Find on all DianaHsieh.comjust NoodleFood / Most Recent Comments / NoodleFood RSS Feed

Wednesday, October 29, 2003 Colorado Wildfires By Diana Hsieh @ 9:18 PM Today was a hot and gusty day... and Colorado seems to be following the lead of California. As I drove up to Boulder for class today, I saw a huge plume of smoke from what turned out to be the Overland fire. And as I drove home after class, I discovered that a second fire was burning out of control just a few miles northeast of our house. We're not in any immediate danger -- are are unlikely to be given the lay of the land and the forthcoming weather. However, for the moment, the wind has picked up and shifted in our direction, which is worrisome. Here's a news photo of the fire. We have a fairly good view of the fire from a hill in our neighborhood, so Paul and I are going to go take a look before heading to bed. This is our third fire in three years. I must admit, it's getting a bit tiresome. Update: The cold and damp weather seems to have knocked out the fire. Yeah! E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis New Fire Map By Diana Hsieh @ 9:35 AM This morning's fire map doesn't look good: The news isn't so great either: Fire crews exhausted by three days of battle were pulled back. "There's really no way to stop this fire from getting up to Julian," said Rich Hawkins, a U.S. Forest Service fire chief. Reinforcements were sent out, but Hawkins said he needed twice as many. "They're so fatigued that despite the fact the fire perimeter might become much larger, we're not willing to let the firefighters continue any further," he said. Ten miles south of Julian, about 90 percent of homes were destroyed in Cuyamaca, a lakeside town of about 160 residents, said Chief Bill Clayton of the California Department of Forestry. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Sunday, October 26, 2003 Fires in San Diego By Diana Hsieh @ 6:46 PM As many of you know, Paul and I used to live in San Diego: first in La Jolla, then in Alpine. So when I look at the GeoMac wildfire map, I know all to well just how densely populated so many of the areas affected by the fires are. The news report only makes the situation sound worse: Three major fires are cutting a swath through San Diego, in Valley Center, Scripps Ranch and Otay Mesa. Residents and businesses in Kearny Mesa, Scripps Ranch and Tierrasanta have been evacuated. Ten deaths have been confirmed in San Diego County. One of the fires started near Ramona overnight. The fires have since charred more than 100,000 acres and destroyed hundred of structures. Officials said that weary firefighters were battling the blazes on several fronts, contending with gusting winds, soaring temperatures and low humidity as they struggle to stop the flames. "We have everything sent out that we can possibly send out," said San Diego Fire Department dispatcher Ron Cumbey. "And we are asking for all that we can get." The so-called "Cedar" fire started about 7:45 p.m. Saturday near Ramona and swept through parts of Lakeside, jumped Highway 67 and reached Scripps Ranch, said Susan Plese of the San Diego County Sheriff's Department. Flames jumped from home to home in Scripps Ranch, which authorities said was evacuated by 10 a.m. It is not yet known how many strucutres have been destroyed or damaged there. The fires soon spread westward toward Interstate 805 and skipped over 805 near State Route 52. Residents and businesses in Tierrasanta and Kearny Mesa have been evacuated. Officials said that a small patch of fire west of 805 near Clairemont Mesa Blvd. has been contained, and it appears that the Clairemont Mesa area will not be immediately affected. ... And so on. My heart goes out to the people affected by the wildfire. Update: I just found this picture of a firefighter walking along one side of Clairemont Mesa Boulevard while the other side burns. Jesus. The story that accompanies it said: One victim was found dead in a trailer, one in a motor home and four in vehicles, county sheriff's spokeswoman Susan Knauss said. Three were killed while trying to escape on foot and two were dead on arrival at local hospitals. "We were literally running through fire," said Lisza Pontes, 43, who escaped the fire with her family after the roar of flames woke them at 3:45 a.m. As they drove off, they saw a neighbor's mobile home explode. "I was grabbing wet towels. Fire was at our feet," Pontes said. "It was blazing over our heads and burning everywhere." Augh. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Hot Hot Hot! By Diana Hsieh @ 3:57 PM David Kelley's recent commentary "The Witless Battle Over General Boykin" was excellent: informative, philosophical, and a bit spicy. It's short, so I've reproduced it in its entirety. The crackle of small-arms fire you hear about General William Boykin is the sound of the latest skirmish in America's culture wars. Boykin is the Pentagon's head of intelligence in the war on terrorism. He is also an evangelical Christian who has told church groups that Muslim terrorists hate the United States because it is a "Christian nation," that our real enemy is not Osama bin Laden but Satan, and that we will prevail only if "we come against them in the name of Jesus." It gets worse. According to the Los Angeles Times reporter who broke the story, Boykin would show audiences a picture he took while in Somalia, after the "Blackhawk Down" fiasco in Mogadishu. Pointing to an unnatural-looking dark streak in the sky, he said, "Ladies and gentlemen, this is your enemy. It is the principalities of darkness. It is a demonic presence in