Sunday, February 22, 2015
In preparation for that, I've changed the Template to a simple one and I've taken down a number of old marginal posts.
The goal here will be longer form writing. I don't believe anyone is reading and I'm not going to announce it on other Social Media.
Blogging is one of the many new directions I'd like to take and I think that perhaps those changes would make a good post.
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Friday, April 30, 2010
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Not being a spanish speaker (or reader), I attempted to use translate.google.com. It did an excellent job and I find I can understand all the posts there. One interesting thing is that it translated Spanish algebraic chess notation to English algebraic chess notation. For example, Cf3 was translated, correctly to Nf3. Pretty handy.
By comparison, babelfish didn't do nearly as good a job at the translations, and did not convert the chess notation. Here's a comparison of the translations:
Until half-full of century XIX, the chess games were juegaron without no limitation in the necessary time for the examination of a movement.
Until the mid-nineteenth century, chess is played without any limitation in time for consideration of a motion
This looks like a great site, by the way. I greatly appreciate their historic posts, which seem well researched and interesting. I'll try to follow it, using translate.google.com, of course.
[Update: Tried Microsoft Translator from bing.com. It didn't do well in the translation. Confusingly, it translated some of the chess notation correctly and some not correctly and strangely used mixed case in the chess notation that was not in the original Spanish text.
Actually, I'm reading the translation now more carefully with translate.google.com and it appears to get confused in the translation of spanish algebraic to english algebraic also.]
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
This should be considered not merely a scientific scandal but an enormous journalistic scandal. The elite press treats skepticism about global warming as a mental defect. It uses a form of the No True Scotsman fallacy to delegitimize people who dissent from the (manufactured) "consensus." Dissent is scientifically unserious, therefore dissenting scientist A is unserious. There's no way to break in. The moment someone disagrees with the "consensus" they disqualify themselves from criticizing the consensus. That's not how science is supposed to work. Skeptics who've received a tote bag from some oil company are branded as shills, but scientists who live off of climate change obsessed foundations or congressional fiefdoms are objective, call-it-like-they-see-it truth seekers. Question these folks and you get a Bill Murrayesque "Back off, man. We're scientists."
Monday, November 23, 2009
In a report compiled last summer, the Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group at the U's College of Education and Human Development recommended that aspiring teachers there must repudiate the notion of "the American Dream" in order to obtain the recommendation for licensure required by the Minnesota Board of Teaching. Instead, teacher candidates must embrace -- and be prepared to teach our state's kids -- the task force's own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
A lot of focus is on the New Deal and Government spending. Others say it was the War that jump started the economy.
I've read some on it and I think there's a perspective you hear sometimes, but doesn't get enough play. The US economy in the late 30s was terrible and getting worse. The economy in the 40s was better by some measures. Sure, GDP went way up, but we were building tanks, planes and ships. Standard of living was terrible during the War as you would expect.
What happened to the economy when the War ended? In '46-'48 there was high inflation and then a bad recession hit with high unenployment. It appeared that the Depression might have come back. What happened then? The economy picked up as markets started opening world wide for US goods.
I'm no economist, but could it have been the case that it was the destruction of world-wide productive capacity (primarily Europe and Far East) during the War that accelerated the US economy out of the duldrums? Perhaps this continued until the bad economies of the late 60s/70s? Not sure what happened during the 80s/90s, but I think maybe we've been living on debt during that period and the basic realities of the economy haven't changed.
It's cautionary. If we have another Great Depression, will there be pressure for us to use our status as the only Superpower to start or encourage the start of a Great War? A War that would diminish world productivity to our benefit?
Saturday, January 03, 2009
I think that some (many?) of the people who invested with Madoff thought they were benefitting from a network of connected people. With his secretive investment strategies, his reputation and his consistent returns the investors could assume that Madoff was getting inside information from other investors that they couldn't act on themselves, but could reap reciprocal rewards from other insiders who similarly helped guide Madoff's investments.
It was just insider trading, once removed. It was a scam on Madoff's part, he wasn't brave enough to actually DO that, but that's what I think he was selling. Whenever you look into what he said he was doing to make such consistent returns, it didn't make sense, so "smart" money would assume he was doing something he couldn't talk about.
Insider trading is such a complex subject. I think, more and more, I'm coming around to the view that we should abolish insider trader restrictions. I read an opinion piece on insider trading in the WSJ a few years back that took this stand. I was suprised to learn a few years back that they are a fairly recent invention, going back only to the 60s. Used to be, CEOs were rewarded by insider trading, but their trades were all public (still are), so you could follow them. Sure, they were front runners, but shouldn't someone who worked hard and came up with a winning strategy be rewarded? Note that in this world, the CEOs (and other well-connected people) typically made money only when they did well for their companies. Now, we have these arrangements where CEOs make many millions whether their companies prosper or not.
