The Six Million Rupee Men

Royal Wedding - Great but, so What?

2010-12-06T10:52:00.002+11:00

Kate Middleton’s pretty cute, for a British chick. She’d be about an 8 I reckon. What’s-his-face has done pretty well for himself to get to nuptial point with her. Good on them. I could go for a pub lunch right now.

Beyond this thought, I fail to see why I or any other young Australians should actually care about this wedding. It would be good to see a case put forth for why our media is so enraptured by a union which for myself at least, quite frankly, probably ranks a couple of rungs below Geoffrey Edelsten’s wedding to that well proportioned 25 yr old. At least Edelsten is a taxpayer, a citizen, a philanthropist, self-made man who’s done some work and then had some work done (but that’s a different story). As for the royals, well just because your family has a Facebook page does not make them relevant.

Sure the Prince can’t be blamed for the privilege he was born into, and from most accounts he seems like a nice bloke. But surely, there is something so wrong with the way our media pines over a royal who:

a) Has not spent more than 3 months collectively in Australia, despite being a future head of state.

b) Is not influential to Australian politics or society in any way other than the surge of subscriptions to No Idea and the like.

c) Unlike his predecessors, has not had to conquer or colonise foreign lands. Or maybe he’s done that by marrying non-royal bloodlines – technicality?

So what exactly is the effort they have made to earn the gushing wide-eyed praise of us proletariat, their ever loyal subjects? At least in blighty they seem to have lifted the mood of a society ailing economically and in national confidence, and they would undoubtedly bring in some much-needed cash from tourists and exports of commemorative teacups and assorted china. However for Australia it is perplexing in the least that, as a democracy which largely operates independently of the Crown, we place any of our national value on a family living off the best welfare deal in history. Even Katie Price, another doyenne of the tabloid trade, had to pose topless, write a few children’s books and at least married an Aussie – as much as most of us were happy to see Peter Andre leave our shores. So how do we justify the immense attention this wedding is receiving in Australia?

Some might say ‘But we’re a Commonwealth, we’re such amicable brethren!’ Oh I forgot about that, what with U.K reporters taking pot shots at our cricket teams, the hopelessly irrelevant circus tent that is the Commonwealth Games, and England bidding against us for the FIFA World Cup. We voted against a republic? Oh you mean when we voted against the model for the republic, and then had a royalist PM speak for the majority in declaring we didn’t want the republic. Howard was enacting a political version of Paul Newman in ‘The Hustler’, and admittedly voters got played. Even still, karma had its way when bushy brows Johnny didn’t get the top job at the International Cricket Council (ICC), in what was essentially a colony vs. ex-colony standoff. If it’s any consolation I think he’ll probably get a wedding invite though.

This reminds me, I have a small request for our tabloid mag editors. I have a couple of close friends getting married in a couple of weeks, both of them vote, work honest jobs, have a small mortgage and I think they’re pretty photogenic. There’s relevance, geographic proximity, an event, a very romantic ‘how they met’ story and some glamour...all the pieces are there. Would you mind putting them on the cover and doing a 5-page feature?

When Oil Spills Go Viral

2010-06-30T22:06:00.001+10:00

Viral videos are a phenomenon particular to Internet culture. At best, they tap into widespread cultural psyche, opening up a well-considered issue for commentary and more often than not, pillory or parody (Obama girl or United Breaks Guitars). At worst they confirm the opinion of many that sites such as YouTube have simply become a stage for the banal and mediocre to take undeserved status (via millions of views), consuming space better deserved for other artists or productions. Numa Numa is one of the worst but then again, what's so great about Funny Cats? Luckily, UBC Comedy's video 'BP Spills Coffee' falls into the former category, and with almost 8 million views as of 28th June. Beneath the humor of crudely characterized corporate lackeys, the skit has likely tapped into frustration with a company and the oil industry. Additionally, it connects with the concerns of many regarding the broader environment and social climate that allows these practices, such as BP's gross negligence, to thrive and persist.

Allegory - Coffee to Oil

The video begins with an innocent coffee spill which becomes an empty debate on how to stop the spill, before turning into widespread panic amongst the hapless boardroom attendees, whose pathetic attempts at containing the spill (e.g. throwing hair onto the coffee) only exacerbate the problem. External consultants and Halliburton suits are similarly ineffective, and 48 days later the boardroom table is a neglected wasteland of coffee cups, paper towels, hair and sushi trays (in hilariously simple allusion to damaged sea life). Throughout the unfolding events is a central and recurring theme, with every action the BP employees are only worried about themselves. While the employees' prolific incompetency and selfishness is in satiric traditions, it also reflects the views of many who question the decisions and motives of BP's management in taking the risks that allowed such disastrous damage to be done to the environment and livelihood of local fishing industries.

Coffee and Oil - An Aside

While it was likely an unintentional decision, coffee is an interesting choice as an oil metaphor. Increasingly, the takeaway coffee is undergoing an anti-oil revolution of it's own with focus on takeaway coffee cups, consumed at a rate of millions daily worldwide (estimated at above 16 billion/year in the U.S. alone). Most takeaway coffee cups are lined with an oil-based resin for insulation and to stop coffee leaking from the cup. The environmental impacts are significant, and the industry is beginning to move toward non-oil based alternatives, as evidenced by the Starbucks sponsored Betacup project, promoting the development of a reusable coffee cup.

The oil consumed throughout the coffee supply chain, from growing a coffee to feeding the worldwide love affair with the beverage, are enough for coffee chains to take notice in reducing their oil-based impact on landfill and emissions. Thus it is interesting that UBC's video shows Halliburton - as the Gulf spill's other guilty party - providing styrofoam (read: cement) cups for the boardroom coffee, with BP employees insisting they share the blame for the spill.

The Value of Viral

Of course the BP spill, while certainly one of the largest, is not the first of it's kind. British Petroleum has been responsible for some of the most damaging instances of rig failures, including the 1965 Sea Gem oil rig disaster. The corporations' history is stained with deceit and dubious practices in an endless pursuit for profit, including (famously) their collusion with the CIA in overthrowing Iran's Government in 1953. The Gulf of Mexico spill is merely one of their more publicized failures (shattering the idea of safe offshore oil drilling), perhaps due to it's proximity to the U.S. Unlike previous decades, in this age of social media it is more difficult to suppress public dissent. As the UCB team have deftly demonstrated, channeling criticism into ridicule can also be a way for the broader community to share their frustration, albeit in a darkly comical manner.

The sheer volume of viral video audiences (in the multi-millions within weeks) and their accessibility also have the power to create public awareness of social events, their history (e.g. how the political power and arrogance of large corporations is borne), and what people can do about these issues on a grassroots level. Viral, for so long a negatively laced term, has in some instances, been turned into a shining light of the Web 2.0 generation.

Michael J. Fox: Small Fortunes Are Worth Looking Up To

2010-05-31T00:02:00.000+10:00

Memoirs are ultimately fluid journeys structured as life 'chapters' to fit the modicum of book publishing. Then again, the 'life as an open book' metaphor endures, and exists ostensibly to allow people to comprehend, structure, and make sense of their journeys. Most people can map out their lives according to various 'stages', often identifying particular events which mark the beginning or end of these periods in life. These events are only recognised, as with most great observations, with the wisdom of hindsight. For Michael J. Fox, this moment came one morning in 1990 when he 'woke up with a hangover and a twitching left pinky finger'.

Any 80's child would remember just how famous Michael J. Fox was in his halcyon days as a star ofFamily Ties and the Back to the Future Trilogy. His next significant acting move was as actor and producer of Spin City, which also launched the career of producer/director Bill Lawrence (Scrubs,Cougar Town). Fox was diagnosed with Parkinsons disease in 1991 and since publicly stating his condition in 1998, he has become a lobbyist for policy changes on stem cell research and an advocate for scientific breakthroughs towards finding a cure. The Michael J. Fox Foundation has raised almost $179 million and aided countless patients and their families to boost the profile and awareness of this oft-misunderstood condition. During this phase of life (he mentions advocacy as his 'true calling') he has authored 3 books including Always Looking Up: The Adventures of an Incurable Optimist (2009).

Always Looking Up follows from the authors first book, Lucky Man, while linking back to his debut in various recollections, most notably regarding expansive road trips taken across Canada with his father. Journeys, whether physical (e.g. road-trips, the well orchestrated wake up routine of a Parkinson's patient) or psychological, are a recurring theme across Fox's recollections and future plans. This book focuses on the journey of his 'post-acting' life, how he came to develop the hugely successful foundation bearing his name, and becoming a knowledgeable and involved advocate for a broader cause than (arguably) most in Hollywood can lay claim to, beside donating money and then forgetting about the issue at hand after leaving the relevant black-tie event.

Fox manages a great balance for general readers between describing his journey from Parkinson's patient to active member of the 'Parkinson's community', anecdotes of his youth and family life, and enough glamorous (yet always relevant) celebrity stories to sustain interest amongst fans and the celeb-voyeur in all of us. A particular highlight involves Robin Williams, Eric Idle (of Monty Python fame) and Fox riding chauffeured toward the Arc De Triomphe at the Apex of Tour De France 2000, an episode set within his journey as Parkinsons advocate, detailing how Lance Armstrong inspired Fox to pursue his own fundraising and research goals. Similar highlights include his meeting with evangelist Bishop Pearson who assists Fox in defining his own spiritual outlook, and an encounter with his childhood hero Muhammad Ali, who arguably remains the world's most famous boxer...oh and Parkinsons patient, by the way.

Politically, the authors activism succeeds largely from a keen sense of reaching people through media 'airtime', and positively channeling the 'trust' audiences have in him. Fox himself notes that on the Davie Brown Index, which rates celebrities according to how much trust the public have in them (utilised by advertisers and marketers), he rates easily in the top 5, ahead of Michael Jordan. Understandably, Michael J. Fox treads a fine line between using his public status to leverage political action on PD and stem cell research, and appearing to align that trust with the broader political support for a particular party. Certainly this 'conflict' has been misconstrued by anti-stem cell groups and other opposition in Fox's journey as PD advocate, culminating in a ludicrous misrepresentation (and eventual 'apology') by Rush Limbaugh, of Fox personally as well as Parkinsons Disease generally. Fox takes a more philosophical stance, arguing that the potential advantages of stem-cell research make this a politically neutral issue. With his boundless spirit, positive outlook on life and the journeys he and his family have partaken through his increasing symptoms, it's hard to disagree.

Michael J. Fox recognises his own fortune despite the onset of PD, and has clearly found the direction his post-acting journey will take him. The constant presence of his family (particularly his wife, and his father as a young boy) are a reminder that all of our successes, failures and non-events couldn't happen without (sometimes under appreciated) strong social networks, and not the online type. No matter your disposition toward our celebrity-age, it is refreshing to hear a Hollywood star with a strong sense of the small things, a maintenance of which are ultimately life's biggest priorities. Fox's common touch accentuate his accessibility from those who have a debilitating illness, to their support networks, and even those facing any of the many difficulties life can throw up. As such, Always Looking Up is a worthy yet unsurprising member of the New York Times' best-seller list.

Face it: Death, Taxes and the Diaspora

2010-04-12T15:30:00.016+10:00

With its ostentatious decor based on the foliated metamorphic rock of it's namesake, one wouldn't expect the Marble Bar's patrons to be so decisively ignorant of the changing face of Australia. Then again this is Sydney, known for our vapid pretentiousness as much as the stunning harbour views, and then again this is the Hilton Hotel (where the Marble Bar relocated in 1973), where the Friday night punters are largely well-heeled corporates in their mid-30's, many of whom are likely to be part of a very different Australia in their not-so-long-ago youths. Nevertheless, last Friday night was a revelation of sorts for myself and a couple of friends of the Gen-Y bracket, kind of a subtle reminder that old misconceptions and prejudices still pervade the psyche of many in our young pseudo-colonial nation.

The lounges at marble lend themselves to larger social groups, so with numbers 2-3 and the close lounge arrangement we were inviting the company of newcomers (or strangers, depending on your outlook). One compliment about a hairstyle, dress or something else I don't remember (obviously it wasn't about me) and before long we were engaged in small talk with two chirpy female sales executives, one blonde in her late 40's (divorced, with a son as we were to find out) and a brunette in her early 30's, let's call them Jane and Jill. After Jane commented in astonishment "wow you're Indian! But you're skin is so light", we explained the broad variation in skin colour which appears across the country, mainly by region. Really from this point the conversation was heading toward a kind of cultural Mythbusters, a situation I believe is quite familiar with most of the population labelled 'ethnically diverse'.

While Jill questioned around whether Australians of Indian origins only dated others of Indian origin (answer is, we do not), Jane had a more personal matter which exposed a general lack of cultural knowledge and also the reasons why she was so keen to ask questions related to 'our' culture. She had been pursued by an Australian of Indian origin, who like us was born and brought up in Australia, and mentioned he was a 'nice guy, good looking, I wouldn't mind going out with him' but that she'd never dated an 'ethnic' before because, and this won the award for most unexpected comment of the night, "I just can't see him as an Aussie, like me...". Seemingly, this was the only reason she wouldn't consider dating Mr.Ethnic. While I didn't take the comment personally, in my mind I wasn't sure whether to direct my frustration toward Jane or to view the comment as an indictment of the system, or simply the blinds placed over an older generation. Perhaps this was an indictment of our city, famously declared as it were by Premier Kristina Keneally as a 'city of villages'. These villages may have created diversity when looked at as an entire system, but may have conversely closed off any communication and exposure amongst villages. The lack of general cultural knowledge in spite of being in one of the most multicultural cities in the world is ironic, considering Australians are famously (and infamously) amongst the most traveled in the world. While this is commentary off a single case rather than empirical study, I and surely many others have had similar experiences. To be fair, Jane and Jill were lovely and their questions came largely from innocence, seemingly genuine curiosity, general social chit-chat and a glaringly obvious lack of experience socialising with non-anglo saxon people.

In the name of friendly socialising we were happy to discuss the differences and more often accentuate the similarities between 'them' and 'us'. However, it may be this very same brand of genuine ignorance that quickly spills from curiosity into defensive/reactive or provocative hatred when 'contentious' racially charged issues are raised such as immigration, adapting to the 'culture'. Certainly the language of Jane and Jill, their sentences peppered with 'them' and 'us', 'you' and 'Aussies' suggested that even implicitly, they hadn't accepted that Australia is fast becoming a country of many races. It may be this lack of inter-cultural education that eventually results in the Cronulla riots, Government policy on detention centres, racially motivated attacks on Indian students and even indigenous affairs.

It is certainly true that many immigrants themselves are ignorant of how systems work here, and adapting to the positive qualities of Australian society - our generally strong civic sense, a respect of 'personal space' (though this notion itself differs amongst cultures) and in some cases developing fluent English being as it is the national language. Regardless, it is also true that immigrants are required to make many leaps and bounds of adaptation aside from the cultural and superficial in planting their entire lives in a strange and foreign country often in order to ensure a better future for themselves and their children. It is Australian's who have grown up in predominantly white-Australia that mainly appear stubborn to the notion that that this country will carry on as it has, their blissful ignorance of the fact that the very demographics of the nation have changed faster in the last decade than ever in our 200 year history. Our beautiful country can still be beautiful, albeit in a vastly different manner, if we find ways to truly embrace our diversity and decrease the inter-cultural educational gap. I'd like to think we did our part, that at least Jane and Jill could walk away without the many misconceptions they had. In the way of cultural education and knowledge, Sydney is akin to a rote learner or a charlatan - knowing all the fancy words and terminology, but knowing none of the true meaning or application - a multicultural illusion if you will.

In that spirit, I should probably find out what a foliated metamorphic rock actually means...I wonder if the Marble Bar staff would know...Gin and Tonic please, oh and by the way can you explain something to me, I'll give you the background story...

NYE - If it's overrated, it's got to be December 31

2009-12-31T00:34:00.006+11:00

How do you ring in New Years Eve 2010? Traditionally, we’re presented with the following options:

Cruises – For those who plan ahead.

Picnics –For those who actually WANT to wake up early (to get a good view of the fireworks, particularly in Sydney).

House Party (Host) – For those who understand that come January 1, 2010, their residence is probably going to look like a Dresden shack after D-Day.

House Party (Attendee) – For those who don’t want any responsibility. A solid choice for NYE.

