Technology gettin' on my nerves

Conditions: Overcast.


Hypocritin'.

In a show of, I don't know, solidarity with the Bush administration perhaps, Former Attorney General John Ashcroft, in a poorly-received address at the University of Colorado, admitted that he was willing to undergo water-boarding in order to demonstrate that it wasn't actually torture.

During the speech, Ashcroft caused an uproar when he declared Guantanamo Bay was a “good place” for detainees. In addition, he defended the torture tactic of waterboarding:

Ashcroft also responded to questions from the audience. The first question came from a woman who asked if Ashcroft would be willing to be subjected to waterboarding.

“The things that I can survive, if it were necessary to do them to me, I would do,” he said.

Ashcroft apparently believes that torture should be allowed as long as it doesn’t kill him.

- thinkprogress.org

Indeed, and that is the entire hypocritical point. Because Ashcroft knows, in that deep dark place that used to house his heart, that were he to be actually waterboarded it would be short-lasting, in a safe environment, for demonstration purposes only, and with a medical team standing by. Therefore basically it is to actual torture what sitting in a class learning about physics is to falling off a building. What an asshole.



They Just Don't Get It.

As usual, U.S forces killed a bunch of road workers in Afghanistan on Wednesday, and promptly shifted the blame elsewhere. The "it's not our fault, it's was just bad intelligence" line of defence, as if bad intel is the same as foggy weather, or a sudden attack of stupidity.

The workers, who had been contracted by the US military to build a road in the mountainous province, were sleeping in their tents when they were killed, according to Sayed Noorullah Jalili, director of the road construction company Amerifa.

"All of our poor workers have been killed," Jalili said. "I don't think the Americans were targeting our people. I'm sure it's the enemy of the Afghans who gave the Americans this wrong information."

The company has asked the US military to investigate the information that led to the air strike, Jalili said.

- The Guardian

Firstly, it should be anyone else investigating this rather than the US military, for blindingly obvious reasons. Secondly, and more importantly, why in hell are the US still conducting these kinds of operations? How are they supposed to be fighting wars by flying around and dropping bombs randomly? Who does that really help? Certainly not anyone on the ground, good or bad guy. I bet it's great for the bombmakers, though. And the plane builders. Maybe they're the ones who sent in the tip?



Cameron Weeps.

It has been the dream of military commanders for ever to have mechanical soldiers that can be sent to do all the hard work, like killing and dying. It's been the nightmare of any rational person that such a thing could happen one day. Well, those insane geniuses at DARPA may be getting closer, based on statements released recently by the military.

"The enhanced mobility and load carrying capability provided by the MEPAC" -- that's short for "Marine Exoskeletal Performance Augmentation Capability" -- will eventually "allow Marines to individually carry more ballistic protection and heavy weaponry," the memo says.

The first uses of exoskeleton (in about 10 years, according to the document) would be in logistics units, to "complement smaller forklifts [and] overhead cranes." As the suits became more capable, Marines might wear 'em to lug heavy crew-served weapons around.

"Still later, the MEPAC could evolve into an objective capability that stands alone as a computationally-self-aware machine, a fully sensing and interactive endoskeletal entity that has outgrown its practical need for unmitigated Marine contact, and can act constructively on its own."

- blog.wired.com

I've no doubt such a system is technically feasible, that is not the issue. The issue is simply and clearly the danger of having weapons that can be wielded without any danger to those that wield them. And the more disconnected we are from the weapons we use (or are used in our name), the more truly dangerous they become. Gee, it's almost as if there's been a movie or two about this...



20 Year Max Anniversary.



Yes, this is very surreal. 20 years ago someone or something broke into WTTW channel 11 in Chicago, and broadcast a disjointed and very disturbing monologue, disguised as infamous 80's TV character Max Headroom for a couple of minutes. To this day they have never been caught.

Who was this prankster, and what was he trying to accomplish?

Good question. No one knows who he was or what the point of the broadcasts were (it was actually the second of the evening, with the first being a shorter clip of the same video broadcast during the evening news on a different channel). It's not like there was a message really, either. The ramblings are pretty tough to make out, and when you do they don't make a whole lot of sense.

