nerdgirl

That's Photoshop'd, yes? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Would you explain what you think the significance of this line drawing in your sig line is? For example, I can remove Farrakhan and replace that box with Sec of State Condoleeza Rice in order to show a connection to Libya's Q'addafi. Which is a more contextually accurate, more timely, &/or a more significant connection, particularly w/r/t US foreign policy? Where is the box showing a connection to Milton Friedman? Sen Obama taught at the same University as Friedman. What kind of selection bias do the choices show? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for separating this out and for the links. [Feeds me primary data addiction. [nerd]-] Reading through the excerpt that you posted and the longer commentaries, recollections, and thoughts in the links, a couple themes stood out to me: the 2nd Amendment in relationship (1) to standing armies, and (2) to technology. Some of the Founding Fathers are more direct and explicit w/r/t concern regarding standing armies and threat they were perceived in that day of having to civil liberties/citizens’ liberties. And that the 2nd Amendment was needed to protect citizens from the army, largely seen as an agent of the government. We can see this in the Constitution w/r/t the specific, delineated restrictions on funding for the Army (the 2-yr money section). It strikes me as a poignant example of fundamental change in what Americans expect and see in government, i.e., an evolution. Few of the folks who today argue most strongly for “original intent” arguments are going to argue for need to restrict standing armies. In the wake of 9-11 and Hurricane Katrina, there has been a fair bit of discussion on the extent, applicability, and proposals for review/revising Posse Comitatus, e.g., through DoD Homeland Defense (HD). The other more speculative thoughts that occurred to me were w/r/t technology and ability to preserve/ensure civil liberties/citizens’ liberties. During the Revolutionary Era and into much of the 19th Century, firearms were the state-of-the-art is personal offensive/defensive weapon. (Canons were even less reliable and cumbersome.) The 20th Century yielded a dazzling array of new weapons. Excepting a limited forays into tactical nuclear weapons (‘Strangelovian’ on the operator-scale, perhaps), nuclear weapons were/are largely strategic. Even Al Qa’eda claims that they want nuclear (& biological) weapons for strategic purposes (they see chemical and radiological as tactical). There are a lot of other examples from RPGs to tasers. The technologies available to today’s (civilian) law enforcement is beyond what most Revolutionary era soldiers would imagine. If the Founding Fathers were alive today, what technology might they see as the potential biggest threat to civil liberties/citizens’ liberties? If they were writing the 2nd Amendment today, would they restrict the 2nd Amendment? And from where/what would the perception of the greatest threat to civil liberties/citizens’ liberties originate? A week or so ago I was talking with some folks about advances in neuroscience (& subsequent pharmacologicals, etc) and thinking about future capabilities. For example, Andy Morgan at Yale is funded by the Army (through Army Medical Command) to research cognitive changes and to identify biochemical-physiological correlates (neurochemicals, vagal tone [pronounced like “vay-gull”]) in those soldiers that respond well under stress. He and his team have also looked at the cognitive patterns and neurochemistry of soldiers who experience PTSD versus those that don’t. Few would argue that decreasing incidence of PTSD is a ‘bad thing’ or an infringement on the autonomy of personhood of soldiers, sailors, marines, or airmen. That’s a defensive, precautionary, medical application. What about using a neurochemical as a cognitive enhancement to enable soldiers and marines in the ‘fog of war’ to make better decisions? Stress, sleep deprivation, lack of food, etc have been shown to have *extremely* deleterious effects on decision-making. Some folks get hung up on the term “cognitive enhancement;” caffeine is a potent cognitive enhancement that the Army, Navy, & Air Force use in multiple forms. In this hypothetical application one might argue that enabling more rational decision-making in the ‘fog of war’ – especially in asymmetric, urban conflicts – would reduce the likelihood unintended targeting of civilians. One can also imagine less desirable implications. Think it’s important to be cognizant of history – it may not be predictive, but it should not be ignored either. Thanks for the links and the thread. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Does DARPA get all the credit here though, or shouldn't it be shared considerably with Berkeley and Bell Labs? Not sure to what you are specifically refering ... lots of different options. If Bell Labs & transistor, sure; as Meitner/Hahn and Jenner deserve credit for their respective discoveries. Berkeley - not sure you mean UC Berkeley or LBNL? Either way, both likely govt-(supported)-programs. As far as the govt program that enabled/fostered the ARPANET - yes, Steve Lukasik, et al. should get credit. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Just one? The Manhattan Project A couple other candidates: Eradication of smallpox The "Intergalactic Computer Network" (i.e., ARPANET) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Bangkok? Or somewhere further south? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

What do you think about reducing terrorist access to fissile material? That qualifies as "something" from my perspective, acknowledge it may not meet others' criteria. What about legislation enabling destruction of foreign stockpiles of shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles (aka Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems (MANPADS))? Again, I consider that to qualify as "something"; others may not. The Lugar-Obama Nonproliferation Legislation was signed into law by President Bush in January 2007. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

