Media, Technology, National Security, and more.

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Jane Jacobs, Urban Activist, Is Dead at 89 - New York Times

Jane Jacobs, Urban Activist, Is Dead at 89 - New York Times:

Jane Jacobs, the writer and thinker who brought penetrating eyes and ingenious insight to the sidewalk ballet of her own Greenwich Village street and came up with a book that challenged and changed the way people view cities, died today in Toronto, where she lived. She was 89.


'The Death and Life of Great American Cities' (1961)

'The Economy of Cities' (1969)

Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics (1992)

The Nature of Economies (2000)

Dark Age Ahead (2004)

She died at a Toronto hospital, said a distant cousin, Lucia Jacobs, who gave no specific cause of death. In her book "Death and Life of Great American Cities," written in 1961, Ms. Jacobs's enormous achievement was to transcend her own withering critique of 20th-century urban planning and propose radically new principles for rebuilding cities. At a time when both common and inspired wisdom called for bulldozing slums and opening up city space, Ms. Jacobs's prescription was ever more diversity, density and dynamism – in effect, to crowd people and activities together in a jumping, joyous urban jumble.



It's interesting that she lived in Toronto, a place that I associate with the some of the best architecture in the world, yet it's a very alive place, with focus on community.

Much the reverse of much of the United States. When I look at where I live, Maui, I think of Kihei as one long strip mall, where there's lots of condo's, then lots of shops, but much is separate. It doesn't seem to encourage community. Then I look at Haiku, a place where I think of it all community. It really is no better, but it has three major community attractors, and not much else. The energy gets concentrated - and that creates community.

I wonder what she would have thought of Prince Charles's Poundbury Village that seems to be one of the better thought out communities.

Good bye Jane - your influence was amazing!

Simpler and Cheaper Clean Coal Technology

Simpler and Cheaper Clean Coal TechnologyA Swedish utility is testing a process that could be far more practical than much touted gasification processes.


Gasification, in which coal is converted to a gaseous fuel, is the front-runner as next-generation technology for cleaner coal-fired power plants. Already, a number of utilities, including American Electric Power in the United States and RWE in Germany, are engineering large-scale gasification plants that would capture their carbon dioxide. But one major utility, Stockholm-based Vattenfall AB, is bucking the gasification trend. Last month, it finalized plans for a 40 million euro ($50 million) test of a simpler and potentially cheaper technology called oxyfuels.

- MIT Technology Review

It would be amazing if coal turned out to be the cheapest clean fuel. Solar, Wind, Hydro, GeoThermal, Wave Motion, and others probably don't have much to worry about where they are practical, but this would be great in cooler climates where they may be unavailable.

As far as I can tell, it seems that taking existing technologies and making them more efficient would be a good idea. GE has tackled Wind in a good way. They seem to want to dominate electricity production. That's fine, as far as it goes.

I would think we need to find a technology and financing story that can convince a utility to invest in new equipment when they haven't yet depreciated the existing stuff. I'm sure it's more than tax incentives. I don't know what's required, but who ever figures out the right mix would go a long way to saving the planet. (And probably the American way of life.)

If I were GE/Westinghouse I'd be putting together sales teams to evangelize state and local governments as well as utility companies. I hate the idea that we need to create separate generation companies (like we have on Maui). I just don't understand why it's not in a utility's interest to do it them selves?

Holographic Solar: A novel approach to concentrating sunlight could cut solar panel costs.

Holographic Solar: A novel approach to concentrating sunlight could cut solar panel costs.

By Prachi Patel-Predd

The main limitation of solar power right now is cost, because the crystalline silicon used to make most solar photovoltaic (PV) cells is very expensive. One approach to overcoming this cost factor is to concentrate light from the sun using mirrors or lenses, thereby reducing the total area of silicon needed to produce a given amount of electricity. But traditional light concentrators are bulky and unattractive -- less than ideal for use on suburban rooftops.

Now Prism Solar Technologies of Stone Ridge, NY, has developed a proof-of-concept solar module that uses holograms to concentrate light, possibly cutting the cost of solar modules by as much as 75 percent, making them competitive with electricity generated from fossil fuels. The new technology replaces unsightly concentrators with sleek flat panels laminated with holograms. The panels, says Rick Lewandowski, the company's president and CEO, are a "more elegant solution" to traditional concentrators, and can be installed on rooftops -- or even incorporated into windows and glass doors.

The system needs 25 to 85 percent less silicon than a crystalline silicon panel of comparable wattage, Lewandowski says, because the photovoltaic material need not cover the entire surface of a solar panel. Instead, the PV material is arranged in several rows. A layer of holograms -- laser-created patterns that diffract light -- directs light into a layer of glass where it continues to reflect off the inside surface of the glass until it finds its way to one of the strips of PV silicon. Reducing the PV material needed could bring down costs from about $4 per watt to $1.50 for crystalline silicon panels, he says.



Solar getting dramatically cheaper, that's a good thing!

Sunday, April 16, 2006

'Hip' hijab takes on Dutch prejudices | csmonitor.com


'Hip' hijab takes on Dutch prejudices | csmonitor.com: 'Hip' hijab takes on Dutch prejudices
A ban on head scarfs in school gym classes spawns the 'capster' and a small business.

SON EN BREUGEL, THE NETHERLANDS

In 1999, while seeking a graduate project idea at the Design Academy of Eindhoven, Cindy van den Bremen found a problem-solving opportunity.

The Dutch Commission of Equal Treatment had recently ruled that high schools could prohibit Muslim girls from wearing head coverings in gym class. Girls were advised to wear turtlenecks teamed with swim caps. But some were ignoring the sartorial advice, preferring instead to skip gym all together.

At about that time, the Dutch were beginning to become disillusioned with multiculturalism - a trend that was to intensify in the next few years with the death of maverick anti-immigrant politician Pim Fortuyn and the murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a radical Dutch Islamist.



Capsters

It's interesting that both cultures (Islamic/Dutch) are accepting modern design. Makes one wonder what all the fuss is about.

If I was a modern business leader, needing to be dressed formally all the time, I'd investigate Iranian fashion for men. It looks great.

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Triple Boot via BootCamp - OnMac.net Wiki

Triple Boot via BootCamp - OnMac.net Wiki: This procedure allows you to triple boot OSX, Windows XP and Linux. It has been sucessfully used to setup a macbook, but is untested on the imac/mini. Therefore if you try this you do so at your own risk.

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Protein burns fat, suppresses hunger | Science Blog

Protein burns fat, suppresses hunger | Science Blog: A team led by a Canadian researcher has discovered a process by which a small protein acts directly within muscles to increase the body's metabolism to burn fat while simultaneously suppressing appetite. These findings suggest that the protein, known as the ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF), could play a key role as a weight loss agent.



Perhaps Atkins and the Zone were right after all.

Women in the workforce | The importance of sex | Economist.com

Women in the workforce | The importance of sex | Economist.com
: A woman's world

What is clear is that in countries such as Japan, Germany and Italy, which are all troubled by the demographics of shrinking populations, far fewer women work than in America, let alone Sweden. If female labour-force participation in these countries rose to American levels, it would give a helpful boost to these countries' growth rates. Likewise, in developing countries where girls are less likely to go to school than boys, investing in education would deliver huge economic and social returns. Not only will educated women be more productive, but they will also bring up better educated and healthier children. More women in government could also boost economic growth: studies show that women are more likely to spend money on improving health, education, infrastructure and poverty and less likely to waste it on tanks and bombs.


Beverage Creates a Buzz - Los Angeles Times

Beverage Creates a Buzz - Los Angeles Times: Coca-Sek, bottled by a Colombian tribe, gets its kick from coca leaves. The not-so-soft drink has stirred debate about drugs and sovereignty.

By Chris Kraul, Times Staff Writer
April 12, 2006

INZA, Colombia – Call it the "Real Thing." Indians in this remote mountain village in southern Colombia are marketing a particularly refreshing soft drink that harks back to Coca-Cola's original formula, when "coca" was in the name for a reason.

Advertising posters here describe the carbonated, citrus-flavored Coca-Sek as "more than an energizer" – a buzz that just might be provided by a key ingredient, a syrup produced by boiling coca leaves.



Friends who've tried chewing coca leaves tell me that this isn't Cocaine, but it's quite pleasant, and loaded with vitamins' and minerals.

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Fries With That? - New York Times

Fries With That? - New York Times: Published: April 13, 2006

Sometimes it's all too easy to lose perspective in the modern world. On Tuesday, The Times reported that McDonald's has begun experimenting with a new way of routing menu orders at the drive-through window. The voice you hear at the squawk box comes not from an employee inside the restaurant but from a call center hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away. The order is then relayed to the front of the very restaurant where you are bodily present and filled as usual. A man who wants a Big N' Tasty in Wyoming and a woman who wants an Egg McMuffin in Honolulu may be placing their orders with the same teenager in California. Several customers, told of the fact, seemed taken aback.

And yet where is the surprise? There you sit, perhaps miles from home, idling in a car that was manufactured almost anywhere, burning gasoline refined from a substance pumped out of the ground who knows where and shipped, in all likelihood, across the ocean to be trucked to the station where you last filled up. Meanwhile you're talking to your best friend on your cellphone — and who knows how that works or where those signals go? — or listening to satellite radio beamed down from space. Yet what's really on your mind is the food they're getting together for you inside that McDonald's, made from cattle that once lived anywhere and potatoes that grew someplace else, all of it relayed from some way station in the McDonald's supply chain.

Yes, a long-distance call center for a drive-through window is something to marvel at. The real wonder is that the call center isn't in Bangalore.



Just in case you were thinking that you could work at McDonalds when your job is outsourced.

Red Ink Run Amok


Red Ink Run Amok: ...So Cooper, a conservative Democrat, had plenty of time to talk about one of the most secretive documents in Washington -- the official Financial Report of the United States Government.

Cooper, a member of the Budget Committee, had referred to the document several times during that panel's truncated debate on the budget resolution. Like many of the others in the room -- including the legislators -- I had no idea what he was talking about. So I went to inquire.



David Broder in the Washington Post wrote about the report above, I've added the link for the Report, as google is my friend.

Lot's of chart's and graph's to explain what's up.

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

With Big Boost From Sugar Cane, Brazil Is Satisfying Its Fuel Needs

With Big Boost From Sugar Cane, Brazil Is Satisfying Its Fuel Needs - New York Times: Already the use of ethanol, derived in Brazil from sugar cane, is so widespread that some gas stations have two sets of pumps, marked A for alcohol and G for gas.In his State of the Union address in January, Mr. Bush backed financing for "cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn but wood chips and stalks or switch grass" with the goal of making ethanol competitive in six years.



Wired News: Brazil Schools U.S. on Renewables: But in Brazil, they're far beyond the talking stage: Ethanol and biodiesel are already making significant contributions to the nation's trade surplus, boosting the country's economy and reducing its reliance on foreign oil. The South American scenario provides valuable lessons in how strong political will can spark domestic energy production.



Living on Maui where Sugar Cane production is our third largest industry, and gas is currently at $3.25 / Gallon, it would be nice to have an inexpensive alternative.

Monday, April 10, 2006

TPCSv8

TPCSv8:
KittenAuth is a new system for human-checking that forgoes all the useless random string crap that people cannot read, and replaces the whole lot with pictures of cute animals.The current 9*9 design displays 9 pictures and requires that the user clicks 3 pictures of kittens. The location of the kittens in the grid is random and to make things more fun the contents of the pictures changes too.



A bit more fun than most Catchpa's.

Sunday, April 09, 2006

Daily Kos: All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400

Daily Kos: All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400: All About NSA's and AT&T's Big Brother Machine, the Narus 6400 by bewert

Earlier today we found out that the EFF had sued AT&T over their secret work with the NSA on surveillance of millions of US citizens without wiretaps. We learned that paragraph 65 of this complaint shows EFF is trying to turn it into a nationwide Class Action suit covering all current and former customers (any after 9/2001) of AT&T. And we learned that a retired AT&T technician had stepped forward and disclosed the installation of secret NSA spy equipment in the San Francisco trunk facility. As well as the belief that similar equipment is in place in Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego.

Specifically, this equipment was the Narus ST-6400, a machine that was capable of monitoring over 622 Mbits/second in real time in May, 2000, and capturing anything that hits its' semantice (i.e. the meaning of the content) triggers. The latest generation is called NarusInsight, capable of monitoring 10 billion bits of data per second.
Follow me over the jump and let's learn some more about the private company Narus, it's founder Ovi Cohen, and board member Bill Crowell. Shall we?



This is a good overview of what the NSA has been using at every major switching point inside the United States. Really amazing when you start to think about it. I hope congress or the courts start to investigate.

Saturday, April 08, 2006

The New Yorker: Fact

The New Yorker: Fact: There is a growing conviction among members of the United States military, and in the international community, that President Bush's ultimate goal in the nuclear confrontation with Iran is regime change. Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged the reality of the Holocaust and said that Israel must be “wiped off the map.” Bush and others in the White House view him as a potential Adolf Hitler, a former senior intelligence official said. “That's the name they're using. They say, ‘Will Iran get a strategic weapon and threaten another world war?’”



Just as I start to think that the world has a chance, that the nation will send these guys packing, I see we are starting up again. Argh! Let's hope we survive.

Thursday, April 06, 2006

alphaWorks : IBM Toolkit for MPEG-4 : Overview

alphaWorks : IBM Toolkit for MPEG-4 : Overview: "IBM Toolkit for MPEG-4
A set of Java classes and APIs with five sample applications: three cross-platform playback applications and two tools for generating MPEG-4 content for use with MPEG-4-compliant devices.
"



If you don't have QuickTime, this is a fairly cool system. I tested some samples, and all went well.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006

Cartoons as Free Speech -- Written 2/7/06

The other day, I was asked about my views regarding the Danish and French Cartoons that have inflamed the Islamic world, I wasn't as clear as I should have been with my friend so I wrote the note below:

I generally prefer freedom of speech. There should be some limits, such as I don't accept the outing of an undercover agent, or disclosing military plans durring a time of war. Otherwise, I tend to agree with George Soros and the Open Society Institute.

