I just went for a walk. After a day in front of the computer, I just needed to get out...
So I walked down our road, to one of the main roads near here, along, up a medium sized street, and then down a fairly quiet one until I came to a park.
The park is just a wedge between one road and a hill, with one tennis court and a children's playground, plus some grass and a few statues of dogs...
Hmm, I thought to myself through the buzz of traffic and the wail of sirens.
Hmm.
I don't want to live in a city. I really, really don't. Looking at all the houses in various states of repair, some with beautiful circular windows, others very run down... When I look out of a window, what do I want to see? Someone else's house (be it well kept or falling down)?
There are trees in Ottawa, and lots of fearless squirrels (as well as a fearless youth practising jumps on his skateboard in the road!), but there is mostly tarmac, concrete, and...
I'm not meaning to single Ottawa out for abuse. I just happen to be here. Southend, where I grew up, is in many ways no better (except it has the beautiful wonderful glorious sea, and the center is pedestrianised).
Well, aside from completely irrelevent things - about Javascript, SQL and the like - those are my thoughts for today!
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Free stuff?
Tody i ota free rollp kybard n thepost.
I am typin on t now.
Ihno idea wh it was nt to me.
I hae o idea why iteven exiss.
I am typin on t now.
Ihno idea wh it was nt to me.
I hae o idea why iteven exiss.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Last Night
Two comments.
One, Last Night is a good Canadian film - I saw it on the flight over to Vancouver. I'd really recommend it!
That's a complete aside - I just thought of it because I'm going to mention what happened last night.
Last night I went to a "Computers for Communities" social evening - C4C being an Ottawa not for profit organisation that gets computers from businesses at the end of their lifecycle, refurbishes them, and then places them with families that wouldn't otherwise have access to one.
It was *so* nice for me to spend an evening with geeks - real, true to life geeks. Talking about partition sizes, the pros and cons of operating systems, and so on. It renewed my faith in humanity, to some level - people are generally decent. But it asks the question - if people are generally decent, how come we are collectively so hellbent on over-exploiting any resource that comes our way?
And how do we marry the two - getting to decent people, and getting them to do lots of decent things?
One, Last Night is a good Canadian film - I saw it on the flight over to Vancouver. I'd really recommend it!
That's a complete aside - I just thought of it because I'm going to mention what happened last night.
Last night I went to a "Computers for Communities" social evening - C4C being an Ottawa not for profit organisation that gets computers from businesses at the end of their lifecycle, refurbishes them, and then places them with families that wouldn't otherwise have access to one.
It was *so* nice for me to spend an evening with geeks - real, true to life geeks. Talking about partition sizes, the pros and cons of operating systems, and so on. It renewed my faith in humanity, to some level - people are generally decent. But it asks the question - if people are generally decent, how come we are collectively so hellbent on over-exploiting any resource that comes our way?
And how do we marry the two - getting to decent people, and getting them to do lots of decent things?
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Fair
I'm constantly trying to pin down my value system, my morality, and give it a name.
I think it boils down to fairness. And I think I can try to describe it.
I buy organic milk, not because I *believe* in the whole organic system. I try to dry my clothing outside and not in a tumble dryer because it is wasteful to do otherwise. I prefer to cycle than drive not because it is good excercise, or more fun.
What?
Ok, case by case.
Organic is not perfect. But, especially for dairy, it guarantees certain things for the animals in question: access to the outdoors, and pasture for grazing, where possible (i.e. when it's not snowing outside), and generally non-cramped, "humane" living conditions. What I want is for the cow to have as good a life as is possible, bearing in mind that she is being harnessed for my use. I am grateful to her. The cleaner life, morally, would be to be strict vegan, I think, with no life harnessed to make mine easier. However, cattle as they exist today would not exist if we had not domesticated them.
The tumble dryer is even more straightforward for me. Why would I use money-electricity to do something the sun will do for me for little effort? I have never owned a dryer, though I can see that, in Canada, it is perhaps more necessary where the winters are long and cold... So, it is not fair to use that electricity to dry my clothes when any use of electricity impacts the environment (wind turbines need building, after all). 1kWh of electricity might dry one load of clothes, or power my computer for a couple of days.