that city that God revealed to me as the enemy." The usual suspects quickly rounded themselves up and the cultural skirmish began. Liberals denounced the general's remarks as divisive and likely to offend Muslims worldwide, and called for his resignation. "The most important global struggle," wrote Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman, "is not between one religion and another but between fanaticism and tolerance." Conservatives rushed to Boykin's defense. Not only does he have the right to express his religious conviction, they argued, but he is also right that America is a Christian nation, engaged in a war against evil. Following the culture wars is usually interesting. It is often infuriating. But in this case it's just embarrassing. The mark of the devil over Mogadishu? And this from a man in charge of military intelligence? The problem here is not intolerance, divisiveness, or extremism. It is rank irrationality. The whole exchange is another tiresome example of a false dichotomy: dogmatism vs. relativism. Conservatives are right that liberals are afraid to assert the truth of their convictions. Liberals are right that conservatives are claiming truth for sectarian religious dogmas--and rightly alarmed that they invoke those dogmas to justify war. What both sides ignore is the alternative of reason and rational certainty. When Islamic terrorists attack us out of hatred for our secular way of life, our pursuit of happiness, our wealth and productive achievements, it is reason, not Jesus, that tells us they are viciously wrong. And reason does tell us that they are wrong, objectively wrong, and that we are objectively right in responding with force. Earth to General Boykin and his conservative allies: You are defending a country founded in the Enlightenment, the era when reason was finally recognized as the arbiter of truth. You are relying on America's vast wealth, created by people who used their minds, not their prayers, to work and produce. You are employing sophisticated military technology created by scientists whose highest commitment is to facts, observation, logic, and proof. You would not count on incantations or sacred texts to find bin Laden's cave. How can you rely on such means to justify your cause? Earth to Ellen Goodman and her liberal co-ideologists: You are living in a country founded in the Enlightenment, by men who believed in the power of reason to find the truth and create a good society. The tolerance you enjoy is not an ultimate value; it is a means to an end, an enabling condition for peaceful cooperation and the rational exchange of ideas. If peace and reason are not objective values, worth defending when attacked, then you have no case for tolerance in the first place. And to judge by your vehement antipathy to dogmatism, you're really not willing to tolerate that, are you? The next time one of these skirmishes begins--whether it's the Ten Commandments in a courtroom, the Pledge of Allegiance, or a leader's invocation of faith--could we try to avoid another such witless battle? E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Wednesday, October 22, 2003 A Great Day By Diana Hsieh @ 8:18 PM Today has been a most excellent day. First, I had only very, very mild problems with migraines. The beta-blockers seem to be kicking in. Second, in my Aristotle class, we discussed a rather interesting and fundamental objection to Gilbert Ryle's argument that philosophy of mind is shot through with a "category mistake" concerning mind and body. (Perhaps I'll post on that later.) Third, I had a fun time arguing about a priori knowledge and intuitions while out for drinks with other grad students and Mike Huemer after Epistemology class. Fourth, I had an interesting chat with Mike Huemer about dualism and other theories of mind before heading home. Fifth, I found out that my article on false excuses has been accepted for publication by The Journal of Value Inquiry with only editorial changes needed. Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! This is huge for me. This is what made a good day absolutely fucking great. Sixth, I found my glasses sitting on one of our recliners, where they had been hidden under a blanket for the past week. After two weeks of migraine hell, I deserved a day like this, dammit. And wow, has it ever been sweet! E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Translation Services By Diana Hsieh @ 10:06 AM A while ago, I got this spam advertising translation services. Let's just say that, based upon the quality of the English in the letter, I won't be hiring them anytime soon. Dear Sir or Madam: I am the general manager of Beijing Huayi Translation Co.,Ltd, that is a professional translation company based in Beijing. we supply high quality translation service. I hope to have opportunity to supply you with translation service. Our company is skilled in Chinese translation, especially in English-Chinese, Chinese-English, French-Chinese Chinese-French, German-Chinese, Chinese-German, Japanese-Chinese, Chinese-Japanese, Japanese-Chinese, Chinese-Japanese, Russian-Chinese, Chinese-Russian, Korean-Chinese and Chinese-Korean translation projects. We have finished many big projects and made many achievements in the translation industry. We have good and long-term relationships with many famous international corporations, for example, P&G, Delaware Corporation, Multiling Corporation, many governmental organizations of China and big publishing houses. We have translated about 30 books from English to Chinese for some famous press house of China. We once translated technical