I had a pretty good birthday if a bit low-key. That’s ok though my parents came down from Medicine Hat and we ate at East Side Mario’s. Although the standing up in the booth where we were seated while they sing some Happy Birthday jingle was a little embarrassing, I was pretty stoked because I won a free meal from their spin the wheel on your birthday game and win a prize. Hey it’s better than a pie in the face.
Paul Tyma is a frequent (and opinionated) computer industry speaker and writer. Paul has two articles which I think you should read.
The first is called “The Internet is full of Idiots”. It’s about Amazon.com book reviews. Paul is writing a book and guarantees that the reviews he will get on Amazon will be good ones, at least the first couple. How can he be so sure? Well he’s going to write them himself. (Read More)
Paul’s next article is titled, “I’ve invented the greatest compression algorithm ever”, and as Paul explains – he’s keeping it a secret.
I still heart Google. So does this NYTimes writer.
The popular party in Spain has lost the election. It is speculated that if the recent bombings had actually been perpetrated by the ETA it would have helped the preceding government win the election. Interesting coverage via The Toronto Star.
Over 3 billion kilometers further away from the Sun than Pluto and 40 years away from Earth in a space shuttle exists Sedna. The article didn’t specify the exact time the discovery was made but NASA is expected to announce details during their news conference Monday. Named after the Inuit goddess of the sea, Sedna has a diameter almost 2000 km, which is the biggest find in the solar system since Pluto was discovered 74 years ago. It is believed to be made of ice and rock, and is slightly smaller than Pluto.
Since there is some conjecture whether Pluto is even big enough to be considered a planet, it seems that these large planet-like objects that orbit the sun should at least have some sort of official name rather than “Space Objects”. At this time I have no suggestions, but I’m just saying!
While writing a paper for my New Media Seminar class, I submitted a couple of paragraphs from it to a previously empty link on Wikipedia’s Free Encyclopedia page. The submission is a background on the philosophy of the Creative Commons movement.
I think the Wikipedia is a great way to spread information, but I wonder – isn’t the potential to spread disinformation pretty high too? I understand that they have editors that check over user submitted work, which is great, so long as the editors know the difference between fact and fiction absolutely, all the time, and on every topic imaginable.
Xeni Jardin posts via BoingBoing about the impromptu protests in Spain yesterday, where thousands gathered in the streets demanding answers from their government about this week’s deadly terrorist attacks in Madrid. Bloggers in Spain tell BoingBoing the gatherings were decentralized flash mobs, organized primarily by short text messages sent via weblog forums, online in chatrooms and through Internet-capable mobile devices.
“Around 6PM local time in Madrid, an estimated 3,000-5,000 protesters gathered spontaneously in front of the headquarters of Spain’s ruling Popular Party (Partido Popular, or PP), located on calle Genova. Participants shouted slogans against media manipulation, and carried signs asking, “Who did it?”. Flashmobs spread by SMS throughout the country, with parallel gatherings quickly emerging in other cities.
The protests occurred one day before general elections take place in Spain. Government representatives denounced today’s gatherings, describing them as illegal assemblies — but because they were organized in a decentralized manner using mobile technology, there was no single responsible party against whom punitive action could be taken.”
Also of interest, from the same site, is the fact that “the events of 9/11 and 3/11 share a number of unsettling connections: the Madrid attacks took place exactly two and a half years after those in NYC, and there were precisely 911 days between the two.” Strange coincidence? Maybe, but growing evidence suggests not.
