Friday, January 6, 2012
Likee-poo is double dog tired this morning
Stayed up too late last night writing my buns off. And then had about two hours of calming down time, so not much sleep was had. I also had to run errands over lunch, which means not too much time to look on these here interwebbies.
More proof our world is weirder than you think, fish mimics a mimic octopus for it's own protection. I believe that falls into the triple-spy realm of, "Huhn? What?" (Grokked from Jay Lake)
I'm a big believer in families of choice of heredity, but when older siblings stick up for their younger siblings this way, it makes the world a little nicer. (Grokked from Janiece)
Dissection of a winning map. Also, some great examples of what it means to be a designer and how the little choices we make can dramatically alter the impact of the medium. Not only could our clients use such knowledge, but unfortunately many designers also don't get this. Design = Communications, it isn't just making pretty pictures. "You have no doubt that every tiny decision on Imus’ map was made for a reason." Should all our designs receive such praise. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
"Romney’s plan cuts taxes at greater rates for wealthier people. The average millionaire would thus pay $145,568 less in taxes in 2015 than they do today… Per (the Tax Policy Center), 'The Romney plan would reduce federal tax revenues… by $600 billion in calendar year 2015…" All while raising taxes on those who make less than $30,000. The current crop of republicans running are a joke. A bad joke being made at our expense. But then, they can't even tell the truth from fantasy (that's Paul Krugman's analysis of Romeny's jobs claims). There's helpful charts in each article.
"The real Rick Santorum is indeed a frothy mixture -- of self-interest, loose ethical standards, and careerism in a career that's been largely devoted… (to) the interests of big corporations and the wealthiest 1 Percent of Americans. It's a shame that more voters don't know that yet. That is the 'Google problem' that Santorum actually deserves." A Philadelphia Inquirer blog post outlining Santorum's career. Not a shining star of the people, but a corporate toady who lacks any real social values (except mouthing those that will get him elected). This is your champion, social conservatives? You ought to be ashamed (but we know you won't be). (Pointed to by John)
The Washington Post nails my thoughts about Newt Gingrich's concession speech. The angry Newt, disconnected from his own self-love, spewing venom become someone dared to mention his shit has a little odor, that's the Newt I remember. Glad to see I was right and that Newt hasn't changed one little bit. "(Newt) went so far as to suggest that the negative ads against him were not worthy of the sacrifices of American men and women in combat." It's called "narcissism", it's a sin, BTW (vanity if you didn't know), and it's something Newt has by the metric butt load. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
More proof our world is weirder than you think, fish mimics a mimic octopus for it's own protection. I believe that falls into the triple-spy realm of, "Huhn? What?" (Grokked from Jay Lake)
I'm a big believer in families of choice of heredity, but when older siblings stick up for their younger siblings this way, it makes the world a little nicer. (Grokked from Janiece)
Dissection of a winning map. Also, some great examples of what it means to be a designer and how the little choices we make can dramatically alter the impact of the medium. Not only could our clients use such knowledge, but unfortunately many designers also don't get this. Design = Communications, it isn't just making pretty pictures. "You have no doubt that every tiny decision on Imus’ map was made for a reason." Should all our designs receive such praise. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
"Romney’s plan cuts taxes at greater rates for wealthier people. The average millionaire would thus pay $145,568 less in taxes in 2015 than they do today… Per (the Tax Policy Center), 'The Romney plan would reduce federal tax revenues… by $600 billion in calendar year 2015…" All while raising taxes on those who make less than $30,000. The current crop of republicans running are a joke. A bad joke being made at our expense. But then, they can't even tell the truth from fantasy (that's Paul Krugman's analysis of Romeny's jobs claims). There's helpful charts in each article.
