise the debt ceiling seems rather ironic.
If the money you spend is based on something you don't have, and not even something that will ever exist... what is more outrageous than that you should never break trust with what you don't have, with a fake trust? So, we need to raise the debt ceiling and say to our creditors, "No, we don't plan on paying you back yet. In fact, we're going borrow more because we have authorized ourselves to do so."
So, the way this works (and if I get my facts messed up, don't hesitate to try and correct me) is that the Treasury decides that it needs more money, so it sells these things called bonds or securities to the Federal Reserve, a private bank. These bonds represent something I guess, at least I think they do in theory. But, I really don't know.
Anyway, the Federal Reserve says, "All right, I'll take those bonds.", and gives the US Treasury X amount of money. Now, the Federal Reserve doesn't mind paying for the bonds because, well... it has a limitless supply of money. Those things you stuff in your wallet and are perhaps pinching a little more in this strained economy... they're called Federal Reserve Notes, and that is what the Federal Reserve pays the Treasury for their "valuable" bonds. When they agree to buy more bonds, they just print off another batch of "money" notes. What this means is that the US Government can get as much money as it wants from the Federal Reserve, as long as it has bonds to sell.
Now, the problem. The US Treasury is going to reach the debt limit soon and oops... it won't be able to sell any more bonds! No worries! We can just raise the debt limit, and voila! we have more bonds to sell. Just. Like. That.
But, unfortunately (depending, of course, on who you talk to), many Republicans don't feel like raising the debt limit anymore... or they at least won't do it unless we drastically cut spending and NOT raise taxes. Oh, and they want this Constitutional amendment for ensuring balanced budgets.... never mind the fact that Congress hardly pays attention to the Constitution anymore.
I don't know, I just kinda found the idea that Congress needs to allow itself to sell more thin air amusing. Also, if defaulting (not paying bills, interest payments, etc.) is bad faith with our creditors... how is borrowing more, to pay our debts (but borrowing more than we pay, nonetheless), good faith on credit?
I haven't really made up my mind whether the government should or should not raise the ceiling. I mean I am one for standing on principle, but it seems like a kind of artificial limit. Nothing more arbitrary than Congress has already done.
The reason so many conservatives are against this, I believe, is that they feel that now should be the time when America should turn from its fiscal irresponsibility. It's kind of obvious that both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to use the issue politically, though. They just can't keep their eyes off of next year's elections.
If the money you spend is based on something you don't have, and not even something that will ever exist... what is more outrageous than that you should never break trust with what you don't have, with a fake trust? So, we need to raise the debt ceiling and say to our creditors, "No, we don't plan on paying you back yet. In fact, we're going borrow more because we have authorized ourselves to do so."
So, the way this works (and if I get my facts messed up, don't hesitate to try and correct me) is that the Treasury decides that it needs more money, so it sells these things called bonds or securities to the Federal Reserve, a private bank. These bonds represent something I guess, at least I think they do in theory. But, I really don't know.
Anyway, the Federal Reserve says, "All right, I'll take those bonds.", and gives the US Treasury X amount of money. Now, the Federal Reserve doesn't mind paying for the bonds because, well... it has a limitless supply of money. Those things you stuff in your wallet and are perhaps pinching a little more in this strained economy... they're called Federal Reserve Notes, and that is what the Federal Reserve pays the Treasury for their "valuable" bonds. When they agree to buy more bonds, they just print off another batch of "money" notes. What this means is that the US Government can get as much money as it wants from the Federal Reserve, as long as it has bonds to sell.
Now, the problem. The US Treasury is going to reach the debt limit soon and oops... it won't be able to sell any more bonds! No worries! We can just raise the debt limit, and voila! we have more bonds to sell. Just. Like. That.
But, unfortunately (depending, of course, on who you talk to), many Republicans don't feel like raising the debt limit anymore... or they at least won't do it unless we drastically cut spending and NOT raise taxes. Oh, and they want this Constitutional amendment for ensuring balanced budgets.... never mind the fact that Congress hardly pays attention to the Constitution anymore.
I don't know, I just kinda found the idea that Congress needs to allow itself to sell more thin air amusing. Also, if defaulting (not paying bills, interest payments, etc.) is bad faith with our creditors... how is borrowing more, to pay our debts (but borrowing more than we pay, nonetheless), good faith on credit?
I haven't really made up my mind whether the government should or should not raise the ceiling. I mean I am one for standing on principle, but it seems like a kind of artificial limit. Nothing more arbitrary than Congress has already done.
The reason so many conservatives are against this, I believe, is that they feel that now should be the time when America should turn from its fiscal irresponsibility. It's kind of obvious that both Republicans and Democrats have been trying to use the issue politically, though. They just can't keep their eyes off of next year's elections.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Tale of Linux Addiction: Post 1
So, ever since I installed Linux on my netbook, I don't know that I have ever booted Windows, except maybe to leave immediately. Hey, my options are Windows 7 Starter or Ubuntu 10.04... not much competition there. I have wireless internet access, touchpad control, and tons of apps and utilities to mess around with. I haven't been able to print using my Dell Laser yet, but I am not giving up on that.
I have also discovered that youTube is about as useful as any Linux forum for getting how-to information for problems. Some of the videos preclude the user from even being anything near a computer geek. There is hope yet that we may put Microsoft out of business... well, maybe we can get a few more personal users at least.