House Party (Small Group less than 10 people) – For a deep and meaningful session of resolutions, life’s mistakes, and possibly more regrettable (and unspoken) mistakes after loading up on the beer and sherry (assuming this is what small groups drink)

With Family – For those who aren’t old enough to drink, or young enough to enjoy the mistakes of drinking. Likely to be asleep by 12:01am.

With Partner – Likely to figure out this is the same as most other nights, or try something ‘different’. Both result in disappointment.

Alone – Either a choice (I guess?), lack of planning, in a foreign country, likely to be asleep before 12 or if self medicating, to miss the turn to New Year altogether.

Somebody may already be onto this, but I can firmly state that no matter how many streamers, new years’ novelty spectacles, free booze cruises etc are thrown around, New Years is the most overrated night of the year. Now I’m no party curmudgeon - you know the old guy, who might be asleep upstairs at a party, comes staggering down on his walking stick and pops all the balloons in sight, grunts then goes back up to take his gums out and retire. I also understand partying just needs an occasion/excuse and what better than to celebrate the turning of the Christian calendar another 365.25 days. However, the build-up to New Years is such that it’s bound to end in an anti-climax.

The best nights of the year, are the ones where you turn up to a place thinking ‘I’ll just have a couple of drinks then go home and watch Once Upon a Time in America', and then 6 hours later you find yourself stumbling back somewhere after visiting a number of places which may include a greasy kebab shop. This could be any weekend night of the year, thus resulting in at least 50 nights better than New Years. In other words, it’s all about the unexpected. High expectations may disappoint, but New-Years style build up even saddens the kid who goes to Disneyland, only to see a middle aged man, dark circles under his eyes smoking his 20^th cigarette of the hour, holding up his costume’s Mickey Mouse head. So the clock strikes 12, you wake up late afternoon Jan 1^st and realise it was just another night out with your best friends bar the smoke and mirrors – fireworks and an open bar (if it’s an event).

Perhaps I’m jaded by past experiences, I now lag my way into whatever New Years plans are provided by friends in order to reach a compromise with this thing called New Years Eve. I fear it’s something I won’t resolve anytime soon, and I don’t intend to make my peace with NYE through a ridiculous resolution – my other pet peeve about 31^st December. Why do we make New Year’s resolutions? As Morgan Freeman narrates in Shawshank Redemption ‘all it takes is time and pressure...’ Real goals are reached by chipping away at them day in, day out, not making lofty statements you’re likely to forget once recovered from an alcoholic stupor. I would propose a daily resolution, small bits and pieces at a time. One day like the pop-art exclamation “POW” that came when Adam West’s Batman slugged a villain, you may suddenly find yourself in the desired place.

I for one am trying to get out of the habit of tacking on long jokes to the end of already stretched out sentences, like the NYE patron who explains one resolution which leads to an epiphany that there are other related ones, like ‘focus more at work’ to ‘be on time to things’ to ‘save up for a watch’ etc. As you can see it’s a work in progress. So I will go forth, bravely yet cynically to a House Party (yes I’m in the third option) and perhaps this year I’ll try to explain my disdain, which is likely to be unpopular. Either that or nobody listens between food & drinks, attempted pick-ups, karaoke and Wii Tennis tournaments (FYI check the Eager Beaver on the photo in the link provided). That actually sounds like a pretty good night. Happy New Years everyone, here’s remembering that a New Year starts with a new day. So let’s make that a great 1^st of Jan.

Michael Jackson - This Is It (oh yes, it's a review)

2009-11-22T01:29:00.010+11:00

Britney’s Circus, Pink’s Fun House and Beyoncés Sasha Fierce are among the best in a current run of extravagant, bombastic , military-precise pop tours. However if we were to believe the vision showcased by Kenny Ortega (the concert and film’s director) and Michael Jackson in This Is It, none of the current crop of pop-starlets would have held a proverbial slow-song candle to possibly the greatest concert never to be staged.

This Is It becomes an important reminder, amongst the plethora of news and gossip regarding Jackson’s personal life, of why generations of pop music fans loved him in the first place. Here we see Michael Jackson the artist: the dancer, singer, songwriter, choreographer, stage and perfectionist involved in (seemingly) every element in producing a massive pop spectacle. Where he isn’t saving his voice, he sounds as good as ever and moves phenomenally, holding his own amongst young and energetic, star-struck and wide eyed backup dancers half his age. Ortega provides an insight into Jackson’s deep understanding of his music and how it translates to live performance, picking over the details of ‘The Way You Make Me Feel’ with a keyboard player, explaining the need to allow the introduction to ‘simmer’ and build into the cocksure-stride characteristic of the song. This is Michael Jackson the masterful old-school showman, at one end exploding with energy in the opening ‘Wanna Be Startin Somethin’ and later acknowledging the power of silence to convey his message in the aftermath of ‘Earth Song’. Once any sliver of music begins during rehearsal, MJ begins to move as if his body can’t function without it, and his passion for his craft is engaging and endearing. Many wouldn’t remember the last time they’d seen him smile and seem so comfortable on screen, so embedded in the public consciousness are images of Jackson with an umbrella and dark shades exiting a courtroom, or snapped despairingly through a Jeep’s tinted windows.

There are highlights in the supporting cast; particularly Australian guitarist Orianthi Panagaris who impressively shreds an interpretation of the ‘Beat It’ solo paying homage to Eddie Van Halen’s original while injecting it with a style of her own. Amongst the drug addictions, the insomnia, the chequered and sheltered upbringing, This Is It is a note that an artist is defined by his art, and that their legacy will always lie within that work. Certainly, MJ appears uplifted when surrounded by the undoubtedly familiar environment of performance and he has a natural ability to nurture and bring out the best in everyone around him, noted duly by almost everyone in the film. This is Jackson’s show and if ever there were solace for fans looking for closure, or Doubting Thomas’s wondering if Jackson could ever surpass the Timberlake’s, Beyoncés and others he’s influenced in every way, then This Is It.

Moore's Mores, Draws Flaws

2009-10-22T16:35:00.007+11:00

'This year is going so fast' is a sentiment I've heard so many times lately, that it would be a mouldy old cliche to suggest that I'd be rich if I had a dollar for each time it was uttered. Although it's likely that 70-80% of the time I'm probably hearing myself say it, I'm sure many can identify with the suggestion. Normally this is followed up with 'I know I say that every year, but I really feel like this one has gone faster...'. A simple retort would be that no, every year is 365.25 days long, with 24 hours per day and so on, the time is the same. However, apart from the lame Mr. Obvious joke, this is a blatant misconception; while time can be objectively measured, peoples perception of time passing can be extremely different. 1 minute in a waterboard torturing session is decidedly different to 1 minute with, say, Adriana Lima the way I would dream it). So in that vein, let's consider the 'speed' of a year as a perception of time, rather than the obvious (and still not funny) 'umm..a year is always 12 months' unicycle of thought. It's also worth mentioning the following ramble would mainly apply to those in the developing-lives 20-35 (and possibly up to 50) age bracket. On the other hand, with life expectancy rates increasing each generation, 60 may be the new 30 in no time - so let's all consider this:

Moore's law dictates that the number of transistors that can be placed on an integrated circuit has doubled (approximately) every two years. For non-technical readers let me draw a simple analogy:

A board (circuit) can fit a certain number of lightbulbs on it (transistors). Moore's law suggests that, because of advancements in peg and lightbulb technology, the amount of lighbulbs that can fit on a board doubles almost every two years - more light, concentrated on the same board area.

Ok, maybe that was a bit weak, almost as if I don't know what analogy means. Anyway, as Brian Moriarty would say, 'The Point Is...' that Moore's law effectively doubles the speed of computers each year. This allows us to perform functions twice as fast and, in an only slightly simple stretch of logic, multiplies the amount of things we're able to do (since most things we do in our lives are via computers), all within the same 24 hour day. Although this also means more technology is developed to automate our lives (think of Roledex before outlook, throwing actual paper balls in office bins before 'Paper Toss' for iPhone etc) it also means more time managing our gadgets. Our tasks are playing catchup with what we can let our gadgets do. Moore's law may in fact have an abstract relation to laws of relative time (general relativity), in that the speed of technological developments also affects our perceptions of 'time' and the speed of our lives. In which case, of course this year seems faster than ever, because our computers, phones etc have doubled in speed and capacity.

It is also arguable that developments in computing capabilities affect everyone implicitly, even for those of us who haven't upgraded our personal technology. For example, a development in film camera technology can mean cinemas themselves show movies differently (as is expected for James Cameron's Avatar, where many U.S. moviehouses are converting to the technology required to screen the film, shot in potentially revolutionary Stereoscopic 3D). This would mean the way we experience films will change, regardless of whether we buy a stereoscopic 3D camera ourselves. The effect of technology, like many other social phenomena (e.g. Got Milk? - catch phrases from ads that become everyday phrases), can permeate through society in silent and discreet ways.

So far, the speed of technological innovation has moved faster than lawmakers have been able to in regulating and stemming the flow of creativity and actual invention (which is what regulators are so adept at). Sometimes authorities have a case, as in Shephard Fairey's appropriation of an Associated Press image that became an iconic poster during Obama's campaign, as it turns out Fairey had lied about using the original source. Ironically, Obama probably has alot to thank Fairey for, and it's likely Associated Press wouldn't have cared had the image not become so lucrative (in money, political popularity etc) to everyone but the A.P. Photoshop makes it easy to appropriate, but just as easy to strip back and superimpose to find instances of copyright. Regulators, and large organisations for the forseeable future, are probably going to find it difficult to charge everyone who (possibly) uses some form of their work - why, because of technological speed.

Blogs, wiki's, everyone's an author, a critic with something important to say, as millions march into the bloggosphere armed with opinions and half-baked social theories (as we're part of the zeitgeist it's probably not our place to say whether this is good or bad) we challenge pillars of authority to catch up. A brilliant piece called A Writing Revolution by Denis G. Pelli & Charles Bigelow suggests that, like the age of universal literacy after the printing press, we're now entering a phase of universal authorship - that is, everyone is becoming a 'published' author. The internet has, naturally, accelerated this process to the point where it's estimated that 0.01 percent of the worlds population are authors (that is they have published a work that more than 100 people have viewed). This speed is so rapid, that we may expect everyone to publish by 2013. With all these blogs to read, all these opinions to consider, the millions more youtube videos to be uploaded, of course our time is going to go quickly - 2013 may prove to be the fastest year yet, perhaps so fast I won't even have time to discuss how fast it is.

An iconic print of Audrey Hepburn hangs slightly lopsided in the local cafe. She's handling a long-cigarette holder nonchalantly, gazing out into some other space, almost contemplative (let's imagine the sophisticated image fits her smarts). I'm sure many of you feel the same - that we haven't felt that expression ourselves for a while - or our years are moving too fast to notice.

Darfur and Green Avatar (not James Cameron's)

2009-08-27T16:26:00.023+10:00

Press the circular button (the only physical button on the front). Touch, slide, tap to enter passcode (yes, I have a passcode) - ****. I'm concerned that waking up with this routine for the last 3 weeks as if I couldn't open my eyes without it is a prelude to some greater gadget/connectivity addiction. The iPhone in itself seems to link the ever-impressive advancements of mobile internet, with a primitive instinct of touch (tactile interaction) which is familiar to most of us from infancy. Watch a child, with their endless fascination for touching surfaces and holding onto things, throwing them around, tearing them up etc, and note the parallels with iPhone wielding yuppies from Sydney to L.A.

The iPhone thus signals the return of the inner child, and in some ways the worst aspects of this. As if baby boomers and some Gen X'ers didn't have enough ammunition for their critical analyses of Gen Y, with lifephone (or lifeline, or post-phone - whichever iPhone nickname you prefer) they can hyperbolically speak of our De-Generation with our short-attention spans, moving between conversations real and online, constant email access (you can now get push e-mail functionality) and addictive games such as Paper Toss or HoopsLite in the split seconds where we were devoid of stimulation before the lifephone, when all mobiles did was make calls, send messages, and play pixelated snake games.

The idea that there are now an endless stream of procrastination methods (let's be honest, that’s what most of the cool iPhone features are about) available via software advancements is nothing new, but there are some positives out there which will hopefully catch attentions and imaginations of the time-starved, overly stimulated (or entertained) consumers of online-all the time lifestyles (proviso added that I'm firmly planted in this group myself). The plight of civilians in Darfur has been well explored in niche academic environments in Western countries, approached with constant difficulty by the United Nations (who have perplexed many in claiming that the 'war is over') and received honourable mentions by George Clooney and Madonna. Although the celebrity factor of the latter is (in many situations) a sure-fire way to reach a mass audience for public sympathy/support, the complexity of Darfur's plight (including the number of state and non-state actors involved and regional, ethnic and religious factors) makes it difficult to package the cause and the action for neat mass consumption, which often means tapping into upper middle-class guilt for $$ that fund overhead (administrative) costs for many not-for-profit organisations.

Turning a viral idea for a cause into a mass display of support is great, and provides a sign of hope to cynical minds who may feel social networking simply allows individuals of Generation-Me to create a 3rd person pseudo-celebrity version of themselves in the virtual world. But once you've got support for the cause - then what? If 1 million twitter subscribers turn their Avatar (profile picture) green in support of an inadequate Iranian democratic system (as happened prior and since the recent 'election' in Iran) can we be resolved of any further action? What are the results of such widespread support? Well the answer, in the Iranian example, depends on who's talking (The issue and the protest are absorbing in their own right - in Kase Wickman's words 'The Iranian Revolution will not be Televised, It will be Twittered' - can cover at least 6 months worth blog entries). Some view the green movement as purely symbolic, one click and the 'supporters' can delude themselves into thinking they've done something, and move on with their lives in a 4WD, with a Big Mac meal and new iPhone in tow. The Air America Media website smacks its readers more directly 'One click is too easy. One click is not one life saved, one dollar donated, not one ounce of difference made. One click is nothing at all'. BC Politics takes the same sceptical stance, but uses the time honoured tradition of parody in suggesting that along with making our Twitter Avatars green, we should also do the following to show our support for Iran from Afar (among other things):

Change your computer to Iran's time zone (+4:30 GMT).
Write only in Persian.
Grow a neckbeard.
Paint your house green.
Paint your baby green.

The list ends wryly with 'Cease thinking about Iran once the craze dies down' (for the complete list, and a quick, funny read to boot check BC Politics). On the other hand, the Green Twitter revolution has been a definite influence in the Iranian Government's decision to censor and ban certain webpages from view within the country (including Tehran). And as we all know from the many pop songs banned by churches and governments (see 'Only the Good Die Young', or anything by the 2 Live Crew) whenever something is banned by large and powerful institutions, the more inquisitive people become to seek it.

So, following this long digression, how has gathering mass-support in the age of new media helped advocates of Darfur (for awareness, if nothing else)? If hunger is the mother of invention, then software is at least the favourite son. Having recognised that gaining support for a cause is still a far cry from real action in troubled nations, building awareness is still a great place to start. Combining the badge of support/identity of Iran's Green Avatar with the interactivity (gameplay, if not touch) of the iPhone, is a fantastic web concept developed by mtvU (MTV's college Media Network) called Darfur is Dying (http://www.darfurisdying.com/). It is worth checking out, but is a great attempt at placing users in (virtual) situations familiar to Darfurian citizens living in constant fear of Janjaweed militias. The site is multilingual, and also provides constant exposure to the real message (detailing suffering and human rights abuses in the region), and ways to take real action. A definite goal, a real issue, a worthy cause, and a clear message. Amidst the clutter lies the clear.

For a good overview of the Darfur conflict, check out the BBC Sudan/Darfur Profile and the introduction by Global Security.org.

Discovering Home on YouTube

2009-07-11T16:52:00.008+10:00

"We live in exponential times...."

- Karl Fisch, Scott McLeod in Globalization & The Information Age.

Yesterday I was down to one apple in the house. So I went out to the shop, and bought 20, enough to last a couple of weeks. From one apple to twenty in one day...exponential times indeed. In 2006 I had no Apple platforms in my direct existence. By 2008, I owned 4 (2 iPods, iPhone and some Apple music software), doubling my rate of uptake. Google search, and now Bing search, Wolfram Alpha and countless others, even search platform options themselves are increasing. So with all these facts, figures and information which are surely too much for anybody to absorb in a single lifetime, it's great to see attempts that put it all into context for our consumption via modes that best suit our attentionnally-challenged age.