"The real Rick Santorum is indeed a frothy mixture -- of self-interest, loose ethical standards, and careerism in a career that's been largely devoted… (to) the interests of big corporations and the wealthiest 1 Percent of Americans. It's a shame that more voters don't know that yet. That is the 'Google problem' that Santorum actually deserves." A Philadelphia Inquirer blog post outlining Santorum's career. Not a shining star of the people, but a corporate toady who lacks any real social values (except mouthing those that will get him elected). This is your champion, social conservatives? You ought to be ashamed (but we know you won't be). (Pointed to by John)
The Washington Post nails my thoughts about Newt Gingrich's concession speech. The angry Newt, disconnected from his own self-love, spewing venom become someone dared to mention his shit has a little odor, that's the Newt I remember. Glad to see I was right and that Newt hasn't changed one little bit. "(Newt) went so far as to suggest that the negative ads against him were not worthy of the sacrifices of American men and women in combat." It's called "narcissism", it's a sin, BTW (vanity if you didn't know), and it's something Newt has by the metric butt load. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Linkee-poo hears the sound of the things you said today
"In this series, which appears in three installments this week on Places, we look at fairy tales through the lens of architecture." And don't miss part two and part three. Wish that Rapunzel Tower graphic was enlargeable to we could read the text. But, uh, yeah, Bob. (Grokked from Random Michelle)
So, do you, like me, remember the days way back when… when we had to manually set our computer preferences with dip switches? Then you might like this watch to relive the heady days of when video games took actual quarters (and usually only one). It was a simpler time when we programmed wearing bear skins and using flint knives. We celebrated with SCSI voodoo dances wearing chicken feathers and bone necklaces to placate the Gods of Peek, Poke, and Call. Oh, you kids have it so easy. (Pointed to by John)
And another toy to keep you occupied, Cubelets. A modular robotics kit. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Montana thumbs its nose at Citizens United. (Grokked from Paolo Bacigalupi) And in related news, Portland petitioners ask their government for a resolution saying, "corporations are not people and that money is not free speech." (Grokked from Jay Lake) It's like there some backlash against something or other.
One of the funny things, Rick Santorum rants against government trying to tell you how to live and taking away your freedom (which I haven't really noticed in the past few years - also, no, really, that's what he said in his "not a concession" concession speech), but thinks it's perfectly okay to deny you birth control because, "It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." Tell me again who wants to take my freedom away and tell me how to live my life, 'cause I keep forgetting. The radical right, irony impaired since 1980. (Grokked from Mur Lafferty)
Or to be more coarse, if social conservatives get their way, they'll force you to go "bare back", if liberals get their way, it's up to you. The same thing with abortion, etc. It's all right to believe what you do and act the way you want under a progressive government (until your rights interfere with someone else's rights). It's only "not alright, and by golly we'll put you in jail" under a social conservative (especially in questions of "morality"/ie. "Our God tells us we're right"). Do we all get this yet?
A very persuasive argument why some people shouldn't be allowed near the internets. Alternatively, why you should read the best and worst rating comments before making a decision based on Amazon ratings. (Grokked from Camille Alexa)
The poor foo bar. (Pointed to by John)
So, do you, like me, remember the days way back when… when we had to manually set our computer preferences with dip switches? Then you might like this watch to relive the heady days of when video games took actual quarters (and usually only one). It was a simpler time when we programmed wearing bear skins and using flint knives. We celebrated with SCSI voodoo dances wearing chicken feathers and bone necklaces to placate the Gods of Peek, Poke, and Call. Oh, you kids have it so easy. (Pointed to by John)
And another toy to keep you occupied, Cubelets. A modular robotics kit. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Montana thumbs its nose at Citizens United. (Grokked from Paolo Bacigalupi) And in related news, Portland petitioners ask their government for a resolution saying, "corporations are not people and that money is not free speech." (Grokked from Jay Lake) It's like there some backlash against something or other.
One of the funny things, Rick Santorum rants against government trying to tell you how to live and taking away your freedom (which I haven't really noticed in the past few years - also, no, really, that's what he said in his "not a concession" concession speech), but thinks it's perfectly okay to deny you birth control because, "It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." Tell me again who wants to take my freedom away and tell me how to live my life, 'cause I keep forgetting. The radical right, irony impaired since 1980. (Grokked from Mur Lafferty)
Or to be more coarse, if social conservatives get their way, they'll force you to go "bare back", if liberals get their way, it's up to you. The same thing with abortion, etc. It's all right to believe what you do and act the way you want under a progressive government (until your rights interfere with someone else's rights). It's only "not alright, and by golly we'll put you in jail" under a social conservative (especially in questions of "morality"/ie. "Our God tells us we're right"). Do we all get this yet?