I have also discovered that youTube is about as useful as any Linux forum for getting how-to information for problems. Some of the videos preclude the user from even being anything near a computer geek. There is hope yet that we may put Microsoft out of business... well, maybe we can get a few more personal users at least.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Science Is as Science Does
Regarding the old Creation vs. Evolution debate and what should be taught in schools...
The I.D. movement has made claims that their concepts are science... I cannot really agree.
The proponents of the Big Bang theory and macro-evolution claim that their concepts are scientifically produced... I cannot agree to that either.
What is science? Science is knowledge. The word's etymological roots are in Latin: scientia - knowledge, sciens from scire - to know. Ok, knowledge. Both intelligent design people and Big-Bangers claim to possess this knowledge.
But, as science is understood in the present day (hopefully it hasn't been changed too much to obviate this discussion), and more specifically the scientific method, science is a practice that produces knowledge gained by observation and the practical testing of theories. The way I learned about it from a wee age is that you observe some phenomenon, create a hypothesis to explain it, test this hypothesis, approve it enough to claim it as a theory, test it more, and eventually (usually post mortum) it becomes a scientific law. Voila!
Now, as far as I can understand, the I.D. people cannot claim to be practicing science. But, I am not really focusing on that now. My main intent here is to show that the evolutionary crowd and those who tout the common explanation of cosmological origins that goes in hand with evolutionary theory cannot claim to practice science either. Why? They have an explanation of origins... an idea not based on observation, or at least only observation and then a guess. An explanation not tested by practical methods at hand. Not reproducible. Not even falsifiable, as far as I am aware with our present body of knowledge.
Wait, those are the same accusations they lay at the feet of proponents of Intelligent Design. How strange?
The question looms... is origins a field in which we can actually practice science --contribute to the body of knowledge found in the study of the natural world by way of the scientific method? I kinda of doubt it. We can make guesses based on data, but they remain guesses. We can suggest explanations, but we cannot reproduce the events to test our case. So, if they only want science to be taught in the classrooms when teaching origins, they should probably just shut up altogether.
Maybe, they could include it in a philosophy course...
The I.D. movement has made claims that their concepts are science... I cannot really agree.
The proponents of the Big Bang theory and macro-evolution claim that their concepts are scientifically produced... I cannot agree to that either.
What is science? Science is knowledge. The word's etymological roots are in Latin: scientia - knowledge, sciens from scire - to know. Ok, knowledge. Both intelligent design people and Big-Bangers claim to possess this knowledge.
But, as science is understood in the present day (hopefully it hasn't been changed too much to obviate this discussion), and more specifically the scientific method, science is a practice that produces knowledge gained by observation and the practical testing of theories. The way I learned about it from a wee age is that you observe some phenomenon, create a hypothesis to explain it, test this hypothesis, approve it enough to claim it as a theory, test it more, and eventually (usually post mortum) it becomes a scientific law. Voila!
Now, as far as I can understand, the I.D. people cannot claim to be practicing science. But, I am not really focusing on that now. My main intent here is to show that the evolutionary crowd and those who tout the common explanation of cosmological origins that goes in hand with evolutionary theory cannot claim to practice science either. Why? They have an explanation of origins... an idea not based on observation, or at least only observation and then a guess. An explanation not tested by practical methods at hand. Not reproducible. Not even falsifiable, as far as I am aware with our present body of knowledge.
Wait, those are the same accusations they lay at the feet of proponents of Intelligent Design. How strange?
The question looms... is origins a field in which we can actually practice science --contribute to the body of knowledge found in the study of the natural world by way of the scientific method? I kinda of doubt it. We can make guesses based on data, but they remain guesses. We can suggest explanations, but we cannot reproduce the events to test our case. So, if they only want science to be taught in the classrooms when teaching origins, they should probably just shut up altogether.
Maybe, they could include it in a philosophy course...
Sunday, July 10, 2011
In which I share a thought or two about our nation's economics...
So, these talks are happening, and I am starting to grow a little concerned about the whole thing.
Two things come to mind from the article above. One, the US Congress surely could have started addressing this issue long before now. It seems rather short-sighted to be on a crash course of debt-reduction planning on the eve of defaulting.
Second, this idea of tax hikes or closing tax loopholes (depending on who you talk to, it seems to be referred to by either of those terms) has me confused and wondering. If these are actual tax loopholes, I am beginning to wonder at the conservative opposition to the plan. Obviously, though, I don't know the details of what these "tax loopholes" are. I have my doubts that something illegal is happening on a massive scale with these supposedly profitable businesses.
On the other hand, though, one can make an argument that, even if big businesses and banks are getting a break on taxes, this is probably better for the economy anyway. If you want liquidity and credit flow, I think your best bet for the source of that liquidity is going to be in the top-tier of earners, especially large banks and other such businesses. It seems a little ridiculous, especially when the employees of these rich companies bring in million dollar bonuses, but hey, you're going to have unequal situations in a market-driven economy.
Two things come to mind from the article above. One, the US Congress surely could have started addressing this issue long before now. It seems rather short-sighted to be on a crash course of debt-reduction planning on the eve of defaulting.
Second, this idea of tax hikes or closing tax loopholes (depending on who you talk to, it seems to be referred to by either of those terms) has me confused and wondering. If these are actual tax loopholes, I am beginning to wonder at the conservative opposition to the plan. Obviously, though, I don't know the details of what these "tax loopholes" are. I have my doubts that something illegal is happening on a massive scale with these supposedly profitable businesses.