material of many big projects, for example, China West-East Gas Pipeline Project of PetroChina. There are 8 full-time employees and 1500 full time and part-time translators in my company. Our weekly turnout is 250 thousand words and the monthly turnout is 1 million words. Almost all of our translators are professional translators with many experience and good education background. Most of our managers and full-time employees of our company have doctor degree or master degree in science, law or other specialties. Our translation business mainly includes following fields: Medicine & medical instrument (15%); Computer & IT (15%); Chemistry, Biology & chemical engineering (10%); Law (10%); Economy and management (10%); Finance and Insurance (5%) ; Traffic & railway (5%); Mechanism (5%); Architecture (5%); Culture and People (3%); Geology and Environment Protection (3%); Commerce (2%); Education (2%); Others (10%). We mainly translate through traditional way by human being, and at the same time we can use computer-aided translation software to do translation work. We have many copies of the famous computer-aided translation software, Star Transit and TermStar. Many of our translators and employees can use the software to translate the big projects as our customs required. With the software our translation works have higher quality and productivity. Our rates are as follows: English-Chinese: US$0.045-0.05/English word; Chinese-English: US$0.065-0.08/English word; French-Chinese: US$0.055-0.06/French word; Chinese-French: US$0.065-0.08/French word; German-Chinese: US$0.055-0.06 per French word; Chinese-German: US$0.065-0.08 per French word; Japanese-Chinese: US$0.035-0.05 /Japanese Character; Chinese-Japanese: US$0.04-0.06 /Japanese Character; Japanese-Chinese: US$0.035-0.05/Japanese Character; Chinese-Japanese: US$0.04-0.06/Japanese Character; Russian-Chinese: US$0.03-0.035/Chinese Character; Chinese-Russian:US$0.04-0.045 /Chinese Character; Korean-Chinese:US$0.03-0.035/Chinese Character; Chinese-Korean:US$0.040-0.045/ Chinese Character. Best regards Dr. Zhen Wei General Manager of Beijing Huayi Translation Co.,Ltd. 602 of Building 1, 123 of Zhongguancun East Road Haidian Dis.Beijing China. Post code: 100086 Tel: 008610-62144551 62144542 Fax: 0086-10-62149508 E-mail: bjctn@163.com gukexinxiang@sohu.com If this mail has disturbed you, I will be very sorry. You can send me a letter to: translation18@sohu.com I will remove your e-mail from our list. I just love the reference to their "many copies of the famous computer-aided translation software." I have Dragon NaturallySpeaking myself, but it must not be very famous, as I have yet to see any paparazzi sneaking around the house! E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Sunday, October 19, 2003 Ouch! By Diana Hsieh @ 10:25 PM Life has really sucked lately. I mean: REALLY SUCKED. From the outside, everything is pretty much the same as usual. From the inside, pain and suffering abound -- thanks to a now ten-day migraine. Normally, I get migraines a few times a month for a few hours at a time. Aspirin and Excedrin usually work very well for me, even though they do sometimes create "rebound headaches," i.e. repeat headaches the next day. If those options fail, then I can turn to my prescription Maxalt. And if that fails, then usually a nap or a night of sleep will cure all ills. A few weeks ago, I started getting migraines while up in Boulder twice a week for class. That was unusual and bother, but not a huge problem. But then late last week, hell descended upon me. I got a migraine that just wouldn't go away. In its first few days, I was able to banish it for a few hours at a time with aspirin or Excedrin. But after a while, the pain was getting worse and the medicine less effective. One dark 4am, I woke up with the delightful feeling large spike through my skull. The Maxalt (which does not generate rebound headaches) was completely ineffective. In short, life sucked. On Friday, I saw my doctor. She recommended that I stay away from the aspirin and Excedrin, so as not to create more headaches later. Instead of the Maxalt, she gave me a new prescription for the migraines (Relpax), one supposed to cover a person for 24 hours better. She also put me on a low dose of beta-blockers in order to break the migraine cycle. (When I was an undergrad, I effectively controlled my excessive migraines with beta-blockers. They made me tired, but otherwise worked very well.) This all seemed like a reasonable course of action to me. Unfortunately, the Relpax has done nothing to curb the migraine pain, even in its maximum dosage. And the beta-blockers don't seem to be working yet. (I'm going to call my doctor tomorrow about increasing my dosage.) As a result, Saturday was a really miserable day; the migraine just ground into me all day long. The pain hasn't been quite as bad today, but I've had problems reading due to my aura. (An aura is the visual hallucination associated with a migraine. Mine tend to be a cross between strangely shifting shadows and very fine tv snow.) So now you know why my life has sucked of late. Um, thanks for listening. Okay, my migraine and I are going to bed now. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis More Word Jumbles By Diana Hsieh @ 12:15 PM In response to my previous post on word jumbles, Tibor Machan sent me this jumble: Almtiedtdy, the eniaimtoiln of tmtnrileeeakg furad and the piiibroothn asnaigt dipeevcte and aviubse tmtnieeeakg atcs or pcaiecrts are sfiacinngirt pilbuc ceornncs. I readily concede that I have no idea what it says. So what is the difference between this jumble and the ever-so-readable one? In the comments on my previous post, Tim pointed us to this excellent explanation by Matt Davis of the facts of the matter. Based upon his research into the subject, the author concludes that the brain can compensate for some jumbles, but is not as flexible as claimed in the original jumble: Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Matt disputes that merely the placement first and last letters determine whether a word can be easily read or not by asking us to compare these three sentences: 1) A vheclie epxledod at a plocie cehckipont near the UN haduqertares in Bagahdd on Mnoday kilinlg the bmober and an Irqai polcie offceir 2) Big ccunoil tax ineesacrs tihs yaer hvae seezueqd the inmcoes of mnay pneosenirs 3) A dootcr has aimttded the magltheuansr of a tageene ceacnr pintaet who deid aetfr a hatospil durg blendur Matt then comments: All three sentences were randomised according to the "rules" described in the meme. The first and last letters have stayed in the same place and all the other letters have been moved. However, I suspect that your experience is the same as mine, which is that the texts get progressively more difficult to read. If you get stuck, the sentences are linked to the original unscrambled texts. Hopefully, these demonstrations will have convinced you that in some cases it can be very difficult to make sense of sentences with jumbled up words. Clearly, the first and last letter is not the only thing that you use when reading text. If this really was the case, how would you tell the difference between pairs of words like "salt" and "slat"? So what really determines the readability of jumbled words? Using the sentence "The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm" as his example, Matt suggests these criteria: 1) Short words are easy - 2 or 3 letter words don't change at all. The only change that is possible in a 4 letter words is to swap the order of the middle letters which doesn't cause too much difficulty (see 4). 2) Function words (the, be, and, you etc.) stay the same - mostly because they are short words, see (1). This really helps the reader by preserving the grammatical structure of the original, helping you to work out what word is likely to come next. This is especially crucial for reading jumbled text - words that are predictable are going to be easier to read in this situation. 3) Of the 15 words in this sentence, there are 8 that are still in the correct order. However, as a reader you might not notice this since many of the words that remain intact are function words, which readers don't tend to notice when reading. For instance, when people are asked to detect individual letters in a sentence, they are more likely to miss letters in function words. 4) Transpositions of adjacent letters (e.g. porbelm for problem) are easier to read than more distant transpositions (e.g. pborlem). We know from research in which people read words presented very briefly on a computer screen that the exterior letters of words are easier to detect than middle letters - confirming one of the ideas present in the meme. We also know that position information for letters in the middle of words is more difficult to detect and that those errors that are made tend to be transpositions. One explanation of this property of the reading system is that it results from the fact that the position of an exterior letter is less easily confused with adjacent letters. There is only direction in which an exterior letter can move, and there are fewer adjacent letters to 'mask' an exterior letter. Both of these properties emerge very naturally from a neural network model in which letters are identified at different positions in an artifical retina. The account proposed by Richard Shillcock and colleagues, also suggests another mechanism that could be at work in the meme. They propose a model of word recognition in which each word is split in half since the information at the retina is split between the two hemispheres of the brain when we read. In some of the simulations of their model, Richard Shillcock simulates the effect of jumbling letters in each half of the word. It seems that keeping letters in the appropriate half of the word, reduces the difficulty of reading jumbled text. This approach was used in generating example (1) above, but not for (2) or (3). 5) None of the words that have reordered letters create another word (wouthit vs witohut). We know from existing work, that words that can be confused by swapping interior letters (e.g. salt and slat) are more difficult to read. To make an easy to read jumbled word you should therefore avoid making other words. 6) Transpositions were used that preserve the sound of the original word (e.g. toatl vs ttaol for total). This will assist in reading, since we often attend to the sound of the words even when reading for meaning: 7) The text is reasonably predictable. For instance, given the first few words of the sentence, you can guess what words are coming next (even with very little information from the letters in the word). We know that context plays an important role in understanding speech that is distorted or presented in noise, the same is probably true for written text that has been jumbled. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Friday, October 17, 2003 Word Jumbles By Diana Hsieh @ 11:35 PM Some of you may have seen this little tidbit in e-mail a few weeks ago when it was making the rounds: Instructions: Just read the sentence straight through without really thinking about it. Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod dosen't mttaer, the olny thnig thta's iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat ltteer of eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one is stlil able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy. What I find strange about my capacity to quickly read that jumble of letters is that I am horrible at real jumbles, i.e. puzzles where you have to discern the word from totally mixed-up letters. I wonder why fixing the first and last letters makes such a huge cognitive difference. Anyone know? E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Oh, Blessed Fibula By Diana Hsieh @ 11:23 AM For a long time now, I've done much of my computing work on an old but ultralight Sony Vaio laptop (200MHz CPU, 96MB RAM, 2GB HD, Win98, but only 2.8 lbs), as I don't like being constrained to my desk. So I've long had all philosophy files on the laptop, but I also recently swapped over my e-mail too, as I found that I could keep up with the flood better if I could send out e-mails while watching TV. A while ago, I decided that I would get a new laptop soon. And then I decided that I wanted it sooner. And then I decided that I wanted it now. So on Tuesday, I ordered a refurbished Dell Inspiron 300m (1.2GHz CPU, 632MB RAM, 60GB HD, WinXP, and still just 2.99 lbs). I was expecting it to arrive sometime next week or so. But it arrived today, just 3 days after I ordered it! And wow, am I ever in love. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Wednesday, October 15, 2003 Kill Bill By Diana Hsieh @ 6:47 PM I haven't seen Kill Bill yet, but I suspect that this NRO review by philosopher Thomas Hibbs is spot-on. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Magic Words By Diana Hsieh @ 11:50 AM Everyone needs a refresher on Magic Words on occasion. So here's the short course from my beloved Miss Manners: "Please": Precedes any request, however trivial or perfunctory. Unauthorized replacements: "Here's what I need" or "I need you to . . ." "Thank you": Follows any granted request, however trivial or perfunctory. (Note to Gentle Reader who argues that he is "not obliged to be profusely grateful for a person's actions or requests in the normal course of their work": No, but you are obliged to say "please" and "thank you" to them.) "You're welcome": Response to "thank you." Unauthorized replacements: "No problem" and "Thank you." (Note to Gentle Reader who argues that "we need to assure customers that there is not anything that cannot be done to assist them": Yes, there probably is, but you can create that impression by saying "Certainly, I'd be happy to" when the request is made, and then by cheerfully fulfilling it.) "No, thank you": Negative response to offers, typically of refreshments. Unauthorized replacement: "I'm fine." "Yes, please": Positive response to offers. Unauthorized replacement: "Okay." "Excuse me": Preface to interrupting or otherwise inconveniencing someone. Unauthorized replacements: "Hey," "I'm just going to sneak by you here," "Coming through!" "Let me just steal that" and "Well, excuse you." (Note to numerous Gentle Readers who point out that "Excuse me" is often the immediate prelude to grabbing and shoving: Deplorably true, but would you really be happier with the unannounced rude action?) "I'm sorry": Response to complaints about mistakes made by oneself or one's place of employment. Unauthorized replacements: "I'm sorry you feel that way," "I can see you're upset," "I wasn't here that day" and "Okay, here's what you have to do." "That's quite all right": Response to an apology. Can be said graciously if the apology is satisfactory or coldly if it is not. Unauthorized replacement: "Well, you ought to be." "Sir, Madam, Ma'am, Miss": Courtesy titles to people whose names are not known to the speaker. Unauthorized replacement: "You guys." Response to the argument that such titles makes one "feel old": Perhaps you are, but whatever your age, you can't alter it by being rude to people who treat you with dignity. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Tuesday, October 14, 2003 Myths of Marriage By Diana Hsieh @ 4:24 PM Paul forwarded me this article debunking ten common myths about marriage a few days ago. Thanks, oh husband of mine, but where is the debunking of the myth about the need to engage in retaliatory wife-tickling? For me, the most interesting research about marriage concerns the "benefits gap" between cohabitation and marriage. In particular, I suspect that cohabitation makes abandoning a relationship both too easy and too hard. Cohabitation makes abandonment too easy for couples that probably ought to be married, in that a person can leave without the sense of personal failure that (at least ought to) accompany a divorce and without the push from friends and family to "try to make the marriage work." Often that internal and external pressure can prevent a couple from giving up on a good relationship too soon. Cohabitation also makes abandonment too hard for couples that probably ought to only be dating, in that their lives become too deeply intertwined to easily break up if a relationship goes sour. Leaving a bad relationship is often hard to do, but cohabitation makes such a change even more difficult with the need to move, to divide up stuff, and so on. So a cohabitator might thus be more likely to stay with the wrong person than someone merely dating. Both of these considerations might be reasons why the psychological data overwhelming shows that "those who live together before marriage have less satisfying marriages and a considerably