That said, the cartoons were an incredibly stupid act at an incredibly stupid time. The newspapers that published them should be doing a mea culpa on the order of the NY Times with Jason Blair. They fired the low-level responsible parties, but everyone who saw it from the most senior editor on down should be fired, and the publisher should have to explain why this was allowed to continue. (Unless it is the perspective of the News Paper that Muslims and Islam is wrong, in which case the public should stop purchasing from them and advertisers should leave.)

We've seen where Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" got him a Fatwa of Death from the Ayatollah. Iran not exactly an open society. We would all condemn the New York times publishing a cartoon (like Nazi propaganda did) showing fat jewish bankers stealing from children. According to the New York Times: a small but vocal Muslim immigrant organization responded with a drawing on its Web site of Hitler in bed with Anne Frank. "Write this one in your diary, Anne," Hitler was shown as saying.

In my view, the real problem is that it was allowed to continue for as long as it did, without being challenged earlier by responsible individuals. Denmark and France have much bigger problems than a cartoon if this truly represents the readership of their respective major daily's.

Lúnasa

Enjoyed the Lúnasa www.lunasa.ie/home.php concert at the MACC last night - great band, just wished the front man would shut up and let the band play.

It's been a long time since I heard a great celtic band. It's funny to listen to Celtic Music in such a formal setting. I'm used to the various SF Celtic festivals where there is always space to dance in front of the stage.

Anyway, if you get a chance check them out - there music is like a water fall, incredibly brilliant.

Touch the Sound - written 2/2/06

Got to see "Touch the Sound" www.touch-the-sound.com at the MACC last night. It's about Evelyn Glennie, OBE www.evelyn.co.uk a UK percussionist who is also deaf. Must confess that when it started I thought what a self indulgent piece of crap. But over time I got to be really amazed and impressed. She's quite impressive with an interesting story, and rather amazing talent. It's worth your time.

Contagious obesity? Identifying the human adenoviruses that may make us fat

Found at www.scienceblog.com

There is a lot of good advice to help us avoid becoming obese, such as "Eat less," and "Exercise." But here's a new and surprising piece of advice based on a promising area of obesity research: "Wash your hands."

There is accumulating evidence that certain viruses may cause obesity, in essence making obesity contagious, according to Leah D. Whigham, the lead researcher in a new study, "Adipogenic potential of multiple human adenoviruses in vivo and in vitro in animals," in the January issue of the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology published by the American Physiological Society.

The study, by Whigham, Barbara A. Israel and Richard L. Atkinson, of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, found that the human adenovirus Ad-37 causes obesity in chickens. This finding builds on studies that two related viruses, Ad-36 and Ad-5, also cause obesity in animals.

Moreover, Ad-36 has been associated with human obesity, leading researchers to suspect that Ad-37 also may be implicated in human obesity. Whigham said more research is needed to find out if Ad-37 causes obesity in humans. One study was inconclusive, because only a handful of people showed evidence of infection with Ad-37 � not enough people to draw any conclusions, she said. Ad-37, Ad-36 and Ad-5 are part of a family of approximately 50 viruses known as human adenoviruses.

Researchers now must:

* identify the viruses that cause human obesity

* devise a screening test to identify people who are infected

* develop a vaccine


Screening test and vaccine still a long way off

The Whigham et al. study prompted an editorial in the same issue of AJP-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology by Frank Greenway, professor in the Department of Clinical Trials, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.

"If Ad-36 is responsible for a significant portion of human obesity, the logical therapeutic intervention would be to develop a vaccine to prevent future infections," Greenway wrote. "If a vaccine were to be developed, one would want to ensure that all the serotypes of human adenoviruses responsible for human obesity were covered in the vaccine."

"If one could predict the potential of an adenovirus to cause human obesity by using an in vitro assay or even by animal testing, screening of the approximately 50 human adenoviruses might be accelerated, shortening the time required for vaccine formulation," Greenway wrote. "Human antibody prevalence in obese and lean human populations appears to be the only reliable method to screen adenoviruses for their potential to cause obesity in humans at the present time," he noted.

Obesity contagion theory slow to catch on

The notion that viruses can cause obesity has been a contentious one among scientists, Whigham said. And yet, there is evidence that factors other than poor diet or lack of exercise may be at work in the obesity epidemic. "The prevalence of obesity has doubled in adults in the United States in the last 30 years and has tripled in children," the study noted. "With the exception of infectious diseases, no other chronic disease in history has spread so rapidly, and the etiological factors producing this epidemic have not been clearly identified."

"It makes people feel more comfortable to think that obesity stems from lack of control," Whigham said. "It's a big mental leap to think you can catch obesity." However, other diseases once thought to be the product of environmental factors are now known to stem from infectious agents. For example, ulcers were once thought to be the result of stress, but researchers eventually implicated bacteria, H. pylori, as a cause.

"The nearly simultaneous increase in the prevalence of obesity in most countries of the world is difficult to explain by changes in food intake and exercise alone, and suggest that adenoviruses could have contributed," the study said. "The role of adenoviruses in the worldwide epidemic of obesity is a critical question that demands additional research."

Ad-37 third virus implicated in animal obesity

The theory that viruses could play a part in obesity began a few decades ago when Nikhil Dhurandhar, now at Pennington Biomedical Research Center at LSU, noticed that chickens in India infected with the avian adenovirus SMAM-1 had significantly more fat than non-infected chickens. The discovery was intriguing because the explosion of human obesity, even in poor countries, has led to suspicions that overeating and lack of exercise weren't the only culprits in the rapidly widening human girth. Since then, Ad-36 has been found to be more prevalent in obese humans.

In the current study, Whigham et al. attempted to determine which adenoviruses (in addition to Ad-36 and Ad-5) might be associated with obesity in chickens. The animals were separated into four groups and exposed to either Ad-2, Ad-31, or Ad-37. There was also a control group that was not exposed to any of the viruses. The researchers measured food intake and tracked weight over three weeks before ending the experiment and measuring the chickens' visceral fat, total body fat, serum lipids, and viral antibodies.

Chickens inoculated with Ad-37 had much more visceral fat and body fat compared with the chickens infected with Ad-2, Ad-31 or the control group, even though they didn't eat any more. The Ad-37 group was also generally heavier compared to the other three groups, but the difference wasn't great enough to be significant by scientific standards.

The authors concluded that Ad-37 increases obesity in chickens, but Ad-2 and Ad-31 do not. "Ad-37 is the third human adenovirus to increase adiposity in animals, but not all adenoviruses produce obesity," the study concluded.

There is still much to learn about how these viruses work, Whigham said. "There are people and animals that get infected and don't get fat. We don't know why," she said. Among the possibilities: the virus hasn't been in the body long enough to produce the additional fat; or the virus creates a tendency to obesity that must be triggered by overeating, she said.

Mass screening for these viruses is impractical right now because there is no simple blood test available that would quickly identify exposure to a suspect virus, Whigham et al. said. More work is needed to develop such a test, Whigham said.

FreeCycle Maui

Just found out about FreeCycle, I'm going to post it's faq below, but it's about recycling and keeping stuff out of the landfill. It's a bit like craigslist, but no money changes hands - anywhere. www.freecycle.org

They've got a fairly simple, yet clever, system. They just create yahoo groups. There are over 154 people on Maui alone. You'll want to check it out, I'm sure you'll either find some stuff you want or be able to get rid of stuff you don't. Seems like a great idea.

*WHAT IS FREECYCLE(TM) ABOUT?

First, what Freecycle is NOT about.

Freecycle is NOT about giving only to the poor.

It is NOT about getting as much free stuff as we can.

It is NOT about getting things to earn money on the side.

It is NOT about getting rid of junk that would be better off in the landfill.

It is NOT about posting a "wish list" for expensive items and expecting a fairy godmother to fulfill it for us.

It is NOT a community bulletin board for finding rentals, dentists, mechanics, or advertising our businesses and services or special events.


What Freecycle IS about

Freecycle IS about keeping things out of the landfill.

It IS about giving away something that has no use in our life anymore to someone who could extend its usefulness a little longer.

It IS about giving gifts to people while clearing out our own clutter.

It IS about creating, building, and sustaining an environmentally aware community.

Offering Items We No Longer Need to Those Who Need Them

When we post an OFFER, we are offering to give someone a gift. It is up to us to give this gift to whoever we feel would be the best recipient. We are not obligated to give our gift to someone who is rich, poor, single, married, has no kids, has 1 kid, has 15 kids, has a car, doesn't have a car, or has a purple octopus named George living in their backyard. We can choose the most polite, the rudest, the funniest, or the shortest response to receive our gift. We can put their names in a hat and do a draw, or we can wave our magic fingers over our screens and pick one that way. We can choose the first, 3rd, or 53rd respondent. We can wait 24 hours and then decide. It is up to us.

Letting Other People Know What We Need

When we post a WANTED message, or respond to an offer, we are requesting a gift. The odds are that no one on this list will be able to give us what we are asking for. But sometimes somebody will see a WANTED for a bowling ball and go "AHA! I have one in my closet!" But, you know what? Just because we are rich, poor, single, married, have no kids, have 1 kid, have 15 kids, have a car, don't have a car, or have a purple octopus named George living in our backyard, does not mean we are more worthy of receiving a gift from a fellow Freecycle member than the average person living down the street.

Sending emails that don't say "please" or "thank you" are a way to not receive an item. Sending emails with nasty comments in them are one way to find ourselves in a bit of trouble.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN FREECYCLE

When you want to find a new home for something -- whether it's a chair, a fax machine, piano, or an old door -- you simply send an e-mail offering it to members of your Freecycle group.

Or, maybe you're looking to acquire something yourself. Simply respond to a member's offer, and you just might get it. After that, it's up to the giver to decide who receives the gift and to set up a pickup time for passing on the treasure. You can even post a Wanted message to the group because somebody might have just the exact thing you really need stored away in a closet.

One main rule: Everything posted must be free, legal, and appropriate for all ages.

YOU ARE BUILDING A COMMUNITY BY PARTICIPATING

We are part of a community. In every community, there are people who don't get along. And in most communities, when two people don't get along, they just avoid each other. To do that on Freecycle, all you have to do is set up a filter to send any email from someone you don't want to hear from straight into your trash bin. If you need help with that, let the moderators know and they can help you.

So, just remember: If you're offering a gift, it's up to you to decide who gets it.

And if you're requesting a gift...well, be patient. Your turn will come eventually, but if you're not careful your name could end up on a 'will not give to' list. You may want to try making an OFFER to the list, just to see how the process works. Look in your closet or in that box you haven't unpacked since you moved in two years ago. Prime stuff for Freecycle!

Above all - keep on keeping "stuff" out of the landfill!

If you have any comments or questions, please send them to MauiHIFreecycle-owner@yahoogroups.com

Thanks So Much!

You are a member of The Freecycle Network(TM) in Maui Hawaii.
It is affiliated with The Freecycle Network and can be verified by its link at www.freecycle.org. We appreciate your participation.

Bee Season - written 1/2/06

Saw the movie Bee Season last night at the MACC - part of the Maui Film Festival's First Light series - Very good movie.

Probably the best that I've ever seen of what happens when you initiate a person not ready to receive the teachings. It also was great in that it showed what's possible when your in god's will. And that there isn't an "appropriate" age to get involved when it's right. (No E-Ticket required).

If you get a chance - check it out - Richard Gere was good in this.

Hemp - From Culpeper's Herbal

I was talking with a friend recently about this and a De.lico.us reference showed up.

HEMP

This is so well known to every good housewife in the country, that I shall not need to write any description of it.

Time : It is sown in the very end of March, or beginning of April, and is ripe in August or September.

Government and virtues : It is a plant of Saturn, and good for something else, you see, than to make halters only. The seed of Hemp consumes wind, and by too much use thereof disperses it so much that it dries up the natural seed for procreation; yet, being boiled in milk and taken, helps such as have a hot dry cough. The Dutch make an emulsion out of the seed, and give it with good success to those that have the jaundice, especially in the beginning of the disease, if there be no ague accompanying it, for it opens obstructions of the gall, and causes digestion of choler. The emulsion or decoction of the seed stays lasks and continual fluxes, eases the cholic, and allays the troublesome humours in the bowels, and stays bleeding at the mouth, nose, or other places, some of the leaves, being fried with the blood of them that bleed, and so given them to eat. It is held very good to kill the worms in men or beasts; and the juice dropped into the ears kills worms in them; and draws forth earwigs, or other living creatures gotten into them. The decoction of the root allays inflammations of the head, or any other parts: the herb itself, or the distilled water thereof doth the like. The decoction of the root eases the pains of the gout, the hard humours of knots in the joints, the pains and shrinking of the sinews, and the pains of the hips. The fresh juice mixed with a little oil and butter, is good for any place that hath been burnt with fire, being thereto applied.

NewsVine.com

Saw a cool use of AJAX technology today - Newsvine.com - so far it's very fast w/ a cool UI for news and blog viewing.

If you can't get registered, send me your email address and I'll send you a bata invite - not sure how seriously they take the "beta" idea.

Not sure how I got invited.

What is self responsibility? -- Written 1/5/06

I was reading Richard Dawkins answer to the Edge question, what is your most dangerous idea? (prior blog posting)

His response was "when will we stop beating Faulty's car?", based on the tv show faulty towers.

I've always believed that with out skillful means, karma begat's karma, ie that when a father comes home drunk and beats his kid, that child will be damaged in some way. The common view is that we need to "get over it" and move on with our lives is as reasonable a sentiment as I've ever heard, but sometimes it just doesn't happen, no matter how much one works on oneself, some karma doesn't seem to be processed, and thus gets passed on in some way to one or more people.