On the other hand, though, one can make an argument that, even if big businesses and banks are getting a break on taxes, this is probably better for the economy anyway. If you want liquidity and credit flow, I think your best bet for the source of that liquidity is going to be in the top-tier of earners, especially large banks and other such businesses. It seems a little ridiculous, especially when the employees of these rich companies bring in million dollar bonuses, but hey, you're going to have unequal situations in a market-driven economy.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Just another rant about why I hate Windows...
Windows 7 Starter is doing a power down update at this moment on my new netbook. The amount of software and online apps this thing has on it is mind-boggling, especially when they could have just stuck a nearly empty version of Windows 7 Home or Professional, or even XP, on there and it would run just as fast, if not faster, and have more room to add functionality and applications.
But, no, they have to do it for you and make life all nice and easy! In my case, that usually means my life is made more difficult. And, I bet its the same way for the majority of at-least-semi-intelligent computer users out there.
The sooner I can use Linux for everything the better.
Still fiddling, though, with getting Linux installed via a Live USB...
Oh look! My netbook's almost done with its set of 52 updates.
But, no, they have to do it for you and make life all nice and easy! In my case, that usually means my life is made more difficult. And, I bet its the same way for the majority of at-least-semi-intelligent computer users out there.
The sooner I can use Linux for everything the better.
Still fiddling, though, with getting Linux installed via a Live USB...
Oh look! My netbook's almost done with its set of 52 updates.
Saturday, July 2, 2011
So, I have decided that I need a netbook...
...and I thought that if anyone had any helpful suggestions on what exactly to get, they could give them to me.
Before I ignore them all and buy what I want.
But, seriously, if you know of some netbook that has outperformed them all (but is really a modest computer for modest needs) tell me.
Otherwise, I'm leaning towards this guy.
Biggest bonus is that it appears to work fairly well with Ubuntu Linux.
Before I ignore them all and buy what I want.
But, seriously, if you know of some netbook that has outperformed them all (but is really a modest computer for modest needs) tell me.
Otherwise, I'm leaning towards this guy.
Biggest bonus is that it appears to work fairly well with Ubuntu Linux.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
I never thought much of Rick Perry before, bad or good...
but I have to tell you, this video clinches it.
Wow! I found myself agreeing with nearly everything he said. He seems to embody the kind of ideals and policy Americans need to be pursuing. It's like Ronald Reagan is back.
Wow! I found myself agreeing with nearly everything he said. He seems to embody the kind of ideals and policy Americans need to be pursuing. It's like Ronald Reagan is back.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
I am not intellectually lazy, am I?
Definition
A group of liberals refers to one or more liberals thought of collectively.
Premises
All liberals are in a group of liberals.
A group of liberals (like any group of people) always contains one idiot or, if made up of more than one liberal, an idiot and a group of liberals.
Wait a few minutes...
Conclusion
All liberals are idiots.
QED (Latin for "I love recursive definitions.")
A group of liberals refers to one or more liberals thought of collectively.
Premises
All liberals are in a group of liberals.
A group of liberals (like any group of people) always contains one idiot or, if made up of more than one liberal, an idiot and a group of liberals.
Wait a few minutes...
Conclusion
All liberals are idiots.
QED (Latin for "I love recursive definitions.")
Monday, June 6, 2011
Software #2
When you read Proverbs enough, you get to the point, where for a particular situation, you can begin to quote an apt proverb... but then not be able to finish it correctly.
Like the cold of snow in the time of harvest
Is a faithful messenger to those who send him,
For he refreshes the soul of his masters.
(Proverbs 25:11)
So, I was getting LeTourneau's online course software Blackboard up and checking out the class discussion board in preparation to starting work on some reading and then taking a quiz this evening, when...
What! Somebody is asking on the discussion board whether the second part of an assignment was really due on June 20th or June 6th--today. The instructor replied with something like the following: "Oh, you didn't get the new schedule? A few things have changed."
Looking at the changed schedule, I saw that, yes, this massive part B of the present assignment was due today. I had to read a chapter and take a quiz already today. Furthermore, I had wanted to do some other reading I had never finished yet and polish up Part A that I had never really finished before I even started on Part B.
It turns out, if you ask, and lay out the situation, some professors (and I suppose managers) will re-evaluate the milestones you have to make. So, after emailing the professor to say that, I would probably not be able to make this deal go through and I also doubted the capability of my classmates to do the same, especially when the schedule change was unannounced... after all this, I got an email that was basically cold snow.
Two more days for Component B of Assignment 3.
Phew. Now as far as I have observed in software engineering, this also happens in the work world. But, seriously, it is a lot easier for a professor presiding over a summer class which he facilitates in an open-ended, uncertain fashion to move back a due date, than it is for a customer to move back a delivery on a multi-million dollar product.
Note to self: When it comes to software creation, think ahead and plan for the worst.
Like the cold of snow in the time of harvest
Is a faithful messenger to those who send him,
For he refreshes the soul of his masters.
(Proverbs 25:11)
So, I was getting LeTourneau's online course software Blackboard up and checking out the class discussion board in preparation to starting work on some reading and then taking a quiz this evening, when...
What! Somebody is asking on the discussion board whether the second part of an assignment was really due on June 20th or June 6th--today. The instructor replied with something like the following: "Oh, you didn't get the new schedule? A few things have changed."
Looking at the changed schedule, I saw that, yes, this massive part B of the present assignment was due today. I had to read a chapter and take a quiz already today. Furthermore, I had wanted to do some other reading I had never finished yet and polish up Part A that I had never really finished before I even started on Part B.