higher chance of eventually breaking up." In short, cohabitation attempts to split the difference between marriage and dating; the couple wants to enjoy the benefits of marriage without the burden of commitment or the need to be very selective about one's partner. But marriage without commitment and selectivity isn't a recipe for bliss, but for personal turmoil and disaster. Yet some people (including people I know) keep trying -- over and over and over again. When will they learn the true nature of the problem? E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Oh, Chilly! By Diana Hsieh @ 2:58 PM Okay, I admit it: My family has a somewhat twisted sense of humor. This picture was forwarded from my aunt (who lives in Denmark) to my mother to me. Brrrrr! E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Sunday, October 12, 2003 The Psychology of Prostitution By Diana Hsieh @ 1:26 PM Josh Zader pointed me to these fascinating comments by Heidi Fleiss on prostitution. She talks about the government's legal pursuit of her, how she got into the madam business, and advocates the legalization of prostitution. People often presume that prostitutes are somehow psychologically damaged by their trade, but I wonder whether that is true. Certainly streetwalkers are not paragons of mental health, but it is doubtful that prostitution made them that way. And what of the higher-end prostitutes? And some women may be drawn to the profession due to past sexual abuse or somesuch, but even if they are thereby damaged further, prostitution cannot really be blamed for the negative outcome. And some women might simply be dispositionally unsuited for the profession, such that they would be damaged if they entered it. But none of these facts shows that the profession is itself psychologically harmful. It might be positively beneficial for some women in some circumstances -- or at least no more psychologically harmful (and much more lucrative) than alternative professions. Frankly, I suspect that casual sleeping around is far more damaging to a woman than prostitution, given the likely resulting emotional confusion and turmoil. The prostitute can fairly easily create a sort of emotional distance between herself and her clients, largely because she knows exactly why she's sleeping with them: money. The slut, on the other hand, is performing extremely intimate acts with virtual strangers and other unworthies... but why? She is investing her trust in men who have done nothing to deserve it. I think that such a contradiction must prey on the mind over time, gradually diminishing the woman's capacity to make wise judgments about other people. I wonder if there are any good psychological studies on the psychological effects of promiscuity... and comparing those effects in women versus in men. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Saturday, October 11, 2003 Spam Control By Diana Hsieh @ 11:27 PM Yesterday, I hit my limit. I'd finally had just way way way too too too much much much spam. A few months ago, I started using PopFile to filter my mail, as sorting through my inbox had become way too cumbersome. (I must have a high tolerance for spam to begin with, for at that point I was probably getting about 150 spams per day.) But as of yesterday, spam accounted for about 75% of my messages -- around 400 per day. As a result, even a super-quick scan of the "from" and "subject" fields in PopFile (in increments of 100 messages per page) in order to catch the inevitable occasional error was becoming way too cumbersome. Downloading mail while travelling via dialup took forever. It was time to do something server-side. Since I run my own mail and web server, I had options... and much work to do. So yesterday, I spent hours trying to get a few of the friendlier DNS-based blockers to work with sendmail, based upon recommendations from sysadmins on Politech. (Politech is an excellent list on the intersection of politics, culture, and technology run by Declan McCullagh.) As it turned out, the setup was fine; the recommended test was what was broken. Unfortunately, that solution didn't seem to block all that much spam. More drastic and time-consuming measures were needed. So today, instead of working on philosophy (like I was supposed to), I implemented some further anti-spam measures. One fairly easy change to make was to the e-mail address listed in my internic registrations. The old address (internic@brickell.net) attracted a fair amount of spam. So I created a new alias for those registrations, changed my account information with my registrar, and eliminated the old alias. I expect that I'll have to change that address periodically. A more cumbersome change was eliminating my auxiliary diana@whatever.com e-mail addresses in favor of just my dianahsieh.com address. Basically, one common problem is that I often get multiple copies of the same spam within a short time period, one to diana@olist.com, another to diana@geekpress.com, another to diana@brickell.net, and so on. So I changed all of my web sites to list only my dianahsieh.com address (in a de-spamified format, of course)... and then set up my virtual user table to reject all the other addresses as "user unknown." (I did e-mail the dozen or so people still using my brickell.net address.) Basically, that's about as much as I can reasonably do at the moment. There's one more spam-attracting address I might want to change. And I should google for other suggestions from sysadmins. But I want to see how effective these changes are... and for that I need a few days to track the effect. But sadly, I don't expect to be able to cut my spam down to less than 100 messages per day -- at least not while still letting all my real mail through. In closing, I should mention that after grappling with spam in my own small way on my own small server, I see now what a massive problem it is for real sysadmins. Before, I knew that the problem was big, but I thought the anti-spam tools were more effective and reliable than they are. Now I know better. Spam is a huge drain upon computing and human resources -- one that requires a technical rather than legal solution. But I don't see one forthcoming any time soon. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Friday, October 10, 2003 Food Blogging By Diana Hsieh @ 9:38 AM In addition to her always-funny cat blogging, Hanah Metchis often blogs about her exploits with new recipes. So in that grand tradition, I thought I'd tempt you with thoughts about three days worth of meals cooked up in my kitchen: Last night, Paul and I enjoyed delicious steak au poivre with brandy cream sauce, braised belgian endives (a favorite), and baked spiced pears. Tonight, we'll be having chicken marsala, mango and tomato salad with basil dressing, green beans with orange essence and maple-toasted pecans, and sangria. On Saturday, we'll be enjoying chicken cutlets stuffed with gorgonzola, walnuts, and figs, carrots vichy, and some as-of-yet unknown dessert. Let's just say that I was in a serious mood to cook when I made up the dinner menu. By the way, almost all of these recipes are courtesy of the fine folks at Cooks Illustrated. Unlike most, their recipes are reliably stellar. Why? Because unlike most, they focus on the science of cooking -- and always test an insane number of variations of a recipe in order to get the most delicious one. As a result, I totally trust their recipes to be well worth my time, effort, and money. But you might wonder whether such extensive testing of recipes is really necessary. After all, shouldn't a cook be able to deduce the effect of changes to a recipe based upon past experience? It's just chemistry, right? Well, it's not that easy, as cooking involves such complex chemical processes that reliable prediction is often impossible. And even in cases where general principles might apply, many recipes will have some obscure, not-yet-thought-of confounding factor in terms of ingredients or preparation. Thus it is critical to test variations of recipes, to vary the factors that are most likely to result in changes for the better. (As such, it's also necessary to have an idea of what constitutes better or worse, i.e. to know what your goal for a dish is.) The Cooks Illustrated recipes always have a short essay on their testing, which (in addition to being interesting and well-written) is invaluable for implementing the recipe well. Okay, I admit it, I'm in love with these folks... or at least my stomach is. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Tuesday, October 07, 2003 Vile Cartoon By Diana Hsieh @ 4:23 PM Want to see something vile and dishonest? Then go visit this cartoon by Pat Oliphant which paints Ahnold as a Nazi, as someone Hitler would love. In a bit of gross irony, these leftist attacks fairly well exemplify the sins-of-the-father ideology of the Nazis. Arnold is supposed to be guilty due to his father's association with Nazism, not due to any action or sympathy of his own. The comment "Well, you can take the boy out of Austria, but..." paints Arnold as unable to shed himself of birth-nation, despite his choice to become an American. What ever happened to judging people on the basis of their own choices and ideas? Personally, I think I would have voted for Tom McClintock if I still lived in California, but the barely-Republican Terminator doesn't deserve this kind treatment. E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Dam Beavers By Diana Hsieh @ 10:57 AM The following exchange between the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, State of Michigan and citizen Ryan DeVries is hysterial -- and better yet, true! STATE OF MICHIGAN Reply to: GRAND RAPIDS DISTRICT OFFICE STATE OFFICE BUILDING 6TH FLOOR 350 OTTAWA NW GRAND RAPIDS MI 49503-2341 JOHN ENGLER, Governor DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY HOLLISTER BUILDING, PO BOX 30473, LANSING MI 48909-7973 INTERNET: http://www.deq.state.mi RUSSELL J. HARDING, Director December 17, 1997 CERTIFIED Mr. Ryan DeVries 2088 Dagget Pierson, MI 49339 Dear Mr. DeVries: SUBJECT: DEQ File No.97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20; Montcalm County Dear Mr. DeVries: It has come to the attention of the Department of Environmental Quality that there has been recent unauthorized activity on the above referenced parcel of property. You have been certified as the legal landowner and/or contractor who did the following unauthorized activity: Construction and maintenance of two wood debris dams across the outlet stream of Spring Pond. A permit must be issued prior to the start of this type of activity. A review of the Department's files shows that no permits have been issued. Therefore, the Department has determined that this activity is in violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated. The Department has been informed that one or both of the dams partially failed during a recent rain event, causing debris and flooding at downstream locations. We find that dams of this nature are inherently hazardous and cannot be permitted. The Department therefore orders you to cease and desist all activities at this location, and to restore the stream to a free-flow condition by removing all