How are we defining history? History of the planet? I would argue shift from reducing atmosphere to oxidizing one was much more important. Extinction of the dinosaurs, which facilitated the rise of mammals, perhaps the second. If history is defined as 'human history," #1 & #2 are unquestionably domestication of animals and plants. That had to happen for wheel, beer & soap(invented in the area of ancient Iraq), writing, mathematics, etc. If recorded human history, I'd offer steel and germ theory. Altho' might revise that one. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

First we have the issue of "Citizen" vs. "Natural Born Citizen" in which he has been declared a citizen. Senator McCain was born in 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone and the fact that his parents were American citizens - was thought to be enough to satisfy the constitutional requirement that the President be a "Natural Born Citizen" with one exception... The law conferring "Natural Born Citizenship" to children of American citizens serving in the Panama Canal Zone was not passed until 1937 - thereby, making his status as "Natural Born Citizen" one year too late. Thanks for the additional information. This is the first I had heard of this. Illustrative of the today's more globalized world -- and even the last century -- compared to that of the late 1700s. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Which question? A number of folks and I tried to give you earnest direct answers and responses (others may have been more flippant). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

No theories but I have asked several questions that no one has been able to answer. Is that no one has been able to answer ... or that you have not liked the answers? In life there are lots of questions which I don't like the answers I received -- sometimes because the answer is inadequate, sometimes because the answer given is wrong, & sometimes because the answer is not what I wanted hear (that happened a lot when I was a teenager) . VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Astute observation ... or knowledge of the candidate. VR/Marg, who didn't know that... Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I think THIS here is one of the keys to the issue. Darius is right, there IS a bias against intelligence and education in this country. And what i quoted is one of the main reasons, i think. I would speculate it’s exacerbated by late 20th/early 21st Century anti-intellectualism and elevation of the pridefully ignorant jerk as epitome of ‘cool’. Although, it seems to go back further, e.g., Richard Hofstadter's Anti-Intellectualism in American Life published in 1963. How does one measure extent of anti-intellectualism? Where in the 20th Century was the most significant anti-intellectualism observed? Maoist China is the first candidate that I would put forth. Cultures, states, groups of people that do not value education -- whether inner city anti-intellectualism or rejection of education for women in most religious Islamic states -- tend to have higher levels of poverty. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thsoe are the averages as reported by the Dept of Commerce. That's the data. As I wrote there will be exceptions -- highschool graduates makig millions and PhDs below the poverty line. If you have other data, it would be interesting to consider comparatively. Concur that would be interesting. By default, those folks are above average in incomes at least. Here's the list of the 400 richest Americans. 8 of 10 of the top have bachelors and about half of those have masters. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Understand ... and very much appreciate those exceptional exceptions. Wanted to put some hard numbers ($$$) into the conversation. Not intended as contrarian. Apologize if it came across as such. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