It turns out, if you ask, and lay out the situation, some professors (and I suppose managers) will re-evaluate the milestones you have to make. So, after emailing the professor to say that, I would probably not be able to make this deal go through and I also doubted the capability of my classmates to do the same, especially when the schedule change was unannounced... after all this, I got an email that was basically cold snow.
Two more days for Component B of Assignment 3.
Phew. Now as far as I have observed in software engineering, this also happens in the work world. But, seriously, it is a lot easier for a professor presiding over a summer class which he facilitates in an open-ended, uncertain fashion to move back a due date, than it is for a customer to move back a delivery on a multi-million dollar product.
Note to self: When it comes to software creation, think ahead and plan for the worst.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Human Life
I watched Unthinkable this afternoon. Good movie. Well made. (For those of you who want to know, I should say it contains a fair amount of language and violence, and the torture scenes are definitely not for the faint of heart.)
But, it is really impossible to stop there.
I was browsing through the Netflix Instant collection recommended for me and I noticed this item. Passed it by a couple times. But, when I was getting desperate for something to watch, I took a deeper look at it. After reading the short description on Netflix's site and seeing only high-rated reviews, I decided it might actually be well worth the watch. It was, but I didn't know that until I had gotten at least half-way through it.
The premise, which every reviewer repeats and concentrates on is this (and I'll try not to put in any spoilers, but I can't guarantee I won't give away some things you would like to discover yourself):
If America was faced with a monstrous threat and we had the pending-perpetrator in custody, could we--could officials, security forces, interrogation officers and military personnel--do whatever was required to get the information necessary to dismantle this threat?
If many thousands or even millions of lives hung in the balance, what are our limits?
I am not going to answer that question. The movie doesn't even definitively do that. But, the issue is one worth pondering.
I can only seem to figure out how I should act in such a situation, and not even the full of that. Sure, if I was the one in charge of the situation, I would set boundaries, limits that should not be passed for interrogation. But, what if I was the interrogator and it was my duty to do whatever was required to extract the information?
Before I watched this movie, I never really cared much what the government had or had not done to terrorists or abetters in custody. I didn't voice any strong opinion about waterboarding or other forms of torture used in interrogation processes. Over the past couple years I have adopted an attitude that basically took it for granted that the United States government and military uses clandestine/black-ops methods in interrogations and operations. I wouldn't be surprised if I had found out that they had deliberately killed civilians in some country to further the fight against another regime or ideology. In fact, I had heard a specific story about such an occurrence. I believe the bigger and more powerful the nation, the harder it has to work preserve its peace and safety.
After watching the film... hey, my opinion hasn't changed that much. I know I could never do such things personally if I had the choice. But, that doesn't erase the realization that my attitude about the rights of humans and even American citizens does not mesh particularly well with my staunch ideas about Constitutional government and rule by law. Or, is the government simply a non-human enterprise that does not need to conform to the same rules that apply to us as humans--laws of decency and respect that stem from our creation?
I think perhaps the movie could be taken to say two different things. You could possibly come to the conclusion that torture is a very necessary, although undesirable, part of maintaining national defense. Or, you could change your views (if they were different before) that torture should never ever be allowed in any interrogation, for getting any kind of information.
Anyway, I highly recommend the movie for those who may be interested. It is definitely one of my favorites. Thrilling, deep, developed plot... it's all there. It made me a little sick too, though.
But, it is really impossible to stop there.
I was browsing through the Netflix Instant collection recommended for me and I noticed this item. Passed it by a couple times. But, when I was getting desperate for something to watch, I took a deeper look at it. After reading the short description on Netflix's site and seeing only high-rated reviews, I decided it might actually be well worth the watch. It was, but I didn't know that until I had gotten at least half-way through it.
The premise, which every reviewer repeats and concentrates on is this (and I'll try not to put in any spoilers, but I can't guarantee I won't give away some things you would like to discover yourself):
If America was faced with a monstrous threat and we had the pending-perpetrator in custody, could we--could officials, security forces, interrogation officers and military personnel--do whatever was required to get the information necessary to dismantle this threat?
If many thousands or even millions of lives hung in the balance, what are our limits?
I am not going to answer that question. The movie doesn't even definitively do that. But, the issue is one worth pondering.
I can only seem to figure out how I should act in such a situation, and not even the full of that. Sure, if I was the one in charge of the situation, I would set boundaries, limits that should not be passed for interrogation. But, what if I was the interrogator and it was my duty to do whatever was required to extract the information?
Before I watched this movie, I never really cared much what the government had or had not done to terrorists or abetters in custody. I didn't voice any strong opinion about waterboarding or other forms of torture used in interrogation processes. Over the past couple years I have adopted an attitude that basically took it for granted that the United States government and military uses clandestine/black-ops methods in interrogations and operations. I wouldn't be surprised if I had found out that they had deliberately killed civilians in some country to further the fight against another regime or ideology. In fact, I had heard a specific story about such an occurrence. I believe the bigger and more powerful the nation, the harder it has to work preserve its peace and safety.
After watching the film... hey, my opinion hasn't changed that much. I know I could never do such things personally if I had the choice. But, that doesn't erase the realization that my attitude about the rights of humans and even American citizens does not mesh particularly well with my staunch ideas about Constitutional government and rule by law. Or, is the government simply a non-human enterprise that does not need to conform to the same rules that apply to us as humans--laws of decency and respect that stem from our creation?