One of the best I've come across is from a presentation made in Rome (which, being dated from 2008 might as well be ancient history now considering the video's theme) by Karl Fisch, titled Did You Know? 3.0. It contains veritable nuggets of enlightenment such as 'It is estimated that a week's worth of the New York Times contains more information than a person was likely to come across in a lifetime in the 18th century', before ending rather tantalisingly with the question 'So what does it all mean?'. Needless to say, the 5 minute clip of facts and figures is unable to answer the question, and I guess that's the point - does it mean anything? What is all this advancement if the Earth is going to heat up and dry up in 50 years, diminishing the very environment we have at once relied upon and abused in the name of civilisation?

These are questions examined in what is almost an accidental sequel to Did You Know? (at least it seems like that in my mind of fractured connections), in Yann Arthus-Bertrand's film Home, an exquisitely crafted project tracing the origins of human beings during the Earth's development, our substantial exploitation of the environment over the last century, and future directions required for conservation, and all through some of the most spectacular cinematography of natural landscapes and cityscapes you'll find (at least on YouTube - and for free at that!). Arthus-Bertrand, president of the GoodPlanet Foundation, is evidently a master of the environmental narrative, and unlike some other projects (Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth springs to mind) it balances the strong rhetoric of warning with an emphasis on hope and initiatives currently driving alternative methods of energy consumption.

The initial impact of the film is it gets one thinking about consumption, which for my immediate concern raised the question of why I bought 20 apples for myself when perhaps I could've done with about half that amount comfortably (the other 10 normally go bad before I get a crack at them anyway). I found myself in the same boat, or dwelling, as every greedy consumer of a megalopolis (not that Sydney is on par with Palm Springs or Las Vegas - 2 of the most resource intensive cities in the world) described by Arthus-Bertrand. This is something I intend to remedy, piece by inconsequential piece of daily living.

What links Home and Fisch's glorious tribute to technology and its uptake, is that the latter serves to show just what the impact of the former can achieve in terms of exposing critical issues to large audiences. Did You Know? mentions that to reach an audience of 50 million, radio took 38 years, TV managed it in 13 years, the Internet proved it could be done in 4 years, it took 3 years for the iPod to get there, and a quickfire 2 years for Facebook to register 50 million users. So imagine in the exponential times we live, a film on YouTube, with its millions of subscribers, the amount of exposure that can be gained for prominent issues affecting us all, and how many more could decide to go for 10 apples rather than 20.

More than 50% of the world's wealth sits in the hands of the richest 2% of our population, and 50% of the world's poor live in the most resource rich nations on Earth. Clearly there is something askew, and tipping the balance can begin with the minor thoughts of many, which can translate into the minor actions which in turn create major changes. This can be the strength of YouTube, and of our ever changing and expanding times. Home concludes with the narrator emphasising that it's 'too late to be a pessimist', and I would add that it's also too late to be a pacifist. Ultimately both point to the strength of a collaborative, online community - it's just difficult to find the most effective way to harness this community. Perhaps the answer to 'So what does it all mean?' lies somewhere within the large-scale action (hopefully positive rather than negative) that can result in these exponential times.

As the above rambling is unlikely to present anything that hasn't been mentioned before, and probably more eloquently, we'll move back into safer territory of humouring the minutiae of daily life at the next entry :). I would recommend sparing time to watch Yann Arthus-Bertrand's film, it was without doubt worth the 1.5 hours of my life it consumed, and for that the filmmakers cannot be blamed, as it is 'a carbon-offset movie'.

Memories, Search Engines, and Bar Cortona

2009-05-30T12:08:00.014+10:00

This week, I decided to try something different, which brings me to the pleasant atmosphere of one of Sydney's best kept secrets, Bar Cortona in Homebush. We all have places of familiarity we visit when we meet friends i.e. a particular bar, a landmark, a movie theatre, or perhaps for those socially awkward types - a web forum. However, Cortona is a place that lends itself to circumstances which we're probably all finding more and more scarce - spending time alone without the ever lingering thought of work, entertaining company, outstanding tasks, seething rage about the constantly broken down ticket machines at Sydney train stations, and so forth.

Sitting on the neither small nor medium sized chairs, surrounded by the calming beige/orange pastels of the walls and the endearing, handmade jewellery and assorted home decorations - seashell photo frames, glass-blown cookie jars, a rooster carved from wood (I'm not sure who would buy that, but it works in here) - one can sit with a coffee, looking out the window on a Sydney winter which can typically include sun, rain and overcast within an hour, and think there is still a place to find a respite from living vicariously through Google and the Internet (where most of our social interactions are being recorded nowadays - or does this post now take that away as well?). The only gripe I have about this hallowed sanctuary is that the leisurely atmosphere seems to incite some form of juvenile Alzheimer’s among the new staff there.

The new guy at Cortona, a young scraggly looking kid (hair tossed about, face half-shaven, all in a prepared manner), always forgets my order. This is particularly irritating after the first 6 times, considering I've been going there for 4 years, and that my order is extremely simple (no soy-latte half sugar easy-on-the-froth with a spoon of cinnamon extra hot, or anything like that). Now these are not unrealistic expectations, when I say he forgets my order, I mean consistently only 5-10 mins after ordering he'll ask me, all uncertain tone, eyebrows tilted with an upward inflection at the end of the sentence 'What did you order again?'. Perhaps it's the puberty setting in, I know it's tough to think of anything other than girls at that age...maybe Neil Strauss can help.

After his most recent bout of memory lapse, I told him half-jokingly 'dude, you always forget my order', to which he replied 'I always get you confused with another guy that comes here, Pete...do you know Pete?’ The 'do you know Pete' bit was a weak lead to divert the conversation and perhaps provide him with some sort of excuse. I didn't know Pete, what's his last name? Pan, Sampras, Townshend, Wentz, Doherty? For all I know he could be the imaginary friend scraggly hair is giving my coffee to, while he forgets the real people sitting in the place. Imagination has a way of becoming hyperbolic when expectations aren't met, so I had this image in my head of a public announcement of scraggly hair announcing, Clinton-style 'I did not forget...that man's order'.

I'm not sure if there is a simple way to rectify this problem, and I doubt even Stephen Wolfram has the answer to that. I even asked the question to his brilliant new search website Wolfram Alpha. Although I couldn't find answers to complex human problems, before I knew it I was searching facts and figures of everything else, loving the idea of being able to 'compute' Michael Jordan's age to the day, and a moment later discovering the economic toll being wrought by Australia’s ageing population - as a percentage of GDP. With a single search entry, Wolfram produces a page of statistics, summaries and information as far as one is compelled to drill down into, needless to say it's a huge (and perhaps natural) step our conception of information search.

In his mesmerising novel The Shadow of the Wind Spanish author Carlos Ruiz Zafón describes the (fictional) 'Cemetery of Forgotten Books', a place containing all the books ever written, and the souls of their respective authors (seemingly a high-culture version of the Alice in Wonderland Library managed by Sir Cheshire Cat). It is not too inconceivable, with Wolfram Alpha, Google, Wikipedia, and perhaps Bing as repositories of all human knowledge attained over thousands of years, that 'real' books (as knowledge stores) will be confined to a lost cemetery, the top level perhaps becoming a popular place for university students to 'meet' - a combination of cemetery, shrine, nostalgia and the hormone-sharing taking place in today’s local libraries.

When we need an answer, we find search engines - whether this eventually helps us get an answer or leaves us more confused by choice is another question - which requires a search engine. Instantaneous access to so much knowledge - known as 'search overload' in industry parlance - will also have an interesting effect on our memories when we Gen-Y'ers reach older, riper ages (perhaps 100 will be the new 80 with increasing life expectancy). With so many answers available at the click of a button, what's the point of actually 'remembering' everything? Perhaps my answer to the scraggly kid dilemma is to post my order up on a website, with my name, throw in some metadata so it shows up early in search results, so he can type in 'what was his order - the guy that reminds me of Pete' and will come up with....my order! Sounds like a solution I will have to try out...but how am I going to remember it?

Now for some light entertainment, here's something I won't forget (for a week, at least).I'm sure you've all seen it, but you can't possibly get tired of seeing something superhuman like this. King James is 24 months, 5 days old today (thanks Wolfram).

Tweep Tweep, Who got the keys to the jeep?

2009-04-30T13:02:00.028+10:00

'Is Madonna an early adopter?' My tweets are lame (search harpt). However, even I don't tweet out stuff like this - "i iz tired" - thanks for that brit. I'm not sure of the reason you're following me, but I know why I'm not following you. In the last 2 months, I've found slowly but surely many friends and acquaintances are using Twitter as a primary source of information, from CNN feeds, NYTimes feeds to your more sublime and poetic fare such as "u remind me of my jeep...I want 2 ride it", or the prophetic "Ow this bleach hurts, rofl" - this could be interesting if it involved another person pouring the stuff on APGirlie3 - then it would also be interesting as to why she would be 'rofl' - too vindictive?. Google take note, if you want to buy Twitter, you're also buying into banal tweets (ban-weets), same goes for Facebook who, let's face it, may see their numbers dwindle by this time next year in the face of a(nother) significant tipping point in the history of social networking. Personally, I also like the word 'tweet' because it's like the commonly applied sounbyte used to censor swearing on brilliant broadcast TV like Jerry Springer and the like (I don't think HBO has this sound in their database - thankfully). In honouring this, for the remainder of this entry I feel it's only right...nay, necessary, to use the word 'tweet' place of profanity.

When you can break news of an American Airlines flight qualifying for Olympic Diving in the Hudson River, or a swine flu epidemic, or insider updates during the Mumbai Terrorist attacks (11/9 as its being cemented in the public consciousness) faster than the big boys of breaking news - you are onto something. When you figure out how to profit from feeding tweet inquiry into business enquiry - you are onto something. Likewise if a profitable model for news and reliable journalistic practice can be created from this technology (I am indebted to UNSW lecturer Kate Crawford for thinking in this direction). Invariably, in times of revolutions be they industrial, artistic, musical or technological (informational), the old system always breaks before a solution appears.

By the late 1800's, Horse Carriages, or more specifically the horses themselves, were producing such significant amounts of tweet that they placed an almost unbearable liability on the streets (infrastructure) and citizenry of New York City (amongst others), that a solution seemed nigh impossible till Henry Ford waltzed in with those wheels of his, and the internal combustion engine came of age (for those factussies - fact fussy people). Indeed, the tweeting horse tweet problem was such a threat that it dominated discussion at the first International Urban Planning Conference in 1898 - the issues were pollution, environmental by-products and infections where swelling human populations were in proximity with horses and their tweet, and the rise of carriage related accidents. Till Ford, citizens were left with more pedestrian solutions including development of NYC's professionalised street-sweeping service and developments of road rules to reduce carriage-related accidents and deaths (which happened more frequently than us of the 21st Century may expect). For a while there was a system in complete chaos, the dominant thinking being how to preserve the system rather than finding a completely new and innovative solution out of left field. We know the rest of the story, the horse-carriage arrived at it's not so glorious finish line, and a new race started with the Ford Model-A (1903). To begin a sentence with a classic line from 30 Rock's Dennis Duffy, 'In this analogy..', the horse tweet is the old way of doing things - newspapers, online newspapers, facebook (oops), and the internal combustion engine is what we're waiting for, Twitter is just the wheels - and someone's developing the idea for a new Ford Model-A.

Till then the metaphorical chaos in the virtual world gets reflected in the physical world. Illness, Flu. Swine? Is Medieval English on the comeback trail? Well the Urban Dictionary entry is particularly informative in this endeavour, and brings up such gems of definition as "Swine: probably one of the best words ever, swine can be used in any situation to degrade another person... ". The following are U.D's suggestions for potential uses around the watercooler and in everyday banter/duel with your arch nemesis from the middle-ages:

- Leave me alone you swine!
- Look at that tweeting swine.
- That man is a filthy swineish animal.
- You are the swine of all swine.

So it goes, and these may prove more effective in the event of the swine flu epidemic (or is it pandemic? - WHO's Margaret Chan is confusing us all). If it's pandemic, believe I’m taking a break from my beloved Vietnamese Pork rolls at Phuong’s Bakery. However, the possible severity of a pandemic should not be underestimated, particularly in light of the first swine-flu related death in Mexico. That there is any general sympathy about those most likely to be affected is questionable in light of...what else other than a tweet. Here's an incredibly touching, humanistic tweet from NYTimes columnist Charles M. Blow: "Pandemic, Smandemic, I want to invest in that surgical mask company". Lovely. We have the wheels, we need the engine, but what we really need is for these guys to stay in the passenger seats, preferably up the back with the naughty kids. Another browser window is chirping away with news, recommendations, and ban-weets about gardening and recessionary stock-tips. I would love to chuck my 140 characters of gold in with the rest of this horse tweet...but I iz tired.

Finally...a message from Jon Stewart.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

M - Th 11p / 10c

Twitter Frenzy

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Economic Crisis

First 100 Days

Who else wants the secret of Rothschild?

2009-03-29T15:40:00.008+11:00

In case you're wondering about the title, I've combined two of the suggestions from a site dedicated to showing bloggers 'formulas' for blog headlines. Admittedly the site is aimed at online marketers, and I have nothing to market apart from a few poorly constructed posts and armchair social observations. Nevertheless I've combined two of them ('who else wants..' and 'the secret of..') so the formula should be twice as powerful! (That’s how it works right?) I have also decided, in the wake of the flooding of articles relating to the financial crisis, to stop writing about the financial crisis (and the minutiae that accompanies it). After this post.

All this financial tumult has provided plenty of watercooler chatter, and everyone’s throwing around buzzwords of the day. These include (but are not limited to) the following: Recapitalisation, mark-to-market, credit default swap and negative equity. Recently we've also seen the re-emergence of a fancier term for 'pyramid scheme', the Ponzi scheme - which when thrown into watercooler chat also allows one to use the names Bernie Madoff and Charles Ponzi, the mail fraud maven whom the term is named after.

Additionally, those interested in sounding interesting seem to have suddenly become interested in the history of finance, similar to when they suddenly took an interest in previous presidential speeches during the Obama campaign (followed by e.g. 'That was Kennedy right?'). That's not to say that keeping in tune with topical conversation is a bad thing, but the speed at which false historical accounts spreads through word of mouth (office or elsewhere) is alarming - perhaps there should be a section on the email/internet hoax site snopes.com for word-of-mouth hoaxes and misinformation. The most recent one going around has inspired me to get history straight so that at least the 10 or so people that might read this will be able to spread the correction. Namely, the story going around involves that 'Napoleon of finance' Nathan M. Rothschild. Of course the Rothschild’s were a wealthy family by the time Nathan entered the family business, but it was he who took them from moderately wealthy to stratospheric heights of wealth not seen till perhaps the Rockefeller dynasty.

So this week I heard the same story twice, on opposite ends of the city, that Nathan Rothschild created his family's banking powerhouse by being able to receive news of Napoleons loss at Waterloo before everyone else (he had extremely fast couriers, which is true), at a time when Napoleon was surging through territories voraciously enough that many thought the British would also suffer defeat. In this version of the story, Rothschild, having early knowledge of Wellington's victory, buys up British sovereign bonds at a low price (the price being low because of speculation of a Napoleon victory) and sells them a year later for a massive return after British victory and financial stability returns - government borrowing reduces after the war is over, sending bond prices up and the Rothschild fortune in the same direction. This version of the story, heard across two areas of the city (not in the exact same words naturally) was enough to make me go back and check its validity. Now some may say this is not a representative enough sample - but if those two people tell another two people and so forth, you can see how this inaccuracy can be a problem - it's like when everyone at the White House thought there were nuclear weapons in Iraq, that’s how that started. This is actually far from the real story, and neglects a few key details. Now it's time to launch into history mode, SMRM style.

Nathan Rothschild was, according to the 4th Lord Rothschild (his great-great-great grandson, which makes him very great indeed) 'short, fat, obsessive, extremely clever and wholly focused....’ Meyer Rothschild had ran a moderately successful antique dealing and bill-brokering business, and in efforts to expand he expatriated his sons across Europe with Amschel (Frankfurt), Salomon (Vienna), Calmann (Naples) and James (Paris) spread across mainland Europe, and Nathan sent to London to conduct business. After arriving in 1799, making most of his business purchasing textiles and sending them back to Germany, Nathan entered the banking business in 1811 not through his own directive, but being fatefully approached by the British Government themselves. Napoleon was at this time conducting his efforts in earnest, setting up a blockade imposing trade from Europe to England. The British Government approached Nathan as he had acquired valuable experience smuggling gold to the Continent, often in breach of these blockades. Britain’s Commissary-in-Chief, John Herries, was authorised to employ Rothschild to (confidentially of course) collect the largest quantity he possibly could of French silver and gold from Germany, France and Holland within 2 months.

