Caveat: Mexico Still Independent, Sorta

Monday and Tuesday were Mexican independence day.  Two days, yes.  They put the event of declaring independence right at midnight, as that way they can party two days in a row each year.  But this year, the celebration was marred by grenades being lobbed into crowds in Morelia (which is the place in Mexico where I've spent the second-longest amount of time, after only my "#3 hometown," Mexico DF).

Mexico has always had a strong undercurrent of violence and anarchy, but lately I'm beginning to wonder if my time in Mexico in the mid-to-late 80's was maybe exceptional in being relatively tranquil, or whether in fact it was just as violent as now but I was simply being oblivious to it.  I know that the murder rate in Mexico City was very high even in the 80's, but it's even higher now.  Back then, murders were out of hand in the U.S. as well, so maybe it didn't seem so alarming.  Nowadays, the rate in Mexico City is the among the highest in the world, while notorious death-dealing U.S. cities like L.A. or NYC have improved substantially.

My run-in yesterday with Korean private-sector bureaucracy had me thinking about Mexico, too.  Obviously, any run-in with bureaucracy can cause me to wax nostalgic for those interminable hours standing in lines at banks or government offices in Mexico.  Though the DMV in California isn't disimilar.   Superficially, Korea has leapfrogged into the developed world.  But the undercurrent of thirdworldism (as pat and offensive and cliche as that really sounds) is still there, to be found, lurking under the surface of things.

Now that I work for a large, much-more-faceless corporation, perhaps I'm seeing that more, too.  Anyway, it's on my mind. 

But back to Mexico.  I'm worried.  When I surf the news articles on the grenade incident, I detect a certain institutional despair over the increasingly out-of-control situation vis-a-vis the drug violence that seems to be sweeping the country.  And, like any vaguely liberal American, I blame the American "drug war," at least partly, for the problem.   But Mexico's ambivalence about genuinely enforcing rule of law is saddening.  It's depressing to observe its tendency to allow money of all varieties (thus including narco-money) to seep into and quietly control all political processes, in ways that makes U.S. money-driven politics look profoundly transparent, humane, and fair.  Calderón seems as weak and aimless as any old boy priísta in his day.  The congress, supposedly more under the panista´s control than during the Fox term, stil seems to resist any efforts whatsoever at reform.  The PAN, far from offering anything genuinely new, just seems to be a new PRI with a sexy neoliberal headdress but nothing really new, and the left (PRD etc.) remains as chaotic and self-absorbed as ever. 

In other notes:  "These are your father's parentheses."  LISP programming language humor.

Caveat: Barack me obamadeus

I ran across the above phrase while surfing through panels of the webcomic xkcd (one of the best comics of all time – and the fact that I believe this proves I'm a nerd).  It struck me as funny, and made me laugh out loud (which is not the same as LOL, after all). The phrase is a play on the title of that German guy Falco's 1985 pop hit (his only U.S. hit), "Rock me Amadeus."

The distortion has been attributed to an episode of Jon Stewart's Daily Show in June, but I have found occurences of it in the blogosphere from quite a bit farther back than June, including a scathing criticism of Obama in a difficult to attribute blog written April 1, 2008. The criticism is sarcastic and brutal, yet cogent and mostly accurate as far as it goes. Yet it doesn't dissuade me from thinking we're still better off under Obama, next term, than McCain. Politics is so depressing.

Caveat: Running Mates

I really haven't been impressed with how the U.S. presidential candidates picks of running mates has played out. Obama played it excessively safe, and frankly I've always found Biden to be almost creepily inauthentic – an old-school democrat machine politician as far as I can tell. And now a vote for Obama isn't an unambiguous vote for "change," after all. 

Meanwhile, McCain chose a total wildcard in Palin. Pandering to the youth and female vote without actually managing to cross the line into something genuine or exciting. In actuality, if we look at her positions, Palin is more plausible if we read her as a fillip for the conservative, Christian-right base of the Republican party, who just "happens to be" female and relatively youthful. But she, also, therefore manages to make McCain's efforts to be a "different" sort of Republican – less beholden to the far-right – completely moot.

Their actions lowered my interest or desire to vote for either of them, and I am forced to return to my basic motivation: I will probably vote for Obama not because of what he stands for be merely because I perceive the Republicans to be the more dangerous brand of hypocrite, currently.

Caveat: 스페인 여객기 추락 153명 사망

I had another tiny yet triumphal linguistic milestone this morning when I logged onto the internet. I opened up google news, which, because of my IP address, plops me down on the Korean version of the site by default. Normally, the only time I spend time on google news in Korean is if I’m intentionally and masochistically spending time there trying to decipher a headline or maybe (if I’m feeling ambitious) the first line of an article.
But today, I had the experience of a headline grabbing my attention and leading me to click through to the article. It said: “스페인 여객기 추락 153명 사망…19명만 생존.” It helped that there were a few keywords in the article that I easily knew: 스페인=(Spain), 명=(PEOPLE COUNTER), 사망=(dead). So it was about 153 people dead in Spain. More terrorism? I, the reading public, had to know more!
Of course, I went to google news in English, finally, to satisfy my curiosity. But it was cool to have the experience of “spontaneous reading” (as opposed to deliberate reading, I guess). Still, reading about airline crashes, whether in Korean or English, isn’t necessarily smart, right before an airplane trip.
And now, a completely unrelated thought. There’s been a lot in the news lately about McCain closing his gap with Obama in polls on the presidential race, and much commentary about how they’re “neck and neck,” or somesuch.
But Obama is still at 60 points to McCain’s 40, if you look at Intrade.  Intrade is a “prediction market”–a place where people bet real money on the outcomes of future events–and a large number of studies have shown that prediction markets are phenomenally more accurate than polls at predicitons.  So I’ll just keep watching Intrade and keep ignoring the polls–I will be surprised if that historical accuracy doesn’t again prove out.