A very persuasive argument why some people shouldn't be allowed near the internets. Alternatively, why you should read the best and worst rating comments before making a decision based on Amazon ratings. (Grokked from Camille Alexa)
The poor foo bar. (Pointed to by John)
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Linkee-poo dances in the rain from a shattered comet
Jim Hines on writing about rape. What he says. Although, in the current novel there is a rape, but it happens off-camera, is not committed against a main character, and is implied the main evil bady-guy did it. However, it is part of the story and makes sense in context. The victim acts like a victim of abuse. Our hero isn't there to rescue her, but does because that's how he's put together. He doesn't however, carry her from the building and form some sort of bond with her. He views her as another victim of what the bad guys are doing (and then he kills the bad guy). I did take that part out, but then the scene felt incomplete. So I put it back in.
Mur Lafferty talks about her big-D depression. I don't think I've talked about it more than once or twice this year, so some of the new people don't know. While I don't have a "diagnosis" of depression, I do suffer from the big-D (it's just not on any medical chart - but I take Wellbutrin, which always leads to the question). I finished my novel while taking my meds. I was afraid they might take my writing away, but the prospect of falling into another 3-4 years of big-D was to much of a scary thing. I like not being depressed. I like myself when I'm not depressed. Sure, I still have some bad habits (denigrating myself when something goes wrong, or feeling guilt or shame for something done 10+ years ago). But I laugh, I can smile, and, to quote Monty Python, "I feel happy." If you also suffer from big-D (and I didn't think I was until near the end of that bout) don't be afraid to get help from professionals. My doctor listened to me and immediately said, "We can help." I was lucky and hit it out of the park on the first try, if the first path doesn't work, there are plenty more. To quote Mur, "You are not alone."
More proof the world is weirder than you think. Including the discovery of the first hybrid shark (viable offspring of two related species) in the wild. (Grokked from Jay Lake and Jeff Beeler)
There was a comment in the blathering news the other day about "liberals (being) 'angry' at (Ron) Paul for forcing them to confront their hypocrisy and therefore obsess over his 'character defects'." But I think what Eric has to say later, including his quotes from other on their idiocy, is much more to the point. And it brings words to something I was intuiting lately. There is a fundamental schism in the mindset of the populace on what role government should play. Eric pretty well lays out the liberal view.
Tobias Buckell gets optioned (and helps write the script) adapting a short story of his. Congrats, Tobias.
Freeze-dried whackaloon, Rep. Steven King (R-IA) admits all this brinksmanship has just been a negotiation strategy. Yep, that's the new politics for you. No principals, no "promoting the general welfare", just willing to fuckup the country just so they can keep tax-breaks for the rich. I said it back in August, I think it's time the dems just walked away from the table. Make a big play in the press about the GOP "intransigence" and let them shut the government down. This, in the game of chicken, is known as "committing." (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Oh, no, our frenzied work around immigration and all those new "tougher" laws couldn't harm anyone who isn't guilty. Surely they wouldn't deport a teenager who gave a false name so the police wouldn't return her home after running away. Nah, that couldn't happen. (Grokked from Tobias Buckell)
Mur Lafferty talks about her big-D depression. I don't think I've talked about it more than once or twice this year, so some of the new people don't know. While I don't have a "diagnosis" of depression, I do suffer from the big-D (it's just not on any medical chart - but I take Wellbutrin, which always leads to the question). I finished my novel while taking my meds. I was afraid they might take my writing away, but the prospect of falling into another 3-4 years of big-D was to much of a scary thing. I like not being depressed. I like myself when I'm not depressed. Sure, I still have some bad habits (denigrating myself when something goes wrong, or feeling guilt or shame for something done 10+ years ago). But I laugh, I can smile, and, to quote Monty Python, "I feel happy." If you also suffer from big-D (and I didn't think I was until near the end of that bout) don't be afraid to get help from professionals. My doctor listened to me and immediately said, "We can help." I was lucky and hit it out of the park on the first try, if the first path doesn't work, there are plenty more. To quote Mur, "You are not alone."