Nathan and his brothers stretched their trade channels and executed the commission well enough that by May 1814, he had advanced £1.2 million to the Government (almost twice the expected target) and collected hefty commissions for himself in the process. The Rothschilds, being spread out across Europe, were now in a great position to exploit price and exchange rate differences between markets (arbitrage). Rothschilds also handled 12.6 million francs of subsidies to be paid to Continental allies, as such Nathan was 'a very useful friend' according to the Prime Minister Lord Liverpool. When Napoleon famously left his exile in Elba, deciding to revive his Empire (March 1, 1815) Nathan Rothschild responded by buying up all the gold and coins him and his family could get their hands on - totalling almost £9.8 million. In this purchase, they had assumed the war would be a long one, the gold necessary for its funding. This proved to be an almost fatal miscalculation, as the belated arrival of the Prussian army dismantled Napoleons chances at Waterloo, to the exaltation of Wellington (he of the boots) and co.

Thanks to the speed of his couriers, Rothschild received the news 48 hours earlier than the official dispatch sent to the Cabinet. However, unlike the urban legend suggests, this news was hardly positive from Nathan's standpoint. Now the family was 'sitting on top of a pile of cash that nobody needed - to pay for a war that was over' (Ferguson, 2008). With the coalition dissolved, and the armies disbanded, there were no more soldiers’ wages ant no need for subsidies to Britain's wartime allies. During the war when Government borrowing and demand were high, gold prices soared, but now they were bound to have a post-war fall. Rothschild was faced with heavy and growing losses.

It was under this predicament that Nathan made one of the most audacious trades in financial history. Using much of the gold Rothschilds acquired, Nathan made an enormously risky bet on the bond market, buying up great purchases of 'stock' (as reported in the Courier 20th July, 1815, meaning Government bonds). The idea was that a reduction in government borrowing following victory at Waterloo, would soon escalate the price of British bonds (upwards escalator, not the one going downwards that is more stressful on the knees and which old people claim is more difficult to get on). Nathan bought, and as the price of consols began to rise, bought some more. I think N*Sync's 'Buy, Buy, Buy' is about shopping, right? - think of this song as the soundtrack for this part of the event. Despite his brothers' desperate calls to suppress the gamble and realise faster profits, Nathan held his nerve for another year, eventually selling his stock in late 1817 when bond prices were up 40%. As historian Niall Ferguson notes 'Allowing for the effects on the purchasing power of sterling of inflation and economic growth, his profits were worth around £600 million today'. Now that’s alot of breadsticks.

Why? Why have I derided a site dedicated to interest and mockery of small oddities and anomalies of our activities, and suddenly turned history professor? Because now when you hear the inaccurate version of the story, you can be that annoying woman/man who uses one finger to correct her/his glasses (from the middle), then raises her/his finger slowly and begins with 'Actually...what happened was...' and proceed to regale them with some enlightenment. This is for all of the correctors, and if someone started a sentence with 'Actually...' in the White House 8 years ago, who knows where we'd be, a better place I'd like to think. And after you're done correcting them with the Rothschild story of wealthy to swealthy (that’s stinking-wealthy), no doubt you'll find yourself with a captive audience around you, and so you can ask 'Who else wants the secret of Rothschild?'

Doom and Gloom, clouds in the boardroom

2009-03-12T14:40:00.010+11:00

Unlike many other popular expressions in the English language, 'Doom and Gloom' which has likely featured somewhere in every form of media since September 2008, is not derived from the King James Bible or that colossus of adage and maxim, William Shakespeare. The phrase has its humble beginnings in the 19th Century Newspapers in the U.S. - take for example this ominous titbit from The Statesville Landmark (1875) "Slowly, and with a tone of doom and gloom, the ponderous clock began striking." Moreover, the phrase was predominantly used in economic and political pieces. However, with nationwide literacy rates still relatively low in the mid 1870's (approximately 50% illiteracy in the U.S.) it's unlikely that Jeb from the anvil factory was going to pick it up and pass the ball till word spread of 'doom and gloom' and the devils earpiece invented by Alexander Graham Bell.

The modern proliferation of the expression can be attributed to that steadfast bastion of the American golden years, the Broadway musical. Specifically, it was the 1947 musical Finian's Rainbow (also popularised for later audiences through revivals and a film adaptation) which spouted a classic line from the pessimistic leprechaun Og "Doom and gloom... D-o-o-m and gl-o-o-m... I told you that gold could only bring you doom and gloom, gloom and doom.” Nowadays you may find "doom and gloom" employed as phrase of the crisis in all media forms. Googling "doom and gloom" proves its popularity also runs across industries - with articles on doom and gloom in finance, I.T., fashion and even fruit juice companies (economic Boost anyone?, Stimulus Jamba Juice?). Although the locution has its origins in Broadway, it is precisely that staple of popular culture that has been thriving despite the global gloom and doom. Broadway ticket sales are surging, even improving during the early part of 2009 on previous earnings from February 2008. True that some of this effect can be attributed to the potential 'ticket tax' that may be passed by New York state, adding an extra $10 to theatregoers bills, however the irony brings a wry smile to the faces of those who are jobless and have time to dig for it (this blogger falls into said category). How can the financial services industry, which has so long eschewed the values of honesty, integrity and basic competence we learnt from musicals such as Chicago (crooks become celebrity) and Westside story (ethical gangster show) suddenly owe so much to the not so humble song and dance narrative..right? Surely a musical about the falling giants of Wall St - complete with Bull symbolism, choreography in the shape of plummeting stock prices, a hedge fund that actually deals in hedges (those of the garden variety) to save itself and numbers like ‘Lehmann Brothers to the gutters’ - is in tall order (and I would say, timely). Also if produced before the NY ticket tax, it may even be profitable – thus becoming the only thing related to financial services that is so.

Doom and Gloom, like a team of parasitic bit-players (think the evil twins in Cinderella, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Hamlet) have filtered their way through the media, via a hopelessly deregulated U.S. market, to all of us to the point where we aren’t even buying underwear. Is there more of a basic human right to be denied? A society in recession and without underwear is a worry indeed. So the recession is real, Pacific Brands has canned 1,850 jobs in Australia, Macquarie Bank had a period prior to Christmas where almost 50 heads were rolling each week, and countless others in financial and other industries are afraid that any second the boss is going to lean over their desk and ask them to come in 'for a chat' or to simply leave with only their personal belongings. As if the layoffs weren’t enough bad PR for these large conglomerates, Pacific Brands, one of the great underwear suppliers (I have some) and now much maligned employers, are paying the Cato Counsel PR firm up to $50,000 per month to revive their public image. Somehow I think that strategy in itself will work against them. Perhaps there should be a PR firm to revive the PR of the PR firm hired to revive the PR of a brand with failed PR. The firm could be called Doom and Gloom PR, their mascot Og from Finian’s Rainbow, assuring us that despite the volatility of financial markets, not even ‘stable’ investments such as gold can escape a global recession “I told you that gold could only bring you doom and gloom, gloom and doom." An optimist might say that the bit players always lose out in the end (see Cinderella, etc), a realist might say this is just the beginning of the play and they will still make us scrub the dirty floors for a while.

One man’s recession is another man’s boom, as they say (I don’t know if anybody has actually said that, but surely someone has). Federal departments have too long been bogged down by mediocre staff, unable to offer top guns the salaries they receive in the private sectors. Now, with big name firms falling faster than a man without a parachute, Governments wait eagerly with napkins on laps, holding out the trampoline below. They are preparing for a net grab, to get the best hired guns who worked for the very companies that strove to find loopholes in federal law to maximise profits. Yes, the silver lining has come in 2009 and it’s called The Year of the Regulator.

Excellence in mediocrity (and the award goes to..)

2008-09-23T23:23:00.013+10:00

History books spread across classrooms around the world chronicle the venerable characters of the past, and whether they are portrayed as heroes or villians, they are nonetheless exceptional heroes and villians. Khan, Napoleon, Shakespeare, Gandhi, (Queen) Elizabeth, Hitler, Curie, Lincoln, Einstein, Churchill, Kennedy - all examples of historical figures and more importantly, whether applied for vice or virtue, people with outstanding talents and power. History has rightly been kind to the exceptional - defined as having or showing intelligence and ability well above average - as they are the ones who write it. With our culture dissolving into contradictory increases in consumerism in the face of a financial crisis, where celebrity worship and instant gratification reign supreme, it is difficult to discredit the arguement that (more so than in the past) many of those central to the history of our times (Paris Hilton? Hefner? Bush Jr?) are mediocre personnel whose impact has largely been a result of shock value, celebrity obsession, good start-up capital (Hilton, Bush) or factors more poignant than any aspect of excellence inherent in these people.

As a member of Gen-Y, and an ardent Gen-Y defender to boot, it is nonetheless disappointing to witness the degradation of what is considered exceptional talent in the public eye, and what appears to be an increasing preference for mediocrity amongst positions in which selecting outstanding individuals is crucial in instigating the change required for society to advance. Although quick analogies do not necessarily suffice in an arguement of this scale, they are nonetheless the most direct manner in which to make a point within the blog framework. So Bill Clinton - by any standards an exceptionally intelligent politician, was the first to begin to reel in the treasury deficit. George Bush - by any standards an exceptionally mediocre politician, has in accordance with treasury monkeys, congress puppets and the legitimate Mafiosi of the Fed board (with the exception of Bernanke and a number of others not directly running the institutions insisting on bailouts for debt which they are responsible for creating) has allowed the deficit to blow out to $11.3 trillion to 'save' the world’s financial markets. Spend on a futile war, spend to maintain US dollar supremacy, raise the deficit ceiling to breaking point. The actions of the mediocre have negated the progress of the exceptional and increased the regression of a society and its values.

It is in essence a vicious cycle - feed the masses the ignorant, easily digestible celebrity laden angle of the story, it will sell and propagate in value, further increasing demand for its supply. Nowhere is this more evident than in the comedy otherwise known as the US electoral race. That Sarah Palin can even be considered to be vice-presidential material can happen, as they say, only in America. That a man from Tokyo has made a multi-million dollar fortune in his homeland selling Sarah Palin glasses frames speaks to the ludicrous nature of this electoral race and the 'values' that underpin the Republican party. Even the political move to select a running mate such as Palin, however shrewd, is indicative of the sort of candidate political party's think will win over the majority of Americans. An average education, a strong belief in 'intelligent design', a bible belt buckle holder who ironically had a daughter knocked up before marriage, she thinks she can see Russia from her house, and is unsure of the meaning of the word 'doctrine'. I could go on, however surely the kicker is that she doesn’t even know how to turn up the volume on her TV (thank you Tina Fey for a hilarious impersonation). No amount of toy dolls, cheap-trick advertisements or calls to Americas misinformed and uneducated can hide what the rest of the world seems to already know - that surely the election of McCain/Palin will likely mark the beginning of the end of the great history of the U.S.

That someone of the questionable 'calibre' of Palin is not only standing on the same stage, but attaining greater popularity than Obama/Biden - an opponent with far greater qualifications, integrity, vision and charisma (yes, this is necessary to inspire people in a country that for all intents and purposes appears on the decline) - is an insult to a nation which has proudly displayed its supremacy largely through the exceptional characters of its history.

Although it is generally satisfying to watch the greedy suffer at the hands of their own indulgence, there is nonetheless a dollop of sympathy and regret. This is reserved not for the fat cats who will walk away unscathed, but for the general populace, who in this case seem to have been left highly misinformed (or uninformed altogether), swayed by passionate beliefs rather than the rationality which should be paramount in nation building. As all of us in the rest of the world laugh and shake our heads at the circus surrounding what to us appears to be a simple decision to elect a leader who has great promise to inspire, educate and revive a superpower, we also wonder if that country is smart enough to make the right choice. If you're unsure, buy a pair of Sarah Palin frames, note the blur that ensues, put in some earplugs and listen to confederate songs, while watching the TV with the volume down. That should do the trick.

Friends for the 00's

2008-07-20T16:39:00.004+10:00

And we're back - to a rousing reception and much fanfare, people have lined the streets, they closed off George st and we all received SMS's from the Pope - oh no that was World Youth Day Sydney 08'. Nevertheless, with WYD coming to an end this week there are some interesting observations to be made by those of us constituting the normal population of the city. We have peeked into the pilgrim world with curiosity, bemusement, and perhaps the fear that belies the former (apologies for the lengthy sentence):

1) With all the face paint, large groups of various nations adorned their respective flags and were sprawled out across the city - some of us were half expecting a soccer (euro:football) world cup. I may have even seen a group of italians with the ball they love best (not meatball).

2) Being the chaste, cleansed and enlighted souls they are, I was surprised to find a report on a group of pilgrims who had entered a large shopping centre in the city (Myer). They were caught shoplifting. There may be reasons for this, including the following:
- It was a conspiracy organised by atheists/Jedi's who disguised themselves in WYD gear in order to undermine *conversion rates*, I mean Youth Day celebrations, and increase taxpayer angst.
- The pilgrims had discovered fine print below the tablet which contains the 10 commandments. The footnote attached to 'thou shalt not steal' details exceptions to this commandment, those exceptions being woolly jumpers, tracksuit pants, clubbing shirts, and those awesome novelty alarm clocks. Wait..theres a knock on the door..someones outsitde...oh it's Irony.

With all the hoopla surrounding the Papa's visit, it's difficult not to get caught up in the blessed atmosphere of the last week. Thus, I find myself in a pensive, reflective, perhaps even spiritual mood. And as such, I have a confession to make: I am and have been..a sitcom tragic (or a sitcom slut, as suggested). From the moment Vinny Barbarino swung into the classroom in Welcome Back Kotter to the daily dose of theme song opening line 'Now this a story all about how, my life got fliped, turned upside down..' and the teenage boy fantasy that was Rachel Green (seasons 1-6 being particularly spectacular) - sitcoms have become an escapist, time-consuming, educational and affirming feature of our idiot boxes. They are a tapestry of the absurd (Kramer, Joey, Balky) and emotional, peppered with light and ultimately inoffensive social commentary. When Martin Crane provides wisdom to the stubborn and pompous Frasier, which he ignores and ultimately pays for this ignorance, he is affirming a core belief of the working and middle class that the smartest guy in the room isnt always the one with the degrees and the money. This may be false, but in tapping into the belief of the masses, it is also a brilliant way to make a show popular.

More recently, shows such as Scrubs and 30 Rock have veered from the conventional and time-honoured (read: lame and unrealistic - but thoroughly enjoyable) format, opting instead for time jumps, special effects, and other filmic techniques otherwise reserved for hollywood. However, a new player has emerged, combining the best of the old and new schools, and thus becoming the Friends of our generation (Y, in case there is confusion here) and it is, legen - wait for it - dary.

How I met your mother has brought back the sitcom - with a simple yet clever idea, a set of five well concieved characters (where other shows would have 6 or 7 characters to put forth much the same). It is full of plot holes and inconsistencies, like Friends, but the characters SMS, have college debt, youtube, ipods, reminisce about the 90's and were too young to really know the 80's. It also includes the ultimate bachelor character perhaps ever placed inside the microcosm of the sitcom world. Evidently, you can see where this recommendation is headed - watch it, just don't steal the DVD. We move now from World Youth Day and back into the regular week, which can't be summarised sitcom style, in 2 mins before the ad break.

Big Man 'G' Bless, and signing off

FB

And so it goes..

2008-04-28T14:35:00.004+10:00

A man, youngish yet withered by his jaded view of the world, sits at his desk and begins to type on his laptop - the first time he has attempted anything outside the creation of corporate memorandums, emails, proposals and literature within the similar vein, for 3 months. The cursor, blinking ever so steadily, akin to perhaps an elderly lady with a walker straddling a pedestrian crossing, entices his fingertips to translate ideas into words on a page. He stares at the cursor. It says nothing. He stares blankly. Nothing but self-absorbed, self-referential drivel emanates onto the screen. Why isnt there anything to write about? There appears to be a plethora of objects to inspire mediocre comment on. Phone bills piled up to the left of his laptop, an empty cup of coffee from the night before still bears the stains of cheap nestcafe, and amongst this mad modern mess, a pen sits idly by the ipod. Pen: mightier than the sword, might err in the presence of the word processor. He types a sentence, deletes it, and lets the pen idea slide - no point philosophising about the evolution of how ideas have been recorded by humans for other humans. He decides to summarise this idea in one sentence, not to trivialise it, but merely to point out the frivolity in thinking it can be expressed in an internet forum. He writes 'spoken word, cave drawings (ochre), sand drawings, papyrus, inks, quail, pencil, pen, printing, typewriter, wordprocessor'. So it goes.