I think perhaps the movie could be taken to say two different things. You could possibly come to the conclusion that torture is a very necessary, although undesirable, part of maintaining national defense. Or, you could change your views (if they were different before) that torture should never ever be allowed in any interrogation, for getting any kind of information.
Anyway, I highly recommend the movie for those who may be interested. It is definitely one of my favorites. Thrilling, deep, developed plot... it's all there. It made me a little sick too, though.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Software #1
Big revelation here. Hold your breath, folks...
Based on my personal experience, experience in the professional world, and the stories I have heard from colleagues, I have to say that I believe the testing phase of software development to be the most brutal and expensive.
Anyone can put together a few requirements.
Most anyone, especially with a year or so of training, can write up some code to meet those requirements.
It takes intelligence or lengthy headaches and hard sweat or both to test the result.
Do yourself a favor and write code that works the first time.
Based on my personal experience, experience in the professional world, and the stories I have heard from colleagues, I have to say that I believe the testing phase of software development to be the most brutal and expensive.
Anyone can put together a few requirements.
Most anyone, especially with a year or so of training, can write up some code to meet those requirements.
It takes intelligence or lengthy headaches and hard sweat or both to test the result.
Do yourself a favor and write code that works the first time.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Yawn...
So if I hijack my own blog and nobody notices... I think I should feel a little disappointed... unloved... etc.
Fortunately, my extremely healthy egotistical predilection always kicks in.
Well, if anyone is interested, look here again. I should start posting more regularly.
Fortunately, my extremely healthy egotistical predilection always kicks in.
Well, if anyone is interested, look here again. I should start posting more regularly.
Friday, May 20, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
The Digital Saga
The days are winding down before the end of the semester. Tomorrow, I mean today, my team has to make a tremendous effort to finish our final project in Digital Electronics so we can present it on Friday. (Oh, and I have a quiz, 3-4 homework sets of Differential Equations, and a two page paper due on Friday also. I am behind a Circuits homework set. I have to finish a final project in Computer Science II and a homework set in Statics by Saturday and I think I just failed two quizzes in Digital Electronics.)
Concerning the Digital project, though, we are still figuring out the logic. And, when you are using 3 CPLD's and dozens of logic chips, figuring out the logic is not a good stage to be in just before the presentation.
I have to say, this semester has been a whirl-wind. I feel like I have learned more in the past four months than I have ever learned in my life. Nobody told me engineering would be so difficult... nobody told me I would love it so much.
Concerning the Digital project, though, we are still figuring out the logic. And, when you are using 3 CPLD's and dozens of logic chips, figuring out the logic is not a good stage to be in just before the presentation.
I have to say, this semester has been a whirl-wind. I feel like I have learned more in the past four months than I have ever learned in my life. Nobody told me engineering would be so difficult... nobody told me I would love it so much.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Down Circuits Lane
Another breaking of the light this morning. Unfortunately, the truth was disappointing.
As I was sitting through the lecture on Thevenin's and Norton's equivalent circuits, an idea (or maybe I should say the splintering of an idea) slapped me in the face. Up to this time I had understood Thevenin's theorem vaguely as some truly beautiful technique of analysis that allowed one to simplify any complicated circuit by replacing it with an equivalent circuit. Somewhere in this process, all the mess of the former would be replaced by the simplicity of the latter, and the problem solver would never have to stoop to adding up individual currents (in the original circuit), analyzing specific branches, etc.
What was the shock, then, when I discovered that Thevenin's forces one to dredge through the entire circuit, starting from a case voltage or resistance between two specified points. The magic was gone! I was dumbfounded by the menial nature of this once revered concept. It was as if the heavens had touched the earth, only to trip and fall crashing to the ground... or something like that.
As I was sitting through the lecture on Thevenin's and Norton's equivalent circuits, an idea (or maybe I should say the splintering of an idea) slapped me in the face. Up to this time I had understood Thevenin's theorem vaguely as some truly beautiful technique of analysis that allowed one to simplify any complicated circuit by replacing it with an equivalent circuit. Somewhere in this process, all the mess of the former would be replaced by the simplicity of the latter, and the problem solver would never have to stoop to adding up individual currents (in the original circuit), analyzing specific branches, etc.
What was the shock, then, when I discovered that Thevenin's forces one to dredge through the entire circuit, starting from a case voltage or resistance between two specified points. The magic was gone! I was dumbfounded by the menial nature of this once revered concept. It was as if the heavens had touched the earth, only to trip and fall crashing to the ground... or something like that.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Ok, so, yes, I didn't post every day in January.
I underestimated two things:
1. The degree to which staying on the LeTourneau campus is conducive to intellectually recreational thought.
2. The amount of time necessary to invest in such an activity.
So, in order to make up for not posting anything for a while, I will leave you with a puzzling problem which probably has a very obvious solution.
Can a digital circuit be made to produce random numbers (withstanding any current human capacity to produce a pattern through analysis)?
Hint: Take a look at the Linear Feedback Shift Register.
1. The degree to which staying on the LeTourneau campus is conducive to intellectually recreational thought.
2. The amount of time necessary to invest in such an activity.
So, in order to make up for not posting anything for a while, I will leave you with a puzzling problem which probably has a very obvious solution.
Can a digital circuit be made to produce random numbers (withstanding any current human capacity to produce a pattern through analysis)?
Hint: Take a look at the Linear Feedback Shift Register.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Read this. You'll like it.