More proof the world is weirder than you think. Including the discovery of the first hybrid shark (viable offspring of two related species) in the wild. (Grokked from Jay Lake and Jeff Beeler)
There was a comment in the blathering news the other day about "liberals (being) 'angry' at (Ron) Paul for forcing them to confront their hypocrisy and therefore obsess over his 'character defects'." But I think what Eric has to say later, including his quotes from other on their idiocy, is much more to the point. And it brings words to something I was intuiting lately. There is a fundamental schism in the mindset of the populace on what role government should play. Eric pretty well lays out the liberal view.
Tobias Buckell gets optioned (and helps write the script) adapting a short story of his. Congrats, Tobias.
Freeze-dried whackaloon, Rep. Steven King (R-IA) admits all this brinksmanship has just been a negotiation strategy. Yep, that's the new politics for you. No principals, no "promoting the general welfare", just willing to fuckup the country just so they can keep tax-breaks for the rich. I said it back in August, I think it's time the dems just walked away from the table. Make a big play in the press about the GOP "intransigence" and let them shut the government down. This, in the game of chicken, is known as "committing." (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Oh, no, our frenzied work around immigration and all those new "tougher" laws couldn't harm anyone who isn't guilty. Surely they wouldn't deport a teenager who gave a false name so the police wouldn't return her home after running away. Nah, that couldn't happen. (Grokked from Tobias Buckell)
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Running down Paul
Well, with almost 90% of the vote in, it looks like I'm wrong. Looks like Paul will take 3rd place, with Santorum and Romney battling it out for 1st (Ricky is holding a lead of less than 50 at the moment). Unfortunately this means we will be subjected to the bizarre, misogynistic, neo-paleolithic conservative mindset that is Frothy the No-man for at least another month.
Story Bone
So, you all know how with string theory (or M-theory) there are an infinite number of universes. And how in all those universes it is statistically possible there are multiple yous doing slightly different things. Now most SF people focus on this last point and start doing the the "character crosses over into alternate universe/reality and must 1) realized what happened and 2) adjust or get back to their home universe."
But what they miss is that with the infinite number of universes it is also statistically possible that if you could actually jump from one universe to another (or from one brain to another), chances are you'll end up in a completely unknown place that may not even play by the same rules of physics (this is sometimes used as the "hyperspace" to get FTL travel). Within an infinite number of universes, the universes with alternate Earths, and specifically you, in it is still a vanishingly small number (infinity is a really huge number, I mean, really, really huge).
For this experiment we'll ignore the also highly likely chance that you aren't anywhere near each other if you were able to build a bridge between those membranes.
However, if there are an infinite number of other yous out there, surely another one of them (at least) is/are also trying to get to you. How could you (as the mad scientist you are, chancing the possibly of paradox issues and creating massive-Earth-eating blackholes) work in collaboration with that other you who has also realized another you may be trying to reach them to build a membrane/universe bridge that will allow them to meet.
Or in other words, you're not building the bridge one way across the divide. You're goal is to meet that other you halfway.
Bonus points Okay, write it as first person or tight/limited third. However, switch between yous every break. Figure out how to signal to the reader which you they're following quickly and clearly. Then, when the "break through" discovery happens, switch characters mid chapter (alternating them in a few fashion). Finally, when they meet, they see each other as completely different (ie. not in the "one of us" manner most universe switching deals with). And while the reader knows they are the "identical twin", the characters don't realize that.
But what they miss is that with the infinite number of universes it is also statistically possible that if you could actually jump from one universe to another (or from one brain to another), chances are you'll end up in a completely unknown place that may not even play by the same rules of physics (this is sometimes used as the "hyperspace" to get FTL travel). Within an infinite number of universes, the universes with alternate Earths, and specifically you, in it is still a vanishingly small number (infinity is a really huge number, I mean, really, really huge).
For this experiment we'll ignore the also highly likely chance that you aren't anywhere near each other if you were able to build a bridge between those membranes.
However, if there are an infinite number of other yous out there, surely another one of them (at least) is/are also trying to get to you. How could you (as the mad scientist you are, chancing the possibly of paradox issues and creating massive-Earth-eating blackholes) work in collaboration with that other you who has also realized another you may be trying to reach them to build a membrane/universe bridge that will allow them to meet.
Or in other words, you're not building the bridge one way across the divide. You're goal is to meet that other you halfway.