He has called in sick at work today, in order to pursue other goals which are difficult to partake on working days. Despite taking the first step in making some time, laziness rears its head and fixates its eyes on the mind numbing entertainment that is Midday TV (free-to-air). Girls are screaming because some celebrity or the other with an axe to grind and a product/film/album to plug have shown up on a couch next to the ever omnipotent Oprah. Dr Phil spends an hour discussing various marital problems, before rubbing it in everyones face at the end of the show when he walks off ever so happily with his wife. Melodramatic antics ensue on various soap operas when someones husbands dog marries his sister, dies and comes back to life, or so you would think until you realise that the husband is actually the father, best friend and second uncles cousin of the girl who is the town bicycle. Very confusing. Next up, a man with a history of petty crime and a ragged checkered shirt requests the payment of $200 from his ex-lover: an overweight, underdressed and illiterate character who allegedly broke her ex-boyfriends window when they lived together 2 years ago. Judge Judy's verdict is final - someone wins, but ultimately the viewer loses. So it goes.

He sits back in front of his laptop, upon the realisation that none of the things he'd set out to do today had been achieved. His attempt at contributing to an otherwise (relatively) interesting forum has simply become a trite recollection of a day spent in the usual mediocrity and obscurity many of us in the middle(ish) classes have become accustomed to. He realises however, that things could be worse, the pain of midday TV or living in a sub-saharan slum. Middle class guilt sets in, and he decides to give some money to charity. He walks away realising that he hasn't yet given up his name to those reading his blog post, but that part of him continues to walk away from the screen. Since we don't know his name, let's call him 'I'. And so it goes.

Nice to meet you, stranger I've known a while..

2008-01-15T12:07:00.001+11:00

If there's one industry that has profited from the steady increase in working hours over the last 50 years in most of the worlds nations, it is the beverage industry - specifically re (in wanky corporate office lingo we say 're' for regarding) coffee. The digital age has the whole world connected 24/7, and the playing field has been 'flattened' (Thomas Friedman - The World is Flat [2004]) thanks to outsourcing - quality skills at lower market rates - fiber optic cables, web browsers and everything else i'm sure all intelligent readers are aware of. However this flattening has seen the emergence and subsequent proliferation of the angular, yet cylindrical figure many of us take for granted as an integral part of our day to day minutae - your coffee cup.

To notice the coffee habits of coworkers is to understand their cycles, whether they're morning or afternoon people, whether they use coffee as an innocent pick-me-up, or they devour it 10 times a day just to get wired since it may be inappropriate to snort a line of cocaine off ones HP notebook (unless you're in investment banking, in which case this i'm told this is regular fare on a friday afternoon in the bathrooms - see http://www.leveragedsellout.com/ ). The direction of the lifestyle-coffee relationship is uncertain, but evident. As a result we grow accustomed to, perhaps even attached, to our local barista. This is the genius, the man amongst men, that works at the cafe which services all the caffene hungry constituents in surrounding office blocks, and memorises each individuals order. When you turn up, there's no verbal order but a code word - 'the usual'. Suddenly from being a cog in a wheel (in an office) one is made to feel like a someone.

The barista/regular customer relationship is a special one, and could well serve as a model for many a successful relationship. Some opt for an interaction of efficiency: for $3.00, you get satisfaction guaranteed with no questions asked, and bit of small talk before leaving with a smile. Others have their barista as a listening ear, rewarded for divulging their life secrets with something hot, possibly sweet, and certainly satisfying. It is precicely the sort of bond which keeps many of us office plebs going through the day, knowing that tomorrow contains the possibilty of the same.

Those who aren't coffee drinkers (or 'mocha' drinkers - please don't say you're buying coffee if you're getting a mocha) wouldn't understand this relationship, perhaps equating it more with traditional retail/consumer interactions. Maybe they're tea drinkers - the type who go out to essentially pay for boiling water, as most establishments will source teabags from your regulars; Mildura, Tetley, dare I say Dilmah. 'You ordered a camomile tea' - goodness gracious that cafe makes good boiling water. Hot chocolate drinkers are generally the types who don't frequent beverage establishments often, as it is not the sort of drink to have daily. The hot chocolate order, i'm told by our barista Ben, is either the order of the aloof, or the order of novelty - that is non-frequenters.

After posting this one here, i'm gonig to walk over and say hi to Ben. He will say 'the usual', there will be a nod of confirmation and a returning nod for recognition. We will lament and discuss the dearth of mens magazines in the cafe (only reading material is womens/gossip mags) and i'll get my card stamped and collect my 30 mins of satisfaction in a cup, and return to my desk. The Moccopan coffee brand has an interesting slogan which I never understood until recently: 'Coffee Philosophy'. Perhaps its my own particular delusion, could be a number of completely incorrect abstract connections, but this beautifully bittersweet drink does have something to say about people, their interactions, and maybe the world around us. Philosophy indeed.

The new currency of busyness

2007-12-16T12:57:00.000+11:00

Material goods: The souped up car, the rolex, the designer shirts, branded minutae etc. All quite affordable and not quite unreachable in this age of large disposable incomes of young professionals in the 22-35 age bracket. Generation celebrity has us flooded constantly with targeted images of the latest, greatest and trendiest at (seemingly) the best price point. This on the one hand will grab the attention of the mindless who want, and on the other to desensitize people as to the 'exclusivity' of an item. So what is it then that people use to differentiate themselves from their rat racing peers, when the large majoriy of material possessions are ho-hum (s/he saved up for it, got a good deal, knew someone who knew someone - many methods of aquisition)?.

Trying to catch up with friends nowadays involves about 5 phone calls, and it is for all intents and purposes, like a sales process. There is the initial guaging of interest (call 1) - 'Lets meet up sometime' 'Yea that would be great'. Next is the inevitable gap in communicae, lets label the absence of a call an event in itself (call 2). Following this would be facebook message (call 3) with a suggestion of time/day, then the renegotiation of said time/day (call 4) after which both members will check their outlook calendars. Finally there is the close/sell (call 5), which is the confirmation call. Both/all parties will then meet up at the specified place 10 mins late and spend a bit of introductory time explaining how busy they all were.

We all fill up our proverbial plates with activities which, were we to be of any decent level in ALL of them, would require significantly more than the 24 hours per day we have been granted by the great nothing (insert your preferred deity) and those responsible for calendar invention (who's more powerful?). Granted none of us should feel terribly guilty about this as we are of the age where forming a solid sense of self is paramount - lets open ourselves up to every opportunity given. However, the downside is that being busy has been equated to success. If money talks, busy-ness is the tone of superiorty behind the speech, the swagger in M.Jagger.

The confound? success is neither tethered to nor completely disconnected from being busy, but could in fact be a function of what one is busy doing, and importantly the person themselves. Bill Gates has his days scheduled in 15 minute increments for the next 3 years. Warren Buffett turns up to work every morning and places a blank page of paper on his desk, and this is his diary for today. Need I describe in another long winded sentence what this implies.

Tell me you're busy and I wont immediately conclude you're on the path to happiness, so we might have to probe further. Maybe we should have coffee to discuss that. But I'm only free between 6 and 7pm on Thursday, how's does that work for you?

A first in Sri Lanka

2007-12-10T10:12:00.000+11:00

"Sala Ek General"

2007-11-23T02:42:00.000+11:00

Since the bloodless coup d'etat in 1999, I've never really known what to think about Pervez Musharaff. Now, though, his last ditch grab for power has gone too far. The Haneef case showed us all what happens when there is too much power in the hands of one person. Then it was Kevin Andrews playing with our justice system. Now, I give you General Musharraf in all his glory:

Pakistan police arrested scores of school students, the youngest being a 12-year-old, who participated in a silent rally in Islamabad to protest against the emergency imposed by President Pervez Musharraf.
With silver and black tape stuck on their mouths and holding placards with slogans like "Justice for justices" and "Free the media", about 100 students braved police batons near the upmarket Jinnah Super market in Islamabad on Monday.

I stumbled on this great dissenting voice. The pictures are clear enough:

Seneca, perhaps a translation is in order? Our cluster map ain't exactly showing a rollicking readership in Pakistan. Maybe the General, inspired by his military ruler buddies in Myanmar, has decided to disconnect the Internet?

The Post without Direction (Alternate title - Where is the post?)

2007-11-22T12:45:00.000+11:00

So, just a short gripe I've been holding for a week or so. The Sydney train fare has increased by approximately 5% and one may see not a word spoken in the news, and not an adjective printed in the press. The apathetic nature of Australian society persists. If this had happened in France, there would be a riot, walls torn down, banners harking back to the days of French Revolution, and perhaps the dropping of the name Charles De Gaulle. But in Australia, and 'she'll be alright'. I've held back thus far without expletives, so i'll end it there. Moving on now, and we're back.

Yesterday, a festive time was had by all present. Hattori Hanzo was off to the land of the saints for a month, and we found this to be a suitable enough reason to get together, and naturally invite a common friend of hours, Mr. Jug O. Beer (BSc, B.A, MBA, RSA, MB BS, FCUK). Perhaps the idea lay dormant in my subconscious, or perhaps i'm not quite ahead of the curve so much as bringing up the tail from a mental aptitude perspective, but a few points about social interaction in the 2000's came to light. In an odd subversion of the social networking phenomenon, which has obviously been widely criticised for the devaluing of 'real' human relationships among our generation, I was surprised that the trashbagging of social networking sites served as an excellent entry point for real life conversation (I was guilty of this particular brand of introductory conversation on at least 3 occasions - with 3 different people).

There's an initial irony of being disillusioned by social networking websites (SNW's) and then using it as not only an entry point but a large framework of discussion with strangers. Then theres a rollover effect where following a successful introductory conversation at the expense of SNW's, where you meet someone new, one may continue to traverse these SNW's to find flaws to again bring up in actual life conversation. Everybody wins - Zuckerman, MySpace, Murdoch, you, me and the stranger who shared my disgust of false 'friendships', who I will will get a friendship request for on facebook, and probably worse, whom I will accept. Truly, the new age of social interaction is the exchange between the physical and cyber worlds.

On a different note, I'm glad that there are 1 or 2 more people besides us contributors who are reading this blog. Although they are friends of ours, I am still glad to have a readership outside the authorship, and for further notice all ships are invited. Some members of the readership thought we were turning into a male version of the show 'Sex and the City'.

I can't say i've ever sat through a complete episode of it, but thanks to some thoroughly brilliant marketing (and marketability) even those of us not privy to lives of 4 professional female New Yorkers, are aware of the style of each character. I've certainly babbled alot just there to get to my point that I got labelled as the Samantha (who is more of a pro than a professional - wink wink) of the Six Million Rupee Men. I thank those for their opinion, however somehow I feel my reputation precedes me. It does however bring up an interesting topic for which I would like to open up a discussion forum. Perhaps, like snakes on a plane, only better, we can take contributors, put up a script (or a pilot) and do something with it - and if nothing happens, we can leave this post as a nice reminder of ideas squashed at first hurdle. So heres some questions for those who can be bothered to place their input (and for which I will be forever thankful towards) - What would a male sex and the city be like, has it been done in another form (Entourage perhaps?), character names, location? All welcome. Just don't make a group about it on facebook, we shall instead potentially brood over this with an old friend, Prof. Jug O. Beer.

Oh no! Not again...

2007-11-16T04:55:00.000+11:00

If there ever was a case of a picture saying a thousand words:

The secret to removing The Great Man has been revealed: let him get to 95. I think - don't quote me on this - he's been dismissed almost half a dozen times in the nervous nineties over the last year. Mohan, you fancy a statsguru of his ODI scores since the bilateral series with South Africa in the UK before the Test tour of England? The one they won 2-1? Perhaps you could it append it to this post.

Postscript - 23 November 2007
Some flowing prose from a favourite cricket writer, Rohit Brijnath in The Hindu:

Tendulkar’s body may have healed and allowed him a fuller expression of strokes, but it is his confidence in himself, confidence that was shaken and rattled surely but never extinguished, that carried him on. He still gets beaten some days, but he is also more fluent, too, astonishing no less in his ability to rack up scores of 99, 93, 8, 17, 99, 8, 55, 71, 94, 30, 0, 16, 43, 79, 47, 72, 21, 4, 99, 29, 97 in his last 21 one-day innings.
What does Tendulkar play for? Team, himself, pride, records? Maybe he plays because part of him is just a boy who finds himself when bat meets ball. Maybe he plays because of a boy agog in the stands. Maybe he has summoned this last reservoir of energy to show a kid, now old enough to understand, why, for 18 years, the world has made such a fuss about his father.

No action left in your keyboard?

2007-11-14T00:14:00.000+11:00

Mr Charity happens to be in the market for a new keyboard. Discussion of his search bought on memories of this moment from The Blues Brothers movie of 1980 - wikipedia synopsis:

"a tale of redemption for the paroled convict Jake Blues and his brother Elwood as they decide to take on a "mission from God" and reform their blues band in order to raise funds to save the Roman Catholic orphanage where they grew up."

I have included this quote because of the wikipedia links, an opportunity to explore The Art of Wikigroaning, no doubt. Back to the matter at hand. Elwood and Jake catch up with an old friend at Ray's Music Exchange:

Michael Jackson - Prince - Justin Timberlake (?)

2007-11-09T12:37:00.000+11:00

It's like that question they often place in the literacy component of aptitude tests: Which is the odd one out? Increasingly, the opinion is being built that Justin (JT) is very much in line for induction into the pantheon of solo male popstars, MJ and the artist formely known as (but now known as such) amongst the groups finest. Some of the evidence is quite strong: teen star of N*Sync turned glamour boy thanks largely to the brilliant production of the Neptunes on his debut album, then popstar with (minimal) musical cred thanks to the arguably even more brilliant production of the current studio king Timbaland. So the faithful ask..why doesn't he deserve his place among the greats?

I have had the great fortune of seeing MJ in concert (1997 SCG 70,000 sold out crowd) and Prince (2002 Sydney Entertainment Centre), and last week I went to JT to see if he was the one to make the holy trinity. He was not.

The boys talent, nobody is doubting. The dancing - spectacular. The voice (i'll get to that later). The musician (well..sort of, but not really), but the general showmanship was better than any other solo artist touring today. This however, I would argue, is thanks largely to the strength of the pop/dance tracks produced by Timbaland. As a spectacle, with the lighting and sound effects, the show was a success.

Although in many ways pop music is self indulgent by nature, JT's constant posing throughout his gig doesn't allow for any real connection to be made with the audience - it's all about him. This might not seem to faze the 13 yr old girl, a concert first timer, and her friends sitting in the row below as they are enthralled to simply see his face projected onto large screens (omg he's real!). He is obsessed with showing us, his lowly audience, that he can do everything. So he dance, sings in his painfully thin falsetto voice, and takes any opportunity to strum out chords on guitars, synths, piano - then the 13 yr old girl said 'I didnt know he could play so many instruments'. The magic trick worked, and for most people playing chords = virtuosity = musician. Evidently, and I will spell this out - he is not the Princely musician he wishes to become - Eric Clapton said Prince was the best guitarist he'd ever seen.

The greatness of MJ and Prince (just examples - there are others) lies in their ability to never let their artistic superiority get in the way of losing their connection with the audience. In their shows there is elements of the spectacular, lighting, sound, explosions, the posing (and what is a pop-star without the 'hey look at me' element) but there was also honesty and humanity. Watching Prince sing purple rain, or MJ sing 'shes out of my life', and no matter how large the audience, pindrop silence ensues, and for the girls out come the tissues (and some of the guys - ok yes maybe it was me). Timberlakes 'Prince imitation' falsetto really is false - rather than communicating the song it feels like he's singing just so he can show us his wafter thin high notes.

Even with a band as great as i've ever seen, I can only really recall one 2 minute window where I saw such honesty from JT. Part of it isnt completely his fault. Although his pop/dance tracks are among the best pop songs of the last 10 years, a glaring weakness in his repertoire is his ballads. MJ had great ballads, Prince had the sort of ballads that hit you straight in the gut (think 'Adore'). JT's ballads are not only poor songs, but in the wake of his paper thin voice he is drowned out by his band, so theres almost no articulation..what is he singing about? Probably some kind of love, so the girls scream anyway 'he's amazing!'. If only you knew, what a superstar was. Timberlake is a somebody, a megastar in the youtube 'everybody can be a star' era, but dont put his name amongst the others. MJ - Prince - ? we're still waiting, and i'm hopeful, but perhaps it'll have to wait till the next generation.