That's not to say that it was brushed off as not that big a deal; the FCC actually launched an investigation trying to figure out just who this Max Headroom character was to no avail.

- Gizmodo.com

Click the link to watch the video clip, and read about how it probably was done. And then salute whomever it was that did that. Whoa.



Cellphones Make You Crazy!

Cellphones drive everyone crazy, and this week a New York judge snapped when he couldn't find out who's cellphone had gone off in his courtroom. So he dealt out a swift serving of The Law to everyone in the courthouse.

He began by ordering the doors of the court locked, and set the officers to searching for the phone.

When that failed to find the offending item he ordered each of the defendants present in the room up to his bench and in turn asked them if they knew whose phone it was. "When each in turn said they had no idea, he sent each in turn to jail. All 46 of them.

When a defendant protested the judge's actions were not fair to those who didn't possess the phone, Mr Restaino replied: "I know it isn't."

Court transcripts show that when another told him "This ain't right", the judge shot back: "You're right, it ain't right. Ain't right at all."

The judge's actions caused pandemonium. Extra officers had to be drafted into the court to control the crowd, and booking officers at the city jail were at full stretch. "We were playing Twister in here," one said at the time.

Fourteen of the defendants who could not post bail were shackled in irons and sent to the county jail.

- The Guardian

Now, yes this is pretty bad, but in his defense, cellphones are terrible, terrible things.



From The Lighter Side (Figuratively).

Quick question: What happens when you're engine testing a brand new giant-ass plane and you don't properly secure the wheels?

airbus-a340-meets-wall-airbus-loses

Art Corner: With Lego.



Kinda makes that spaceship you built when you were 10 look like crap, huh?

http://bestpicsaround.com/pic-440-Lego-Brick-Art



Film Review: Lions For Lambs.

Over the last 7 years, Liberal America has basically been shoved to one side, Dr Jekyll-like, by Conservative America's Mr Hyde as it rants and raves and casts a net of destruction across the middle east in fear-fueled retaliation for the attacks on 9/11. Now here we stand, 7 years, uncounted numbers of innocent dead, and god knows how many billions of dollars down the shitter, and Dr Jekyll is perhaps maybe starting to wake out of it's shock-induced coma. Lions for Lambs is a somber, serious, yet fleeting look at the war, and how America looks at itself in the mirror in the morning.

Director Robert Redford has basically tried to wrap a quick sermon about how important it is for kids today to get good grades and become good citizens up with a couple of quick pieces about how horrible and wasteful war is, and how horrible the political situation in America today is. To the latter he uses Tom Cruise as a creepy Republican senator, desperately trying to interest veteran reporter Meryl Streep in the latest All New military offensive plan for Afghanistan. This gradually, guardedly and carefully turns into a conversation about how badly the war has been fought so far, and how unlikely it is that this latest 'new policy' will work, no matter how much the conservatives need it to. Not to mention the role the media have willfully played in helping the government sell it's policies of fear and violence since 9/11.

To the second point we have two college buddies, now Army Rangers, facing pointless death on a mountain in Afghanistan as part of this bold new strategy while, back home, Redford (playing a college professor) talks about exactly how dangerous our disinterest and apathy is. His audience is basically us, in the form of a jaded and demotivated, yet brilliant, student who sees how shitty everything is, and so is losing any hope that he can change it, with the subsequent falling attendance and grades.

So, what is this movie? Essentially, it's Robert Redford telling the Kids Of America to stop watching the news and start understanding the news. And to those who are particularly offended by the actions of their elected leaders, run for office yourself. You know, after you get an education and everything. It's a brave and even worthy message, but the wrapper it's in comes across a little cheesily and somewhat forced. I watched this film in a completely empty theater, and it's not hard to see why. It's not just talky, it's preachy. And if you're paying enough attention to want to see this film, then you already know everything it's trying to tell you anyway. Yes, the war on terror is one of the biggest swindles this planet has ever seen. Yes, politics in America are at perhaps their lowest point in a good long while. Yes, anyone with half a brain can see how corrupt and decaying everything is, with little hope of improvement in the short term. But going and watching a movie about these things is not exactly entertaining. Perhaps it should have been a play instead. Three pointless deaths out of Five.


Peace out.