While there are exceptional exceptions (e.g., your colleague, rock stars, ect), the US Dept of Commerce found that “over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million. Persons with doctoral degrees earn an average of $3.4 million during their working life, while those with professional degrees do best at $4.4 million.” Those are the averages for the US; ones' choices, random luck, good strategic planning, charisma, height, and a whole wealth of other factors can affect individual outcomes. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Perhaps it is … Mark, don't insult our intelligence. There are plenty of people who profess -especially in their youth - (Michelle was a university student) to put first and foremost emphasis to benefit their ethnic group, or their religion, or a particular ideological agenda. She said when she was in college that she would "utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit the black community first and foremost." Barack is one hell of a resource to accomplish her goals. Having the ear of and sleeping next to the president of the US should help her accomplish her life long goal. Quoting this because it is approporiate and timely: Should Michelle Obama not be allowed to ask questions? Are you proposing that only questions that you approve or think appropriate should be written about by students? Do you know what was the question underlying her thesis? Perhaps, more insightful, did you ever read more of the thesis than the incendiary snippets? The full thesis is readily available online. What you keep quoting was part of her hypothesis (literally page 2), i.e., the set-up for the question she was asking: “Earlier in my career, there was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the Black community I was somehow obligated to this community and would utilize all of present and future resources to benefit this community first and foremost.” Continuing on page 3 (still the hypothesis): “At the same time, however, it is conceivable that my four years of exposure to a predominantly White, Ivy League University has instilled within me certain conservative values. For example, as I enter my final year at Princeton, I find myself striving for many of the same goals as my White classmates – acceptance to a prestigious graduate or professional school or a high paying position in a successful corporation. Thus, my goals after Princeton are not as clear as before.” “Is it possible that other Black alumni share these feelings? Do most alumni experience a change in their attitudes; and, if so, how are they likely to change? This study will try to provide some answers to these questions.” She did a survey of Princeton students and Princeton alumni. She’s not asserting what you keep quoting - she’s questioning it and questioning how that sentiment changes for Princeton graduates. She's not even doing what [Angy9o8] suggested, she's questioning the sentiment. And the “Major Conclusion” (p. 53): “The major conclusion to be drawn from the findings of the study is as follows: despite the respondents’ sense of community with Blacks and Whites, their motivation to benefit the Black community, or their attitudes toward the Black lower class before Princeton, more respondents tended to identify with Blacks during Princeton in every measured respect. However, after Princeton this identification decreased dramatically.” The more interesting & more challenging (in multiple ways) questions are why is the text of her thesis intentionally misconstrued? Why are the other parts left out? Why do so many people so easily believe and perpetuate that misconstruction? Why don’t more people investigate for themselves? The internet makes information more readily available yet is this an indication that even with greater available information people still largely seek out sources that reinforce the opinions that they already hold? And then less interesting but perhaps more likely to occur than non-flippant answers being posed: will I be called a “communist” or received a condescending, insulting, &/or patronizing reply because I asked those questions? Or will I just get PMs calling me a “stupid bitch” and “elitist cunt”? In the end one might also ask if this is another example fitting the quote in the OP? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yes. As your example suggests, the problem becomes what is defined as “discriminate” vs “indiscriminate.” Most law is not prescriptive because that is seen as unnecessary inhibition. So has to respond to a case or incident. NB: one can devise scenarios, e.g., Georgi Markov in which biochemical agents are discriminate .... still doubtful that most folks are going to support distribution of ricin tipped umbrellas. Like suicide or illegal drugs, a state may decide that there are other reasons why something should or should not be legal. Also depends what epistemological system one wants to use us basis for logic: legal or ethical (normative or applied). The two overlap but are not the same. The world already has dazzling weapons, acoustical weapons, infrared weapons, etc. Some have national and international restrictions. For example dazzling weapons were first prohibited under a US-USSR bilateral {that’s how old} and subsequently addressed through international law, via additional protocol to Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. There are also much older weapons that are indiscriminate that have varying levels of restriction or non-restriction beyond fragment bombs, e.g., landmines and incendiary weapons. The latter goes back, at least, to the Greeks. And, as most know, fire-bombing of Tokyo killed more non-combatants immdeiately than did either atomic weapon used in WWII. As to “personal use” – does that mean civilian in a non-combat situation? E.g., this scenario: In most civilian circumstances (unless extraordinary mitigating circumstances, e.g., self-defense) that would be murder (homicide &/or manslaughter) of both people. One doesn’t need to create a new law if existing ones already cover it. In a military situation, it depends: where is that “innocent person”? Is that “innocent person” a civilian or a uniformed medic? (Not supposed to target either … but different contexts.) Conflict zone or urban setting? Is it the only available weapon? If yes, it may be reasonable; if a more discriminate weapon was available but was not chosen, it may not be reasonable. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

If "you" are an inhabitant of the US, the US Congress has done that. (See my reply to Dave above.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

"Gadget" ... /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

McCain turned his back on the families of POW/MIA's by refusing to talk with them. This "reconcilation" came when there was still the possibility of locating our guys left behind. I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the additional information. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I'm ok with the government limiting the effective area of impact a weapon can have, e.g. those weapons that can, in one discharge, kill everything within X radius...or something like that. Of course I'd also prefer that our government work toward disarming us of *all* nuclear weapons, including those held by our military. One differentiation ([Andy9o8] may remember this from customary international law and laws of war/laws of armed conflict) is dicriminate versus indiscriminate weapons. A gun is a discriminate weapon. Nuclear, chemical, biological, & radiological weapons are indiscriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Within the US, there are federal laws, e.g., Title V of Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (PL 104-132) & USC 18.I.113B Section 2332 Use of weapons of mass destruction which establishes that anyone "without lawful authority, uses, threatens, or attempts or conspires to use, a weapon of mass destruction— ... shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, and if death results, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life." Criminal & other civil penalties vary significantly around the planet. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Sen McCain's efforts toward reconciliation with former enemies is a positive indicator, imo. Yes, Vietnam remains a communist political system and has been problems (e.g., human & civil rights violations); in the 1980s, they shifted to a market economy. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for posting your conclusions/analysis and the process to get there. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

As [likearock] noted, in this context it really doesn’t matter what it means to me (altho' I will respond to that at the end) … or what “surge principles” are. The criticality is what GEN McKiernan said and how that does or does not correlate positively or negatively with what Sen Biden and Gov Palin asserted, i.e., who demonstrated the best understanding? Who demonstrated the better understanding of stability operations (or "ops" - for [normiss]