Bonus points Okay, write it as first person or tight/limited third. However, switch between yous every break. Figure out how to signal to the reader which you they're following quickly and clearly. Then, when the "break through" discovery happens, switch characters mid chapter (alternating them in a few fashion). Finally, when they meet, they see each other as completely different (ie. not in the "one of us" manner most universe switching deals with). And while the reader knows they are the "identical twin", the characters don't realize that.
Linkee-poo was born in a cross-fire hurricane
So far, no rejections. I take that as a good sign. (Oh sure, harsh my mellow by pointing out that it's only the first official work day since I submitted, shut up.)
Chuck Wendig and 25 things writers should stop doing (emphasis mine). Yes! To all of them. Writers looking for some NY Resolutions could do a whole lot worse than promising themselves they won't do any of these. (Yes, it's a goose and gander thing, shut up).
(Here I'll note when I type "shut up" you should hear it in a high, whiny voice with all the drama that can be infused into it - like sounding out all 6 syllables of that phrase-, along with an ornery grin afterward)
It's book day for Benjamin Tate and Leaves of Flame. Congrats. You go Jos*(cough)* I mean, Ben.
A Writer Beware look back on 2011.
Sword-master Bob Anderson died yesterday. If you like movie sword fights that aren't all sword against sword (that is, the enactors work to hit their opponents sword), you owe real sword play (or close enough) in the movies to Bob Anderson's influence. (Grokked from several sources)
A kickstarter for a consumer 3d printer. (Not an endorsement, but a, "well, that's interesting" pointer). (Pointed to by John)
Why 2012 is looking a lot like 1932. While a little alarmist, frankly I've been having the same thoughts myself. Add another voice whispering on the wind, "Revolution." (Grokked from Jay Lake)
"… when people in D.C. talk about deficits and debt, by and large they have no idea what they’re talking about — and the people who talk the most understand the least." Paul Krugman on the debt scare. Lots of truth, not sure it's being heard in the halls of power (or the Iowa Caucuses for that matter - where they barely acknowledge Pres. G. W. Bush tenure or that Reagan raised taxes - shades of Frost/Nixon with that last one, which I did see live - and the right double downing on the Southern Strategy). (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Think that last claim is a bit too far? Okay, many republicans were for things Pres. Obama has put forward, until he put them forward. One of the things that disturbs me most about this current election is the GOP isn't coming out saying, "We've got better ideas", it's all about "beating Obama." True, elections are often about "beating the other guy/gal", but I've never seen it so entrenched in the general public before. It's like Obama is the anti-Midas to the conservatives. (Grokked from Tobias Buckell)
Tweet of my heart:
@TalkPolitical: IF THE $5.15 HOURLY minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO compensation since 1990, it would now stand at $23.03.
Chuck Wendig and 25 things writers should stop doing (emphasis mine). Yes! To all of them. Writers looking for some NY Resolutions could do a whole lot worse than promising themselves they won't do any of these. (Yes, it's a goose and gander thing, shut up).
(Here I'll note when I type "shut up" you should hear it in a high, whiny voice with all the drama that can be infused into it - like sounding out all 6 syllables of that phrase-, along with an ornery grin afterward)
It's book day for Benjamin Tate and Leaves of Flame. Congrats. You go Jos*(cough)* I mean, Ben.
A Writer Beware look back on 2011.
Sword-master Bob Anderson died yesterday. If you like movie sword fights that aren't all sword against sword (that is, the enactors work to hit their opponents sword), you owe real sword play (or close enough) in the movies to Bob Anderson's influence. (Grokked from several sources)
A kickstarter for a consumer 3d printer. (Not an endorsement, but a, "well, that's interesting" pointer). (Pointed to by John)
Why 2012 is looking a lot like 1932. While a little alarmist, frankly I've been having the same thoughts myself. Add another voice whispering on the wind, "Revolution." (Grokked from Jay Lake)
"… when people in D.C. talk about deficits and debt, by and large they have no idea what they’re talking about — and the people who talk the most understand the least." Paul Krugman on the debt scare. Lots of truth, not sure it's being heard in the halls of power (or the Iowa Caucuses for that matter - where they barely acknowledge Pres. G. W. Bush tenure or that Reagan raised taxes - shades of Frost/Nixon with that last one, which I did see live - and the right double downing on the Southern Strategy). (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Think that last claim is a bit too far? Okay, many republicans were for things Pres. Obama has put forward, until he put them forward. One of the things that disturbs me most about this current election is the GOP isn't coming out saying, "We've got better ideas", it's all about "beating Obama." True, elections are often about "beating the other guy/gal", but I've never seen it so entrenched in the general public before. It's like Obama is the anti-Midas to the conservatives. (Grokked from Tobias Buckell)
Tweet of my heart:
@TalkPolitical: IF THE $5.15 HOURLY minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO compensation since 1990, it would now stand at $23.03.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Condensing 90,000 words into 800 or less
If the first draft of the novel or story is allowed to suck, so too is the first draft of the synopsis allowed to suck. I have to remember this.
