Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Tuesday links

I am pleased to announce a new co-blogger, Charlemagne. She is a six month old black cat from the Humane Society and right now she is crawling on my leg after having gotten used to her environment. She seems to enjoy watching me type, but I haven't been able to get her interested in Youtube videos of other cats. The real test will be to see if she is calm while I play TF2. Tomorrow there will be a fuller introduction, and then I will use every ounce of self-control I possess to keep this from becoming a cat blog.

  • Pretty funny. If this is half true it is an interesting comment on US-Chinese wealth and culture differences.
  • The forward march of science. I tend to be of the opinion that all sorts of doping should be allowed, and that anything which enhances the capabilities of the human body is a good thing.
  • Fascinating. Note that the lower axis is not zero.
  • The forward march of science. The more that robots or other automata integrate into daily life, the better.
  • Droughts in the US, animated. Takes a minute to load, even on my machine.
  • Why do people complain about the creation of private businesses? Obviously the business will either be appreciated by the community or will go broke. The only issue I can see is if you are a hyper-moralistic busybody who absolutely has to tell everyone around them the "right" way to live their lives.
  • The forward march of science. I feel that 3D printing is as big an innovation as home computing, and yet we hear very little about it. Was the PC as much of a stealth technology before it became really big?
  • The forward march of science. I have fewer hopes for space travel as a super-futuristic technology, but of course the only way to ensure our survival as a species is to be a multi-star civilization, so clearly these guys are doing more to save the species than I am.
  • Not a fan of the New England, but Mrs. McMahon is a veritable model for Conservative libertarianism that I am totally fine with.
  • An interesting debate with implications for the reliability of medical journals.
  • Phillip Roth is wrong. He, the author, is a terribly unreliable source for his own work. Just ask yourself how reliable an elected official is as a source for his own Wikipedia page and throw in the tremendous amounts of money that Mr. Roth has riding on his personal reputation.
  • This is what religion does to people.

No comments:

Post a Comment