Our prisons are filled, and we as a society listen to an accused person's story, attempt to find fact, and then a jury or a judge will pass sentence. We say take some responsibility for your actions, society must have revenge, or you must be away from us until you find a new way.

The one thing that we don't appear to have institutionalized is looking at our society and seeing if we played some part in the drama. Was this person covered as a child? Did they get all the opportunities we wish on our citizens? If not, why not?

If we changed in some (small) way, could this damage have been mitigated? Is this a victimless crime? Is the law in question based on some irrational moral system?

When I was taught management, I was told that all business failures were management failures. If that is so, why aren't at least some of societies failures a failure of society?

What's your most dangerous idea?

www.edge.org/q2006/q06_9.html


RICHARD DAWKINS
Evolutionary Biologist, Charles Simonyi Professor For The Understanding Of Science, Oxford University; Author, The Ancestor's Tale


Let's all stop beating Basil's car

Ask people why they support the death penalty or prolonged incarceration for serious crimes, and the reasons they give will usually involve retribution. There may be passing mention of deterrence or rehabilitation, but the surrounding rhetoric gives the game away. People want to kill a criminal as payback for the horrible things he did. Or they want to give "satisfaction' to the victims of the crime or their relatives. An especially warped and disgusting application of the flawed concept of retribution is Christian crucifixion as "atonement' for "sin'.

Retribution as a moral principle is incompatible with a scientific view of human behaviour. As scientists, we believe that human brains, though they may not work in the same way as man-made computers, are as surely governed by the laws of physics. When a computer malfunctions, we do not punish it. We track down the problem and fix it, usually by replacing a damaged component, either in hardware or software.

Basil Fawlty, British television's hotelier from hell created by the immortal John Cleese, was at the end of his tether when his car broke down and wouldn't start. He gave it fair warning, counted to three, gave it one more chance, and then acted. "Right! I warned you. You've had this coming to you!" He got out of the car, seized a tree branch and set about thrashing the car within an inch of its life. Of course we laugh at his irrationality. Instead of beating the car, we would investigate the problem. Is the carburettor flooded? Are the sparking plugs or distributor points damp? Has it simply run out of gas? Why do we not react in the same way to a defective man: a murderer, say, or a rapist? Why don't we laugh at a judge who punishes a criminal, just as heartily as we laugh at Basil Fawlty? Or at King Xerxes who, in 480 BC, sentenced the rough sea to 300 lashes for wrecking his bridge of ships? Isn't the murderer or the rapist just a machine with a defective component? Or a defective upbringing? Defective education? Defective genes?

Concepts like blame and responsibility are bandied about freely where human wrongdoers are concerned. When a child robs an old lady, should we blame the child himself or his parents? Or his school? Negligent social workers? In a court of law, feeble-mindedness is an accepted defence, as is insanity. Diminished responsibility is argued by the defence lawyer, who may also try to absolve his client of blame by pointing to his unhappy childhood, abuse by his father, or even unpropitious genes (not, so far as I am aware, unpropitious planetary conjunctions, though it wouldn't surprise me).

But doesn't a truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make nonsense of the very idea of responsibility, whether diminished or not? Any crime, however heinous, is in principle to be blamed on antecedent conditions acting through the accused's physiology, heredity and environment. Don't judicial hearings to decide questions of blame or diminished responsibility make as little sense for a faulty man as for a Fawlty car?

Why is it that we humans find it almost impossible to accept such conclusions? Why do we vent such visceral hatred on child murderers, or on thuggish vandals, when we should simply regard them as faulty units that need fixing or replacing? Presumably because mental constructs like blame and responsibility, indeed evil and good, are built into our brains by millennia of Darwinian evolution. Assigning blame and responsibility is an aspect of the useful fiction of intentional agents that we construct in our brains as a means of short-cutting a truer analysis of what is going on in the world in which we have to live. My dangerous idea is that we shall eventually grow out of all this and even learn to laugh at it, just as we laugh at Basil Fawlty when he beats his car. But I fear it is unlikely that I shall ever reach that level of enlightenment.

"Match Point" and "Matador" -- Written 12/31/05

Saw both of these last night at the Maui Film Festival's - First Light Screenings.

Liked both of them. Of the two Matador was the funniest, probably one of the funniest movies I've seen in a while - Greg Kinnear was lots of fun and Pierce Brosnan shows how good an actor he really is in his over the top performance. A very funny film.

"Match Point" - takes place in London, and is about what is required to climb the greasy pole and to stay there. Like Matador it's a dark film, with bits of humor thrown in. If your looking for a classic Woody Allen film, this isn't it, but if your looking for what he can do at the top of his game, well this is your film. Scarlett Johansson gives yet another brilliant performance. I hope she's able to work for years to come. It's quite an amusing send up of acting as well as a study of luck and human relations.

It's interesting that both films viewed luck being often more important than skill.

And both films showed Murder as a plausible way to solve one's problems. Not an idea I can support.

The New Monogamy

Saw this today, thought I'd put it up here.
From: http://www.newyorkmetro.com/lifestyle/sex/annual/2005/15063

The New Monogamy

Until death do us part—except every other Friday.

By Em & Lo

Claire is a pretty, 31-year-old Park Sloper who studies furniture design. Her husband, Alex, is a 32-year-old Web-design consultant with a fondness for floral shirts. He’s the center of attention at a party; she’s the one off to the side, seemingly aloof but really just shy. That’s why she was shocked when, more than a year into their relationship, she was the one who found herself attracted to someone else.

“I was totally confused, because I’d assumed that once I found ‘the one,’ I would be done with all that,” says Claire. “Going through all this was hard for us as a couple.” But when her husband subsequently got a crush of his own, she was more prepared. “Now that it was his turn, I was in a position to understand,” explains Claire. “So I told him, if he wanted to kiss her, that was okay—but I wanted to know about it, and I wanted that to be as far as things went without him talking to me first.”

For much of human history, monogamy (or, at least, presumed monogamy) has been the default setting for long-term love. Hack the system, goes the theory, refuse to forsake all others, open the door even a crack—and the whole relationship will crash. Any dissenters have been pathologized as delusional idealists or worse. But now a new generation of couples is employing a kind of homeopathic hypothesis: that a tiny injection of adventure will ward off the urge to stray further—as long as it’s all on the table and up for discussion. (And just as with homeopathy, a healthy percentage of the population considers this premise bunk.)

“I realized I really didn’t care what he did, I only cared how he felt,” says Claire. “So we spent many hours discussing our expectations and came up with a deal: Anything above the waist is okay, as long as we tell the other person. If it’s a problem, then we have to say so. And we’ll work it out.” So far, these negotiations have remained friendly. “I think the permission alleviates a lot of the stress of being with only one person for the rest of your life and makes us both feel lucky to have such an understanding partner.”

For years, we have said—to each other, to our boyfriends, to people writing in to our advice column—that monogamy is a choice, and if you expect it to come naturally, then your relationship (or your shot at one) is doomed. In other words, don’t take monogamy for granted; take the urge to stray for granted. But then again, our underlying assumption was that of course you’d choose monogamy, because what other choice was there? That’s what happily-ever-after requires. Although we may crave a fling on the side, the thought of our partner’s doing the same is heartbreaking, and so we agree to fidelity in order not to drive each other crazy.

But lately, these questions have become more than just theoretical. Em is engaged; Lo is in for the long haul with her fella. And we each recently began toying with the idea—independently of one another, and well before we were assigned this article—of arranging happy endings for our boyfriends at a Chinatown massage parlor, as a sort of gift in honor of long-term monogamy. Who knows where the idea came from? Was it something in the air? Pure generosity? Or a way to beta-test an idea? And could we go through with it? Probably, if we handled the arrangements, we agreed over a bottle of red one night at a Brooklyn wine bar. Naturally, we imagined the most clinical of hand jobs administered by wizened, grandmotherly ladies. But still, we took it as a sign of the times and of our evolution.

The idea of jimmying the lock on monogamy is not new, of course. Even before marriage made the leap from an institution designed to protect property to something a bit more intimate (and in recent decades, with the changes wrought by feminism, to a freely chosen option for women), early American communes like the Oneida Community, founded in 1848, advocated nonpossessive love and “complex” (i.e., nonexclusive) marriage. In the fifties, Kinsey’s researchers swapped spouses. And by the seventies, the more daring members of the divorce-slash-therapy generation were experimenting with the form: key parties, organized swinger communities, and—inspired by the 1972 book Open Marriage, by George and Nena O’Neill—sanctioned slutting around.

It never quite caught on, though, in part because the prospects of extramarital relationships (or even temptations) were so heavily skewed toward men, who had all the freedoms and fewer erotic prohibitions. These days, however, a woman is as likely as a man to attend a sales conference in Des Moines. E-mail, text messaging, and online porn and personals provide both men and women with privacy and virtual intimacy. Both sexes stay single longer, and variety is built into the way they think of their sex lives. The increasingly open gay community has dramatized the fact that there isn’t just one way to be two. Even evolutionary psychologists, once stalwarts of the men-cheat-women-cling school, are questioning whether females are innately monogamous. Perhaps this time around, seventies-style swinging and slutting will actually be feasible—and fair.

Or maybe people will just start talking about it more. Because in its mildest form, managed monogamy is nothing more than the ability to joke about temptation. Our friend Patrick is fond of introducing his wife, Anne, as “my first wife.” Ty and Lynn tease each other about their respective “work girlfriends and boyfriends.” Andrew and his fiancée, Heidi, browse online ads to stimulate role play—imagining three-ways in a manner that is sheerly theoretical, so far. And then there are the popular celebrity lists swapped between partners, like a dirty game of fantasy football.

“My fiancé and I each have a Hump Island,” says Karen, a 30-year-old editor. The idea being, which stars occupy their personal fantasy retreat? “The island has many iterations,” Karen explains. There’s Geriatric Hump Island (“for Robert Redford and Catherine Deneuve”), Lolita Hump Island (“That was for him, before Natalie Portman turned 18—I didn’t invite any young boys”), and Homo Hump Island (“He’s picked Elvis Costello, though I think it’s more of a man crush than an actual attraction”).

What all these lists have in common is that they’re not meant to be attainable—mutual friends are definitely not welcome on Karen’s Hump Island. And even if she should find herself behind a velvet rope with the Sundance Kid, she’s not supposed to really make a move.

However, not all couples keep the people around them out of the fantasy mix. Some freely scope men and women together—and a few go further. “My ex and I used to go to a bar and see who could start a conversation first,” says Kirk, a 32-year-old film editor. “It never went past flirting, but then we would go home and role-play the scenario. It always made for hot sex but never crossed the line of fantasy.”

Of course, the trick is to keep that line from moving. Which is exactly why neither of us mentioned the happy-ending idea to our boyfriends. Until now.

But let’s face it: Batting around hypotheticals is beginners’ stuff. “Before I met my boyfriend, I enjoyed nasty IMing and phone calls with a stranger I call my insignificant other,” says Diane, 30, a renovations project manager. When the couple got serious, they started negotiating and decided to be monogamous in physical acts only; they are still free to flirt, talk dirty on the phone, and share fantasies over IM. “As long as no one ends up actually making out with anyone else, it’s all fine.”

There are risks involved in such experiments, of course: Letting your partner talk dirty is one thing; reading the transcripts another. So for many, being more directly involved in the dalliances can be, ironically, the more comfortable choice. Take strip clubs. “On my boyfriend’s birthday,” says Melinda Gallagher, Club Cake founder and co-author of A Piece of Cake: Recipes for Female Sexual Pleasure, “I asked all the female Cake dancers to give him a collective lap dance. We are friends with the dancers, so it was cute and playful.” And the giving goes both ways: “I wouldn’t hesitate to get him a lap dance at a strip club, but he usually prefers to get them for me instead.”

If you’re partners in crime, it would seem, then there’s really no crime.

Jonathan, an attorney, and his wife of one year, Natalie, both 30, prefer to keep professionals out of it, but they too like both parties to be present. “We’re more a couple who does everything together than a couple with separate social lives,” says Jonathan, “and that’s not about to change because we’re talking about nookie.” They recently took part in an extended game of Truth or Dare, says Natalie. “It involved a lot of kissing and feeling up—boys on boys, girls on girls, all combinations—and me getting licked navel to throat by the hot 23-year-old girl across the table.”

Mike (42, writer) and Jessica (31, graphic designer) just celebrated their fourth anniversary. “When we first started dating, we talked about monogamy and how it seemed to create more problems than it solved,” says Mike. “So we decided we’d be open to new things, so long as we told each other everything and never did anything for the sake of the experience—we would only have sex when we were actually turned on.” They tested the waters by making out with people at clubs, and then a year or so later, had a three-way with a mutual friend. When that experience didn’t lead to jealousy, they agreed to “being open to other possibilities as they came along,” says Mike. Those “possibilities” have included, to date, make-out parties, more three-ways, a four-way (Jessica had sex with both members of the couple, Mike only with the other woman), and a full-blown orgy. They’ve even had the occasional licit one-night-stand independent of one another.

How free! How . . . polyamorous!

“We’re not polyamorous,” insists Mike—and in fact, every couple we spoke with said the same thing. “We don’t date other people, and we don’t have romantic relationships with our sex partners—though we’ve become close friends with some of them.”

If he sounds a bit defensive, it’s understandable. Because in most people’s imaginations, you’ve got on the one hand your earnest, hairy polyamorists (see San Francisco) and on the other, doughy, middle-aged swingers (see Minnesota or HBO). These are the bogeymen of today’s hipster open relationships—if we swing tonight, can a purple muumuu and a relocation west be far behind?

“What’s new here is not that couples are being nonmonogamous,” says Stephanie Coontz, professor of history and family studies at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, and author of Marriage: A History. “It’s that couples are negotiating the terms of their monogamy.” Of course, such negotiations can be as exhausting as cheating ever was; just ask anyone who’s tried to plan a “nontraditional” wedding. There’s something to be said for the well-worn path—it’s like a built-in referee. Sure, you might not agree with his calls, but at least he always has one.