Caveat: comander-in-chief.com

pictureAn article in the LA Times (online) about Sean Tevis was intriguing.  It’s showing how the new, Obama-style of internet-based fundraising is beginning to impact local political races, in the reddest of red states, Kansas.  He’s using geek-speak and webcomics to transform the electoral process in a state legislative race. At right is a particularly funny excerpt from the comic on his website. I could borrow this diagram to explain how to survive in Korea as a westerner!
In fact, I’m not entirely unfamiliar with Olathe, KS… I’ve spent a little bit of time there. That area is basically a Marin County or Westchester County for red-staters (which is to say that Johnson County, KS, is one of the wealthiest counties in the country, but unlike most of the U.S.’s wealthiest counties, it’s about as red as red can get). So the fact that a democrat-leaning computer guy is using the internet to raise unexpected campaign cash, even there, is proof that this new mode of campaign finance is truly taking root, I guess.
Really, the credit belongs to Howard Dean, as I understand it. And various semi-counter-cultural computer types from Vermont and, of course, Silicon Valley. It was Dean, in the 2004 race, who first used the internet effectively in this way – and had it been the case that he’d managed to avoid the “Iowa Scream,” things could have developed Obama-style in that election.  But instead, Dean’s campaign self-destructed and the deanoids (including Dean himself, from his position running the DNC) are now the not-so-secret engines driving the internet-based fundraising juggernaut that is barackobama.com.  Hmm… I just had a thought. I said sometime back that Obama was going to be our Urkel-in-chief, but how about this: commander-in-chief.com? I wonder who might be squatting on that particular domain name.
In other news… The character Han Ji-eun in Full House is quite different from others I’ve seen, so far, in Korean dramas. Most of the characters (both male and female) in these shows seem to struggle with the same sorts of cultural-based communication taboos that I’ve confronted in my working environments–see my post of several days ago. In fact, it is the existance of these communication taboos that very often drive so many of the convolutions of plot and character development, where, just like in Baroque Spanish drama, the “misunderstanding” is the cultural apparatus behind all the great stories. But Han Ji-eun evolves to become amazingly straightforward in talking about her feelings and situation, which makes her a very sympathetic and appealing character to me.
Quote:
“Power begets more power, absolutely.”–Frank Rich, regarding Obama, in a recent editorial in NYT
-Notes for Korean-
context:  talking with my students about big numbers
억=100,000,000 (one hundred million)
context:  learning to use the grade-posting website at my new job
평가=evaluation
관리=management, admin
상담=consultation, talk
원생관리=(I haven’t got a clue what this means, dictionary not helping…
문제=theme, subject, question
풀이=explanation
표시=indication, manifestation (with a check box, …표시 means “show…” I think)
context:  reviewing old notes (from 7/1 – 7/14)
첫걸음 baby steps, first steps
첫 maiden, first time of something
걸음 walking, pace
정표 keepsake, memento, love token
걷기 fall into step, tip toe…
운동 movement, motion
인재채용 employment recruitment
눈싸움 a snowball fight
긴급 emergency
기상청 weather forecast
문화 culture, civ
겪다 undergo, experience, suffer
분야 sphere, realm
인간  mortal, human
인간계 the world of mortals
사신 (邪神) demon, false god
사신계  ?the world of demons (shinigami)
매일 daily
같이 like, similar to, same as, as usual, side by side
똑같다 alike, absolutely identical, exact image of
맞다 to be right
여행  travel, trip, voyage
돈 money, cash
여우 fox
암여우 vixen (female fox)
아이구 oh my! oh goodness!
picture

Caveat: Postponement

After several weeks of anxiety over whether or not to renew my contract with ElBeuRitJi (the hagwon taking over my current employer at the end of this month), partly because of it being a bit of an unknown, now I've managed to simply postpone the decision.  ElBeuRitJi will "inherit" my existing contract, which ends at the end of August.  So I have to work for them, regardless, for one month.  That will give me a chance to get a feel for how they are, and for them to get a feel for how I am.  Essentially, I will just not sign anything until down the road a month. 

Meanwhile, I've decided to make a halfhearted commitment to the Obama campaign – I signed up on his social networking site my.barackobama.com.  As I've said some months back, I was more of a Richardson supporter (although even that had its ambivalences because of my libertarian tendencies), but I'm so certain we need to exclude the Republicans from government (given that they have behaved in such frighteningly unlibertarian ways – in everything from size-of-government to social policy to civil liberties to foreign policy), that I've decied to just come out and openly support Obama – for what it's worth. 