So after leaving the concert, I felt entertained, but not amazed and not with the feeling that you were the presence of greatness. It wasnt all his fault, it was Just-him.

Mutterings in 07'

2007-10-17T15:00:00.000+10:00

An older gentleman sits next to me at the office in St Leonards. Currently in the most stable time his life, he is part of a substantial yet fading population - the old caucasian Australian male. A man of decorum, charming and funny in the most inoffensive manner possible, he has earnt his place as the most lovable fellow in the office, and he's brilliant at what he does. He is a local North Shore boy, shielded by a life of prosperity and distance from the inner suburb experience. He speaks earnestly (and without any sense of superiority or haughtiness) of holiday houses, frequent flyer miles, stocks, bonds, and various financial securities which make me drift off to my happy place. He has lived through the conversion from imperial to metric systems, and through at least 15 governments from Menzies to Howard (the last bastion of hope for his generation). He is, with the watered down profile provided, a liberal voter.

Slightly out of touch with the complexities of modern Australia, he turned and said to me with the innocence and sincerity of tone he has become well known for, 'I wonder why Howard is dropping so much in the polls when he's done such a good job'. This is the group which the Howard government has known all along would support them thanks to economic luck and a healthy tax cut for their end of the spectrum. For the most part blunders such as Tampa, Cornelia Rau's wrongful detention, hesitation to sign the Kyoto protocol, and the farce that was the Dr.Haneef debacle (among other incidents) slip through their collective consciousness. It's the same conservative mentality that believes the Howard governments' arguement against the development of nuclear power plants. They mustve forgotten how far nuclear technology (and safety) has come since Chernobyl.

However it's also true to a large extent that they are not to blame, that they are a product of their generation and their environment: one of prosperity and a much more homogenous population, perhaps that which it seemed the Coalition strived for in its later years. The point is, scathing and hissing at liberal voters is useless, better instead to opt for a silently patronising tone and recognising the irony of what they stand for: Howards 'better Australia'. Multimillion dollar tax-payer funded campaigns advertising a new 'citizenship test', funded largely by people who wouldnt pass it themselves. Call an election, then call a tax cut, people imagine Costello standing on the corner of George st handing out $34 million. Part of the coalitions success then, is appealing to individuals' base attractiveness to money and the undeniable appeal of seeing a few more dollars next to their name. This makes it extremely difficult for the layman to see through and realise the ironically conservative nature of the current government. The prosperity they promise cannot come from holding onto our old ideas, pass strict laws on immigration (read: terrorism), regress from current trends in nuclear and environmental policy, and generally not move in the direction of the rest of the world.

The Liberal government, by and large, is like the old man sitting next to me, just without the charm. They stand defensive, eyes weary and ragged, legs shoulder width and palms stretched outwards in 'stop position', in the hope that time somehow runs counterclockwise. They speak dreamily of material prosperity without actually noticing that the rest of the world speaks another language. So i'll continue to enjoy the company of the silvertail next to me, and hope that with a new government both our generations will be better off, only he might not know why.

Racism in Cricket

2007-10-13T12:53:00.001+10:00

There is absolutely no excuse for racism in sport. Although this is somewhat a narrow minded view in the global context of equality and fairness the issue only seems to attract any media attention when presented on the sporting field. Recently, Andrew Symonds complained that he was the subject of racial abuse on the cricket field during the fifth one day cricket International against India in Vadodhara. Symonds complained that he was subject to “monkey chants” from the Indian crowd who constantly tormented him whilst he was fielding at the boundary rope.

Let me ask you: how is a monkey chant racial abuse? Does Symonds believe that he is cross bred with a gorilla and a human; maybe two gorillas? If not, then he should not be affected by such claims. Now, any slur can be taken offensive especially whilst under the pressure of a tightly contested sporting event. However, India was thrashed by Australia by nine wickets. Where is the pressure? Mr Symonds, you are softer than a kindergarten girl who cries after being teased for wearing pigtails to school.

This incident is being compared to other instances of racial abuse. For example, during the Australia – South Africa game at the WACA ground in Perth South African players were racially abused as ‘kaffirs’ whilst fielding on the boundary rope. Such taunts are several degrees more severe than a ‘monkey’ chant. Although the Symonds event in Vadodhara is rather trivial in comparison to other instances of racism in cricket, it does highlight an important issue.

In the global context, racial abuse is regarded as a terrible offence and much is done to abolish it. However, in places such as the sub-continent racism is common. People often refer to another’s caste, class, birth, status etc in a derogatory manner as a method of slight. In Australia, such actions are regarded as outrageous and so the media condemn the crowd. But in India, the slander which Australian cricketers torment the Indian cricketers with is regarded as outrageous in India in the same way Symond’s monkey chants are taken to be offensive here. If the same slander that Australian players use on other International teams were used in a local Australian state game it would not affect the local players. That is, the manner in which sledging affects a player is simply due to a clash of cultures.

What was it that caused Harbhajan Singh to confront the entire Australian team after he was dismissed in the second ODI at Eden Gardens? India was also losing at that point and it would seem rather silly to confront a side that is thrashing you to all corners of the cricket field. Nevertheless, Singh stood up to the Australian side and had to be pulled away from the umpire. This was regarded as comical by the Australian media. When Singh complained of inappropriate sledging, the media portrayed the Indians as sore losers. Obviously, something terrible was said (if you were an Indian with Indian values as opposed to Australian cultural values). So, to an Australian player it is mild offence; to an Indian player it is terrible slander.

The simple fact is that the content of Australian sledging is insensitive to other cultures. This is simply ignored because Australia keeps winning and so the complaints of the other team are simply taken as poor sportsmanship. Now the attention is shifted towards the Indians: no doubt there will be an investigation and consequences. But the simple fact is that Australian players are sore losers. If they are going to sledge in whatever manner they wish then they should accept sledging in whatever manner the opposition wishes. Given that the content of sledging cannot be monitored if sledging is allowed, then action must be taken to police what is said on the field.

Much of the sledging occurs at the crease around the batsmen and so it is a simple task for the umpire to judge whether sledges are inappropriate. Psychological games are part of cricket but it should not be interpreted to use issues irrelevant to the game of cricket to upset the batsman. Umpires should therefore be given the power to award penalties or fines to players who sledge inappropriately. Such a practice is logical since they are at the centre of the playing field and can hear all that is said to the batsman.

Once the players clean up their act all this media attention can focus on crowd behaviour. The idiots who taunt players in any manner should be harshly dealt with after being banned from cricket games. Usually, much of what fuels the crowd is what is either said or observed by the crowd. Singh’s confrontational stance to the Australian players during the second ODI obviously fuelled ideas of unfair abuse amongst the Indian public. Put simply, if we are to remove racism from sport it must begin with the players. In cricket, this begins with policing the content of sledging.

Dress

2007-10-10T23:01:00.000+10:00

If Adam and Eve had not eaten the forbidden fruit then we would never have to face the everyday dilemma of deciding what to wear. We would all be naked and content, happy that we are free from those prison bars that form the fibres of the clothing that we wear. However, frolicking through our urban jungle with nothing but a smile is merely a fleeting thought. The dilemma of deciding what to wear still hangs over us like a grey storm cloud.

Every day is faced with the daunting task of compiling an outfit. Often this decision is made after having carefully considered a number of prerequisites. Where is it that we are going? What is the occasion? Who will be present? What are they likely to wear? Have I worn this combination before? It would seem sane to consider the weather or look at what is comfortable or at what is not dirty. Yet we still ask those relatively simple questions which also prove somewhat difficult to answer. This leaves us staring at the mirror, digressing into a more dangerous topic – the faults that the mirror reveals.

The fact is that in today’s society, dress plays an important role. Firstly, there are the obvious social consequences. These namely include image, status and expressions of individuality or culture. Secondly, there are political consequences. That is, the dress we wear will help us to pose as confident, intelligent, respectable and trustworthy. Often we would employ such tactics in both the interview room and the court chambers. In such cases, the dress makes that ‘silent recommendation’. When it seems that people these days often judge a book by its cover, it adds more stress to that every day dress decision.

Nevertheless, clothes are only a ‘title page’ to your identity, character and person. Although it is important to edge out competition to win over either the opposite sex, boss or judge by dressing well what is more important is the substance that the clothes encase. If we lived in a world where our judgement was based purely on visual consideration, then ‘clothes make the man’, however this is not the case. Dress may divert another’s attention away from our faults but the minute we open our mouths they can gauge who we truly are. Dress only provides a good starting point and plays no further part in the development of a relationship.

We often regard our dress as the key to success when it comes to developing relationships. Yet if we are truly confident with ourselves, then the dress plays only the practical role and not the political one. More often than not, those who are confident with themselves often find that they are not faced with the daily dress dilemma but also never find themselves analysing their reflection. This confidence stems from a simple belief: the person sees in himself what he wants others to see in him. Armed with this ideal, the dress chooses itself.

FYI

2007-08-23T18:36:00.000+10:00

From the Desk of:
Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani

With great pleasure I Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani, working with a bank here in Nigeria as a Manager. I am writing you in respect of a foreign customer (an Oil consultant/contractor with our National Oil & Liquidified Gas Sector) whom made a US$25M depository for an investment program that has remained dormant for years now. Hence, I have decided to contact you due to the urgency of this transaction.

On my personal investigation, I discovered that the account holder died on December 2002 in the Ukrainian aircraft crash. I made further investigation and discovered that the customer died without making a WILL on the depository.

It may interest you to know that I am only contacting you as a foreigner because this money cannot be approved to a local Bank account here,but can only be approved to a foreigner with an account since the money is in US Dollars. I have decided as a matter of urgency upon this discovery now seek your permission to have you stand as next of kin to the fund as No one has ever come forward to claim this fund. It may also interest you to know that I have secured from the probate an ORDER OF MADAMUS to locate any of deceased beneficiary. In accordance to Nigerian Law, fund deposited for over a period of Six (6) years without claim will be reverted to the Government treasury, if nobody applies to claim this fund.

I will like you to provide immediately your full Names and Address,Date of Birth, Occupation, Tel & Fax Numbers so that an Attorney will be able to prepare the necessary documents and affidavit which will put you in place as the next of kin. The Attorney will draft and carry out the notarization of the WILL and also obtain the necessary documents and letter of probate/administration in your favour for the transfer.

At the successful conclusion of this business, your goodself shall be entitled to have 40% that is, USD$10M of the total money while I will have 55% that is USD$13.750M and 5% that is SD$1.250M for communications and other expenses. I am ready to invest a reasonable percentage of mine into any viable business you suggest as a joint partner. Your percentage will also be a source of upliftment. You have absolutely nothing to LOSE in assisting me instead, you have so much to GAIN. Be rest assured that this transaction would be most profitable for both of us.

Your response is highly imperative as this is a TWO-man business deal transaction as I shall then provide you with more details and relevant documents that will help you understand the transaction. I need your assistance and co-operation to this reality as I have done my Home-work and fine tune the best way to create you as the beneficiary while I would use my connection and money to secure almost all the paperwork for this transaction which will be done by the Attorney and my position as the Branch Manager guarantees the successful execution of this transaction with you as the beneficiary to this fund.

I will appreciate your early reply for commencement of business.Contact me for acknowledgment by E-mail and whereby you are not interested,please indicate in your reply so that I can seek for the assistance of someone else.

If this proposal is acceptable by you, I expect that you will not take undue advantage of the trust I Will bestow in you. I await your urgent response.

Thanks with great regards.

Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani

Food poisoning your career?

2007-08-21T18:34:00.000+10:00

A recent story on www.chow.com for you amusement.

Leftovers: The Career Killer
Does bringing your lunch hurt your chances for success?

By Helena Echlin

Dear Helena,

This coworker of mine, who is above me in the company hierarchy, usually brings her lunch to work—leftovers in Tupperware. The other day she asked me, somewhat seriously, whether it didn’t make her look less “successful” to bring her lunch, and whether it might hurt her in climbing the corporate ladder. I’d never thought about it before that moment, but then I wondered—did it? Don’t you have to look successful to be successful? —Concerned About My Friend’s Climb Through Middle Management

Dear Concerned About My Friend,

Bringing leftovers in Tupperware is like wearing an old cardigan to work: There’s nothing wrong with it, but it doesn’t project power and success. What you eat can send a subliminal message about who you are, just as much as what you wear. As Beverly Langford, author of The Etiquette Edge: The Unspoken Rules for Business Success, says: “Your lunch is part of your nonverbal communication, just like your jewelry.”

So what kind of meal says “management material”? The ideal lunch is expensive. “Having sushi delivered to the office reeks of power—and wasabi,” says Stan McElrae, creative director in a San Antonio advertising firm. By contrast, a Tupperware of last night’s lasagne makes it look like you’re struggling. “Those who pack a lunch are … typically crunched for cash,” claims Rupert, a legislative aide to a senator in Washington, DC, who did not want his real name used.

Your lunch should also be easy to consume. Langford recommends a sandwich, explaining: “You can eat it quickly; it makes you look like you’re a go-getter and you want to save time.” You shouldn’t bring lunch, because that could suggest you’re not completely focused on your work. People will know that you chose to spoon chicken fricassee into a container rather than get to the office five minutes earlier. Says McElrae: “I don’t think about that kind of thing when I get up in the morning; I’m thinking about whether I’ll get to Starbucks and what work I have to do that day.”

Another reason not to bring your own lunch is that it sets you apart. “It means you can never go to lunch with anyone,” Langford says. “It sends a signal: ‘Don’t invite me to go out with you.’” Even if your colleagues bring their food back and eat with you in the office, you’re still isolating yourself by eating separate food. Langford remembers: “I had a colleague once who was vegetarian and always brought her lunch. It was like a statement, ‘I’m different.’ It was tiresome.”

Most important of all, never bring anything smelly. Langford says, “One of the biggest complaints about working together is smells.” Sam, a legislative aide in Washington, DC, who asked that his last name not be used, particularly cautions against nuking fish leftovers in the microwave. “How do you contain the stench? If you close the kitchen door, the room will be foul for days.”

Put simply, if you bring the rest of last night’s fish curry, you risk losing the position to the guy who’s using pizza as a networking tool. As McElrae says, “There is nothing like ordering a pizza to unite everyone in the office.”

While I agree that home-packed-lunch might send off subliminal messages in the minds of your colleagues, the idea that you are just not cut to be a senior manager because of what you eat sounded absurd to me.

Ofcourse what you eat might dictate how you eat it. For example trying to eat 'chapati salan' at your desk might not make up for the tidiest meal thus reflecting poorly on your table manners etc.

Secondly, if you are really that self-conscious about how others might perceive you when eating left-overs from last night and thus susceptible to peer pressure, you just might not be senior-management material anyways.

I say, eat what you want and set a trend! Be a leader if you want that Director's position!

Link to Original story

Slinging Shit

2007-08-19T19:01:00.000+10:00

This evening on National Nine News the headline read “the Naked Truth – Kevin Rudd visits a Strip club in New York”. Kevin Rudd has recently admitted visiting a New York strip joint after a conference in 2003 after “too many drinks”. In the wake of an election announcement, the timing is extraordinary. Recently it seems that Team Howard is trying to sling as much dirt as they can on the Rudd Train to see how much of it can stick.

A couple of days ago, the Australian stock market fell markedly reflected by the fall in the dollar. Team Howard subsequently stated that the opposition does not have the skills nor the experience to manage such a situation. But how does the Government control short term effects on the stock market? I am sure policies passed by the government have an effect on trading yet these are only seen in the long term. What sort of skills and experience are you talking about Mr Howard? The same economic skills that kept interest rates low? Perhaps Mr Howard called the US Federal Reserve and told them to start playing with their figures. Good work, Jonny.

If the Anti-Christ had a tattoo...

2007-08-08T17:26:00.000+10:00

It would have to be this...
Yes, that's right, someone has actually tatooed the dreaded Blue Screen of Death error message on his arm. The link is here.

Invasion, what invasion?