“My dad’s a Presbyterian minister, so monogamy was always a very black-and-white concept,” says Stacey, a customer-service rep. But then a few years ago, two close family friends got divorced—not because they no longer loved each other but because they were attracted to other people. Stacey had herself been cheated on, so when she met Nate, her husband of more than a year, she told him that if he wanted to hook up with someone else, he should tell her. “I wanted a relationship strong enough for him to share his desires with me, even if those desires weren’t about me. Because what had really hurt in the past was not the indiscretions but that my partners had lied.”

Stacey and Nate married young, at least by New York standards: She was 24 and he 25. And neither of them has acted on their do-ask-do-tell policy. But Stacey finds the agreement a comfort nonetheless. “We know that relationships are always changing,” explains Stacey. “Our marriage means we’re going to stick together through those changes.”

Many straight couples struggling with these issues look to gay male friends, for whom a more fluid notion of commitment is practically the norm. William, a 34-year-old teacher, has been with his boyfriend, Dan, for more than five years. “We are totally closed for now,” insists William—but it’s not what you’re thinking. “It doesn’t rule out me making out with foreign boys against parked cars when Dan’s out of town.” Ah, semantics.

“Talking about my sexual adventures outside my relationship shocks my straight friends, then titillates them,” says William. “Until finally they recognize the permanence of my relationship and begin to reinterpret it all as healthy and evolved.” Exhibit A is William’s married friend Nick, who took notice and took action. “Being a spectator of Will’s easy-come-easy-go escapades, though recognizably self-destructive at times, inspired me to bring some casual lust to a vagina not belonging to my wife,” he explains over e-mail. He was able to finagle a swinging episode with another couple. “I can’t say that my wife and I would never try it again. Her getting off turns me on.”

Perhaps this time around, seventies-style swinging and slutting will actually be feasible—and fair.

Never let it be said that these new monogamists don’t know how to articulate their desires. In fact, their loquaciousness goes a long way toward explaining how and why they do it like they do: We’re living in an age of unprecedented emphasis on “communication” in relationships. (Yep, one more thing to blame on your shrink.) Thousands of books detail how couples should communicate their wants/needs/desires/pet peeves to one another. Not happy? Communicate your concerns. Bored with your sex life? Communicate your fantasies. Had an affair? Communicate your fuckup. The result of this communication-bingeing is that negotiation is starting to trump discretion. A man is copping a feel because his partner says he can, not because her back is turned. But he’s still copping a feel.

And then there are the couples who are copping more than a feel. The 33-year-old photographer Clayton James Cubitt (a.k.a. Siege, for C.J.) and his fiancée, Katie James, a 35-year-old makeup artist and photographer, met in Minneapolis in 1999. “I knew immediately that this was the woman I was meant to be with,” says Siege. “The woman I’d been growing toward my whole life, and there’s nothing else I need.” Well . . . almost nothing.

Because their relationship was long-distance, they started off as friends-with-benefits. During late-night calls, they swapped stories about their flings. “We would give each other little assignments,” says Siege. “Like, go off and do this, and send me a picture of it.”

When Siege moved to New York, he knew what he wanted. “I didn’t want to fuck it up,” says Siege, “but I knew I couldn’t do the fidelity thing.” A prior seven-year monogamous relationship had ended when they both cheated. Katie had also recently ended a seven-year relationship when she discovered her boyfriend was fooling around—with both women and men. “It hit me that humans aren’t meant to be with just one person,” she says. “It’s like, you have this best friend, and you want the best for him. So if he’s hot for that chick over there, you want to be like, ‘Yeah, go for it!’ ”

These two are open in every sense of the word: with each other, with everyone they meet, even with the public (Siege has a blog on Nerve.com to which he posts documentation of their escapades). When we requested an interview, Siege invited us to the Williamsburg apartment he shares with Katie. We both hesitated, then Em suggested a coffee shop two doors down instead. We’re usually fearless about nosing into people’s relationships, but knowing that this couple entertains guests on a more intimate basis threw us off balance. “What if they hit on us?” Em asked, insisting that she be the stenographer so Lo could handle the majority of the eye contact. “What if they don’t?” replied Lo.

It’s a response Siege and Katie are familiar with. “If you’re attracted to a friend, it’s like, are you going to skeeve them out?” says Siege. “But if you’re not, are you going to insult them?” Like George C. Scott reportedly once told an actress, “I apologize if I get an erection, and I apologize if I don’t.”

To our pleasant surprise, however, there is absolutely nothing skeevy about Siege and Katie. They’re smart, funny, polite, hip, attractive, self-deprecating, and affectionate with one another. And that’s the most disconcerting thing of all. Call us snobs, but it’s easy to dismiss suburban swingers who show up at orgies with a Tupperware container or Bay Area hippies missing the irony gene. But when a couple like Siege and Katie decry strict monogamy? It makes you wonder, How old-fashioned, socially programmed, and ass-backward am I?

These two can certainly teach most couples a thing or two about communication: They finish each other’s sentences and tease one another gently about the few times they’ve failed to follow their own simple yet strict rules. (1) The Vampire Rule: If they’re both in the same city, they have to make it back by dawn. (2) The Three-Strikes Rule: All pinch hitters must be interested in befriending both Siege and Katie (and vice versa); however, up to three solo dates are acceptable to warm someone up. (3) The Postcards Rule: If they’re seeing someone else on their own, they must bring home photographic evidence. (4) The Woman-Only Rule: Katie is bisexual, Siege is not—thus, for pinch hitters to meet rule No. 2, they must be female. (5) The Veto Rule: for Katie’s benefit, allowing her to rule out potential home-wreckers. (6) The Safety Rule: What some couples call “body-fluid monogamy,” i.e., always use condoms when having sex with a third . . . or a fourth . . . or a fifth . . .

Above and beyond the rules, what makes their relationship work, say Siege and Katie, is that they’re a team, and that comes before anything (hence the Three-Strikes Rule). In fact, this idea of working together came up repeatedly with couples who have tweaked monogamy: Part of the appeal, it seems, is a sort of “us against the world” vibe. More than one couple referred to their additional partners as living, breathing sex toys.

After about an hour of enlightened coffee-shop conversation, even we started coming round to their way of thinking. Now ashamed of our own measly massage-parlor schemes, we started seeing ourselves as sexual Neanderthals introduced to the advanced civilization of lust. But then Katie said something that jolted us out of our daydreams:

“Sometimes we’ll go for months when it’s just the two of us. But if I just happen to be busy or not in the mood, then I’m not going to stop him. For example, the other night I had a bunch of work to do, so when Siege brought a new girl home, I stayed in the bedroom while they took a bath. I walked past and just said hi.”

Em typed away without skipping a beat and Lo nodded professionally, as if to say, “Ah, yes, you simply popped your head in politely, as one is wont to do when one finds one’s boyfriend screwing a total stranger in one’s bathtub.” What?! We kicked each other under the table—our previously worked-out, intricate signal for “Holy crap!” We were no longer wondering whether we got it; we now knew for sure. We didn’t. No matter how appealing the spokespeople, there are some things that will just never compute for your average (i.e., occasionally insecure or jealous) couple. There is no way not to admire Siege and Katie, but there is an otherworldly quality to their relationship—talking to them brings on a slight feeling of disconnect, not unlike walking into your local bar and spotting a celebrity.

If Katie and Siege have taken their nonmonogamy to the extreme, perhaps it’s because they fit a pattern we saw emerge in our research: The most smooth-running nontraditional relationships, it seems, comprise a straight man and a bisexual woman who’s not particularly interested in men besides her No. 1 guy. “I wish I were bi,” says Siege. “It’d make things easier. But it’s like this island of old-fashionedness in my brain—I just don’t want her messing around with other guys. Because I don’t find men attractive, my only instinct would be to punch them.”

In fact, it’s rare to find hetero couples where the guy is willing to entertain even fantasies involving other men. Christen, a 33-year-old performance artist, says that neither she nor her husband are “conventionally straight,” so they ogle men and women together—like “pretty boy Mig from Rock Star: INXS.” But we found that male-female couples like this are few and far between.

It’s impossible to isolate a single explanation, but we’ll take a shot: Maybe women really are more sexually fluid than men—or their sexuality is simply more socially malleable. Or maybe this is just a particular brand of bisexuality; most of the women we spoke with said they are sexually, but not romantically, attracted to other women. And maybe this is a good thing, a sign that girls have more options, more pleasure, more of an experimental nature, more freedom overall. Or there’s the negative interpretation: Perhaps this is all a performance to turn guys on, Girls Gone Wild Gone Nonmonogamous. It could be that sexually speaking, women are just not taken seriously: Hot, yes, but as sex toys, not real romantic threats. (Who could trump the mighty penis?) As two women about to embark on what we hope will be lifelong commitments, we’re left wondering: Has the bar suddenly been raised? Is female bisexuality the latest way to be the perfect girlfriend?

Which is not to say that women don’t also crave a variety of male partners: “A woman needs to feel potent, too,” says Mia, a 32-year-old CFO. “She needs to know men want her. It fuels her fantasies. It makes her feel alive.” The problem is, it’s rare to find a man willing to negotiate these options. Thus, a hetero woman is more likely to be nonmonogamous in a don’t-ask-don’t-tell set-up such as the 50-Mile Rule (don’t sleep with anyone who lives in your city) or to simply cheat. “Before Tom and I were engaged,” says Mia, “I could leave town and end up in bed with an entire soccer team and he’d never know. And he was always smart enough not to ask.” But once they got engaged, Mia reined it in, figuring they had an unspoken agreement that marriage meant monogamy. Still, her urges lingered. “I did consider fooling around for one last hurrah before I tied the knot, but, alas, a good opportunity never presented itself.”


What happens if one partner wants to fantasize about a three-way, and the other wants to have one with the hot bassist next door?

When partners reject the cult of communication this way, the built-in dishonesty can wreck things right off. “My last boyfriend said he didn’t want to take away my freedom, so I could fuck around so long as it wasn’t with his friends and we didn’t talk about it,” says Sarah, a 26-year-old proofreader. “But he’s a musician, very good-looking and charismatic, and always on tour: He was just protecting his own freedom.” Sarah engaged in her own extracurricular activities, more than she thinks he expected. “I wished we could have been an ethically nonmonogamous couple, but how could I present myself to other guys as an ethical slut when our policy was ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’? I wanted to talk to him about the guys, and I wanted to know what he was doing on tour, but he wouldn’t go there.” They soon split up.

These types of conundrums don’t affect only straight couples. When lesbians Gillian (32, producer) and Kiki (28, psychiatric social worker) met three years ago, Gillian, like many people considering an open relationship, was getting over a cheating ex. Gillian suggested nonmonogamy, and though Kiki was shocked and slightly offended at first, she acquiesced. “I figured that this way, I would get honesty,” says Gillian. But a year in, Kiki hit it off with Susan, a woman with whom they’d had a three-way. Kiki fell in love with the pinch hitter, and the two dated monogamously for a year until Kiki cheated again . . . with Gillian, her ex.

Now Kiki’s got a brand-new serious girlfriend, and they are contemplating a three-way: “We’re going to pick someone that neither of us thinks we could wind up falling in love with,” says Kiki. “Someone a little bit slutty who won’t get attached to us.” Meanwhile, Gillian is single and is done with any kind of open relationship. “I’ve learned that I’m strictly a one-woman woman.”

A similar split comes up in a new documentary out this month in New York called Three of Hearts: A Postmodern Family, about a “trinogamous” threesome comprising two men—Sam and Steven—and one straight woman, Samantha. Living in the city, they marry (well, two marry, all three have a commitment ceremony), they sleep and have sex with each other in one bed, and they have two children—one by each man—over the course of their eight-year relationship. But like many attempted Utopias—which is what any form of monogamy could be considered—it falls apart when Steven declares that he’s not happy and can’t live a life that he feels was always Sam’s idea.

It’s way too soon to tell if managed monogamy is any more effective than its stringent cousin at keeping couples happy for the long haul. Even if people can do it, that doesn’t guarantee them eternal love: Is the open relationship really about freedom, or is it about competition, wishful thinking, controlling cheating, rebelliousness for the sake of being different, or passive-aggressive punishment?

But then, the same could be said of monogamy, which can derive from equally suspect motives. Maybe it’s not sex that makes or breaks a couple, after all; maybe it’s the couple’s willingness to change their minds about what fidelity means. We met many strictly monogamous couples who have no interest in any kind of openness, ever—a high proportion refused to even discuss the subject, with their partner or us. But, remarkably, we didn’t find a single open (or openish) couple who weren’t amenable to being (more) monogamous in the future. “An open relationship doesn’t just mean you’re open to sex with other people,” says Siege. “It means you’re open to changes in the relationship, too.” Over and over, couples told us that their goal is less about sex than it is about wanting a relationship that will bend with pressure, rather than break. “It’s like being held together with an elastic band instead of a ball and chain,” says Bob, a 50-year-old married animation director open to the notion of sanctioned affairs.

Seven years ago, when we were in our twenties, single, and working at Nerve.com, we would proofread sex memoirist Lisa Carver’s diaries and gasp at how “out there” she was, making out with a girlfriend at a party and then calling her husband to tell him how it went. For us and our imaginary future husbands, it was out of the question. We were knee-jerk monogamists who had never been in, or witnessed, an open relationship that worked. Now, with real-life future husbands and decades of monogamy stretched out before us, Lisa’s stunt is neither particularly shocking nor out of the question.

For years, we’ve joked that all sex advice really boils down to is “communicate, communicate, communicate.” Meeting the nonmonogamists did confirm this, in a way—because when, during the course of writing this article, we finally fessed up to our partners about the massage-parlor idea, we realized that doing so was the beginning of a long conversation, about what it means to be together, about variety, about the way we see sex now. (And, as it turned out, Em’s fiancé wasn’t even particularly interested in the idea, especially once it came with a permission slip.) For us—and for many of the couples we spoke with—all this talk about nonmonogamy is, essentially, talk about monogamy. It’s certainly a lot more challenging than learning a new position in bed.