Caveat: An Aimless Drive

"Life is an aimless drive that ya take alone.  Might as well enjoy the ride, take the long way home." This is the chorus from the Bloodhound Gang's song, "Take the Long Way Home."  I'm not sure that I have anything specific to say about this. But it's a good quote. And right now, I'm listening to the Beastie Boys.

On NPR, earlier, I heard a man named Tom Segev being interviewed.  He's a columnist for the newspaper Ha'aretz (Israel), and was talking about the whole question of to what degree the Israeli government interacts with groups such Hezbollah or Hamas.   He said (and, because this is overheard on the radio, I don't know that it's a perfect quote), "We claim never to be negotiating with terrorists.  In fact, we are always negotiating – every government in the world is always negotiating – with terrorists."

This struck me as profoundly and fundamentally true, and puts lie to the constantly enunciated position of most governments that "negotiating with terrorists" is neither appropriate nor ever pursued as a matter of policy – "so as not to encourage them" so to speak.

I would only like to add further to his observation, by wondering:  if this [i.e. "negotiation"] did not occur, with great regularity, mightn't terrorists eventually abandon their activities as fruitless?  Terrorists are successful with their generally ideological missions mostly to the extent to which the terror they sow can induce governments to react and change policies, cede resources, or capitulate.  This has always been true, and all war is, ultimately, terrorist in nature, and just an extension of politics by other means, as the aphorism has it.

And now I'm listening to Radiohead's "Backdrifts."

Caveat: existentialist-in-chief

I was reading an article discussing General Clark's recent comments regarding McCain's qualifications to be "commander-in-chief."  (The thought being, roughly, that having been a prisoner-of-war is brave and shows strong character, but isn't the same as command experience.)  I was thinking about that phrase, commander-in-chief.  And began toying with the idea of McCain as "prisoner-of-war-in-chief," reflecting on the way that a person's formative experiences and character can come to define a presidency:  Nixon as rogue-in-chief, Reagan as movie-star-in-chief, Clinton as bubba-in-chief. 

In this vein, and if McCain is to be prisoner-of-war-in-chief, what would Obama be?  I think about aspects of his character and formative experiences, and think, maybe something like community-activist-in-chief?  Perhaps, less charitably, he could become our Urkel-in-chief.  There's definitely something to the idea that, like the sitcom prototype (the legendary Urkel), Obama manages to transcend racial and cultural stereotypes in part through his nerdiness – which is to say, nerdiness as an essential stereotype runs "deeper" than race.  Which actually says something pretty positive about the state of race relations in America, maybe.  I  think it was Joel Stein who first suggested the comparison between Obama and Urkel, but I don't know that most of the comparisons have been entirely meant to be positive.  Still… who am I, as pale white ubernerd, to judge?

Caveat: Sith Master of Silicon Valley

I was reading a Forbes magazine article (byline Brian Caulfield and Wendy Tanaka 06.13.08) about the failure of the Microsoft-Yahoo deal and Yahoo's subsequent scramble for googlence, and one of the lines that stood out to me was a characterization of Larry Ellison (the wildly eccentric boss of Oracle Corp) as the "Sith Master of Silicon Valley."   I liked the idea that this might be on target.

I'm a shareholder in Oracle, and furthermore, I hold an Oracle certification as a Database Administrator – which is ironic since all my actual DBA and development work has been with Microsoft's competing SQL Server product, for which I hold no certification.

Despite this, I am not a fan of their product line, exactly – it is about as baroque as a high technology product line can get and still function.  The reason I bought stock in the company was, rather, because I saw first hand, during my years working with the Paradise Corp (a pseudonym) IT department the amazing ease with which Oracle's enterprise sales team took my employers for a multimillion dollar ride.  A project which was started in 2003 is still going on, years after the original anticipated "go live" date, and as far as I know, it barely works if at all, and only with a zillion caveats (appropriate to mention, I suppose, for this blog).

I figured if all of Oracle's sales teams were half as effective as the ones working my IT higher ups at Paradise, that company had a locked down revenue stream for decades to come.  So, through thick and thin, I remain a loyal Oracle shareholder – and among all my long-term holdings, it's been, overall, one of the most pleasing.  Or maybe that's just the luck of jumping on (and off and on again) the bandwagon at the right time?

Caveat: The Beef

There have been massive and ongoing protests here in Korea over the government's efforts to comply with what should have been a rather routine resumption of imports of U.S. beef.  Most international analyses of this situation that I have seen focus on the fact that it is about more than beef, but that it's not necessarily simple anti-Americanism either.  Something in-between:  it's about authority and control – meaning, whether or not South Korea can or should yield to American pressure to resume imports, or whether it should stand on its own authority and resist.

I find this intriguing, given my own neverending saga over the question of authority and how to deploy it successfully in my current work environment.  This evening, I became frustrated because I felt that one of my coworkers had undercut my authority by telling me, in front of a student, that maybe I shouldn't make them stay late to finish homework (a fairly common form of mild discipline for students who don't complete their work).  This set me up, since to make the student stay at that point I was not only being "unfair" to the student but also ignoring the plea for compassion from one of the student's other teachers.