2007-08-07T15:45:00.000+10:00

In the weeks after 911, I remember hearing about the threat to American national security posed by the lack secret agents in the field. But I suppose the CIA wouldn’t compromise their agents by talking about where they are. Next time you're at the airport and there’s a man reading a newspaper, it could be Agent 56 from Control watching out for Siegfried…

It’s good to know that incompetence like this doesn’t just happen in the movies. It seems like real spies are more like Austin Powers than Jason Bourne.

In 1953 the CIA sent its first officer to Moscow, but he was so inept that he was seduced by his Russian housemaid - really a KGB colonel - photographed in flagrante and blackmailed.
During the Korean War, none of the CIA's 200 officers in the capital, Seoul, spoke Korean and many were accused of having fabricated their reports.
The CIA's difficulties in the Middle East are part of a long and undistinguished history. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, Robert Gates, then the agency's head and now the US Defence Secretary, was at a family picnic.
A friend asked him: "What are you doing here?" Mr Gates said: "What are you talking about?" She replied: "The invasion." Mr Gates responded: "What invasion?"

LIC positive

2007-08-05T22:28:00.000+10:00

Make sure you don't take this pill...

Bass Harmonics

2007-08-01T12:12:00.000+10:00

This is Victor Wooten on the Bass - something truly inspirational

Chess is more complete than life?

2007-07-27T16:05:00.000+10:00

In my rather poor attempts to understand the finer points of professional chess, I came across an article I think will interest anyone who has a thought. http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3985

FIG JAM and rightfully so

2007-07-23T21:52:00.000+10:00

12th Man - Ashes 2006

2007-07-23T21:46:00.000+10:00

Reservations on War

2007-07-23T21:43:00.001+10:00

War is spoken of as something that can be avoided. It is either ‘morally impossible’ or that one can attain ‘supreme excellence’ by subduing the armies of your enemies without even having to fight them. The truth is however, that war cannot be prevented. It can only be postponed. Fact of the matter is that it is in our own nature to feel that one has been wronged and it is within our own nature to be told to believe that we have been wronged and thus be spurred into belligerent action. Hence, it is only a matter of time before war breaks out between two nations no matter how hard the previous generation has fought to maintain peace.

Many an example in history has told us that a War was fought in the interest of border security. In the ancient world, many a clan has ‘secured’ its borders by fighting a weaker clan thereby securing its old border, establishing a new border and then repeating the process except for a new border. This sort of border maintenance is classed as uniting the clans or establishing nationalism. Ancient Greece was made up of several clans that continuously fought one another over domestic disputes. Agamemnon, a ruthless tyrant was one of the first to establish the Greek nation by subduing most of clans. This is not the only example. The clans of China have fought viciously with one another, which eventually led to the establishment of a Chinese nation. Even today, the process continues. Although there may be other motives, one of the reasons for sending Australian troops to Iraq was in the interests of national security. Thousands of years have passed since the Nationalistic Wars of Ancient China took place. Yet ‘border security’ remains as a justifiable motive to wage war.

Another motive and one of the more popular causes that has spurred a nation to war is the quest for resources. During world war two, the war between the United States and Japan was the result of an oil embargo. Paralysed without oil, Japan saw the only way to secure its future was to attack the United States. The bombing of Pearl Harbour eventually resulted in the start of the War in the Pacific. It is interesting to note that the war in this theatre was ended with the ‘unbelievable’ use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, we have seen today that the resource motive still prevails. The American conquests in both Africa and Iraq are seen by many as a method of securing oil for the future of the United States. Resources are essential for the survival of any independent country. Therefore, when a nation is lacking it will do anything to ensure the survival of its people. This is only human nature. No amount of diplomacy can stop a war based on a resource conquest.

In addition, War is also fought in the interests of a political ideal. This motive is seen in almost any war. The political ideal behind ‘border security’ is in fact Nationalism. Today, the political ideal is ironically the reverse of nationalism – self determination. The various clans of Iraq are displeased with the Shiite majority in the newly elected democratic parliament and hence the insurgency continues. However, we all know the racial political motives of Adolf Hitler in his military conquest of Europe. His policies of racial cleansing spurred the whole World into War. The war in Vietnam was fought to stop the spread of communism. The tyranny of Mugabe in Africa is all to uphold a political ideal. These are just to name a few examples in the space of fifty years and it would be naive to suggest that such people will fail to return in the future. To remove them and to ensure the safety of the lives of millions of innocent people, governments will take the gamble in sacrificing a few of their own. Hence, we see yet again that war on this instance cannot be avoided.

Therefore, we can easily conclude that War is an activity that cannot be prevented. It has been thousands of years since the first war has been fought and yet still today in the timeline of human progress we are yet to reach the ‘morally impossible’ state. Peace can be prolonged insofar as the ‘pinpricks’ are prevented; however nobody can prevent the return of a ruthless tyrant or replenish the world’s resources. As a result, a war will be fought based upon such motives. Therefore, war will never be impossible.

Inspiring Words

2007-07-23T12:45:00.001+10:00

The first of many posts on the same theme, I hope. Today I post here Paul Keating's famous Redfern Address - which placed third on ABC Radio National's Unforgettable Speeches poll. The full transcript is here

I re-post the quotation I stuck in the comments for the last post:

Ever so gradually we are learning how to see Australia through Aboriginal eyes, beginning to recognise the wisdom contained in their epic story.
I think we are beginning to see how much we owe the indigenous Australians and how much we have lost by living so apart.
I said we non-indigenous Australians should try to imagine the Aboriginal view. It can't be too hard. Someone imagined this event today, and it is now a marvellous reality and a great reason for hope.
There is one thing today we cannot imagine. We cannot imagine that the descendants of people whose genius and resilience maintained a culture here through 50 000 years or more, through cataclysmic changes to the climate and environment, and who then survived two centuries of dispossession and abuse, will be denied their place in the modern Australian nation.
We cannot imagine that. We cannot imagine that we will fail.

Short, uncomplicated language. A very Australian feel. If this doesn't make you stand up and take notice of the big fat elephant in your closet, I don't know what will.

Who can you fight for?

2007-07-23T11:08:00.000+10:00

Remember this classic sequence from 'A Few Good Men'

On the charge of conduct unbecoming a US Marine, - the members find the accused guilty as charged. You are sentenced to time already served, - and to be dishonourably discharged from the Marines. This court-martial is adjourned.

What did that mean? Hal? What did that mean? Colonel Jessep said he ordered the Code Red. What did we do wrong?

It's not that simple.

We did nothing wrong!

Yeah, we did. We're supposed to fight for people who can't fight for themselves. We were supposed to fight for Willy.

Followed by another Amitabh Bachchan moment from Tom Cruise

You don't need a patch on your arm to have honour.

It raises some interesting questions. In the last few days I've thought of 'fighting for people who can't fight for themselves' as some sort of goal that I can follow in life. In the Australian context, fighting for rights of the indigenous communities, refugees or any other disadvantaged group, entails some kind of implicit criticism of Australian society - and thus of Western values and the concept of a liberal democracy (see this post)

In doing so, you're considered un-Australian and you're boxed in as some kind of rogue, subversive element by the media and eventually by society. One thing I can never understand is how people question why the terrorists always seem to from 'educated, privileged' backgrounds. Isn't it obvious? Weren't they just fighting for people who couldn't fight for themselves, standing up for 'Willy.'

The last three generations of Palestinians grew up in refugee camps. Iraqis have lived under sanctions for how many years now? The powerful entered their country under some guise of 'justice' but surely the injustice of North Korea and Zimbabwe - from breadbasket to basket case of Southern Africa in 20 years - is just as bad. Why mix metaphors? Energy security is not the same as justice.

There has been a serious twisting of the moral compass - on both sides. Did not David Hicks go into Afghanistan because he thought he was 'fighting for people who couldn't fight for themselves?' For centuries there have been mercenaries the world over, finding causes they believe in and fighting for them. 50 years of posturing in Camp David and on White House lawns and where does Middle East peace stand today? The Arab states have never been an adequate voice for the Palestinians - from the very beginning.

So we end up with beliefs that aren't compatible. Yassir Arafat dropped his olive branch and picked up his freedom fighter's gun years ago. You can't pick it up again with helicopter gunships and energy security. These guys probably just think that a few casualties in a rich country is just collateral damage in some wider struggle. Is it really any different to the state sponsored conflict so prevalent today?

FIGJAM

2007-07-23T10:03:00.000+10:00

A good friend told me yesterday that this was the acronym the Aussies use as a nickname for Kevin Pieterson. It stands for 'F*ck I'm Good, Just Ask Me.' I've always called him "The Ego,' but his performance last night was simply awesome.

He has been accused, and one suspects always will be, of showmanship and a singular devotion to himself, but as long as he can produce match-turning innings as he did at Lord's on the fourth day, his team-mates will be mad to complain.

I suppose the same descriptor could be given to Shane Warne as well, but few batsmen can change the course of a game, with such minimal support and under such trying conditions:

England were in danger of being bowled out for under 200 today. The Indian bowlers did themselves credit in the morning session. The sun was shining and the conditions were not helpful to swing bowling as they were on the first three days but the Indian medium pacers stuck to a run-denying line, and RP Singh combined some sharp balls with the knack of picking up wickets to reduce England to 132 for five a few minutes before lunch. Considering that England had lost six for 26 in the first innings, India were in with a chance.
As it happened, England lost their last five for 31. In between, though, Matt Prior stayed with Pietersen long enough after lunch for England to add 120 runs in 25 overs. Prior wasn't a spectator, but the session after lunch bore Pietersen's stamp. His game is based far more on calculation than on instinct and he picked his spots surgically.

I suppose India still have a chance - since rain is a chance event. Thank god I learnt about influence diagrams last semester. Remember anything in an oval is a uncertain event. Let's hope the gods of managerial decision science smile down on the Indians tonight - failing that, let's hope someone makes a big hundred.

The Winter Fog, Part II

2007-07-21T21:36:00.001+10:00

A dream can often be described as the expression of a suppressed desire. Perhaps this is a mechanism to emulate a particular desire so that the desire no longer lingers. Sometimes this expression becomes a nuisance, especially to those who vividly remember their dreams. Remembering the dream, which was a fulfilment of a desire, simply adds fuel to a burning fire. The desire lingers as the person recollects events of an imaginary world leaving a lasting impression of what could have been.

This adds further to the attachment and the longing for an actual fulfilment of the desire. This can be a problem as strong attachment to anything can be poisonous. This is especially true in the instance where the desire is towards something that you do not have control over. Consequently, you are left waiting for something to happen: waiting for the control to change the situation comes to you. Till then, all that is left is the dream. Somehow, you want this fog over your rationale to pass. The winter cold continues to keep you huddled in a corner, wishing for the sun to bring some warmth and resolution.

Favourite ad campaigns

2007-07-21T05:44:00.000+10:00

If it's anygood, then darn it has to be on youtube. Here's good one I stumbled on just now. Sky Sports advertising their schedule of golf and cricket in the current UK summer:
A real shame you can't post video in the comments. The next best thing is a simple web link, I suppose. SMRM, If you feel it's genuinely post-worthy, then fire away by all means.

Another engineer changing the world

2007-07-21T05:23:00.000+10:00

An interesting article from cricinfo about The Mont. Some nice issues about the immigrant experience in Britain.

It's certainly hard to imagine Panesar would find the time these days to do anything as lofty as the "Mathematical Modelling of Physical Systems", which was the title of his final-year dissertation. "Basically you have to simulate a pendulum, using a java programme - an applet." He enthusiastically simulates a pendulum, using his precious spinning finger. "The user sets the settings: the speed of the pendulum, and the time and the distance. And speed equals distance over time." By now he's a daze of gesticulations. "It'll oscillate to whatever time is set. If it's a short time, it oscillates quicker."
His delightfully hyperactive explanation reveals once again Monty's child-like awe for, well, pretty much everything. But in the grand spectrum of all things awesome, there was one moment in his life that will never, surely, be matched. That came on March 2, 2006, in the 18th over of his first spell in Test cricket. Panesar leans forward and his voice drops to a reverential hush.

"It's crazy. Think about it, someone from my background, who'd basically come from a park pitch, and there I was, bowling to my hero, Sachin Tendulkar, who I'd seen all the time on TV. It was like - well, I'm playing Test cricket now, but let's look at the opposition ... Sachin ... Dravid ... Sehwag ... Laxman ... Dhoni. And you just hold your breath and think 'Oh ... my ... god'. That's when it hits you. I used to play cricket in the park, and now I'm here. In India."
What happened next has already passed into folklore. "I was just lucky it hit his pad before his bat," says Panesar. The ball pitched, bit, straightened, and Tendulkar was on his way, lbw for 16. The dream debut wicket. After the match, Tendulkar signed the ball which is now "preciously" locked away in Monty's bedroom. On it, Tendulkar added: "Once in a blue moon, mate, never again."

A stirring fightback from india today... faaaatta-faaaat!

Gladiators, Biggest Loser and that poor friend of ours

2007-07-20T22:22:00.000+10:00

"To gain happiness from the misfortune of others". Guilty as we all are of schadenfreude at one point in our lives or the other, we refuse to accept the reality of our own natures.
Ancient Romans are often loathed at their uncivilized means of entertainment whereupon wild beasts were set free on defenseless human beings. However a closer look at our modern life style reveals the same principle at play only at what now passes as "civilized".
TV shows like The Biggest Loser, Survivor, South Park and might I add Funniest Home Videos are some examples off the top of my head.
Lets step away from looking at schadenfreude from an entertainment perspective. Let us look closely at are basic human need to be financially superior to our friends. Owning a bigger and better car for example is not merely for one's own financial security and peace of mind but rather to see the look on the face of one who is less fortunate. This in my opinion is a more humble version of schadenfreude. Envy and jealousy work in one direction, schadenfreude in the other.

Pretentious economists

2007-07-20T21:42:00.000+10:00

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald (20/07/07) entitled 'When you weigh it up, it can be smart to be dumb' makes the rather tenuous arguement that blondes are in fact , contrary to popular speculation, smarter than the rest of us minions of other follicular shades. The piece itself is written by Jessica Irvine, who rather boastfully includes a disclaimer at the end of the article outlining the fact that she has an honours degree in Economics, and you guessed it, is herself a blonde.

Taking into account the possibility that since the article is published on the back page of the Herald, and thus may not be serious by intention (indeed, im all for the trashing of stereotypes), its hard to shake the feeling that Irvine truly believes in her simplistic, unidimensional, 'economic market' view of the world. As succinctly as I can put it, the jist of her arguement is as follows: In the 'flesh market', inteligent men 'innately prefer' attractive women (evidently some sort of pseudo evolutionary assumption) and that as blondes are characterised in many Western societies as being attractive, the biproduct of this union is, yes thats right..the smart blonde. This insight is supported by the New York Times economist Robert Frank, and both writer and referee come across as being completely oblivious to the complexity of human interaction, particularly that of courtship (although many patterns do exist). Add to that the neglect of empirical evidence and the contentious application of economic principles to human behaviour and you have what i like to call the economists syllogism: economics explains the world, the world is composed of people, therefore economics explains people.

Irvine further attests that blondes are more susceptible to problems associated with 'opportunity costs' (the benefits you concede from not doing the best of your other alternatives). This is apparently so because of the fact that they are attractive, and thus have more alternatives from which to choose. They therefore do not invest in university education, as the opportunity cost is 'higher than for a non-blonde'. It is thus supposed that blondes make a rational choice to be dumb, or as Irvine says 'sometimes it is smart to be dumb'. Its difficult to know where the faulty logic begins, so everything seems plausible for a while in this mumbo-jumbo explanation of life through the economists lens.

Confused yet? Well ill end this rant here, and at the risk of stooping to perhaps a similar base level of faulty logic and pretentious assumptions, heres some evidence that perhaps not all blondes can be considered attractive (base assumption of aforementioned article). I apologise in advance for any resultant damage to a readers vision.

'A great video - take 2'

2007-07-20T14:52:00.000+10:00

This a continuation of the post titled 'A great video'

The Winter Fog, Part I

2007-07-20T13:37:00.000+10:00

Do you sometimes feel that something has left you even though you never had it? The complex boundaries between reality and imagination often leaves the distinguishing marks of awake and sleep state as blurry as a winter fog that envelopes the weary traveller who is looking for a place to stay. This fog wraps around your conscience fooling your logic into believing that reality is a dream and that a dream was reality. You awaken from slumber and then question whether the last few synapses were a memory or something less real. Sometimes you are thankful that it was just a dream. Other times you are grateful and content that it was a memory. The problems start when you wish that a dream is a memory.