1000 0100 0001 0000 0100 0001 0000 0101 0001 0001 0101 0011 0010 0001 0000 0101 0001 0001 0101 0011 0010 0001 0001 0110 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0011 0010 0001 0000 1000 0001 0001 0001 0001 0001 0000 0001 0000 0011 0100 0110
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Two Thoughts
This guy's (the Congressman's) logic is funny.
Oh, and I wish FOX news would do less commentary and more straight reporting. I think they bring in a decent variety of opinion in their reporting, but I wish they wouldn't see the need to correct the people they are interviewing. Why can't they just get someone on the opposite side on too, and have the two sides fight it out to the death?
Oh, and I wish FOX news would do less commentary and more straight reporting. I think they bring in a decent variety of opinion in their reporting, but I wish they wouldn't see the need to correct the people they are interviewing. Why can't they just get someone on the opposite side on too, and have the two sides fight it out to the death?
Friday, January 7, 2011
What does it mean to have separation of church and state?
I started reading this article from Americans United for Separation of Church and State and wondered if they weren't contradicting their mission by criticizing the recommendation coming out of Senator Grassley's office to end the federal ban on politicking by non-profit groups, which would include churches.
I mean, if they want the separation of church and state, how can they be for a federal restriction on church activity?
The alternative, though, is is slightly troubling. Churches, already tax-exempt, being given full reign to tread the political field and put their "profits" behind certain political movements and candidates.
But how can you have a true separation of church and state if the state has to oversee how the church conducts its business? Am I missing something here?
I mean, if they want the separation of church and state, how can they be for a federal restriction on church activity?
The alternative, though, is is slightly troubling. Churches, already tax-exempt, being given full reign to tread the political field and put their "profits" behind certain political movements and candidates.
But how can you have a true separation of church and state if the state has to oversee how the church conducts its business? Am I missing something here?
The Experience of Kindle
In the interests of furthering a better understanding of Kindle's consumers, I wrote up a review for Amazon's latest generation Kindle and emailed it to their feedback address. Here it is, in its entirety:
As I sit back in front of my computer with a cup of tea readily at hand, I think it is high time to write what I think of Amazon's Third Generation Kindle. To start with, I must say that this is the first Kindle I have ever owned, the first e-reader for that matter. Reflecting on the fact that it was decently-sized investment and meant to serve a unique and long purpose, I think Amazon deserves from me some sort of opinion concerning the device's good and bad qualities, its advantages and disadvantages.
Let me start with the pros. The Kindle e-reader is uniquely designed with a variety of supporting features to aid the process of reading. The most important of these features are its size and weight, the screen, and navigation of the reading material. The weight and size of this machine have already been extensively investigated and praised. Indeed, there is not much that needs to be ascertained to come to an opinion on this subject. It is enough to see that the Kindle is so light-weight that one can generally hold it in one hand with ease, although something needs to be said about the stress that may be occasioned on this hand after a good half hour's use and in a state of hospitalization. (But in such circumstances, even the lightest objects became strangely heavy.) The size of the Kindle is a good one indeed, granting maximum possible screen size (comparable to the size of a pocket dictionary's page) in an object that can be carried in one hand without awkwardness and easily slipped into a small book bag.
The electronic-ink screen of the Kindle is its most magnificent feature. It looks like a very smooth paper and ink picture, feels like a slightly spongy plastic surface, and is remarkably easy on the eyes. I have perceived no additional discomfort in reading from it above that felt from reading real paper. The exception to this rule has been the discomfort arising from the glare that inevitably pops up. The reflective screen is remarkably like real paper. You can't see it in the dark. But, mostly due to its very smooth surface, it reflects light much better than the page of a book. Nonetheless, it is a masterful screen. Indeed, upon first taking it up in my hands, I was a minute trying to pull the plastic cover off that I perceived to be covering the screen when, wonder of wonders, I realized this plastic cover was the screen itself! It had words printed on it and the machine was not powered. The screen's ability to sustain a picture while the device is turned off has often left me wonder since.
The third most remarkable feature of the Kindle is the ease with which one can navigate through a book or drop it and pick up a different book. The page turns are effortless and nearly as fast as one can reasonably turn the pages of a real book. Keeping one's place when a book is exited (as if you had had your fingers between the pages all the time) is a very useful feature. A progress bar at the bottom of the page quickly tells you how far you are through a book (and by extension, its plot). Indeed, I get the feeling that nearly everything possible has been done to make the reading process as natural and effortless as possible. As an example, I, who am no fast reader, whipped through three novels of Jane Austen's in less than three weeks time, a somewhat remarkable feat for myself. I will not deny the fact that a reader can get lost in a book while reading on a Kindle.
Given this praise, our friends at Amazon who design the Kindle must wonder whether I intend to raise any criticism. Let me quell those doubts by saying that I do. Though the Kindle's assets (the things that have been done right in the Kindle) are integral to its construction and not minute affairs, its drawbacks, unfortunately (for our friends at Amazon), are small things and easily corrected. The biggest drawback of the Kindle is the clumsiness of its software and input interface and the formatting of its books.
Given that this device was largely designed for reading books, this first issue I will raise may not seem particularly important. But, it is annoying nonetheless. It must be said that the five-way controller is kind of a drag. I guess it is competent for moving from one book to another or perusing one's library, but it is absolutely deficient when it comes to web-browsing and even tedious to use when one is indexing the table of contents of a rather large work, say the Bible, for example. Well, it is possible, this drawback is not so easy to correct, but it was worth mentioning anyway.