These conversations are far from innocuous, however. What happens if one partner wants to fantasize about a three-way, and the other wants to have one, next weekend, with the hot bassist next door? Once you’ve jointly questioned the conventional wisdom and then balk, it’s not society saying no to the candy—it’s you. The most well-adjusted nonmonogamists we found were those who could acknowledge that what they’re both comfortable with today may freak out either of them tomorrow.

As for us, we’re still monogamists at heart, for now, though we’ve learned not to take that for granted—because we discovered that despite all our preaching, we had, in fact, been taking monogamy for granted. And we think we’ve learned to stop poking fun at all those crazy swingers, too. After all, there’s more than one way to a happy ending.

Managed Monogamy


Above-the-waist rule An agreement that any touching above the beltline is fair game.

Body-fluid monogamy When a couple forgoes the latex with each other but requires it for all outside sexual activity.

Celebrity trading card As seen on Friends: an imaginary laminated card in your wallet—proof that your partner has given permission for you to sleep with the stars listed.

Cheating Secret, extracurricular romantic and/or sexual activity that breaks the rules. So nineties, so lame.

Closed relationship How some people in open relationships refer to “old-fashioned” monogamy.

Don’t ask, don’t tell A policy whereby people in a committed relationship may screw around, so long as they are discreet.

Ethical slut A promiscuous person who strives to approach partners with respect and honesty. (From the 1997 how-to book by Dossie Easton and Catherine A. Liszt.)

Fifty-mile rule You don’t sleep with anyone who lives in your city. (Also the title of a 2002 book by Judith Brandt.)

Make-out party Events open to the public where semi-nudity and above-the-waist fondling are encouraged.

Open flirting policy An understanding that flirting is healthy, harmless fun.

Open relationship A long-term, committed relationship in which the couple explicitly agrees to extracurricular sexual activity, either together or individually.

Party bisexual A woman or a man who engages in same-sex sex-play after multiple martinis.

Pinch hitter Someone a couple brings in to spice up their love life, e.g., to watch them have sex or to get together with one-half of the couple while the partner watches.

Physical monogamy You can look, fantasize, and engage in dirty talk— but no touching.

Polyamory A philosophy of being involved with multiple long-term, intimate partners.

Polyfidelity Having more than one long-term partner but being closed to additions, e.g. trinogamy (see below).

Polygamy Multiple spouses.

Swinging

Partner-swapping. Sometimes referred to as “the Lifestyle.”

Trinogamous

To be in a committed threesome.

Work boyfriend/girlfriend A colleague —your lunchmate, IM partner, smoking buddy, etc. No sex, though.

Links referenced within this article

Em & Lo

Violet Blue's comments on 2257 and Tribe -- written 12/16/05

Violet Blue's comments on 2257 and Tribe

If you haven't read it yet, it's a great post. She talks about how Tribe is imposing censorship on it's self and Members w/o being asked to by the government. She has changed my point of view.

I had originally thought when I first heard about Tribe's 2257 changes that, OK, they are a startup business, trying to get by w/o being hasseled, as they have better things to do, like get profitable.

But thinking about Tribe's ownership, (major media companies), I'm coming around to the idea that they are caving to preasure, rather than trying to establish new ways to determine community standards.

I should probably post this in Tribe ideas, but I think there should be a way to allow the community to vote for/against all content, with some standard such as a minimum of 25 votes (or 33% tribe membership - which ever is smaller), and a minimum voting period of 48 hours. (As long as community 75% supports something, it should be kept, as long as 50% support it, it should be shown only to "Mature" members.

Pictures (and other Media) should be certified to be 2257 compliant, and owned by the poster. Technical means should be simple to implement to support this. Tribe should also auto delete all pictures/media posted by members who terminate.

I would hope Tribe and it's corporate owners would try to be on the forefront of Free Speech. That's what I would hope Tribe is all about.

The Libertine - 12/15/06

Saw "the Libertine" www.thelibertine-movie.com this evening at the Maui Film Festival - Johnny Depp's performance reminded me in places of Freddy Mercury. I really liked the move, including Samantha Morton's performance, but I kept thinking, I hate this cinematographer, and thus I probably hate the director. Great performances, but not for the faint of heart - John Wilmot appears to have died of late stage STD(s) - it's very graphic.

Johnny Depp, John Malkovich and Samantha Morton star in this period costume drama about the second Earl of Rochester, John Wilmot, a notorious figure in 17th century Europe, well-respected as a poet and author, who also earned no small degree of gossip for his freewheeling sex life and appetite for decadence. Rated R. 114 min. (The Weinstein Company)

SBIR Workshop last Wednesday -- written 12/12/05

Got to meet with agency representatives, including the MDA (Missile Defense Agency) the folks I've submitted a proposal to.

Also spoke with Robert Hunter - a professional proposal writer - who read my MDA proposal and gave me some feedback. He said that he liked what I wrote, but that my work plan was an engineer's plan, and was too short, that I should write more like a scientist - saying that we'll do this, and test, what results we expect, what we'll do if we don't get them, and such.

The MDA folks said that they were fixing the MDA process, and that its broken at the moment. They asked me what kind of feedback I would like. I said "YES" would be nice.

My proposal is on MDA 05-053 a XML database that uses P2P technology to keep all the notes up to date. If anyone is interested in reading it, drop me a note. I should have an answer in a week or two from them. (4/4/06 - didn't fund it)

I think it's a good project as it could fit in nicely with today's fad AJAX. It would also help those who wish to make geographically distributed websites.

Anyway, wish me luck!

Google Passed on me - Written 12/9/05 amended 4/4/06

Interviewed w/ Google last Friday, 45 minute interviews starting at 10:15 going on until 3PM, with a lunch break. Met with either one or two people each time.

Google's recruiter recommended looking at www.topcoder.com/index before the phone screen. She also recommended looking at labs.google.com to see what they do beyond search. It was useful advice. I would add that reading some of the papers at labs.google.com will help a bit.

I found most of the questions that I knew to be easy and fairly elementary (if you've got experience). It's worth rereading an algorithms book to review.

That said, I think that the stuff I failed on was equally easy, I just didn't know it, hadn't been exposed, or had forgotten. I was interviewing for a position on their Mac team. I failed on some simple objective-C/foundation questions that if I had done an in depth project, I'd have gotten right. (Opposed to the simple stuff I've done). (4/4/06 - in fact when I reread Apple's Obj-C documentation, I found answers to the first two bad questions immediately.) Just know the area that your going in for cold. (I should have). Writing a simple application the week or two before the interview probably would have sufficed. (Also, I would have been able to give them that for their source code request.)

The first interview was opened with questions on objective-C/foundation that I couldn't answer. It didn't pickup. The next interview went well. But I think it was over from the start. (4/4/06 - I had decided to do the interviews w/o caffeine - then when things started going the other way, I went with a TeJava between interviews. I was fairly wired by the end of the day. So I didn't have any imagination when that would have helped. -- Very smart people, very friendly.)

I did have one interview where I had a brain freeze. The interviewer opened with what was a fairly simple question, but I just couldn't see an answer - we never got far beyond that. I was fine for the next person.

The way I explain the process to friends w/ degrees is imagine doing your oral's on a subject your an expert in, but haven't studied the fundamentals in over 30 years.

Overall feedback (4/4/06 from them): Good breadth of knowledge, but not enough depth. I found that fair. I usually have the depth when I'm on a project, but I haven't been on the right kind of project for over three years. Sigh.

(4/4/06 - When I think about how Google interviews vs. how I do, I really think they need to relax a bit, my goal when I do an interview is to find out something I didn't know before, with Google, I felt that I was being quizzed constantly. The best interview was the phone screen. I felt it was a conversation. The campus interview, I felt I was defense constantly. Probably 'caus I didn't know the answer to the first question.

I plan to change my interviews to add skills questions, 'caus I saw where that could be helpful. I did prefer the Google interviews to Microsoft's random word games. MS folks ask leading questions, and can't recognize if you've answered it correctly, but just differently from the "standard" answer. Google's questions were fairly objective, and folks were smart enough to recognize unique answers. One questions was to write a binary search - easy, I've written it so many times before it joined the "C" library it's kind of ingrained. Another was to write a routine to divide two numbers, it was a fun question - even though I didn't have a clue what the standard was. I was told that my solution was "refreshing", and the interviewer was smart enough to recognize a small bug I had in it.

Do wish I had been a bit calmer when I was there, I might have gotten another interview.)

Depressed? Swim with dolphins

Paris - Taking a dip with dolphins can be a tremendous therapy for people with depression, according to a study published on Saturday in the weekly British Medical Journal (BMJ).

Nature lovers - biophiles, to give them their scientific name - have long argued that interaction with animals can soothe a troubled mind but this claim has always been anecdotal, lacking the scientific data to back it up.

Seeking to find out more, psychiatrists Christian Antonioli and Michael Reveley at Britain's University of Leicester, recruited 30 people in the United States and Honduras who had been diagnosed with mild or moderate depression.

The severity of their symptoms was calculated according to established yardsticks for mental health, the Hamilton and Beck scales, which are based on interviews and questionnaires with the patient.

No antidepressants

The volunteers were required to stop taking any antidepressant drugs and psychotherapy for four weeks.

Half of the group was then randomly selected to play, snorkel and take care of dolphins each day at an institute for marine sciences in Honduras.

The other half was assigned to a programme of outdoor activities, also at the institute, that included swimming and snorkelling at a coral reef, but without the dolphins.

Two weeks later, both groups had improved, but especially so among patients who had been swimming with the dolphins.

Measurable symptoms of depression in the dolphin group had fallen by half and by two-thirds according to the two scales - twice as much as in the non-dolphin group.

In addition, a self-rating measurement of anxiety symptoms, the Zung scale, found a fall of more than 20% among the dolphin group, compared with a decline of 11% among the non-dolphin groups.

"To the best of our knowledge, this is the first randomised, single blind, controlled trial of animal-facilitated therapy with dolphins," say Antonioli and Reveley.

"The effects exerted by the animals were significantly greater than those of just the natural setting. The echolocation system, the aesthetic value, and the emotions raised by the interaction with dolphins may explain the mammals' healing properties."

Life has been good - written 11/25/05

The last few weeks have been great! I've have enough work. I've had some of the best interviews in my life. I had a great audition last night.

Life seems great at the moment.

It's not without faults, but things are definitely looking up.

SinceSlicedBread - written 11/17/05

The Service Employees Union is looking for ideas to help the country. They are offering a prize of $100,000 for the best one. www.SinceSlicedBread.com

My post is:

Tax money leaving the country
Submitted by Les V. in Hawaii
Americans invest everywhere in the world, but only investments in America provide a multiplier effect to the economy.

Those who chose to move their money out of the U.S. should be charged a 45% surcharge as their $'s won't be providing that multiplier. Of course foreign nationals should be able to remove their money with a minimum of taxes so that they continue to invest in our country. This should apply to individuals, businesses, and funds. Alas, it's too late to apply to all products, like the founding fathers suggested, but it should apply to any transfer of funds greater than $15,000 / year. (So foreign travel is still possible)

I would expect that this would discourage capitol flight, and provide jobs for americans.

Letter to Warner Brothers: A Night in Casablanca by Groucho Marx

Abstract: While preparing to film a movie entitled A Night in Casablanca, the Marx brothers received a letter from Warner Bros. threatening legal action if they did not change the film’s title. Warner Bros. deemed the film’s title too similar to their own Casablanca, released almost five years earlier in 1942, with Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. In response Groucho Marx dispatched the following letter to the studio’s legal department:

Dear Warner Brothers,

Apparently there is more than one way of conquering a city and holding it as your own. For example, up to the time that we contemplated making this picture, I had no idea that the city of Casablanca belonged exclusively to Warner Brothers. However, it was only a few days after our announcement appeared that we received your long, ominous legal document warning us not to use the name Casablanca.

It seems that in 1471, Ferdinand Balboa Warner, your great-great-grandfather, while looking for a shortcut to the city of Burbank, had stumbled on the shores of Africa and, raising his alpenstock (which he later turned in for a hundred shares of common), named it Casablanca.

I just don’t understand your attitude. Even if you plan on releasing your picture, I am sure that the average movie fan could learn in time to distinguish between Ingrid Bergman and Harpo. I don’t know whether I could, but I certainly would like to try.

You claim that you own Casablanca and that no one else can use that name without permission. What about “Warner Brothers”? Do you own that too? You probably have the right to use the name Warner, but what about the name Brothers? Professionally, we were brothers long before you were. We were touring the sticks as the Marx Brothers when Vitaphone was still a gleam in the inventor’s eye, and even before there had been other brothers—the Smith Brothers; the Brothers Karamazov; Dan Brothers, an outfielder with Detroit; and “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?” (This was originally “Brothers, Can You Spare a Dime?” but this was spreading a dime pretty thin, so they threw out one brother, gave all the money to the other one, and whittled it down to “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?”)

Now Jack, how about you? Do you maintain that yours is an original name? Well it’s not. It was used long before you were born. Offhand, I can think of two Jacks—Jack of “Jack and the Beanstalk,” and Jack the Ripper, who cut quite a figure in his day.

As for you, Harry, you probably sign your checks sure in the belief that you are the first Harry of all time and that all other Harrys are impostors. I can think of two Harrys that preceded you. There was Lighthouse Harry of Revolutionary fame and a Harry Appelbaum who lived on the corner of 93rd Street and Lexington Avenue. Unfortunately, Appelbaum wasn’t too well-known. The last I heard of him, he was selling neckties at Weber and Heilbroner.

Now about the Burbank studio. I believe this is what you brothers call your place. Old man Burbank is gone. Perhaps you remember him. He was a great man in a garden. His wife often said Luther had ten green thumbs. What a witty woman she must have been! Burbank was the wizard who crossed all those fruits and vegetables until he had the poor plants in such confused and jittery condition that they could never decide whether to enter the dining room on the meat platter or the dessert dish.