When I complained about this, the response was: oh, we're not undercutting your authority.  And a demand for concrete examples of other times I felt this occurred, since I had worded my complaint rather broadly, and said that I felt my authority was "frequently undercut."  This wasn't wise of me, as arguments with my one supervisor always seem to devolve into arguments of the factuality of my complaints – a good strategy on his part, since the burden of proof is on the complainer.

Regardless of the wisdom my complaint, I found myself feeling especially put off by a suggestion that somehow the only reason I lacked authority with my students is because I somehow don't have the creativity or force of personality to make that authority for myself.  And coming home and looking at the news, I started to think about the radically different relationships American and Korean cultures cultivate with respect to the concept and practice of authority.  All of which is to say, I'm aware that there's a cultural gap underlying the communication gap, which is brought to the fore by the "authority" gap that I'm experiencing everyday.  And I have no idea how to proceed.

Caveat: Holy Cow… uh, Brains.

One change I'm beginning to notice since the election of the conservative and pro-American Lee Myung-Bak as president last December:  many who oppose the new president, one whatever grounds, incorporate a certain strident anti-Americanism into their discourse.  This is logical, as South Korea's relationship with the U.S. is (and has, historically, long been) an emotionally-loaded hot-button on both the left and right.

This is nowhere more visible than the current outcry over something that was supposed to be a routine aspect of moving forward on a free trade agreement with the U.S. that was part of the president's platform: the resumption of imports of American beef.  South Korea, like Japan, had placed a ban on American beef imports back in 2003 after the incident where an American cow had been detected with BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy), more commonly called mad-cow disease. 

Now that the government has moved to remove the import ban, many Koreans are in a panic over the possibility of infected U.S. beef unrestrictedly entering their markets and diets.  It hasn't helped that there have recently been other issues with the U.S. beef supply (not directly related to mad-cow but definitely related to broader food-safety concerns), such as the authorities closing down that giant processor in California a few months back when it was discovered the place was allowing clearly sick cattle to proceed to slaughter, in contravention of law.

I'm of two minds regarding the Korean public's hue and cry over mad-cow.  On the one hand, I regret that political opposition to the president and his policies, often quite legitimate, is being anchored to an issue with such flimsy scientific foundations as BSE, which is not clearly understood by any scientific community in the world, and given that no incontrovertible case of transmission of "mad-cow" from meat to human has ever been documented in the U.S. (although 3 cases of "new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease" have been found via autopsy – but that's out of a population of 300 million, and it's never been shown that BSE is the only possible source of vCJD).

Nevertheless, I do believe strongly that there are other very strong health and environmental reasons for attempting to reduce consumption and better regulate the world's beef supply – and U.S. beef industry practices are central to this.  Factory farming of beef is neither environmentally sound, nor is it sustainable, and, likely, it will eventually be linked to all kinds of currently poorly-documented and little-understood health ills.

For these reasons, I tend to support the South Koreans' protests as being "right action for wrong reasons."  Which is pretty common in politics, in general, in my opinion.   Burning effigies of American cows – have at it!

Caveat: The Supremacy Clause and Judicial Activism

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Medellin v. Texas (earlier this year), I have felt deeply troubled.  The so-called "supremacy clause" of the U.S. Constitution states:  "all Treaties made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land."  But the court held that unless the Congress passes specific laws implementing treaties, treaties are not binding domestic laws.  How is this interpretation in any way in line with constitutional intent?

I'm not trained in law, but the supremacy clause, and our governments' disregard for it, has always troubled me.  I feel strongly that the "founding fathers'" intent was in line with something U.S Grant subsequently envisioned: 

I believe at some future day, the nations of the earth will agree on some sort of congress which will take cognizance of international questions of difficulty and whose decisions will be as binding as the decisions of the Supreme Court are upon us.

Essentially, I think that the Supremacy Clause must have specifically had in mind the sorts of binding supranational treaties we now see with organizations of states such as the U.N. or the E.U.  I don't think that such supranational polities were in any way beyond the conception of the founders of the U.S., given that it seems very likely they viewed their own project as a supranational rather than national project – there was nothing subtle or requiring interpretation in the name they chose:  United States of America.  They expected more states to join, they thought they were already supranational, and they were not trying to build a nation, but rather replace it, as a concept, with something new.  In this sense, the E.U. as it stands today is perhaps closer to their conception than the contemporary U.S. 

That's just my opinion.  So… whatever.  I had a bad day today at work, so I decided to rant on about something where I'm both uninformed and singularly unempowered.

Caveat: Eliminating the Middlemen in Government

We could just put the corporations in office, directly.  I read a sci-fi novel years ago that had such a scenario, where instead of electing an individual to the presidency, Americans voted in a corporation for a fixed term of office – essentially granting that business a contract to "run the country."   I wish I could remember the title or author.  The concept is too "loaded" (in a satirical sense?) to be effectively searched out in googleland – which is to say, every effort to describe the concept for the search engine only leads to infinities contemporary political and satirical commentary.

I was reminded of this by a clever and silly Onion video I found last night.