In 1995 the RCMP and a group of Natives had a confrontation at Gustafson Lake in British Columbia. A friend of mine told me that the RCMP and Canadian Military used, (among other excessively forceful means), land mines against the Natives. I told him that because of International Law I didn’t believe that the Canadian Military would do such a thing. I explained that it sounded like nothing more than a conspiracy theory. However, he got my curiosity up and after a little bit of research on this topic I came up with the following:
First off the report from a First Nations Website:
“GUSTAFSEN LAKE in British Columbia represents just one more symbol that federal and provincial officials are denying the legitimate claims of Indigenous peoples whose title to the land was never extnguished by treaty. […] The armed conflict reportedly started when a group of cowboys threatened a Shuswap spiritual leader, calling him a “red nigger.” The federal RCMP has now escalated it to include use of the Army’s Bison Armored Personnel Carriers and land mines. This is an unacceptable militarization of a dispute over religious access to sacred land.” (Emphasis mine)
When I read this, I found it very hard to believe. Was it possible that land mines were used in Canada, in 1995? I found another site that reiterated this idea:
Although the Canadian government is enjoying wide acclaim for what appears to be a principled and vigorous opposition to the use of mines, Canada itself employed the weapon against Indigenous traditionalists defending sacred burial and Sundance grounds at Gustafsen Lake in 1995.
Then I realized that both of these pages were hosted on sites that appear to be connected with the Natives and that I would need to widen the scope of my research to find out what really happened. Then I came across this:
There has been no evidence of the use of AP mines in Canada (other than for officially sanctioned purposes of military training and research and development). However, concerns were expressed when on 11 September 1995, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) used a remote-detonated munition concealed below the surface of a gravel road to disable a moving vehicle. These actions by the RCMP occurred during the Gustafsen Lake standoff, a tense 31-day dispute over the occupation of land near Gustafsen Lake, British Columbia, by the First Nations’ indigenous people, the Shuswap. Critics of the RCMP’s tactic described the remote-detonated munition as an “improvised landmine.”
So it turns out that what the RCMP did was place explosive under the ground on the road and then detonate the explosive by remote control as the suspect truck drove over it. Because this mine was set off remotely it didn’t violate the International Law and wasn’t really a land mine, but a command mine.
From the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (PDF link):
Claymore mines used in command detonated mode are permitted by the Mine Ban Treaty. However, use of Claymore mines in tripwire mode is prohibited. Though not legally obligated, States Parties should report on stockpiled Claymore mines and steps taken to ensure their use in command detonated mode only. This will contribute to effective and uniform state practice regarding use of Claymore mines.
A Claymore mine is a generic term for a round or rectangular directional fragmentation munition that can function either in a command-detonated or victim-activated mode. They are mostly mounted above ground level and are designed to have antipersonnel effects. However, some of the larger variants of this type can be used to damage light vehicles. When operated in the command-detonated mode, Claymore mines do not meet the definition of an antipersonnel mine in the Mine Ban Treaty. However, it is prohibited to use Claymore mines equipped with a tripwire in conjunction with a pull or tension release mechanical fuze as an initiating device.
So it appears the RCMP may have been way out of line to be using high explosives on a vehicle that may or may not have contained innocent bystanders, but (as pig-headed as this may sound) technically they didn’t violate the terms of the International mine ban.
People are paying for songs on the iTunes Music Store because they think it’s a good way to support musicians. But iTunes misses a huge opportunity. Instead of creating a system that gets virtually all of fans’ money directly to artists– finally possible with the internet– iTunes takes a big step backwards. Apple calls iTunes “revolutionary” but record companies are using the service to force the same exploitive and unfair business model onto a new medium.
What would it be like to have a cell phone number of someone famous? Someone famous like, Chris Rock. Which famous people would be making wrong numbers to get ahold of Chris? This is exactly what happened to Laura, as she explains on her site, “Laura’s NYC Tales”.
LAURA: [Curious, and ready to tackle the unknown] Hello?
CALLER: Is Chris there?
LAURA: [Inquires politely] Who’s calling?
CALLER: It’s Spike.
LAURA: [Mischievously inquisitive] From…?
CALLER: [Blurts out, in an annoyed tone] It’s Spike Lee.
LAURA: [Speechless, stunned, mouth frozen open. Guess wasn’t quite ready enough to “tackle the unknown.” Takes longer than usual to respond, and when does, does so very slowly] Uh… well… actually… you have the, uh… wrong number.