Getting back to Madoff, here's my takeaway. The "smart" money, the big players who were investing with Madoff knew (or should have known) that they were involved in risky business and they got what they deserved. The little guys who were hurt in this were either conned by their advisers or shouldn't have been involved with Madoff at all. I do think that there should be criminal penalties for not just Madoff but advisers who were directing money into what should have been viewed as a risky investments.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
It was a wonderful experience. It was the first fiction I ever wrote and it certainly showed. I like the ideas behind the story I wrote and I may rewrite it someday, but until then, it won't see the light of day.
There are a few things I would do differently now.
First, I would have studied writing I admired more for structure. I wrote like I talk, lots of odd digressions and rambling. My story was very challenging because it was had a lot of back-story to get out and I'm not satisfied that I did get all the back-story out very well (or did anything very well, actually).
Then, the pacing was poor. I had 40,000 words (the NaNoWriMo goal is 50K) and less than half the story told. Perhaps I should have followed the advice of the FAQ Entry and did my 50K without finishing my story, but I felt that was cheating somehow. So, I decided which scenes and facts from the story arc were absolutely necessary and rushed through them and got out the complete story. I'm somewhat glad I did, although the result is scary bad.
It was a very positive experience. I'd recommend it to anyone, but I will warn you that it is more work than you think it'll be. Especially if you hadn't written before, like me.
Now, I think I'll focus on some short stories. I've got a story idea that's been kicking around for awhile that I might just throw together. I'd be surprised if I could do more than 20K words on this story, but that's a good size short story. 50K is really short for a Novel. I think I could easily take my story and flesh it out to 150-200K, which is more typical of the length of a Novel. I'm concerned that I don't have the skills necessary to do justice to my story ideas, but we all suffer with our limitations and I don't know why my stories shouldn't suffer with my limitations.
I'm going to try and read more, also. I think I'll read what's at hand rather than any great plan. Right now, I'm going through C.S. Lewis' The Chronicles of Narnia. I'd never read them before. They are fun but not as interesting as I thought they'd be. I'd read some of Lewis' other works years ago, stuff for adults like Screwtape and I thought they'd have more observations like I found there. Well, they are for children, so I should give them a break, I guess.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
I'm seriously considering deleting the last post, about my friend Margaret Patton. If you do a Google Search for Margaret Patton, I believe it's the first link. I know that Google customizes results based on information it keeps about you, so your mileage might vary, but I'm not comfortable with my reminisces and the broken link to the news article being the Internet Record of Margaret Patton's life. If you read this and have an opinion, one way or the other, I'd love to hear it. As always, it's Jordan dot Henderson at gmail dot com.
The problem, for me, with blogging is that the things that really interest me have aspects that are too personal to share on a blog. I see a lot interesting blogs out there, they talk about their lives, people they know are carelessly insulted or criticized in public. I don't feel comfortable doing that.
I think it is possible to blog, be interesting and be charitable at the same time. It's harder to do it right, but that's no reason not to try.
Let's see. A lot has happened since I last posted. I don't think I ever wrote about my weight loss. When I posted my last, I was still working on it. I was down by 110 pounds at one point. Now, I'm back up about 20, but I think I'll fight my way back to where I want to be.
I was accepted into full communion in the Roman Catholic Church, April 7th, 2007 at St. Francis of Assisi Church.
Just last night, I finished my novel and became a Winner of the 2007 NaNoWriMo.
Saturday, August 13, 2005
This post referred to a newspaper article about Margaret Patton that's no longer available. I emailed the editors at the newspaper to see if they had a copy, but hadn't heard back.
The post didn't work without the referenced article and I hate uncurated pages with broken links.
Even when this page was "whole" and the linked article was available, this page had entirely too much page rank. This page served as a strange and unfitting memorial so prominently featured by the Google search algorithm.
I still have a copy of this page if there's anything in there someone wants, I can email it to you.
If you do need to get in touch with Margaret's family, try Katherine Patton Fisher's email address in the comments below.
Sunday, November 07, 2004
The poem 'A Ritual to Read to Each Other'. This is the most wonderful thing that I can remember reading or hearing recited in a very long time.
For it is important that awake people be awake,
or a breaking line may discourage them back to sleep;
the signals we give - yes or no, or maybe—
should be clear: the darkness around us is deep.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Saw this on Science Journal on WSJ (pay site), but it's in The Times of India too.Anyone have any ideas on how to go about directing neuroplasticity toward goals you might have for yourself? I imagine there's no good science yet on this question, but it seems like some exercising the brain wouldn't be time terribly wasted in any case.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
I recommend Bloglines. I much prefer a web-based aggregator. I understand that Yahoo has a similar service, but I haven't tried it.