This is pure conjecture, of course, but who knows—perhaps Burbank’s survivors aren’t too happy with the fact that a plant that grinds out pictures on a quota settled in their town, appropriated Burbank’s name and uses it as a front for their films. It is even possible that the Burbank family is prouder of the potato produced by the old man than they are of the fact that your studio emerged “Casablanca” or even “Gold Diggers of 1931.”

This all seems to add up to a pretty bitter tirade, but I assure you it’s not meant to. I love Warners. Some of my best friends are Warner Brothers. It is even possible that I am doing you an injustice and that you, yourselves, know nothing about this dog-in-the-Wanger attitude. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to discover that the heads of your legal department are unaware of this absurd dispute, for I am acquainted with many of them and they are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits and a love of their fellow man that out-Saroyans Saroyan.

I have a hunch that his attempt to prevent us from using the title is the brainchild of some ferret-faced shyster, serving a brief apprenticeship in your legal department. I know the type well—hot out of law school, hungry for success, and too ambitious to follow the natural laws of promotion. This bar sinister probably needled your attorneys, most of whom are fine fellows with curly black hair, double-breasted suits, etc., into attempting to enjoin us. Well, he won’t get away with it! We’ll fight him to the highest court! No pasty-faced legal adventurer is going to cause bad blood between the Warners and the Marxes. We are all brothers under the skin, and we’ll remain friends till the last reel of “A Night in Casablanca” goes tumbling over the spool.


Sincerely,

Groucho Marx

Unamused, Warner Bros. requested that the Marx Brothers at least outline the premise of their film. Groucho responded with an utterly ridiculous storyline, and, sure enough, received another stern letter requesting clarification. He obliged and went on to describe a plot even more preposterous than the first, claiming that he, Groucho, would be playing “Bordello, the sweetheart of Humphrey Bogart.” No doubt exasperated, Warner Bros. did not respond. A Night in Casablanca was released in 1946.

Social Cluelessnes -- written 10/8/05

Once again I had a day exciting social cluelessness. It doesn't happen very often, but when it does, I get to feel all my emotions go off at once.

Happy, Sad, Excited, Alone, Joyous, and Angry. Fear and aggression. And many more conflicting emotions.

You'd think at 47, I'd know how to interact w/ the opposite sex, how to at least take some action towards making a friend, or more... But I don't.

I was staring at the tattoo of a waitress's/Barista's back Midrift, she turns around, bends over, giving me a look at her breasts, while also being able to see her smiling face. She say's she's forgotten my name, I introduce my self, she tells me her name, we haven't actually exchanged names before, I would have remembered, then shake hands. I find my self excited. But now what, I got sit down, read, and wait for my food. Wondering, what she felt, was that on purpose, or is that her effect on everyone? What could/should I have done? Should I have done something at all? Seems like a huge difference in age... Chichereo at it's finest. Argh!

Later that night, after going to the movie "The Aristocrats", (Great movie BTW), I take some friends back to their cars at Manana Garage, I stop try to see if I recognize three women walking, one of them says hi to me by name, it's dark, I have no clue who they are, part of me wants to go in and find out, the other part tells me that I was going home, to just proceed on my way. Which is what I do. I had thought about going dancing, but I forgot to bring extra $'s, it's raining heavily, and I don't go out.

There was yet another, but I need to leave it out. All this yesterday.

I used to call it "deftly ignoring", as I didn't even recognize that something might be going on until after I was in a new situation, but these days, I often recognize it, but I'm still paralyzed, and without a clue what to do next. I guess, in a sense, I have a hard time believing that anyone would be attracted to me.

I watch the same patterns develop, attraction, happiness, to revulsion and anger.

My accupuncturist died... -- Written 10/6/05

It's odd, you never know where you'll take effect. My acupuncturist Av? Nagy died over the weekend of a heart attack. I saw her on Friday at Beyond Reality, and while she seemed a bit slow, she also was alive. I had seen her a few weeks earlier at Little Beach. She always seemed to be enjoying herself, always a smile on her face.

I meditated for an hour when I heard and it lifted, but here I am three days later, still thinking about it. It wasn't like we socialized, typically we just ran into each other at the same gatherings, I liked her, knew her teacher, we had some friends in common. Still, it's odd how effected I am.

Mortality I guess, death gets us to look at our own life.

Thinking about this post, perhaps I'll rename the blog, "Downers I have known". :)

Corruption in Government - written 9/29/05

I think we can all agree at this point that both parties have had a
long history of helping themselves to the public trough. I wonder if
it would be an appropriate time to come up with ideas to clear that.

I'll go first, I favor a market based, carrot and stick approach:

1. We raise the Presidents salary to $1M / Yr, and tie it to some
appropriate average of fortune 500 compensation.

2. We raise a Senator's salary to $600k / Yr, and tie it to a similar measure.

3. We raise a congressman's salary to $500k / yr in a similar fashion.

4. We raise all cabinet rank positions to match Senators.

5. All SES positions can go as high as a Member of Congress's.

6. We eliminate the pension and health care (My original idea was kill) of anyone SES or above convicted (or censured by either the Senate or Congress) of corruption charges.

My goal was to make the pay more equivalent to commercial jobs. I
was trying for a mid range # for guys with ability. If I could have
figured out some kind of Merit pay system for them, then I would
have. (Alas, I'm not that smart)

The Social Justice crowd, (of which I'll often put a foot in their
camp), is part of the problem, at some point, we got it into our head
that Government employees were paid too much, and shouldn't have
their pay reach market levels.

A Supreme Court justice makes somewhere between $156k-$176k or so.
These are supposed to be the top attorneys in the land. Yet, in
private practice, a mediocre attorney can earn $1M / year.

A CEO of a company of 200 employees will often earn 6 mid to high six
figures. Yet we've got cabinet members w/ 100k employees who make
less than I did when I was at Apple.

A Job that costs over $100M to get, should pay more than 400k / year.
Running for the Senate costs over $30M in many states. Yet once
you've got the job, you maintain two homes, and often several offices
on your salary, and you often commute weekly to and from the office.

We need to fix what it costs to get these jobs, but we also need to
fix what they pay, we need good people in office.

I bet your ideas will be different!

New Orleans: A Geopolitical Prize

09.01.2005
New Orleans: A Geopolitical Prize

By George Friedman

The American political system was founded in Philadelphia, but the American nation was built on the vast farmlands that stretch from the Alleghenies to the Rockies. That farmland produced the wealth that funded American industrialization: It permitted the formation of a class of small landholders who, amazingly, could produce more than they could consume. They could sell their excess crops in the east and in Europe and save that money, which eventually became the founding capital of American industry.

But it was not the extraordinary land nor the farmers and ranchers who alone set the process in motion. Rather, it was geography -- the extraordinary system of rivers that flowed through the Midwest and allowed them to ship their surplus to the rest of the world. All of the rivers flowed into one -- the Mississippi -- and the Mississippi flowed to the ports in and around one city: New Orleans. It was in New Orleans that the barges from upstream were unloaded and their cargos stored, sold and reloaded on ocean-going vessels. Until last Sunday, New Orleans was, in many ways, the pivot of the American economy.

For that reason, the Battle of New Orleans in January 1815 was a key moment in American history. Even though the battle occurred after the War of 1812 was over, had the British taken New Orleans, we suspect they wouldn't have given it back. Without New Orleans, the entire Louisiana Purchase would have been valueless to the United States. Or, to state it more precisely, the British would control the region because, at the end of the day, the value of the Purchase was the land and the rivers - which all converged on the Mississippi and the ultimate port of New Orleans. The hero of the battle was Andrew Jackson, and when he became president, his obsession with Texas had much to do with keeping the Mexicans away from New Orleans.

During the Cold War, a macabre topic of discussion among bored graduate students who studied such things was this: If the Soviets could destroy one city with a large nuclear device, which would it be? The usual answers were Washington or New York. For me, the answer was simple: New Orleans. If the Mississippi River was shut to traffic, then the foundations of the economy would be shattered. The industrial minerals needed in the factories wouldn't come in, and the agricultural wealth wouldn't flow out. Alternative routes really weren't available. The Germans knew it too: A U-boat campaign occurred near the mouth of the Mississippi during World War II. Both the Germans and Stratfor have stood with Andy Jackson: New Orleans was the prize.

Last Sunday, nature took out New Orleans almost as surely as a nuclear strike. Hurricane Katrina's geopolitical effect was not, in many ways, distinguishable from a mushroom cloud. The key exit from North America was closed. The petrochemical industry, which has become an added value to the region since Jackson's days, was at risk. The navigability of the Mississippi south of New Orleans was a question mark. New Orleans as a city and as a port complex had ceased to exist, and it was not clear that it could recover.

The Ports of South Louisiana and New Orleans, which run north and south of the city, are as important today as at any point during the history of the republic. On its own merit, POSL is the largest port in the United States by tonnage and the fifth-largest in the world. It exports more than 52 million tons a year, of which more than half are agricultural products -- corn, soybeans and so on. A large proportion of U.S. agriculture flows out of the port. Almost as much cargo, nearly 17 million tons, comes in through the port -- including not only crude oil, but chemicals and fertilizers, coal, concrete and so on.

A simple way to think about the New Orleans port complex is that it is where the bulk commodities of agriculture go out to the world and the bulk commodities of industrialism come in. The commodity chain of the global food industry starts here, as does that of American industrialism. If these facilities are gone, more than the price of goods shifts: The very physical structure of the global economy would have to be reshaped. Consider the impact to the U.S. auto industry if steel doesn't come up the river, or the effect on global food supplies if U.S. corn and soybeans don't get to the markets.

The problem is that there are no good shipping alternatives. River transport is cheap, and most of the commodities we are discussing have low value-to-weight ratios. The U.S. transport system was built on the assumption that these commodities would travel to and from New Orleans by barge, where they would be loaded on ships or offloaded. Apart from port capacity elsewhere in the United States, there aren't enough trucks or rail cars to handle the long-distance hauling of these enormous quantities -- assuming for the moment that the economics could be managed, which they can't be.

The focus in the media has been on the oil industry in Louisiana and Mississippi. This is not a trivial question, but in a certain sense, it is dwarfed by the shipping issue. First, Louisiana is the source of about 15 percent of U.S.-produced petroleum, much of it from the Gulf. The local refineries are critical to American infrastructure. Were all of these facilities to be lost, the effect on the price of oil worldwide would be extraordinarily painful. If the river itself became unnavigable or if the ports are no longer functioning, however, the impact to the wider economy would be significantly more severe. In a sense, there is more flexibility in oil than in the physical transport of these other commodities.

There is clearly good news as information comes in. By all accounts, the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, which services supertankers in the Gulf, is intact. Port Fourchon, which is the center of extraction operations in the Gulf, has sustained damage but is recoverable. The status of the oil platforms is unclear and it is not known what the underwater systems look like, but on the surface, the damage - though not trivial -- is manageable.

The news on the river is also far better than would have been expected on Sunday. The river has not changed its course. No major levees containing the river have burst. The Mississippi apparently has not silted up to such an extent that massive dredging would be required to render it navigable. Even the port facilities, although apparently damaged in many places and destroyed in few, are still there. The river, as transport corridor, has not been lost.

What has been lost is the city of New Orleans and many of the residential suburban areas around it. The population has fled, leaving behind a relatively small number of people in desperate straits. Some are dead, others are dying, and the magnitude of the situation dwarfs the resources required to ameliorate their condition. But it is not the population that is trapped in New Orleans that is of geopolitical significance: It is the population that has left and has nowhere to return to.

The oil fields, pipelines and ports required a skilled workforce in order to operate. That workforce requires homes. They require stores to buy food and other supplies. Hospitals and doctors. Schools for their children. In other words, in order to operate the facilities critical to the United States, you need a workforce to do it -- and that workforce is gone. Unlike in other disasters, that workforce cannot return to the region because they have no place to live. New Orleans is gone, and the metropolitan area surrounding New Orleans is either gone or so badly damaged that it will not be inhabitable for a long time.

It is possible to jury-rig around this problem for a short time. But the fact is that those who have left the area have gone to live with relatives and friends. Those who had the ability to leave also had networks of relationships and resources to manage their exile. But those resources are not infinite -- and as it becomes apparent that these people will not be returning to New Orleans any time soon, they will be enrolling their children in new schools, finding new jobs, finding new accommodations. If they have any insurance money coming, they will collect it. If they have none, then -- whatever emotional connections they may have to their home -- their economic connection to it has been severed. In a very short time, these people will be making decisions that will start to reshape population and workforce patterns in the region.

A city is a complex and ongoing process - one that requires physical infrastructure to support the people who live in it and people to operate that physical infrastructure. We don't simply mean power plants or sewage treatment facilities, although they are critical. Someone has to be able to sell a bottle of milk or a new shirt. Someone has to be able to repair a car or do surgery. And the people who do those things, along with the infrastructure that supports them, are gone -- and they are not coming back anytime soon.

It is in this sense, then, that it seems almost as if a nuclear weapon went off in New Orleans. The people mostly have fled rather than died, but they are gone. Not all of the facilities are destroyed, but most are. It appears to us that New Orleans and its environs have passed the point of recoverability. The area can recover, to be sure, but only with the commitment of massive resources from outside -- and those resources would always be at risk to another Katrina.

The displacement of population is the crisis that New Orleans faces. It is also a national crisis, because the largest port in the United States cannot function without a city around it. The physical and business processes of a port cannot occur in a ghost town, and right now, that is what New Orleans is. It is not about the facilities, and it is not about the oil. It is about the loss of a city's population and the paralysis of the largest port in the United States.