Caveat: Apophenism

Wikipedia says: "Apophenia is the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data."  I think this is one of the most salient features of human psychology, and a defining characteristic of postmodernity as well.  Or perhaps I'm just seeing patterns in random data?

One of the most amazing novels, Pornographia, by Witold Gombrowicz (a Polish-Argentine writer), deals with this phenomenon.  The somewhat embarrassing-to-cite title is in fact misleading – and part of the apophenic game that goes on throughout the whole novel, as it leads the reader into making all kinds of efforts to see meaning where none is to be found.  The title's relation to the novel is in fact the first apophenic movement of the novel, which continues in the same mode throughout.

Actually, the thing that made me think of apophenia  might seem surprising.  I was thinking about macroeconomics, the relationship between command economies and truly market-based ones, and all those gray areas in between.  This was prompted by a recent short article in The Economist (May 31st, 2008) that was explaining the recent government-mandated "restructuring" of the massive and fast-growing Chinese telecoms industry.  To quote the line from the article that got me thinking:  "Each time the government has arranged things to mirror the outcome produced by market forces in the West."

First, I thought, "how clever."  They get the best of both worlds (from their point of view):  command economy as well as the presumed efficiencies of market capitalism.  It's like if the proposed God of the ID (intelligent design) people had a little (or not-so-little) Darwinist laboratory running somewhere "on the side" where He (yes, He – we're talking IDers, right?) that can give Him ideas, and then He imitates it and makes it even "better." 

But then I started thinking.  First – just how random and/or market-driven is what happens to e.g. telecoms markets in the West?  And second, is it really proven that the patterns that emerge in terms of how markets are structured represent some kind of best-rises-to-the-top principle?  We presume that market economics is Darwinist and necessarily leads to efficiencies, but why would it?  Maybe the patterns we see in truly unconstrained markets (to the extent they are, in fact, unconstrained) are just manifestations of apophenia?

I think I want to add the title of "Apophenist" to some of my others.  It's a neologism, although google makes clear it won't be mine, as it's already out there.

Caveat: Faith Based Disaster Management

It seems that in the recent presidential campaigning in the US, both McCain and Obama tend to have problems with endorsing and supporting pastors, priests and various other reverends making outlandish, intolerant and otherwise inappropriate remarks.  This has led to both campaign staffs developing extensive "Faith Based Disaster Management" skills, as one recent blog described it.

I like the term.  Not sure where I'm going with the concept, though.

Caveat: Densities

I just read an article that included the information that Los Angeles is now the most densely populated metropolitan area in the U.S.  This is so contrary to perception and conventional wisdom – to imagine that it is more densely populated than especially crowded-seeming east-coast cities like New York or Boston.  And I wonder especially at the criteria – there is a lot of "in between" space in Los Angeles – the Santa Monica mountains, or the little ranges of mountains between the airport and downtown, or the Arroyo up toward Pasadena.  How do these open spaces count in the calculation of densities?  Alternately, how do the open water spaces of a water-oriented city like New York get counted?  And what about "freeway space" – which abounds in LA and virtually doesn't exist in NYC – is it excluded in the calculations, too?  I just can't see that, on a comparison of built-up areas to built-up areas, that LA is higher density, given how high-rises so dominate places like Manhattan or the projects of the Bronx.

Then again, Mexico City manages to be one of the densest metropolises in the world with very few (relatively speaking) high rises.  I'm just not sure about all this.  Regardless, we also need to understand that higher population density doesn't necessarily imply lesser transportation dependence.  NYC may "seem" denser because of the very high level of public transportation usage in the city, compared to a place like LA. 

Caveat: The Franchise

I am enfranchised.  Meaning, I can vote as a U.S. citizen, despite being, currently, a resident of South Korea.  But here's something interesting:  if I were living in Puerto Rico, instead of South Korea, I would lose my franchise – despite the fact that Puerto Rico is part of the U.S., while South Korea clearly isn't.   Why in the world is this the case? 

I mean… I know why it's the case – it's because of Puerto Rico's "special relationship" with the U.S. (i.e. the fact that basically it's a colony).  But all the same, there's more than a little bit of irony in the fact that by adding Puerto Rican residency to an otherwise enfranchised U.S. citizen causes that citizen to forfeit his or her franchise.  It's like the federal government grants the status of convicted felons, gratis, to the whole island.  Weird.

Caveat: The Quest for the Google-Killer

In the world of internet search technologies, there has arisen a trend where people are constantly looking for the "google-killer" – the "next big thing" in search algorithms or interfaces that will finally vanquish google's market dominance.  There are problems with this quest, that render it somewhat unpredictable if not quixotic:  first of all, google is a moving target, meaning they are constantly innovating their algorithms and methodologies behind the scenes;  second, google, like many other large technology companies, has realized that brand-image is king, and as such, that marketing and design trump genuine innovation and genius (in this, they've learned well from Applecorp).

The technological problem of finding a better "search engine" is daunting, as we are right at the borders of AI (artificial intelligence).  Thus, the next step seems to require real breakthroughs in natural-language- (and/or web-meta-language-) processing and interpretation.  So-called "semantic webs" come into play – and somebody has to build these huge semantic databases, "tag" them appropriately (i.e. figure out how to automate the "tagging" process), and then spider through them effectively and rapidly. 