Something that would be very easy to correct is the formatting of the e-books. Please... how hard can it be to add page numbers? How distracting would be a small number appearing alongside the column of text. Think how such a slight change would aid the expansion of its use. Then, students could follow along in class with their Kindle edition book while their instructor guides them with the printed copy. Citations could be made. The Kindle could then be used for some manner of informal research. I have heard this complaint raised by another party in a product review, and frankly, I agree. It shouldn't be that hard to fix.
In addition, unless you fiddle with the text size, you are bound to find prematurely terminated lines sprinkled throughout the book you are reading. Not only is this distracting, it is just plain unpleasant (and probably not very hard to fix). I have also observed a number of misprints in several of the free Kindle editions of the classics. Perhaps, these are the natural result of freely available e-books. Or, maybe they are just signs of sloppy conversions of the text to electronic format. Whatever the case, they disturb me because I like to be confident that I am reading an immaculate copy of a text, especially when I am reading a digital copy.
Well, I am done criticizing the Kindle for now. Let me just conclude by saying that the Kindle is just about everything I wanted it to be. It has even surpassed my expectations with regard to ease of reading. I have read mostly novels on it, though. So, while it is uniquely designed to enable this endeavor, it may not be suited for many other activities. Whatever the case, Amazon has created a nice little device that I foresee will be well used in the next few years. In addition, books being even cheaper when read through this medium, my intake of literature is already growing. Thank you, Amazon. Not a bad job. Not a bad job at all!
As I sit back in front of my computer with a cup of tea readily at hand, I think it is high time to write what I think of Amazon's Third Generation Kindle. To start with, I must say that this is the first Kindle I have ever owned, the first e-reader for that matter. Reflecting on the fact that it was decently-sized investment and meant to serve a unique and long purpose, I think Amazon deserves from me some sort of opinion concerning the device's good and bad qualities, its advantages and disadvantages.
Let me start with the pros. The Kindle e-reader is uniquely designed with a variety of supporting features to aid the process of reading. The most important of these features are its size and weight, the screen, and navigation of the reading material. The weight and size of this machine have already been extensively investigated and praised. Indeed, there is not much that needs to be ascertained to come to an opinion on this subject. It is enough to see that the Kindle is so light-weight that one can generally hold it in one hand with ease, although something needs to be said about the stress that may be occasioned on this hand after a good half hour's use and in a state of hospitalization. (But in such circumstances, even the lightest objects became strangely heavy.) The size of the Kindle is a good one indeed, granting maximum possible screen size (comparable to the size of a pocket dictionary's page) in an object that can be carried in one hand without awkwardness and easily slipped into a small book bag.
The electronic-ink screen of the Kindle is its most magnificent feature. It looks like a very smooth paper and ink picture, feels like a slightly spongy plastic surface, and is remarkably easy on the eyes. I have perceived no additional discomfort in reading from it above that felt from reading real paper. The exception to this rule has been the discomfort arising from the glare that inevitably pops up. The reflective screen is remarkably like real paper. You can't see it in the dark. But, mostly due to its very smooth surface, it reflects light much better than the page of a book. Nonetheless, it is a masterful screen. Indeed, upon first taking it up in my hands, I was a minute trying to pull the plastic cover off that I perceived to be covering the screen when, wonder of wonders, I realized this plastic cover was the screen itself! It had words printed on it and the machine was not powered. The screen's ability to sustain a picture while the device is turned off has often left me wonder since.
The third most remarkable feature of the Kindle is the ease with which one can navigate through a book or drop it and pick up a different book. The page turns are effortless and nearly as fast as one can reasonably turn the pages of a real book. Keeping one's place when a book is exited (as if you had had your fingers between the pages all the time) is a very useful feature. A progress bar at the bottom of the page quickly tells you how far you are through a book (and by extension, its plot). Indeed, I get the feeling that nearly everything possible has been done to make the reading process as natural and effortless as possible. As an example, I, who am no fast reader, whipped through three novels of Jane Austen's in less than three weeks time, a somewhat remarkable feat for myself. I will not deny the fact that a reader can get lost in a book while reading on a Kindle.
Given this praise, our friends at Amazon who design the Kindle must wonder whether I intend to raise any criticism. Let me quell those doubts by saying that I do. Though the Kindle's assets (the things that have been done right in the Kindle) are integral to its construction and not minute affairs, its drawbacks, unfortunately (for our friends at Amazon), are small things and easily corrected. The biggest drawback of the Kindle is the clumsiness of its software and input interface and the formatting of its books.
Given that this device was largely designed for reading books, this first issue I will raise may not seem particularly important. But, it is annoying nonetheless. It must be said that the five-way controller is kind of a drag. I guess it is competent for moving from one book to another or perusing one's library, but it is absolutely deficient when it comes to web-browsing and even tedious to use when one is indexing the table of contents of a rather large work, say the Bible, for example. Well, it is possible, this drawback is not so easy to correct, but it was worth mentioning anyway.
Something that would be very easy to correct is the formatting of the e-books. Please... how hard can it be to add page numbers? How distracting would be a small number appearing alongside the column of text. Think how such a slight change would aid the expansion of its use. Then, students could follow along in class with their Kindle edition book while their instructor guides them with the printed copy. Citations could be made. The Kindle could then be used for some manner of informal research. I have heard this complaint raised by another party in a product review, and frankly, I agree. It shouldn't be that hard to fix.