Enough of meta-discussions, the Vonnegut quote is one of those things that is really important to remember, all the time.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
Saw this discussion referenced over at Lambda the Ultimate.
Go read this mailing list entry. It's full of wisdom, I think. Another gem:
Programming is just another name for the lost art of thinking. People are quite capable of thinking, but they do not. If they are taught how to think, they are also taught how to program, and vice versa. It is simply a necessity that people learn to program, it is part of a liberal education.There is so much garbage out there about the Lisp languages and recursion as a technique. People complain about it being used when it's "inefficient" or "obscure". I don't get it. In a time when we are supposed to model our programs in "objects" that reflect the "real world", it is common to denigrate modeling conceptual entities in a natural recursive way, just as they appear in mathematics.
The James Legge translation of the Tao Te Ching has this for Chapter XLIII:
1. The softest thing in the world dashes against and overcomes the hardest; that which has no (substantial) existence enters where there is no crevice. I know hereby what advantage belongs to doing nothing (with a purpose). ..."that which has no substance enters where there is no crevice." I just love that.
I feel that the most powerful things are those things which are indefinable, unsubstantial, have no substantial existence.
Some translations of this chapter of the Tao Te Ching refer to water as the thing that dashes against anything in it's path and wears it away. Ice will eventually bring down a mountain. Ice, water, air, light, space, time, truth, love, beauty... Anyone can see where the most substantial of these, ice, water air and light, determine our whole existence. If there were too much or too little of any of these things, we could not exist, certainly the foundations of existence would be radically changed, yet we rarely think of them in our day to day.
But, even moreso, these seemingly insubstantial conceptual things such as space, time, truth love and beauty have control over us. These things permeate our beings at the most seminal level. Those of us who are seen as being the most self-actualized, the most independent and capable are chained to these things. To the fully indepent artistic mind, beauty is the most compelling thing. The pursuit of beauty becomes the master.
I'm not being prescriptive, I would not say it should be different. While slavery and chains have a negative connotation of limitation and the Buddhist or Taoist would say that such striving is vain, I would say instead that it is a high calling to become enslaved to those things that are insubstantial, to truth, to love, to beauty. The scientist who studies the unseen, like light, space and time comes to touch the deeper understanding of existence. The thinker who dwells in the insubstantial comes to touch the deeper reality. To reach to the deepest reality is why we have comprehension, I believe.
Saturday, September 18, 2004
Garrison Keillor's Writer's Almanac is wonderful. I heard this quote on there some weeks back and was meaning to blog it. It has such relevance to me.
I was catching it most every weekday morning on the Radio, but my schedule changed and now I rarely catch it. I must remember to sign up for it in email or something, because it really is worthwhile.
If I were making a suggestion for improving the Writer's Almanac, I might wish that Keillor sometimes have guest readers in for the poetry recitations. Much of the poetry that is selected for the show is beautiful, but sometimes, I feel, Keillor's delivery isn't always fitting to the particular piece. I mean no criticism of Keillor or his delivery style by this. Specifically, some pieces might be better recited with a woman's voice, I feel.
Friday, September 10, 2004
java.net: The Blacksmith and the Bookkeeper:The Evolving Modalities of Human Missions [Sep. 09, 2004]
I'm waiting on the next installment. This could be good, or it could be yet another overreaching theory of everything.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy overreaching theories of everything... really, I do, it's just that they aren't useful for much, well, except for getting people to buy in to your world view and making them your mindslaves, other than that, not useful.
Saturday, September 04, 2004
It's great. I really like the convenience of web mail. I use 3 or 4 different computers and it's nice to be able to check mail really quickly. Gmail is by far the best web mail program I've ever used.
I think the model with labels and starred email for the stuff you are currently working on is good, but I'll have to use it awhile to see. Good search will be a help once I have enough of it... I think. Keeping things in linear conversations is a good way to go also.
One thing that's annoying. It's been down a couple of times recently. If it happens a lot, that'll be a big downside, but I'm willing to wait and see before I pass judgement here. It could well be that I've just started using it when it had a few problems.
I already had some modules for doing this laying around, so it was easier to just do it in Perl. I do want to get back to it, though. I decided to drop the Jakarta Net Commons stuff. It appeared to me that java.net had everything I needed, and the Jakarta Net Commons stuff is largely plug compatible, so...
I will say that LWP is just a lot easier to use, even when you forget about the fact that Perl is easier to get simple things done in quickly than Java. The perspective of java.net is wrong, to me. Doing Basic Authentication is way more complicated in java.net than it is in LWP and there's no real reason for it except bad choices for the objects, from what I can tell.
Once I had some Java interfaces built, things seemed pretty easy to do in SISC Scheme, but I still had a lot of convenience functions built up to deal with my application in Perl that made things a lot simpler.
