Category: Uncategorized

In a recent post in ‘s journal, I commented about how it seems that the religious extremists who value the prohibition of gay marriage over feeding the poor, etc, love Paul more than Jesus. It seems a simple observation to me, but I’d hope it would be offensive to the parties in question, even though I somehow doubt it would. I think it would be more befuddling than insulting. Sad that.

In the segments of time too short to be useful (the time between lunch and bus is turning out to be one of those), I have a variety of time wasting strategies. Of them is to browse international airfare deals. It seems that there is a $303 r/t ticket between minneapolis and frankfurt, for weekday travel after January 10th and before march 31st. You normally can’t get tickets that cheap to san fran, let alone germany. Spring break is included in that time span. I think I’m going to do it, but I’m not sure where all I ought to go in Deutschland and neighboring countries. =)

There is a certain gentleman I’d like to visit in Dusseldorf, a few ljers it’d be cool to meet (at least I’d know I wouldn’t be swimming in totally unfamiliar waters the entire time), and I’d kinda like to check out Amsterdam. Maybe Copenhagen, if I had enough time. Hmmm.

While working on my papers, I’ve been obsessively and repetitiously listening to Ragtime, which Rice introduced me to. Or at least a few songs on it. I can’t tell if it’s trying to parody or represent the zeitgeist of the era. So much of it is like some sort of bizarre propaganda. Originally, I wasn’t sure if it was modern or not. Turns out it is (see article linked to above).

But some of it is just, like, wow I’m torn between laughing at it and crying at it. For instance, from the song “Henry Ford”: “See, my people, well here’s my theory of what this country is moving towards: Every worker a cog in motion, well that’s the notion of Henry Ford” “A genuflection to Henry Ford. Hallelujah! Praise the maker… of the model-t” “Even people who ain’t too clever can learn to tighten a nut forever.” “mass production will sweep the nation. A simple notion, the world’s reward.” all sung in a celebratory air. The cognitive dissonance is simply overwhelming. This has to be tongue in cheek right? And yet, there are people today who really do feel that what’s good for general motors is good for america. Full stop.

Don’t get me started on the condescending admiration in the song about the immigrants. Or the bit about Evelyn and her publicity.

How this helps me concentrate on writing papers, I do not know, but, gift horses, mouths, you know the story.

I finally found that essay that Simon’s old officemate posted on their office door. I like it, though I roll my eyes at it a bit too.

And also showing up when I googled ‘gender geek’ was this article about gender, computer science, and the monofocused geek from my beloved alma mater, cmu. =) Somewhat interesting. I can see myself in there in places.

Scientific misconduct happens. Simplifying Sheila Widnell’s definition, scientific misconduct is the deliberate misrepresentation of scientific research. This can be, from most to least blatant, the construction of false data, editing data to achieve desired results, or presenting others’ discoveries as one’s own. Another type is the conflict of interests that financial holdings and the like can create for a scientist, who may consciously or unconsciously promote those interests over the interests of science. The first two types carry a potential for widespread harm, and the last two are more than simply unjust. Given that scientific misconduct is generally about deception, it is hard to be certain how much it actually occurs. The community of science is structured in a way that encourages a defensive cloistering of scientists to themselves in the face of such accusations. Solutions can be found that protect the integrity of the scientific process without undue risk to scientists.

Scientific misconduct has the potential to produce disastrous results throughout the world, both directly and indirectly, and should not be taken lightly. The scientific community works in large part to facilitate the wide diffusion of the results of the scientific process. So any deliterious impact of scientific misconduct can be rapidly spread around the world. And there are serious concerns about the consequences of scientific misconduct. One can start with the attempts to replicate the results of the experiment. This can tie up the resources of many labs in a wild goose chase, wasting both time and money that could be spent on better things. When taking a more technological bent, the conflict of interests and plaigarism can both result in misapplied resources. An undetected, or unchastised plaigarist may be the party who gets funding rather than the colleague from whom the plaigarist took credit. If past deeds are any predictor of future outcomes, this would be a great mistake. Additionally, the entanglement of conflicting interests may lead a scientist to proclaim virtues that do not exist, or deny harms that do. This is most readily apparent in the approval of drugs, but it has relevance outside this narrow view.

In light of the potential damages, it is important to understand how these misbehaviors can arise, and why members of the community might turn a blind eye. Within the scientific community, members tend to specialize into particular narrow fields. Scientific communication tends to occur mostly within these smaller sub-cultures, if for no other reason, then because the sheer volume and technical detail of information to understand makes universal expertise impractical. Thus, those in the best position to be aware of potential misconduct would be individuals most closely identified with the perpetrator. Within these smaller communities, there is a concern for the outside appearance of the field, particularly to funding sources. As funding comes from outside investment, typically government sources, which may fund projects in a different field instead, there is a strong incentive to foster an image of legitimacy for the field. Individuals making accusations of scientific misconduct may seem to threaten that legitimacy, and thus the funding that the science requires.

To maintain the legitimacy of various domains of science, it is important that effective scrutiny take place. While our current system is perhaps overly insular it is quite possible for us to overcompensate. The quality of the science itself is best left to the judgement of experts in the domain, that is science at work, and science generally does work. However, questions of basic scientific misconduct operate by a different set of principles. It is most appropriate for outsiders, who lack the conflict of interests with the field’s advancement to assess the legitimacy of the science. To that end, making data more publicly available, allows for broader scrutiny. Clear, objective, community guidelines also make standards clearer for conflicts of interest. These should be negotiated by scientists, with an eye to protecting their public legitimacy.

I’m posting the first sentence (or two, if the first sentence is content free) that I posted in my journal every month for 2005. Enjoy.

month by month

Okay, so Blizzard makes kickass games. But in that wikipedia article, it also points out that they a) are owned by a giant conglomerate and b) actively snoop through your computer contents looking for signs of hacking software. They only look for that, they’re not transmitting anything from your computer but whether you have game hacking software loaded, but still… I wonder if ffxi does anything equally obnoxious.

Of course, it’s an arms race. I’m sure the hackers realize that all they have to do is figure out what the process is sending when no bad juju is going on, and replicate that, while shutting down the snooper process.

I wonder if there’s an open-source diablo clone to go with the open source Warcraft-esque game. It’s not as good graphically, or I suspect in terms of game design, but it’d probably run better on my preferred operating systems anyway. I’d really like a gpl’ed mmorpg. They are out there. Graphics are, of course, an issue. But I’m also not all that impressed with the game structures

http://freeonlinesurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?id=131601

Apparently, 17 (unnamed) gay and lesbian orgs find it worth their time to advocate for our right to be advertised to.

Sure, sure, it’s a sign of broader social acceptance. But if the organizations in question take the time to comment on this, why can’t they take the time to comment on things that matter more, and might earn some allies, and maybe build a coallition. Say, labor rights, or health care. (this ties into that NGLTF Creating Change Conference inspired post that I still have hanging out in the wings. More on that later).