wood and brush forming the dams from the stream channel. All restoration work shall be completed no later than January 31,2003. Please notify this office when the restoration has been completed so that a follow-up site inspection may be scheduled by our staff. Failure to comply with this request or any further unauthorized activity on the site may result in this case being referred for elevated enforcement action. We anticipate and would appreciate your full cooperation in this matter. Please feel free to contact me at this office if you have any questions. Sincerely, David L. Price District Representative Land and Water Management Division The response: Dear Mr. Price, Re: DEQ File No. 97-59-0023; T11N; R10W, Sec. 20; Montcalm County. Your certified letter dated 10/17/02 has been handed to me to respond to. I am the legal landowner but not the Contractor at 2088 Dagget, Pierson, Michigan. A couple of beavers are in the (State unauthorized) process of constructing and maintaining two wood "debris" dams across the outlet stream of my Spring Pond. While I did not pay for, authorize, nor supervise their dam project, I think they would be highly offended that you call their skillful use of nature's building materials "debris". I would like to challenge your department to attempt to emulate their dam project any time and/or any place you choose. I believe I can safely state there is no way you could ever match their dam skills, their dam resourcefulness, their dam ingenuity, their dam persistence, their dam determination and/or their dam work ethic. As to your request, I do not think the beavers are aware that they must first fill out a dam permit prior to the start of this type of dam activity. My first dam question to you is: (1) Are you trying to discriminate against my Spring Pond Beavers or (2) do you require all beavers throughout this State to conform to said dam request? If you are not discriminating against these particular beavers, through the Freedom of Information Act, I request completed copies of all those other applicable beaver dam permits that have been issued. Perhaps we will see if there really is a dam violation of Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams, of the Natural Resource and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being sections 324.30101 to 324.30113 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, annotated. I have several concerns. My first concern is -- aren't the beavers entitled to legal representation? The Spring Pond Beavers are financially destitute and are unable to pay for said representation - so the State will have to provide them with a dam lawyer. The Department's dam concern that either one or both of the dams failed during a recent rain event causing flooding is proof that this is a natural occurrence, which the Department is required to protect. In other words, we should leave the Spring Pond Beavers alone rather than harassing them and calling their dam names. If you want the stream "restored" to a dam free-flow condition please contact the beavers -- but if you are going to arrest them, they obviously did not pay any attention to your dam letter, they being unable to read English. In my humble opinion, the Spring Pond Beavers have a right to build their unauthorized dams as long as the sky is blue, the grass is green and water flows downstream. They have more dam rights than I do to live and enjoy Spring Pond. If the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection lives up to its name, it should protect the natural resources (Beavers) and the environment (Beavers' Dams). So, as far as the beavers and I are concerned, this dam case can be referred for more elevated enforcement action right now. Why wait until 1/31/2003? The Spring Pond Beavers may be under the dam ice then and there will be no way for you or your dam staff to contact/harass them then. In conclusion, I would like to bring to your attention to a real environmental quality health problem in the area. It is the bears! Bears are actually defecating in our woods. I definitely believe you should be persecuting the defecating bears and leave the beavers alone. If you are going to investigate the beaver dam, watch your step! (The bears are not careful where they dump!) Being unable to comply with your dam request, and being unable to contact you on your dam answering machine, I am sending this response to your dam office. Ryan DeVries E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis Blogging Resumes By Diana Hsieh @ 8:55 AM Hi folks, I know that I haven't blogged much over the past few weeks (okay, not at all). Life here has been crazy in both wonderful and terrible ways. Blogging shall now resume. Diana E-mail Diana Hsieh    PermaLink    Comments (Popup)    BloggerThis

Goodies NoodleFoodlers Diana Hsieh Paul Hsieh Greg Perkins Guest NoodleFoodlers Paula Hall Blog Stuff Recent Comments RSS Feed by E-Mail Ask a Question Blogger Trackbacks Technorati Trackbacks Blogger Trackbacks NoodleFood RSS Feed NetFlix Friends Reader Map Objectivist Mailing Lists OActivists OBloggers OAcademics Objectivism Resources Ayn Rand Lexicon False Objectivism Collection Front Range Objectivism Ayn Rand Institute DC Objectivist Salon Ayn Rand Society Activism The Objective Standard The Undercurrent FIRM (Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine) Ayn Rand Institute Family Paul Hsieh's GeekPress Meredith Brickell Ceramics Blogroll Archives March 2002 April 2002 May 2002 June 2002 July 2002 August 2002 September 2002 October 2002 November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008