A recent offering seems to go in the right direction: powerset.com.  Right now, it's limited to a small, largely well-formed subset of the World Wide Web – namely, my own favorite haunts at wikipedia.   But its ability to make sense of my "natural English" questions and find appropriate articles is pretty amazing.  Try it out.

I'm listening to Jason Bentley on KCRW – he's playing The Black Ghosts' "Here It Comes Again." Great track… Jason Bentley rules.

Quote. 

"I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation." – President U.S. Grant, on the Mexican-American War of 1846-48, in which he served as a decorated junior officer.

Caveat: Stonking Quantities of Dosh

The Tory candidate for Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, uttered the phrase "stonking quantities of dosh" (meaning, roughly, "large amounts of money") in a recent discussion on the issue of the vast income inequalities in the British capital.  It's a very memorable and colorful turn of phrase, and very much worth memorializing.  So there you have it.

Caveat: 애국심은 악한의 마지막 도피처이다

"애국심은 악한의 마지막 도피처이다" (aeguksim-eun akhan-ui majimak dopicheo-ida) => patriotism-[topic-marker] scoundrel-[possessive-marker] lastly hideout-[copula].  Does anyone recognize the immortal words of Samuel Johnson?  "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

The idea also appears in a Bob Dylan song, and for a long time, I mistakenly believed he was the origin of the quote.  Anyway, it's been on my mind lately, in light of the annoying progression of events in Tibet and China, and the constant posturing of ALL (yes, ALL) of our presidential candidates in the U.S.  I'm sick of it!

The world will be a better, happier place when the last self-declared patriot (of any stripe) finally recants or passes away.  "Patriotism" is almost always just a kindly euphemism for some brand of xenophobia or another:  hating other countries and peoples, or at the least distrusting them and devaluing their common humanity.  I know this is controversial, and it might get me in trouble to declare it so publicly, but on some things you must take a moral stand, right?

I made some curried pasta for dinner.  Kind of a makeshift using various things I had left in my kitchen – curry powder, garlic, onion, tomato, some italian pasta, and yoghurt.  It came out very delicious, and then I sat and watched the original Star Wars movie on KBS2 (dubbed into Korean) and ate my dinner, while running an upgrade to ubuntu 7.10 on my linux OS.   It was a good evening.

Caveat: Obamistic Pursuits

Ever since the popularization of the Rev. Wright "problem" (and note that it is merely a "popularization," not a revelation, as Wright's views have been public and even well-documented, all along), I have been having some concerns about the Obama campaign – in how it's handled the "scandal," in the statements he's made (especially his speech last Tuesday, which I, uniquely among people of my political stripe, found weak-kneed and slightly vacuous), and in general, in a sort of indeterminate discomfort I've had with the quality and level of the "pro-Obama" discourse.   But I couldn't put my finger on what was bothering me, exactly.

And today, surfing the news and blog sites, I finally found a fabulously articulate and cogent summary of all my concerns about this issue, in the form a column by a sports commentator for the Kansas City Star, Jason Whitlock.  Go figure.  Thanks, Jason.  And no thanks to all you other political bloggers and opinion-makers out there.

Yet on the flip side, my personal favorite guy in the race, Bill Richardson, turned around and endorsed Obama later the same week.  I wonder if some kind of secret deal is in the offing – did Obama promise Richardson the number two spot, if he wins the nomination?  And, is that based, in part, on Hillary's implied promise of the number two to Mr Obama if she gets it?  What's certain is that although I find a Clinton-Obama ticket plausible, an Obama-Clinton ticket is patently impossible (because Hillary doesn't want to go from First Lady to VP – that's like going from supporting actress to… supporting actress).

And frankly, an Obama-Richardson ticket would be formidable, as Obama's weakest demographic, latinos, would be perfectly complemented by Richardson's obvious super-strength in exactly that area – Richardson's chilangosity is rarely commented upon, but it's a well-known fact among the Mexican-American population that despite his American birth, he grew up in Mexico City. Additionally, Obama, perceived as weak on both foreign policy and executive-branch experience, would be tucking a former ambassador to the U.N. and current popular state governor into his belt.  Such a ticket would definitely remove any lingering doubts I had about Obama. So… we shall see.

Caveat: The Mexican Space Program

Both chambers of the Mexican congress have approved initial versions of a law which will create, for the second time in history, a Mexican space program, under the title Agencia Espacial Mexicana (with the unintuitive acronym AEXA – probably chosen more because it looks cool than because it makes any sense at all).  I say "second time in history" because few people realize that the Mexicans actually had a space program in the mid-sixties, including rocket launches and collaboration with work by NASA during the same period, that was actually at least mildly significant. 

I don't know why I find this fascinating.  Part of the reason is that, as part of a running joke about "good names for rock bands" with some friends many years ago, one of the most popular ideas for a name for a rock band was "The Mexican Space Program" – perhaps because it goes against cultural stereotypes, and inevitably conjures images of some vato-ized low-rider space shuttle or maybe a burro in a space suit and a meal of freeze-dried tacos.