Cycling is, you would think, obvious. Look at obesity rates. Look at the cost of roads. Look at the social cost of being able to jump in your car and drive away from the society where you live at 70mph/100km/h. The main thing for me is that it is unselfish to cycle. Drive if you need to (I probably have a strict sense of need, though: if where you are going is within cycling distance and anything you need will fit in a backpack, cycle). But don't block up the roads, create pollution, noise and generally waste a limited resource if you don't need to.
Is it exploitation to buy something and sell it on at 10x that purchase price? I believe it is. It should be illegal to make more than a certain %age as profit - dependent on industry sector, etc, etc. The organinc price markup is often as bad at this as conventional, and is a huge turn off for me. The practise of selling something at less than cost price but then charging more for accessories is similar, though there are situations where it is impossible to do otherwise (one example might be in video games - the cost of the console is subsidised at release due to the incredibly high development costs, but then games and accessories are priced to recoup that subsidy. Of course, when a company makes multi-million dollar profits, it does make you wonder.. but such is capitalism, and I digress).
It is not fair that things are forcibly made obsolete by, say, charging almost as much for a spare part than the cost of buying a new whatever. Visiting India showed how cheap labour makes old things "last longer" - the parts for one American's motorbike when it needed fixing was more than 10x the cost of the labour to fit the parts, and that's how it should be. Things should be made to be durable and fixable - because it is *fair* on the consumer, and promotes thriftiness, and reduces waste.
I think it boils down to fairness. And I think I can try to describe it.
I buy organic milk, not because I *believe* in the whole organic system. I try to dry my clothing outside and not in a tumble dryer because it is wasteful to do otherwise. I prefer to cycle than drive not because it is good excercise, or more fun.
What?
Ok, case by case.
Organic is not perfect. But, especially for dairy, it guarantees certain things for the animals in question: access to the outdoors, and pasture for grazing, where possible (i.e. when it's not snowing outside), and generally non-cramped, "humane" living conditions. What I want is for the cow to have as good a life as is possible, bearing in mind that she is being harnessed for my use. I am grateful to her. The cleaner life, morally, would be to be strict vegan, I think, with no life harnessed to make mine easier. However, cattle as they exist today would not exist if we had not domesticated them.
The tumble dryer is even more straightforward for me. Why would I use money-electricity to do something the sun will do for me for little effort? I have never owned a dryer, though I can see that, in Canada, it is perhaps more necessary where the winters are long and cold... So, it is not fair to use that electricity to dry my clothes when any use of electricity impacts the environment (wind turbines need building, after all). 1kWh of electricity might dry one load of clothes, or power my computer for a couple of days.
Cycling is, you would think, obvious. Look at obesity rates. Look at the cost of roads. Look at the social cost of being able to jump in your car and drive away from the society where you live at 70mph/100km/h. The main thing for me is that it is unselfish to cycle. Drive if you need to (I probably have a strict sense of need, though: if where you are going is within cycling distance and anything you need will fit in a backpack, cycle). But don't block up the roads, create pollution, noise and generally waste a limited resource if you don't need to.
Is it exploitation to buy something and sell it on at 10x that purchase price? I believe it is. It should be illegal to make more than a certain %age as profit - dependent on industry sector, etc, etc. The organinc price markup is often as bad at this as conventional, and is a huge turn off for me. The practise of selling something at less than cost price but then charging more for accessories is similar, though there are situations where it is impossible to do otherwise (one example might be in video games - the cost of the console is subsidised at release due to the incredibly high development costs, but then games and accessories are priced to recoup that subsidy. Of course, when a company makes multi-million dollar profits, it does make you wonder.. but such is capitalism, and I digress).
It is not fair that things are forcibly made obsolete by, say, charging almost as much for a spare part than the cost of buying a new whatever. Visiting India showed how cheap labour makes old things "last longer" - the parts for one American's motorbike when it needed fixing was more than 10x the cost of the labour to fit the parts, and that's how it should be. Things should be made to be durable and fixable - because it is *fair* on the consumer, and promotes thriftiness, and reduces waste.