Thursday, August 26, 2004
I don't have time to listen to them right now, but I'll be checking them out over the weekend and I'll write something about them here.
Friday, August 20, 2004
NYTimes.com Article: The Probability That a Real-Estate Agent Is Cheating You (and Other Riddles of Modern Life)
Read this NYT article. It's just wonderful.
This is what academia should be all about. Asking interesting questions, maybe sometimes even trivial or silly questions, and getting better answers.
Wednesday, July 07, 2004
I find this article very interesting. I see a time, in the not-to-distant-future, when higher level languages will standardly outperform lower-level languages for programs humans write. By this, I mean that a higher level language will be more efficient with managing the computer resources of typical computer programs than the hand-coded micro-optimizations that humans like to put in.
This article mentions GC as an area where high-level management beats humans. Here's the text version, from the Google cache, of a presentation that Hans Boehm has done on issues surrounding GC vs. malloc performance. Hans Boehm, being a careful scientist, doesn't state an unambiguous case either way, but he does explode a lot of myths people have around these questions.
There's also this delightful little story about how prototyping in a higher level language created a success story.
Tuesday, July 06, 2004
Just saw this over at Delicious. It's from 2002.
The Princeton Pauper - CompSci Major Confuses attacker with "Leet-Speak": "proceeded to fire off threats in a manner of speaking so archaic, few human beings outside the world of internet message boards can understand it. The confused would-be mugger was apparently intimidated by the devil-talk and broke off the engagement."
The dumbing down continues. The manner of speaking was anything but archaic. I think the writer meant arcane, but who knows?
I would assume that the writer here is a Princeton student. When even Princeton students write so carelessly, what hope have we for the future of thought in America?
Sunday, July 04, 2004
It's true, Slashdot is a cesspool. It attracts a host of pathetic vermin, who apparently have nothing better to do than troll the place. What passes for analysis on Slashdot is at its very best mildly interesting and at its worse just highly attenuated groupthink. But, Slashdot thrives. There is a community there, it's undeniable. A lot of people read it, mention there is important in some circles and as an Internet Media, it's somewhat influential in that mention there can bring many many hits to your site and attention in other more traditional media.
Bruce Perens' Technocrat, which aims to be a more serious and cleaned-up Slashdot doesn't seem to be taking off. I was hopeful, but there doesn't seem to be critical mass forming up there. After an initial flurry of new story posting,
Other places like Codingstyle, which, I think, deserves more attention, seems to languish, almost completely ignored and never influential.
Orkut, which seemed to be taking off a few months ago now seems to be stalling out. There's just not much there to recommend. Those kind of sites - social networking sites - have little advantage over maintaining weblogs and keeping in touch with email, it seems to me.
I think places like Delicious - social bookmark sites - are really filling an important need and I see these becoming a really big thing. Other social bookmark sites of interest are Simpy, Spurl and Unalog (there are others, but I believe that Delicious is the "first" recent example, Clay Shirky wrote up an interesting history of such sites on the Delicious discussion mail list awhile back (search for a June 1 post by Clay Shirky).
I'm not sure what builds a community on the internet. I'd like to be able to say that if you offer something new, or offer it done well that people will be attracted and community will form around it, but I think that's too easy an answer. I think that it has something to do with appealing to egos of those who use it, making them feel special for being a part of this community, but that, too, is the obvious and probably wrong answer.
I guess if I knew the answer, especially if I'd known it before 1999, I would have bottled it and made my .com Million$.
Tuesday, June 29, 2004
I spent some time checking out PLT and I do think there's a lot there.
What I'm kind of excited about today is the prospect of using SISC. I really want to do something with Java, because I want to be able to say that I have and I need a project. For Web Automation, I should be able to pull in The Jakarta HTTP client, which looks excellent.
One thing I was judging Scheme environments on were the quality and maturity of their HTTP client API. I didn't find anything too exciting out there after being spoiled by LWP in the Perl world. I think the Jakarta HTTP library will be darn close to LWP and SXML will be a natural for what I'm planning on doing.
I'll keep you posted
Saturday, June 26, 2004
I think the only way I'm ever going to get into Emacs is to immerse myself in it, use it for my shell, ftp client, news and mail reader (although I'll still need Outlook at work, but maybe I can copy all my email in plaintext to a repository which remem could access). Remem might convince me to do just this, as it's real power would be to bring all those things together.
One significant challenge is that this will be under Windows, running cygwin. I carry a Windows XP system, it only makes since that I'd try to make it work there.
I'll let you know how it goes.
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
Also, maybe a Blogger account will increase my chances of a coveted Gmail invite.
Really though, from what I can see, Blogger has 95% of what I want in a blog, with a lot less work. I don't want my blog to be so much work.