A great video

2007-07-20T11:15:00.000+10:00

An award winning video from the Eye Bank Association of India:

I've decided to edit this post again. Haven't been able to embed the video within the post. Here is the youtube link.

For now, it is in the video bar up the top. The video bar seems to be some kind of silly youtube/Google gimmick that posts all the videos corresponding to a particular combination of specified tags. The four up there now correspond to the tag 'Eye Bank Association of India.' Only the first two are relevant.

Update: the video has been posted properly in the post 'A great video - take 2' above

India's cultural relationship with China

2007-07-19T20:56:00.000+10:00

Following on from MC's last two posts, I post this great link I found while doing a google search for something else - serendipity for me i suppose!

India sent missionaries, China sending back pilgrims. It is a striking fact that in all relations between the two civilizations, the Chinese were always the recipient and the Indian the donor. Indian influence prevailed over the Chinese, and for evident reasons: an undoubted cultural superiority owing to much greater philosophic and religious insight, and also to a far more flexible script. India conquered and dominated China culturally for two thousand years without ever having to send a single soldier across her border. India never imposed her ideas or culture on any nation by military force, not even on the small countries in her neighborhood, and in the case of China, it would have been virtually impossible to do so since China has been the more powerful of the two. So the expansion of Indian culture into China is a monument to human understanding and cultural co-operation - the outcome of a voluntary quest for learning. While China almost completely suppressed other foreign religions, such as Zoranstrianism, Nestorian Christianity, and to some extent Manichaeanism, she could not uproot Buddhism. At times, Buddhism was persecuted, but for two thousand years it continued to Indianize Chinese life even after it had ceased to be a vital force in the homeland and long after it had lost its place as the dominant religion of China.

I think that says a lot.

A Non Conformer is not always the Enemy

2007-07-19T20:44:00.000+10:00

It is very satisfying and fulfilling to take the moral high ground and proclaim that the level of freedom in a country is a direct consequence of the amount of ‘security’ enjoyed by the minorities. Fact of the matter is that there are too many minorities to be satisfied according to their own definitions of ‘security’ and hence this equation is inadequate. A country can be considered ‘free’ if it is able to accommodate minorities through either compromise or, in some instances, reform whilst still maintaining its foundational framework.

To grant all the wants of the minority is to ensure the destruction of a country. A minority will only feel secure if they are able to essentially do whatever they desire. This in their opinion will allow them to be free however it is obvious that this could in fact endanger the freedom of another group. If this level of ‘security’ were granted to each minority group within a society, a society and hence a state or country will no longer exist. Therefore, although it may seem morally correct to allow minorities to practice their definition of freedom, it only redefines the current way of life of a country to align with the beliefs of a minority. This is impractical.

At the same time, the majority must not ardently adhere to their system of beliefs and practices, ignorant of the existence and needs of the minorities. A majority must respect its minorities firstly because they live together and therefore to ensure some social harmony. The majority defines a framework within which everyone must live in but these boundaries must also be flexible enough to accommodate the needs of the minority. That is, the needs of the minorities must be placed in context with the current system of the majority and then assessed in terms of its suitability. For example, voting is compulsory in Australia yet people may be engaged in religious activities on election day. This society has come to a compromise by allowing such people to place a postal vote. Here a compromise is reached so that both the needs of the minority and the rest are satisfies.

Nevertheless, a minority can truly be called ‘free’ if they have a say in how these boundaries are established. Surely it is practical to reach a compromise in most issues however they are still based upon the beliefs and practices of the majority. When a society is open to both legal and moral reform based upon need and the security of that society, then and only then can it be labelled as free. A strong society will know what it needs and is therefore also strong enough to know when certain aspects of its functional policies need to be changed. That is, the people of that country can recognise when certain needs of the minority need to be officially accepted and also when they need to be totally rejected. Allowing reform at this level not only creates social harmony but also political and, in some cases, economic balance.

Therefore, granting every single need of each and every minority with the morally inclined hope gaining the title of a free country is an impractical approach. Rather, a country needs to be firm in how it defines itself but at the same time accommodating so that it can accept certain minorities and their practices. This type of concession can only be practical if such a state allows the possibility of reform to accommodate what it deems as necessary changes whilst at the same time strongly upholding its foundational principles.

Human Weakness and the System of Faith

2007-07-19T20:31:00.000+10:00

One thing that I find most irritating is when people tell me that my beliefs are wrong. For example, we would often come across the instance where we believe that our youth is a time to have fun and experience new things whereas our parents believe that we should just study. This often leads to much distress as we struggle to convince our elders that going out and socializing is essential to ensure fruitful and productive study. Or perhaps we study too much and our parents believe that we should get out more. Whatever the belief, a conflict between the two defeats the purpose of holding a belief and thereby living by it. That is, our belief might be “having fun” but we spend a lot of time defending that belief rather than living it.

In a religious sense, this is what most people do when it comes to religious philosophy. Hinduism is rich in ancient and modern sources of knowledge and therefore numerous commentaries of various interpretations of those texts. Furthermore, Hindus are numerous in number and therefore there are many who follow one of the many paths that this religion has to offer. There are extremists that insist that a certain path will lead to salvation and there are generalists who would follow any path to avoid any sort of commitment. Even so, there are also atheists who don’t care for religion. The major conflicts that arise are when two people with differing thoughts try to impose their beliefs on one another.

Hinduism is plagued by this disease. People try to convince, perhaps even convert another into their line of thinking. Suppose one has the stomach and intellect to defend his own claims. Chances are that he or she may be excluded from certain social circles.

At a recent festival we had just finished celebrating the birthday of a certain deity. It was cleanup time and everyone was eager to help pack up and tidy the hall that we were using. I went up to the altar to pack away the puja items. The offerings were placed in one container, the pictures in another. Then I turned to extinguish the lamp. As soon as I had done so, there was a big gasp from a couple of those who were helping. Apparently, it is bad to turn out a diya (lamp) without letting it to burn out completely. Why I asked? That’s just the way things are. On top of this, apart from a couple of ‘death stares’, one individual even said that I was cursed and the deepest abscesses of hell were reserved for me.

I was now genuinely worried. As crazy as it might sound, I really did feel that I was going to hell. I talked to a couple of people and spent much time thinking of the matter and soon I realized that such notions of religion are mindless and in some ways time wasting. Religion is not about wondering whether turning the lamp out or leaving it to burn is the ‘proper’ method. That day, we were celebrating the birth of a deity. The purpose was to use that time as an opportunity to reflect on how we could improve ourselves and live our beliefs. If the day is reduced to just bickering over little rituals, the whole purpose is lost.

Perhaps we tend to regress into such antics because by finding others who think like us, the more reason there is to confirm our beliefs. Perhaps this is one way of following a religion. But we all must realize that our way is not the only way.

United States of Florida - In Fake Tans We Trust

2007-07-19T12:36:00.000+10:00

From EconLog comes this interesting quote from an interview with Jeremy Siegel about the long run future for investors.

In 50 years the United States will be more aged than all of Florida is today, but we will be, existing in a younger world. So, what I see is exactly the same pattern. We will be selling assets into the world market. They will be buying, they will be absorbing, they will be saving, and they will be producing the goods that we will be importing to satisfy our retirement needs. And, I think that is the only way that we could have an ever-increasing retirement period with the shrinkage of workers and the extension of life expectancy.

The post with link in it is here.

'Western Values'

2007-07-18T15:00:00.000+10:00

Recent posts just re-iterate the present issues the world is going through. There are a whole set of exceedingly abused terms that fundamentally arise from Western, Judeo-Christian ethics - terms like ‘un-Australian,’ ‘Western values’ … even to an extent, ‘democracy.

From the set of values that bought the world imperialism, colonial plunder, slavery, pogroms in Europe, genocide the world over, religious totalitarianism …oh, let’s not forget the burning of books… arises the concept of ‘Western values.’ What does it mean, anyway? The colonisers and colonies of the last 50 years are gradually all heading towards Western-style democracy. If the most prosperous country in the world uses it then ‘Hey, it must be THE way.’

Overly simplistic – monetarily rich, morally bankrupt - as a lot of people in India think of the West. Greek thinkers bought us democracy, but look at all the places in the world they invaded. The Foucaldian view is quite contrarian, but I think it has some juice: justice is just a fabrication by the privileged to hold on to power by keeping the less privileged satisfied. Perhaps the same can be said about the ‘right’ to vote.

Justice is so important, that basic human rights are simply the play things of government. From Arundhati Roy’s 2004 Sydney Peace Prize lecture:

Today, it is not merely justice itself, but the idea of justice that is under attack. The assault on vulnerable, fragile sections of society is at once so complete, so cruel and so clever - all encompassing and yet specifically targeted, blatantly brutal and yet unbelievably insidious - that its sheer audacity has eroded our definition of justice. It has forced us to lower our sights, and curtail our expectations. Even among the well-intentioned, the expansive, magnificent concept of justice is gradually being substituted with the reduced, far more fragile discourse of 'human rights'.

If you think about it, this is an alarming shift of paradigm. The difference is that notions of equality, of parity have been pried loose and eased out of the equation. It's a process of attrition. Almost unconsciously, we begin to think of justice for the rich and human rights for the poor. Justice for the corporate world, human rights for its victims. Justice for Americans, human rights for Afghans and Iraqis. Justice for the Indian upper castes, human rights for Dalits and Adivasis (if that.) Justice for white Australians, human rights for Aboriginals and immigrants (most times, not even that.)

It is becoming more than clear that violating human rights is an inherent and necessary part of the process of implementing a coercive and unjust political and economic structure on the world. Without the violation of human rights on an enormous scale, the neo-liberal project would remain in the dreamy realm of policy. But increasingly Human Rights violations are being portrayed as the unfortunate, almost accidental fallout of an otherwise acceptable political and economic system. As though they're a small problem that can be mopped up with a little extra attention from some NGOs. This is why in areas of heightened conflict - in Kashmir and in Iraq for example - Human Rights Professionals are regarded with a degree of suspicion. Many resistance movements in poor countries which are fighting huge injustice and questioning the underlying principles of what constitutes "liberation" and "development", view Human Rights NGOs as modern day missionaries who've come to take the ugly edge off Imperialism. To defuse political anger and to maintain the status quo.

A step closer to Totalitariansim

2007-07-18T14:00:00.000+10:00

Dr Haneef had his visa cancelled. The law could not pin him down on anything. The judge said to the AFP that he would not stand trial unless he was charged. Instead they terminated his visa and then sent him off to Villawood. What will they do next under these Anti Terrorist Acts? Cancel our citizenship?

It is a very worrying day when the Government can just do whatever they please. Such is the nature of these anti terrorist Laws. Under the new laws, the police can enter whatever house they want and search it "for the security of the nation". This sort of action, on a superficial level, is acceptable however it robs us of our privacy, peace of mind and just simply adds to the aura of terrorism. Who should we be afraid of now?

When the terrorists strikes, panic settles in and the Government uses this opportunity to pass laws that will be approved given the current circumstances. These hasty actions often bear their ugly heads once the dust has settled. You might be peacefully sleeping one morning and suddenly be awoken by the sounds of police dogs and battering rams. They will break into your home, turn everything upside down and then leave with a simple apology. I am sure that today the Police will not storm into just anyone's home, but that day is not too far away. Where is this freedom that democracy brings?

Out of human weakness one craves power, and once obtained it transforms into an insatiable lust. This can now be seen by the Western conquests abroad. Their "boys" are fighting to "give those people democracy". It seems as if we have once again slipt into the ages where we mercilessly killed all those who did not accept the views of the Church. The question remains as to whether it is really a battle between the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq or a battle between beleivers and non beleivers of democracy.

Democracy now seems like a buttress root that slowly envelopes a giant tree eventually choking it off and standing in place of it. This ugly vine is like a cancer slowly spreading across the world and will one day dominate the planet unless something is done. But what can we do? We live in a democracy and yet we find that the very power and freedom that is given to us is slowly but surely being taken away.

Rubin Carter all over again

2007-07-18T12:17:00.000+10:00

The Mohammad Haneef situation is almost a mirror image of Bob Dylan and Jacques Levy's 'Hurricane,' based on the Rubin Carter story and the subject of the Denzel Washington film of the same name. The full lyrics are here. Instead of a black boxer, of world championship potential, we have a successful Indian doctor with a wife and kids.

Pistol shots ring out in the barroom night / Enter Patty Valentine from the upper hall. / She sees the bartender in a pool of blood, / Cries out, "My God, they killed them all!"
Here comes the story of the Hurricane, / The man the authorities came to blame / For somethin' that he never done. / Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been / The champion of the world.

Three bodies lyin' there does Patty see / And anotherman named Bello, movin' around mysteriously. / "I didn't do it," he says, and he throws up his hands / "I was only robbin' the register, I hope you understand. / I saw them leavin'," he says, and he stops / "One of us had better call up the cops." / And so Patty calls the cops / And they arrive on the scene with their red lights flashin' / In the hot New Jersey night.

Meanwhile, far away in another part of town / Rubin Carter and a couple of friends are drivin' around. / Number one contender for the middleweight crown / Had no idea what kinda shit was about to go down / When a cop pulled him over to the side of the road / Just like the time before and the time before that. / In Paterson that's just the way things go. / If you're black you might as well not show up on the street / 'Less you wanna draw the heat.

I think you get the idea. This later part has even more resonance:

Rubin could take a man out with just one punch / But he never did like to talk about it all that much. / It's my work, he'd say, and I do it for pay / And when it's over I'd just as soon go on my way / Up to some paradise / Where the trout streams flow and the air is nice / And ride a horse along a trail. / But then they took him to the jailhouse / Where they try to turn a man into a mouse.

All of Rubin's cards were marked in advance / The trial was a pig-circus, he never had a chance. / The judge made Rubin's witnesses drunkards from the slums / To the white folks who watched he was a revolutionary bum /And to the black folks he was just a crazy nigger. / No one doubted that he pulled the trigger. / And though they could not produce the gun, / The D.A. said he was the one who did the deed /
And the all-white jury agreed.
Rubin Carter was falsely tried. / The crime was murder "one," guess who testified? / Bello and Bradley and they both baldly lied / And the newspapers, they all went along for the ride. / How can the life of such a man /
Be in the palm of some fool's hand? / To see him obviously framed / Couldn't help but make me feel ashamed to live in a land / Where justice is a game.

Now all the criminals in their coats and their ties / Are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise / While Rubin sits like Buddha in a ten-foot cell / An innocent man in a living hell. / That's the story of the Hurricane, / But it won't be over till they clear his name / And give him back the time he's done. / Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been / The champion of the world.

In the spirit of democracy...

2007-07-17T21:32:00.000+10:00

Let's respect everyone's right to express an opinion. But surely this - from Amit Varma's blog at India Uncut - is utterly ridiculous. The sad thing is many in India would probably agree - the rural poor who rightfully felt insulted by the BJP's "India is Shining" campaign at the last general election, come to mind.
Of all the places in the world, I can't think of any place where sex education and family planning would be more necessary than in India. This is a country that, despite its well-documented problems, has managed to be somewhat of a leader in the provision of cheap AIDS (among others) drugs. Let's hope people like Murli Manohar Joshi are dismissed for the quacks they really are.

The Athens Affair

2007-07-17T16:38:00.000+10:00

This month's cover story in IEEE Spectrum is about a bunch of engo's that have taken fraud to a whole new level, hacking into the mobile phone conversations of such high profile victims as the Prime Minister of Greece and high ranking military officials. It seems that it was an inside job - the head of network operations for Vodafone Greece took his own life - but the exact details are anyone's guess.

"A study of the Athens affair, surely the most bizarre and embarrassing scandal ever to engulf a major cellphone service provider, sheds considerable light on the measures networks can and should take to reduce their vulnerability to hackers and moles.
It's also a rare opportunity to get a glimpse of one of the most elusive of cybercrimes. Major network penetrations of any kind are exceedingly uncommon. They are hard to pull off, and equally hard to investigate.
Even among major criminal infiltrations, the Athens affair stands out because it may have involved state secrets, and it targeted individuals—a combination that, if it had ever occurred before, was not disclosed publicly. The most notorious penetration to compromise state secrets was that of the “Cuckoo's Egg,” a name bestowed by the wily network administrator who successfully pursued a German programmer in 1986. The programmer had been selling secrets about the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) to the Soviet KGB."

Think of the things that could have been heard/recorded - love affairs, corruption, other illicit activity. Maybe these guys were using their programming skills for good, instead of evil?