I'll also have to rewrite the synopsis. And if history is any guide, then rewrite again. And then again. And then polish before I have something acceptable.
I'll also have to rewrite the synopsis. And if history is any guide, then rewrite again. And then again. And then polish before I have something acceptable.
I thought you preferred I-O-Wa?
Rick Santorum may win? Oh, please. One, okay, no, he's not going to win the Iowa Caucus. Ron Paul will. But really, conservatives, do you want "President Frothy Discharge"? (although I expect if he goes forward he will play up the whole "conservative victim of liberal ideology" angle, which will work for 3 weeks)
Not fair, I know, there's still those who were hoping Sarah Palin might jump in (BTW, the Sarah hasn't endorsed anybody yet. Why? Because she doesn't know who will win yet. Once it's very clear, you'll see her endorsement. Why? Because she's a coward.). But that ain't going to happen (or, to play the liberal, "Oh please, oh please, oh please run Sarah").
Like I said, Ron Paul will win (or at least take second). Which is unfortunate. If Paul wins, the race will continue with all the same names (okay, Gary Johnson, Fred Karger and Buddy Roemer may drop out, what, you haven't heard of them either?). Now, if Romney somehow wins, I expect only four names to go forward (Romney, Gingrich - he hasn't sold all his books yet -, Paul and Santorum - I'm expecting Perry to come in 4th or worse, which will be the end of his bid, even if he goes forward).
Of course, I could be completely wrong. It's happened before. I am hoping to be very surprised if Huntsman (the only not completely wacky candidate) finished in the top 4 (if so, I see him getting the VP nod, sort of the anti-Palin gambit).
Now, I don't expect Paul to get anywhere near the actual nomination (or, to play the liberal again, "Oh please, oh please, oh please nominate the fruit-bat crazy great-grandpa, with sugar on top). I don't expect Gingrich to get the nomination either (and if he does, Obama should accept his Lincoln-Douglas debates, and just sit back and say nothing and let the man implode). Bachmann right now, IMHO, is shooting to be 2012's Sarah Palin. And I expect the same electoral response if she is put on the ticket (at least most US citizens know the rule of not getting into bed with anyone crazier than they are).
What I do think is hilarious is the anti-Romney ad which claims he's the choice of the "liberal Republican establishment." That's right, the whackaloons are subdividing and claiming the most conservative leadership evar in the RNC is actually too liberal for them.
Personally, I blame all this on the budgetary decisions of the States to close their mental hospitals and put all those people back out on the streets.
The best part of this whole process is that as the "Not-Romney" candidate rises to the top, they get more exposure. The voters get to see more of them. Hear more of their ideas. And because of that (more exposure and attention), they start falling in the polls.
Not fair, I know, there's still those who were hoping Sarah Palin might jump in (BTW, the Sarah hasn't endorsed anybody yet. Why? Because she doesn't know who will win yet. Once it's very clear, you'll see her endorsement. Why? Because she's a coward.). But that ain't going to happen (or, to play the liberal, "Oh please, oh please, oh please run Sarah").
Like I said, Ron Paul will win (or at least take second). Which is unfortunate. If Paul wins, the race will continue with all the same names (okay, Gary Johnson, Fred Karger and Buddy Roemer may drop out, what, you haven't heard of them either?). Now, if Romney somehow wins, I expect only four names to go forward (Romney, Gingrich - he hasn't sold all his books yet -, Paul and Santorum - I'm expecting Perry to come in 4th or worse, which will be the end of his bid, even if he goes forward).