But I've also been fascinated because Mexico, as the one of the most "developed" of the developing-world nations, and as a significantly sized nation in terms of GDP and population, deserves one, and it has been one of the few mid-wealth nations in the world not to have one in recent times (compare Brazil or India – or Korea, for that matter – all of which have space programs, if not terribly ambitious ones).

Other thoughts…

Sometimes I feel as if I'm getting to be a first-hand witness of a major generational shift here in Korea.  Without exception, my students come from basically middle-class, suburban families cast in a "1950's America" mold:  father works, mom stays home, 2.1 children.

Yet as I interview my students and ask them about their interests and ambitions, I get some startling answers:  boys who want to be sushi chefs, graphic artists and lounge singers rather than the typical businessmen or engineers, and girls who energetically discuss their plans to be police officers, chemical engineers, politicians, dentists and even one who told me confidently that she intended to be a world-traveling "free spirit" (not quite sure where she picked up that phrase, though I suspect I must have given it to them at some point). 

The young of any generation exhibit more ambition than they ever live up to, of course.  That's human nature.  But I find it fascinating that I am getting to participate in my very tiny way in what will be the first generation of Koreans who are growing up in a world where men and women are no longer so constrained to traditional roles, and where anything if possible, at least in their dreams.

Caveat: Debucklified

William F. Buckley died the other day.  I used to idolize that guy.  Not sure quite why… he was an arrogant ass, for the most part, although he had a pretty good command of language.

I have a vivid memory of watching a videotape of him and Reagan debating the idea of the return of the Panama Canal to the Panamanian government for my debate class in high school, and thinking they were about as intellectually mismatched as two men could be.  Yet they shared a great deal, in terms of political philosophy. 

Caveat: Excuses and Psephology

"If he wins… Black people, we gonna have to come up with another excuse." – Comedian Wanda Sykes.  This is one of those jokes that only a black person – such as Wanda – is allowed to say. 

Indeed, I may be treading on the edge of offensiveness merely by quoting it.  But I'll give it a try, because it seemed funny to me, at the time I heard it.

I learned a new word this evening:  psephology – the statistical study of elections.  I rather like this word, for some reason.  Not as much as mereological, though.  I wonder, what would it mean to practice mereological psephology?  I'll do some research.

Caveat: Tofu Brings Magic Happy

This is not a real advertisement, I don’t think.
picture
I suspect something subversive going on, vis-a-vis Korea’s fraught relationship with Japan and Japanese culture, but I can’t quite figure it out.
The little baby tofu is screaming “we’re delicious!”


In other news, the Namdaemun (Seoul’s historic South Gate) burned down over the weekend. Despite having survived innumerable wars and invasions since 1398! And I posted a picture here in this blog only a few months back. Hmmm.
picture

Caveat: Ook!

"Ook!" is what is known as an "esoteric programming language."  I've developed a certain passing fascination for these constructs, which I've pursued in my wikipediasurfing.  There are various kinds, but what they share is a certain in-jokey relationship to the practices of theoretical computer science.

Another esoteric language I particularly like is "whitespace" – a programming language that allows you to write code using nothing but ASCII whitespace characters, such as tab, space, and linefeed.  It then treats all other characters as its own  whitespace, thus allowing you to, in theory, embed a secret whitespace program into the code of some other (slightly) more conventional programming language – perhaps "Ook!" 

Meanwhile, I've also been pursuing research into xenotheology – the study of alien belief systems, I guess.  Obviously, since we don't know anything about aliens (yet), this is a strictly hypothetical-based pursuit.  But fascinating.  What do aliens believe?  Or rather, what would they believe, if they existed?  How will what aliens believe interact with what humans believe, in a potential first-contact situation?  Will we be evangelized?  Will they be?  Would human religions as currently structured survive a first contact with an equally (but differently) religious but alien civilization?  I suspect some religions would cope better with aliens than others – especially those currently "fringe" religions that have a belief in aliens (or other worlds/planets), etc., already embedded in their dogmas:  e.g. scientology or, most notably, mormonism.   All of which is to say, which president would you rather have handling a sticky alien first-contact situation:  President Romney or President Huckabee?

Caveat: Subsidize This

Did you know, back in September when I bought it, my cell phone here only cost $30?  I mean, the actual little physical gadget – there was still the calling plan, and all that, too.  But anyway, the reason it cost me $30, and not $200 (the price on the box, roughly), was because we registered it under boss's name.  Because Danny is a citizen of Korea, the Korean government pays for the rest of the price of the cell phone.

That's right:  the Korean taxpayer makes sure that every Korean citizen is guaranteed a rock-bottom-priced cell phone.  Talk about subsidies!  I thought California water subsidies were bizarre, but this was amazing. This might explain why Korean cell phone adoption rates are among the highest on the planet, and also why Korean companies such as Samsung and LG have managed to catapult into positions of global market dominance.  Ain't government subsidized capitalism swell?

In other news, I just got to watch the "Star Wars" episode of the TV series "Family Guy."  I'd never seen this before.  For some reason the scene where Luke Skywalker chops off Danny Elfman's head with his light saber, after finding that John Williams had been killed by the storm troopers, made me laugh for a long time.  I don't understand why that happened.  Then there's the moment when Redd Foxx gets his fighter shot down by Darth Vader and he shouts "I'm comin', Elizabeth!"