In addition, unless you fiddle with the text size, you are bound to find prematurely terminated lines sprinkled throughout the book you are reading. Not only is this distracting, it is just plain unpleasant (and probably not very hard to fix). I have also observed a number of misprints in several of the free Kindle editions of the classics. Perhaps, these are the natural result of freely available e-books. Or, maybe they are just signs of sloppy conversions of the text to electronic format. Whatever the case, they disturb me because I like to be confident that I am reading an immaculate copy of a text, especially when I am reading a digital copy.
Well, I am done criticizing the Kindle for now. Let me just conclude by saying that the Kindle is just about everything I wanted it to be. It has even surpassed my expectations with regard to ease of reading. I have read mostly novels on it, though. So, while it is uniquely designed to enable this endeavor, it may not be suited for many other activities. Whatever the case, Amazon has created a nice little device that I foresee will be well used in the next few years. In addition, books being even cheaper when read through this medium, my intake of literature is already growing. Thank you, Amazon. Not a bad job. Not a bad job at all!
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Facebook, now and then, serves up fodder...
...which is almost too good.
Check out this article.
And, then I was hunting around on the same topic and found this one by the same author.
Dahlia Lithwick appears to make the same mistake that a lot of people in modern American fall into--believing the test of Constitutionality resides solely in the Judicial branch of out government. Oh yes, that may be the current practice today, but that does not mean it is the best one, or even the way it was intended.
I defer to these words that Clarence Carson writes in his book, Basic American Government:
In contrast to the current practice, think about what would happen if each branch of government (the Senators, Representatives, and President in addition to the Supreme Court) thought carefully over the constitutionality of any new law or bureau under consideration. Actually, Christine O'Donnell's remarks quoted at the beginning of the second article linked above sounded rather refreshing.
This is why I am at least slightly excited about the new Congress' intentions of reading the Constitution at the beginning of their session and requiring statements of derivation of Constitutional authority in new laws.
Check out this article.
And, then I was hunting around on the same topic and found this one by the same author.
Dahlia Lithwick appears to make the same mistake that a lot of people in modern American fall into--believing the test of Constitutionality resides solely in the Judicial branch of out government. Oh yes, that may be the current practice today, but that does not mean it is the best one, or even the way it was intended.
I defer to these words that Clarence Carson writes in his book, Basic American Government:
On the question of whether or not the courts have the ultimate power of interpreting the Constitution, Jefferson answered this question emphatically in answer to a letter raising the question in 1820. "You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions," he wrote to a correspondent. But that, Jefferson said, is "a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy." (263)
In contrast to the current practice, think about what would happen if each branch of government (the Senators, Representatives, and President in addition to the Supreme Court) thought carefully over the constitutionality of any new law or bureau under consideration. Actually, Christine O'Donnell's remarks quoted at the beginning of the second article linked above sounded rather refreshing.
This is why I am at least slightly excited about the new Congress' intentions of reading the Constitution at the beginning of their session and requiring statements of derivation of Constitutional authority in new laws.
Yes, I do read a prominent atheist's blog.
Today, I leave you with an article from PZ Myers (I give you warning. This guy's blog can have some rather coarse/vulgar material.), well known for his atheistic and liberal philosophy.
You learn a thing or two when you read the words of someone who believes exactly opposite to what you yourself hold to be true. Sometimes, it can be kind of demoralizing.
But, I wait and watch, learning what the godless say, hoping I will one day be able to better counter them.
One thing I would like to point out in that article. PZ Myers quotes Charles Darwin. Of particular interest to me were these words of his (Darwin's):
I have seen Christianity labeled a death cult more than one time on this guy's blog. God help those who cannot see beyond this world and even those who would care more about a father, brother, friends...
You learn a thing or two when you read the words of someone who believes exactly opposite to what you yourself hold to be true. Sometimes, it can be kind of demoralizing.
But, I wait and watch, learning what the godless say, hoping I will one day be able to better counter them.
One thing I would like to point out in that article. PZ Myers quotes Charles Darwin. Of particular interest to me were these words of his (Darwin's):
"I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.
And this is a --------- [awful] doctrine."
I have seen Christianity labeled a death cult more than one time on this guy's blog. God help those who cannot see beyond this world and even those who would care more about a father, brother, friends...
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
What is a dream job?
I don't know about any of you, but to me, this seems like the best type of job.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
2011
As an attempt to make an auspicious start to the new year, I have to decide to give myself a test: one post every day for the month of January (or the equivalent within the whole month).
And not only that, since the beginning of a new year is a good time to increase one's discipline, each post will have some piece of meat--something worth thinking about, discussing, or just discovering. This is for my own good more than anyone else's...
Since this is the first post of the month and serves partly as an announcement, I'll just end with a question.
What happened at Salem, Massachusetts in the year of 1692? What a few years ago I had thought was an obvious example of demonic influence in the Puritan communities I have observed to be redrawn by the majority of modern interpretations as the product of spoiled rye, jealousies, or misguided and dogmatic notions.
And not only that, since the beginning of a new year is a good time to increase one's discipline, each post will have some piece of meat--something worth thinking about, discussing, or just discovering. This is for my own good more than anyone else's...
Since this is the first post of the month and serves partly as an announcement, I'll just end with a question.
What happened at Salem, Massachusetts in the year of 1692? What a few years ago I had thought was an obvious example of demonic influence in the Puritan communities I have observed to be redrawn by the majority of modern interpretations as the product of spoiled rye, jealousies, or misguided and dogmatic notions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)