Let's go back to the beginning. The United States historically has depended on the Mississippi and its tributaries for transport. Barges navigate the river. Ships go on the ocean. The barges must offload to the ships and vice versa. There must be a facility to empower this exchange. It is also the facility where goods are stored in transit. Without this port, the river can't be used. Protecting that port has been, from the time of the Louisiana Purchase, a fundamental national security issue for the United States.

Katrina has taken out the port -- not by destroying the facilities, but by rendering the area uninhabited and potentially uninhabitable. That means that even if the Mississippi remains navigable, the absence of a port near the mouth of the river makes the Mississippi enormously less useful than it was. For these reasons, the United States has lost not only its biggest port complex, but also the utility of its river transport system -- the foundation of the entire American transport system. There are some substitutes, but none with sufficient capacity to solve the problem.

It follows from this that the port will have to be revived and, one would assume, the city as well. The ports around New Orleans are located as far north as they can be and still be accessed by ocean-going vessels. The need for ships to be able to pass each other in the waterways, which narrow to the north, adds to the problem. Besides, the Highway 190 bridge in Baton Rouge blocks the river going north. New Orleans is where it is for a reason: The United States needs a city right there.

New Orleans is not optional for the United States' commercial infrastructure. It is a terrible place for a city to be located, but exactly the place where a city must exist. With that as a given, a city will return there because the alternatives are too devastating. The harvest is coming, and that means that the port will have to be opened soon. As in Iraq, premiums will be paid to people prepared to endure the hardships of working in New Orleans. But in the end, the city will return because it has to.

Geopolitics is the stuff of permanent geographical realities and the way they interact with political life. Geopolitics created New Orleans. Geopolitics caused American presidents to obsess over its safety. And geopolitics will force the city's resurrection, even if it is in the worst imaginable place.


For more information on STRATFOR's services, please visit www.stratfor.com or e-mail info@stratfor.com today!

© Copyright 2005 Strategic Forecasting Inc. All rights reserved.

A story about my mother

Women's Voices Provides a Setting for Talking About Issues Pertinent to Females

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Women's Voices Provides a Setting for Talking About Issues Pertinent to Females

By Emily Crawford

Of the Journal


Charlie Romney-Brown was raised in a small town outside Salt Lake City, in a tightly structured world where she says obedience to the Mormon Church was paramount. It was a place "where women's options were so limited," she said in a recent interview at her home in Santa Fe.

Romney-Brown left the church and her arranged marriage in her 20s. Now in her 60s, she's spent the last 20 years promoting women's causes.

In Santa Fe, the former Georgetown University women's studies adjunct professor has created a women's forum called, appropriately enough, Women's Voices.

The mission of the group is to enrich women's lives through education, dialogue and outreach, she said of the grass-roots group she founded three years ago and which has swelled to more than 150 members.

"The value of it for me is that I never would have met some of these women," said Patricia Ann Rudy-Baese, a financial planner. "It is a positive experience. You walk out of there and think, 'Oooh good, I'm not alone.' ''

Each week, Romney-Brown invites local and national heavyweights like Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Pat Oliphant and author Natalie Goldberg to speak to the group in one of the member's homes. Issues as varied as violence against women, fostering daily creativity and protecting financial assets have been covered.

The value of the group "is for everyone to grow, to start thinking and sharing," said Santa Fe Living Treasure Mary Lou Cook, who is 87. Cook compared the group to a family where individuals learn from those in other generations. It provides a wisdom that comes from sharing life experiences, she said.

To facilitate the sharing part, Romney-Brown occasionally organizes smaller groups of 12 or so that meet privately and discuss a single topic like "betrayal." It is in these groups that many friendships are made. Professional women with jobs in the public eye benefit especially from having a safe and confidential place to air their thoughts and feelings, Romney-Brown said.


Offering support


Women's Voices also fills a social void for members who have lost husbands, partners, children or have moved far from their families. The community is similar to those found in a church or in service clubs like the Rotary Club, Romney-Brown said.

Women's Voices functions as a support group and an intellectual forum but does not have a specific political platform, though Romney-Brown herself is passionate about women's rights.

"We are inclusive," she said, noting that Women's Voices' membership includes both Republicans and Democrats.

Still, Romney-Brown feels that women today have to be very careful to not allow the achievements of the women's movement to be rolled back.

"If we slumber, we are going to lose those rights," she said, after discussing her thoughts on equal pay for women and abortion rights.

The members of Women's Voices are from diverse backgrounds and professions, and most range from 50 to 80-plus years-old. Many are distinguished in their individual pursuits and professions such as Sally Denton, an author and investigative reporter, and Cook, a longtime activist on many issues in Santa Fe.

Lucinda Marker, a financial planner, said the group is a great place to network and make meaningful friendships.

"It is a fascinating group; I couldn't believe what a high caliber group it was and how supportive they were of each other and to women," Marker said. "It has nothing to do with filling time and everything to do with making women's lives as good as possible."

Romney-Brown said that through the speakers and new friendships, women in the group learn and support each other and local causes.

"The potential power of this group to do transformative things is glaringly apparent. They (Women's Voices members) are individual and collective catalysts for positive change," said Barbara Goldman, the executive director of the Santa Fe Rape Crisis Center.

Goldman spoke to the group recently about sexual violence in Santa Fe. The experience, she said, was "invigorating." The women put their hearts, time and money into the cause of fighting sexual violence after hearing her speak, Goldman said, and they remain staunch supporters.

"Most people, given a choice, don't want to think about (sexual violence). I loved the fact the Women's Voices wanted to be proactive."

Besides the Rape Crisis Center, the group also has provided funding for the New Mexico Women's Foundation.


Based on earlier group


Women's Voices is based on a similar group called Defining Destiny that Romney-Brown started in Washington, D.C., in 1990 with seven members. The group eventually grew to more than 500 members. It was at a time when women's studies programs were growing exponentially as was interest in the subject by older generations.

At first, the group, largely made up of Romney-Brown's friends, discussed literature that she taught in her Georgetown classes.

But her literary group expanded quickly, and soon Romney-Brown was scheduling speakers from many fields to address her burgeoning group of curious and active women from all generations.

"Every important woman author, thinker and philosophers in the axis of D.C., Boston and New York came and spoke," she said, including Hillary Clinton, when she was first lady and Elizabeth Drew, a former Washington correspondent for the New Yorker.

Romney-Brown led the group for seven years before moving to Santa Fe in 1997.

Now that the Santa Fe group is a success, Romney-Brown is thinking of starting a group for younger women that would address issues affecting them like affordable child care and equal pay.

She acknowledges that the issues facing younger women are different than some of those affecting women of her generation. Romney-Brown and her peers are concerned, she said, for their daughters' and granddaughters' well-being and want to keep their community multi-generational.

"We want to improve conditions for women in the future," she said. "We have to learn from younger generations. None of us can know it all."


Staff Writer Emily Crawford can be reached at ecrawford@abqjournal.com


Copyright 2005 Albuquerque Journal

What I thought about the War on 9/21/04

Well, I supported the war initially, I thought:

1. It might make a positive change in the Israeli vs. Palestinian situation. I didn't like that Sadam was paying Palestinian suicide bomber's families $25k.

2. We had lots of troops and resources in the area being tied up enforcing the sanctions and no-fly zone. It looked like it could be a 35+ year sink like south Korea. Ending the sanctions would be good for everyone. (Now it looks like 20 years)

3. Having a major base in the region didn't seem like a bad strategic idea. It would get us out of Saudi Arabia and put pressure on Iran. (It's still not)

4. Nothing wrong with knocking over a gas station. Having a backup to Saudi Arabia would be a good thing.

5. Giving young Arabs a more local place to focus their anger seemed sound. (Clearly accomplished - but we'll likely pay for how bad it was done)

6. I believed (at the time) that Sadam could have supported Al Queda to retaliate against us, like he tried to assassinate W(rong)'s father. He did gas both his own people and Iran. I believed the story of the meeting between Sadam's guy and Mohamed Atta. And that Sadam was likely to have Bio/Chem Weapons.

I still think all but #6 are still valid reasons to have gone to war to end the regime.

That said, I believe this administration blew it over and over again. Miscalculating at every turn. The list of errors is legendary.

However, I don't like him or his team, I would have voted for him had he managed to get a peace deal w/ Israel in spite of all of this - he didn't.

I think the biggest problem with those of us who live on the coasts is that we don't understand those who don't. We don't understand those who have different value systems than we do. I certainly don't understand how someone could listen to news/friends/leaders/preacher's uncritically. At this point, it looks like a very close race because we don't understand each other.

Mark Twain's War Prayer

O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it - for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet!

We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek his aid with humble and contrite hearts.

Amen.

Way too much self revealing - Not for on topic, but ...

I posted this to my old blog on 9/14/05:

Aloha,

I wrote this a year ago to a friend, trying to explain a bit of what happens for me.

Regards,

Les


Aloha XXXX,

I wanted to thank you (and YYY, ZZZ, and WWW) for your friendship and help. My relationships have almost always been started by surprise, accident, or where the girl took the initiative.

I've found two main patterns in my social interaction with new women, 1) where I'm completely oblivious to any possibilities, and not until after the situation is over to I see any possibilities; or 2) where my desire is so great yet my resistance to asking for something becomes matched to the desire. No matter how much I want something, I can't get the words out.

I recently had an occasion at one of your shows where I had been talking with someone off and on for two months and finally to overcome my objections, and she came over and wanted to go clubbing with me, and I couldn't get the words out "yes, let's go". It's terribly frustrating, not to mention somewhat debilitating for a day or so afterwards.

It's amazing how friendliness quickly turns to anger and revulsion when one doesn't play the right next card in the social game. I've watched it so often that I often try to not let it get started and don't quite understand when it does in some situations.

After dancing with YYY (a tribe member & Friend) and the group at the festival, I was just leaving, and gone over to the far fence to watch the two Willies (Nelson/K) play for a bit. And GGG (another tribe member who didn't reply to my friend request) comes up and stares at me, and for the first time that I can recall, I respond (probably all the chi from dancing all day in the rain).

There are also many times that I just misunderstand gestures or why someone is friendly leading to confusing.

While much of me has "given up", I still try to place myself in situations that are uncomfortable for me to see if I can't just break through. But that will probably require more chi, I know how to do it, I just should. The only drawback to that is that it also makes the craving and desire so much larger and so much more painful.

I do appreciate all of your friendship.

Mahalo,

Les

P.S. I found this article today that seems to talk a bit about my experiences.



Answer, but No Cure, for a Social Disorder That Isolates Many

April 29, 2004
By AMY HARMON

Last July, Steven Miller, a university librarian, came
across an article about a set of neurological conditions he
had never heard of called autistic spectrum disorders. By
the time he finished reading, his face was wet with tears.

"This is me," Mr. Miller remembers thinking in the minutes
and months of eager research that followed. "To read about
it and feel that I'm not the only one, that maybe it's
O.K., maybe it's just a human difference, was extremely
emotional. In a way it has changed everything, even though
nothing has changed."

Mr. Miller, 49, who excels at his job but finds the art of
small talk impossible to master, has since been given a
diagnosis of Asperger's syndrome, an autistic disorder
notable for the often vast discrepancy between the
intellectual and social abilities of those who have it.

Because Asperger's was not widely identified until
recently, thousands of adults like Mr. Miller - people who
have never fit in socially - are only now stumbling across
a neurological explanation for their lifelong struggles
with ordinary human contact.

As Mr. Miller learned from the article, autism is now
believed to encompass a wide spectrum of impairment and
intelligence, from the classically unreachable child to
people with Asperger's and a similar condition called
high-functioning autism, who have normal intelligence and
often superior skills in a given area. But they all share a
defining trait: They are what autism researchers call "mind
blind." Lacking the ability to read cues like body language
to intuit what other people are thinking, they have
profound difficulty navigating basic social interactions.
The diagnosis is reordering their lives. Some have become
newly determined to learn how to compensate.

They are filling up scarce classes that teach skills like
how close to stand next to someone at a party, or how to
tell when people are angry even when they are smiling.
Others, like Mr. Miller, have decided to disclose their
diagnosis, hoping to deflect the often-hostile responses
their odd manners and miscues provoke. In some cases, it
has helped. In others, it seemed only to elicit one more
rejection.

This new wave of discovery among Aspies, as many call
themselves, is also sending ripples through the lives of
their families, soothing tension among some married
couples, prompting others to call it quits. Parents who saw
their adult children as lost causes or black sheep are
fumbling for ways to help them, suddenly realizing that
they are disabled, not stubborn or lazy.

For both Aspies and their families, relief that their
difficulties are not a result of bad parenting or a
fundamental character flaw is often coupled with acute
disappointment at the news that there is no cure for the
disorder and no drug to treat it.

"We are with Asperger's where we were 20 years ago with
mental illness," said Lynda Geller, director of community
services at the Cody Center for Autism in Stony Brook, N.Y.
"It is thought to be your fault, you should just shape up,
work harder, be nicer. The fact that your brain actually
works differently so you can't is not universally
appreciated."

Some Aspies interviewed asked to remain anonymous for fear
of being stigmatized. But with the knowledge that their
dysfunction is rooted in biology, many say remaining silent
to pass as normal has become an even greater strain.

"I would like nothing better than to shout it out to
everyone," a pastor in California whose Asperger's was just
diagnosed wrote in an e-mail message. "But there is so much
explanation and education that needs to happen that I risk
being judged incompetent."

Some are finding solace in support groups where they are
meeting others like themselves for the first time. And a
growing number are beginning to celebrate their own unique
way of seeing the world. They question the superiority of
people they call "neurotypicals" or "N.T.'s"and challenge
them to adopt a more enlightened, gentle outlook toward
social eccentricities.

Asks the tag line of one online Asperger support group: "Is
ANYONE really `normal?' "

Discovery: Finding Reason for Social Gaffes

In recent
years, a growing awareness about autism has led to a sharp
increase in children receiving special services for their
autism disorders. But for many adults who came before them,
the process of discovering the condition has been
haphazard.