I bought some Korean pickles.  I didn't even know they made them, but they were pretty good – pickled with hot peppers included.  Interesting flavor… they could grow on me.

Caveat: A dumb war

The following is excerpted from a speech by Barack Obama, in 2002.  Yes, 2002.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perles and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income; to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda.

Meanwhile, in other news, the incoming president, 이멍박, is saying he plans to merge the republic's foreign and "unification" ministries.  This seems like a very good idea – currently, there is a sort of dissonance between the tones of the two – almost as if the republic has two completely separate foreign policies.

The foreign ministry keeps a somewhat hard line and handles positions in multilateral negotiations involving the north, e.g. with the U.S., China, Russia, et al., trying to contain the north's weapons programs.  At the same time, the unification ministry is a much kinder, gentler bureaucracy that seems focused on nothing so much as extending South Korea's immense wealth and successful social welfare programs to the miserable north, regardless of the extent to which the north's government is complicit in creating all that misery.

Caveat: “힐러리!”

Thus read the headline running across the tv news.  What do you suppose it means?  "Hil-leo-ri!" Which is to say, it was announcing Senator Clinton's recent victory in New Hampshire.  Of course, the slog has only begun.  But the result was unexpected, apparently – Obama had been leading in the polls leading into the voting.

I'm not a Clinton supporter.  Aside from my discomfort with the trend toward dynasticism that a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton alternation would suggest, I also feel Edwards, Richardson and Obama all offer more constructive, less cautious, less "stay-the-course" platforms.  And despite my libertarian tendencies – which sometimes make certain Republicans attractive to me – Ron Paul (who otherwise would be the closest match) is definitely not my sort of libertarian:  he's rigidly anti-immigrant and pro-life, neither of which strikes me as remotely libertarian.  So I guess "liberal" trumps "libertarian" in this election.

I have found Richardson the most appealing of the candidates – not least because he's a chilango agringado, which I can relate to, being a gringo achilangado myself. But it looks to me like he's running for Vice President, rather than President.  At least, his resume combined with his poll numbers hint that that would be the most likely possibility.  Maybe I'm leaning toward Mr Obama, then. 

Caveat: Consumption Gap

An editorial / review in a recent Economist magazine ("Economics Focus:  The new (improved) Gilded Age") discusses something that I've been pondering for many years, but haven't been very good at articulating.  Despite the sharp – even alarming – rates of increase in "income inequality" throughout the world in recent decades, something else is going on that isn't being captured in standard economic statistics:  this is the somewhat weird but, I believe, oddly compelling observation that although incomes are diverging, lifestyles are converging.

I don't know if this is really true, but the anecdotal evidence offered in the article is interesting, such as the observation that a $300 refrigerator and a $10,000 one aren't that different in terms of the what they can do for you.  Likewise, the cheapo Hyundai sedan vs the Jaguar.  They both are typically driven by owners on the same crowded highways, despite a 1000 percent difference in price.

This ties in with an idea I like to think of as rooted in marxist analysis (though I'm not confident that that's its provenance):  as capitalism continues to evolve, it drives constantly toward manufacturing new "necessities" which, as a matter of course, are not true human necessities but strictly market-created artificial ones.  And the rich, with all that extra income that the income gap is giving them, go chasing after these artificial necessities, while the lot of the poor continues to improve, albeit slowly, with respect to the profoundly less artificial  necessities which they seek to satisfy.

So incomes are out of wack, and constantly more so.  And consumption, as measured by dollars outlaid, is also diverging.  But if you measure consumption by a more intangible concept such as "range of experience," you will find the experience of rich and poor converging in strange ways.  Fishermen in India, bankers in southwest Connecticut, and grandmonthers and schoolchildren in Korea all use cell phones in markedly similar ways to improve the quality of their very different lives, at almost universal levels of adoption.  And, in other extremes, obesity (a disease of affluence) strikes the poor more than the rich.

OK.  I don't know where I'm going with this.  I'm not trying to say it excuses governments' complicity in the capitalist plunder of the world's people and resources.  Capitalists, being capitalists, require ethical supervision, I suspect.  But I do think the apocalypto-alarmist rhetoric from the anti-globalization camps and the anarcho-left may be rooted in an inaccurate analysis of the current state of the world's economy, vis-a-vis real human needs (i.e. as opposed to manufactured needs).

Caveat: Vote?

Tomorrow is election day.  South Koreans will vote for president.  이명박 (reformed romanization I-Myeong-Bak / conventional romanization Lee Myung Park) is the far-ahead leader in all polls, member of the conservative Grand National Party, which would then replace the slightly less conservative current ruling coalition.  Most people here are voting their pocketbooks, as there has been a lot of inflation of e.g. land prices.  Most of the leading candidates seem to have similar views of such controversial issues as the North Korean rapprochement (i.e. they favor it), as best I have been able to determine (though I haven't researched extensively).

So tomorrow night, we'll know who will be president for the next 5 year term.  Like Mexico, presidents may only serve one term. 

Back to Top