Friday, October 15, 2010
10-10-10
This last week has been a busy one. Last Sunday, on Canadian Thanksgiving, this year's 10/10 Climate Awareness event was held... events, I should say, because there were more than 7000 different events took place the world over.
The event we held in Ottawa was a great success, with maybe 50 people making it out on that most special of family days here, to listen to two mayoral candidates (the mayoral election is on the 25th of this month), a speaker on how climate change is affecting people of the First Nations, and make pledges on how they will cut their carbon emissions. We enticed them in with the promise to give people a black walnut (Juglans nigra sapling in the spring, free coffee (!) and nibbles provided by Credible Edibles.
I can't help wondering why many people chose disposable cups for their coffee, when there were real mugs sitting there as well. Certainly, the disposable ones shouldn't have been put out in the first place, but... baffling?
Both mayoral candidates made a lot of sense, and the first - Clive Doucet - made some telling points. How can we expect change if we continue to vote for the same old same old, for the people who have huge donations made to them by big business? What can we do to ensure the sane people assume roles of power when it seems most people are happy trusting the people who are most capable of reassuring them - in a game where the leaders are the people with most confidence, but a blind aversion to risk?
Sure, many of those people fail, their enterprises fail, but... still, the people most likely to be at the reins of the things that do succeed are those maniacs with blind confidence in whatever it is they believe in. There are shades of grey, but it is only seen as weakness to admit it.
I must admit my personal empathy with the charitable organisations that spearhead these campaigns is low. One email from the Fearless Leader of the 350 campaign spreads doom and gloom; the next, explaining why they cut ties with the 10:10 campaign (well, ok, the exploding people video might have been a bit much... Or, it would have been ok if it was a bit more humorous).
And it all feels like a bit of a money grab. Charities wage corporate war on each other to gain "market share". Maybe the government should oversee all charitable giving, to ensure it goes to the right place and doesn't get wasted.
Er. Well. Maybe not.
Anyway, our landlord/housemate got back from a trip to a conference on sustainability in Denver and promptly turned on the heating system, so I'm now warm and cozy at 21 degrees C. The weather has turned from bright and cold to wet and cold, so the fact I broke the washing line trying to get the last bit of solar power for this year is at once less important but more ironic.
The event we held in Ottawa was a great success, with maybe 50 people making it out on that most special of family days here, to listen to two mayoral candidates (the mayoral election is on the 25th of this month), a speaker on how climate change is affecting people of the First Nations, and make pledges on how they will cut their carbon emissions. We enticed them in with the promise to give people a black walnut (Juglans nigra sapling in the spring, free coffee (!) and nibbles provided by Credible Edibles.
I can't help wondering why many people chose disposable cups for their coffee, when there were real mugs sitting there as well. Certainly, the disposable ones shouldn't have been put out in the first place, but... baffling?
Both mayoral candidates made a lot of sense, and the first - Clive Doucet - made some telling points. How can we expect change if we continue to vote for the same old same old, for the people who have huge donations made to them by big business? What can we do to ensure the sane people assume roles of power when it seems most people are happy trusting the people who are most capable of reassuring them - in a game where the leaders are the people with most confidence, but a blind aversion to risk?
Sure, many of those people fail, their enterprises fail, but... still, the people most likely to be at the reins of the things that do succeed are those maniacs with blind confidence in whatever it is they believe in. There are shades of grey, but it is only seen as weakness to admit it.
I must admit my personal empathy with the charitable organisations that spearhead these campaigns is low. One email from the Fearless Leader of the 350 campaign spreads doom and gloom; the next, explaining why they cut ties with the 10:10 campaign (well, ok, the exploding people video might have been a bit much... Or, it would have been ok if it was a bit more humorous).
And it all feels like a bit of a money grab. Charities wage corporate war on each other to gain "market share". Maybe the government should oversee all charitable giving, to ensure it goes to the right place and doesn't get wasted.
Er. Well. Maybe not.
Anyway, our landlord/housemate got back from a trip to a conference on sustainability in Denver and promptly turned on the heating system, so I'm now warm and cozy at 21 degrees C. The weather has turned from bright and cold to wet and cold, so the fact I broke the washing line trying to get the last bit of solar power for this year is at once less important but more ironic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)