Of course, I could be completely wrong. It's happened before. I am hoping to be very surprised if Huntsman (the only not completely wacky candidate) finished in the top 4 (if so, I see him getting the VP nod, sort of the anti-Palin gambit).
Now, I don't expect Paul to get anywhere near the actual nomination (or, to play the liberal again, "Oh please, oh please, oh please nominate the fruit-bat crazy great-grandpa, with sugar on top). I don't expect Gingrich to get the nomination either (and if he does, Obama should accept his Lincoln-Douglas debates, and just sit back and say nothing and let the man implode). Bachmann right now, IMHO, is shooting to be 2012's Sarah Palin. And I expect the same electoral response if she is put on the ticket (at least most US citizens know the rule of not getting into bed with anyone crazier than they are).
What I do think is hilarious is the anti-Romney ad which claims he's the choice of the "liberal Republican establishment." That's right, the whackaloons are subdividing and claiming the most conservative leadership evar in the RNC is actually too liberal for them.
Personally, I blame all this on the budgetary decisions of the States to close their mental hospitals and put all those people back out on the streets.
The best part of this whole process is that as the "Not-Romney" candidate rises to the top, they get more exposure. The voters get to see more of them. Hear more of their ideas. And because of that (more exposure and attention), they start falling in the polls.
Linkee-poo shovels the snow
It's not the first snowfall of the year. It's not even the first snowfall to stick. But it is the first snowfall I had to shovel (it wasn't deep enough to use the snow thrower, or at least half the driveway wasn't deep enough). Tomorrow it's back to work. We find out if anything changed over my absence. Joy and happy day.
On the plus side, no rejections yet.
Proof there are holiday decorations for everyone. (Grokked from Camille Alexa)
The joy of quiet. Or, why in the future we will pay out the nose for a little piece and quiet being off the grid. Or, the Amish are right. Much of this was prophesized by various writers, including the book Information Overload. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Janeice shares some important insights about holding your own self accountable.
The name of my next band tumblr. (Grokked from John Scalzi)
"Myths are propagated and embellished according to how they appeal to the prejudices of those who hear them…" That article is on the myth of the bra burning feminist, but that line will probably be applicable to several news stories/press conferences/political rallies this year at a rate of at least 3 times per week. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
On the plus side, no rejections yet.
Proof there are holiday decorations for everyone. (Grokked from Camille Alexa)
The joy of quiet. Or, why in the future we will pay out the nose for a little piece and quiet being off the grid. Or, the Amish are right. Much of this was prophesized by various writers, including the book Information Overload. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Janeice shares some important insights about holding your own self accountable.
The name of my next band tumblr. (Grokked from John Scalzi)
"Myths are propagated and embellished according to how they appeal to the prejudices of those who hear them…" That article is on the myth of the bra burning feminist, but that line will probably be applicable to several news stories/press conferences/political rallies this year at a rate of at least 3 times per week. (Grokked from Jay Lake)
Sunday, January 1, 2012
The sounds of horns, the baying of dogs
Not in time to make my last year's resolutions, but just in time for this year's, I've sent off my query letter to the first batch of three agents. I don't have the synopsis done yet, but fortunately there's a number of good agents that just want to see the query letter first.
Three, it's a magic number. So we're off on the great agent hunt.
I didn't keep track of how many time I rewrote the boilerplate part of the query letter. I'm hoping that I didn't commit any blunders or grammatical faux pas.
Also, I'm scared out of my mind. But on the flip side, I feel like a real writer again. I wasn't feeling that this past Fall.
Breathe in. Breathe out.
Okay, back to the regularly scheduled programming.
Three, it's a magic number. So we're off on the great agent hunt.
I didn't keep track of how many time I rewrote the boilerplate part of the query letter. I'm hoping that I didn't commit any blunders or grammatical faux pas.
Also, I'm scared out of my mind. But on the flip side, I feel like a real writer again. I wasn't feeling that this past Fall.
Breathe in. Breathe out.
Okay, back to the regularly scheduled programming.