Mr. Miller, a senior academic librarian at the University
of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, had searched for years for an
explanation for what he saw as a personal failing, at one
point buying stacks of self-help books. Many others sink
into depression, their conditions misdiagnosed, or struggle
without any help.

Now, autism centers intended for children are being flooded
with adults who suspect they have Asperger's. Since the
condition runs in families, psychologists treating autistic
children are often the ones diagnosing it in parents or
relatives.

Often the new diagnoses involve people who for years have
been deemed rude, clueless or just plain weird because of
their blunt comments or all-too-personal disclosures. They
typically have a penchant for accuracy and a hard-wired
dislike for the disruption of routine.

Unusually sensitive to light, touch and noise, some shrink
from handshakes and hugs. Humor, which so often depends on
tone of voice and familiarity with social customs, can be
hard for them to comprehend. Although many have talents
like memory for detail and an ability to focus intently for
long periods, Aspies often end up underemployed and lonely.
Unlike more severely impaired autistics, they often crave
social intimacy, and they are acutely aware of their
inability to get it.

Those with the condition often develop a passion for a
narrow field that drives them to excel in it, but fail to
realize when they are driving others crazy by talking about
it. And they are reflexively honest, a trait that can be
refreshing - or not.

On a recent afternoon at the Center for Brain Health at New
York University, Louise Kavaldo, 57, who received a
diagnosis of Asperger's last month, prepared to take some
cognitive tests.

"Do you think my shirt is too tight?" she asked Isabel
Dziobek, the researcher.

"No," Ms. Dziobek replied. "I like the way the green goes
with your hat."

"Well I think your shirt is too tight," replied Ms.
Kavaldo, who has a B.A. in sociology and works in early
childhood education. "I think it's unprofessional."

Researchers say autism spectrum disorders are a result of a
combination of perhaps 10 to 20 genes, plus environmental
factors, that seem to cause the brain to exhibit less
activity in its social and emotional centers. Unlike people
with classic autism, which is often accompanied by mental
retardation, those with Asperger's have normal language
development and intelligence. First identified in 1946 by
the Viennese physician Hans Asperger, the condition was
little-known until it was added to the American psychiatric
diagnostic manual in 1994. Only in the last few years have
mental health professionals become widely aware of it.

The degree to which someone is affected may correlate with
how many of the autism genes he or she has, some
researchers say. About one in 165 people are thought to be
on the autistic spectrum, although estimates vary.

The recent spike in diagnoses of autism in people who are
generally able to function in society has prompted some to
suggest that it is an excuse for bad behavior or the latest
clinical fad. But psychologists and researchers say they
are simply better able to recognize the condition now.
While many people may have a few of the traits and just one
or two of the genes, to qualify for an Asperger's diagnosis
they typically must have developed obsessive interests and
social difficulties at an early age that now significantly
impair their ability to function.

Carl Pietruszka, 52, said that being found to have
Asperger's had been a blow to a long-held fantasy. "It's
been my hope for years and years that if I keep working at
it, I'll find a strategy that will fix things, that if I
practice enough, it'll be O.K.," Mr. Pietruszka said. "Now
I know I'm working with Asperger's, which is going to be an
ongoing thing. It'll get better, but it's not going to be
O.K. That has me seriously bummed out."

Mr. Pietruszka, who was laid off from four engineering jobs
over a decade, said colleagues had often ribbed him for
being too serious and "not getting it."

"It doesn't make you feel good," he said. "It festers."


Instead of looking for work with a company where he would
have to navigate office politics again, he has set up his
own business as a home inspector in Harleysville, Pa.,
where clients have complimented his thoroughness.

Inspiration: Trying to Learn Hidden Curriculum

Pretending
to be normal, even for a few hours, is mentally exhausting,
many Aspies say. But for some, the diagnosis is an
inspiration to master what autism experts call the hidden
curriculum: social rules everyone knows but could never say
how they learned.

A class taught by Mary Cohen, a psychologist at the
University of Pennsylvania's new clinic for adult social
learning disorders, is crowded with people whose conditions
are newly diagnosed. The subject at a recent session was
basic conversation. As the class watched from behind a
two-way mirror, pairs of students tried talking to each
other without lapsing into silence.

Then came the review: had it been a dialogue, or had
someone gone on too long about the early history of Russia?
Did they lean in? Eye contact, Dr. Cohen cautioned, should
be regular but not "like you're boring a hole through
them." Moving the eyebrows can help.

Gresham O'Malley, 33, a computer support technician, said
he hoped the class might make it easier for him to find a
girlfriend.

But classes like Dr. Cohen's are few and far between.
Mostly, parents, siblings and spouses are left to explain
such everyday social rules as which urinal to select
(preferably not the one next to another that is occupied)
and why a prospective employer does not have to be told
about a punctuality problem.

At a support group for parents in Dix Hills, N.Y., the
two-hour meeting runs late as more than two dozen
participants trade notes about adult children who always
had trouble making friends but now face more serious
problems. After flubbing dozens of job interviews, many
spend their days playing video games.

"Don't you get the advice, `Give him a kick in the pants?'
" one father asks.

"Exactly," answers a mother. " `You're spoiling him.' "


"Our relatives will say, `He looks fine to me,' " adds
another parent. "And he does look fine. That's not the
point."

Some of the anger is directed at mental health
professionals who as recently as two years ago failed to
identify Asperger's when they saw it. But some parents also
complain about the lack of tolerance for "weird" kids, and
the weird adults they grow up to be.

"If my daughter was in a wheelchair, people would be
opening doors for her," said Larry Berman, a salesman who
attends a similar group in Philadelphia. "Wouldn't it make
a quantum difference if instead of it all being on our kids
to flex to meet the rest of the world, the rest of the
world would meet them halfway?"

Aware that their missteps seem all the more shocking
because they show no visible signs of disability, some are
choosing to disclose their Asperger diagnosis in hopes of
heading off social mishaps - or because they are in the
middle of one.

When Eric Jorgensen, a programmer at Microsoft, confronted
his boss's boss in a group meeting, his colleagues told him
later that they were cringing, and he received a reprimand
from his supervisor.

"I talked to my boss and said, `This is an example where I
need help,' " said Mr. Jorgensen, who realized that he had
Asperger's after his son's diagnosis of autism. Mr.
Jorgensen's boss at the time, Ed Keith, had never heard of
Asperger's. But he assigned a team member to form
strategies with Mr. Jorgensen. In public meetings, they
agreed, someone would throw a pen at him when he was going
too far. Privately, they would tell him directly, rather
than hint at it in ways he might not understand.

"They cared about me and I sensed that," Mr. Jorgensen
said. It may have helped, too, that he is what Mr. Keith
describes as "one of the best guys that I've ever worked
with" at finding defects in the design of software. In the
argument with their boss, Mr. Keith said, Mr. Jorgensen was
clearly undiplomatic. "But he was right."

Not everyone is finding such enlightened responses.

When John Hatton, 40, of Boston, began to tell friends about his
Asperger's diagnosis, they were skeptical.

"Almost everyone I contacted about this were either sort of
perplexed or - I don't want to say hostile," said Mr.
Hatton, who said he had been fired from more than 26 jobs
over the last two decades and now received federal
disability assistance. "They thought I had found an excuse
or something."

Results: Saving Marriages, Ending Others

For troubled marriages, the diagnosis can be pivotal.

One
Los Angeles woman remembers the precise angle of the sun
coming through the library window when she first read about
Asperger's. She had wanted to leave her marriage for years
but blamed herself for failing to make it work. When her
husband refused to discuss whether his condition
contributed to their problems, she said, she was able to
leave without guilt.

But for Janet and Eric Jorgensen, the diagnosis helped
smooth out the rough edges. Ms. Jorgensen, attending a
conference to learn more about her autistic son, said it
was like "a light coming on" when she heard that adult
family members were often given diagnoses only after a
child had been identified as being on the autism spectrum.

"It just sort of hit me, `That explains Eric,' " she said.


He still says things that are callous, at least on the
surface.

"She'll say something about how terrible her clothes look,"
Mr. Jorgensen explains. "I'll say, `Yes, honey, those are
terrible-looking clothes,' when really she's wanting some
affirmation that her clothes don't look terrible."

At those moments, Ms. Jorgensen now tells her husband that
he is acting like an "ass burger," a running joke that
defuses anger on both sides. But such exchanges have mostly
disappeared because Ms. Jorgensen knows that she is
unlikely to get what she wants that way.

Learning to be more direct herself was not so horrible.


"I would just go change the clothes," she said. "If I want
affirmation I need to say, `I'm feeling a little insecure,
can you give me reassurance?' "

United by their newfound identity, Asperger adults, so used
to being outcasts, are finding themselves part of an
unlikely community. Through online and in-person support
groups, many are for the first time sharing the pains and
occasional pleasures of feeling, as one puts it, "like
extraterrestrials stranded on earth."

Emboldened by the strength of their numbers, they are also
increasingly defying, or at least exploring, how to bend
the social rules to which they have tried so hard to adapt.


Some brag about their high scores on the "autism quotient"
test, developed by Cambridge University as a measure of
autism in adults. "What's your `Rain Man' talent?" asked a
recent subject line on an Aspie e-mail discussion list,
referring to the movie starring Dustin Hoffman as an
autistic savant. Answers included perfect memory for phone
numbers and "annoying people by asking awkward questions."

At a recent meeting of the Manhattan adult support group,
a woman explained that she "just wanted to see if I fit in
the group."

A longtime member replied, "None of us fit in with the
group."

Neurotypical friends had been invited to serve as "expert"
panelists to field questions on the evening's topic:
flirting. But the best advice came from the Aspies.

"I find that sometimes shutting up and just not talking
often makes them think you're a good listener when in fact
you're just not talking," said one participant.

Michael J. Carly, the group's leader, suggested: "How
about, `Hi, I'm Michael. I really stink at flirting but
would you like to go for a walk to the library or
something?' "

The next generation of Asperger's adults may already be
benefiting from an earlier diagnosis. After the condition
was diagnosed in her son Jared at age 12, Nancy Johnson of
Edmonds, Wash., was able to persuade his public school to
provide a full-time aide who coached him on social skills
for the next four years. Ms. Johnson learned how to rid
Jared of some of his behavioral quirks, like his tendency
to walk over to other tables in restaurants to get a better
look at the food.

Ignoring his mother's concerns about his special interest
("I wouldn't have picked lizards," she says), Jared, now
19, has his path to becoming a renowned herpetologist all
mapped out. After a rough time in middle school, where he
says he finally learned the social consequences of picking
his nose in public, he describes himself as "practically
popular."

"It does seem like people with Asperger's, once they click,
have a lot of advantages in life," Jared said. "It's like
we stay tadpoles for longer, but once we're ready, we're no
less of a frog."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

Let's Start...

Written 9/13/05:

Well, I wanted to start this blog with something, and decided that I didn't know what I wanted to write about, on one of my email lists, I recently posted the following about religion, it's a bit out of context, but I hope interesting none-the-less:

A friend wrote:
>"I live my life according to the principles of science because
>science produces microwave ovens."

That's why people hang on to any tool or belief - It works for
them. As much as I don't like certain Christian Beliefs and
practices, I do understand that it fills a need in peoples lives. 12
Steps does for others, and Buddhism and Science does for others
still. Many of us mix and match.

Human beings are fundamentally all the same. Sex (both procreation
and recreation) and Spirit (Church, meditation, sports, school,
dancing, work, Psychology, etc.) appear as primary drives in all of
us.

What we are talking about when we discuss this stuff is the proper balance.

It's unfortunate that Christianity and a few other religions have at
their core the need "Convert" others to "Save" them. If they could
just accept that they are just one restaurant in a city of many
different flavors we might just get along.

They insist on their superiority over all others. Science, at times
behaves in this way. It's very difficult to deviate from accepted
thought in science. (As an example, I point out the man at UCSF who
theorized about Prions, years before Mad Cow Disease, he couldn't get
funding, but once there was a crisis, he got all he wanted, and his
ideas were suddenly scientific and accepted.)

Ridged beliefs are the problem, where ever they exist. (I wish I
could claim to be with out them, but I can't.)

Cartoons as Free Speech

Written 2/7/06:

The other day, I was asked about my views regarding the Danish and French Cartoons that have inflamed the Islamic world, I wasn't as clear as I should have been with my friend so I wrote the note below:

I generally prefer freedom of speech. There should be some limits, such as I don't accept the outing of an undercover agent, or disclosing military plans durring a time of war. Otherwise, I tend to agree with George Soros and the Open Society Institute.

That said, the cartoons were an incredibly stupid act at an incredibly stupid time. The newspapers that published them should be doing a mea culpa on the order of the NY Times with Jason Blair. They fired the low-level responsible parties, but everyone who saw it from the most senior editor on down should be fired, and the publisher should have to explain why this was allowed to continue. (Unless it is the perspective of the News Paper that Muslims and Islam is wrong, in which case the public should stop purchasing from them and advertisers should leave.)

We've seen where Salman Rushdie's book 'The Satanic Verses' got him a Fatwa of Death from the Ayatollah. Iran not exactly an open society. We would all condemn the New York times publishing a cartoon (like Nazi propaganda did) showing fat jewish bankers stealing from children. According to the New York Times: a small but vocal Muslim immigrant organization responded with a drawing on its Web site of Hitler in bed with Anne Frank. 'Write this one in your diary, Anne,' Hitler was shown as saying.

In my view, the real problem is that it was allowed to continue for as long as it did, without being challenged earlier by responsible individuals. Denmark and France have much bigger problems than a cartoon if this truly represents the readership of their respective major daily's.

Venture capitalists sit on $53.6 billion - 2005-03-25

Venture capitalists sit on $53.6 billion - 2005-03-25: "Venture capitalists sit on $53.6 billion

Venture capital firms have more than $53.6 billion in unspent funds sitting in the coffers, more than half of which is earmarked for new investments in early-stage companies, according to a report by Dow Jones VentureOne."

(Via .)