Linkee-poo of one, because it's important
"Some scientists argue the danger (from back-scatter x-ray devices, the ones the TSA is rolling out) is exaggerated. They claim low levels stimulate the repair mechanism in cells, meaning that a little radiation might actually be good for the body." (Grokked from Tobias Buckell) The first part of that last sentence is true. X-ray radiation is ionizing radiation, in this case it means that when this radiation does damage to your DNA, it breaks the DNA chain. Your DNA can repair itself from such damages. This is called "dark repair" (in contrast to UV/non-ionizing radiation which causes the hydrogen atoms at the edges of your nucleotides - T and A IIRC - to kick into a higher energy level creating new hydrogen bonds between adjacent nucleotides, which can be repaired by a process called "light repair"). So, yes, the damage can stimulate the "dark repair" process. However, to say this is "good for the body" is complete and utter bullshit.
One, it costs you energy, your DNA needs to make the proper enzymes, and the repair isn't always correct. See, this is exactly the mechanism that causes X-rays to cause cancer. If your DNA remains broken, the cell is broken and won't function properly which leads it (in most cases) to apoptosis (or programmed cell death). However if that "dark repair" mechanism switches out some nucleotides while it's repairing that damage, which is possible (the "repair" is just meant to rejoin the DNA), that way can lay cancer.
Just in case you think the government establishes regulations willy-nilly, as in what the conservative Republicans want you to think, don't miss this line: "'Establishing a mandatory standard takes an enormous amount of resources and could take a decade to publish,' said Dan Kassiday, a longtime radiation safety engineer at the FDA." And then there is this line, "… since the mid-1990s, Congress has directed federal safety agencies to use industry standards wherever possible instead of creating their own," and this one: "The government used to have 500 people examining the safety of electronic products emitting radiation. It now has about 20 people. In fact, the FDA has not set a mandatory safety standard for an electronic product since 1985."
Feel safe, yet?
Well, you know, these things (the scanners) should be inspected for safety? Right? "Instead, annual inspections are done by Rapiscan, the scanners’ manufacturer." Because you can trust the person selling you the equipment to let you know when there's a problem with that equipment. Especially when that problem may not appear for years and may not be discernible from the background levels of cancer (see earlier comment about Chernobyl and how many cancers it may have caused).
"Some TSA screeners are concerned about their own radiation exposure from the backscatters, but the TSA has not allowed them to wear badges that could measure it…" Good thing we're not allowing them to form unions. There's a line here about, "if there's no reason to worry, why not let them wear exposure badges?" You know, if you haven't done anything wrong…
It's a good article with lots of info about how the government really works, and the influence of money in politics, the security theater, and just what your representatives (on all sides) are willing to sell your health out to get.
One, it costs you energy, your DNA needs to make the proper enzymes, and the repair isn't always correct. See, this is exactly the mechanism that causes X-rays to cause cancer. If your DNA remains broken, the cell is broken and won't function properly which leads it (in most cases) to apoptosis (or programmed cell death). However if that "dark repair" mechanism switches out some nucleotides while it's repairing that damage, which is possible (the "repair" is just meant to rejoin the DNA), that way can lay cancer.
Just in case you think the government establishes regulations willy-nilly, as in what the conservative Republicans want you to think, don't miss this line: "'Establishing a mandatory standard takes an enormous amount of resources and could take a decade to publish,' said Dan Kassiday, a longtime radiation safety engineer at the FDA." And then there is this line, "… since the mid-1990s, Congress has directed federal safety agencies to use industry standards wherever possible instead of creating their own," and this one: "The government used to have 500 people examining the safety of electronic products emitting radiation. It now has about 20 people. In fact, the FDA has not set a mandatory safety standard for an electronic product since 1985."
Feel safe, yet?
Well, you know, these things (the scanners) should be inspected for safety? Right? "Instead, annual inspections are done by Rapiscan, the scanners’ manufacturer." Because you can trust the person selling you the equipment to let you know when there's a problem with that equipment. Especially when that problem may not appear for years and may not be discernible from the background levels of cancer (see earlier comment about Chernobyl and how many cancers it may have caused).
"Some TSA screeners are concerned about their own radiation exposure from the backscatters, but the TSA has not allowed them to wear badges that could measure it…" Good thing we're not allowing them to form unions. There's a line here about, "if there's no reason to worry, why not let them wear exposure badges?" You know, if you haven't done anything wrong…
It's a good article with lots of info about how the government really works, and the influence of money in politics, the security theater, and just what your representatives (on all sides) are willing to sell your health out to get.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)