What is that? It's a duck pond. Why aren't there any ducks? I don't know. There's never any ducks. Then how do you know it's a duck pond?
Saturday, February 17
Shut 'Er Down Ma, She's A-Suckin' Mud
Spends an entire year investigating collusion with Russia in the 2016 election.
Indicts Russia.
In fairness, this is what the Mueller investigation was supposed to be - counter-intelligence. But spending a year and a hundred million dollars to issue a toothless indictment against a Russian bot farm seems... Kind of pointless.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
09:54 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 58 words, total size 2 kb.
Monday, February 12
So I See America's News Media Has Been Covering Itself With Glory This Weekend
And by glory, I mean shit.
Without a word, only flashing smiles, Kim Jong-un's sister outflanked Vice President Mike Pence in diplomacy https://t.co/c2gTuSTF9e
That woman is Kim Yo Jong, North Korea's Minister for Propaganda, responsible for ordering at least a hundred political executions.
When BuzzFeed has to call you out for shoddy journalism, you know you've screwed up.
Before you decide your favourite new shade queen is a powerful North Korean official, let's talk about why you should probably not stan Kim Yo Jonghttps://t.co/ujv6C7VqAE
Also, I'm on my 19th20th21st22nd 23rd suspension on Twitter right now.
Also, back to reinventing cryptocurrencies again just after I got it working the third time.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at
10:52 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 241 words, total size 4 kb.
Wednesday, August 30
This Week In Australian Politics
About a month ago, I noted that two Australian politicians had been found after years in parliament to have never been eligible for election because our constitution forbids anyone holding dual citizenship with another country from becoming a federal representative or senator.
The number is now seven confirmed instances and at least another eight possible cases - including the Deputy Prime Minister and the Senate opposition leader. Labor (the opposition party right now) are sitting on documentation of citizenship status after originally promising to release it, so there are almost certainly more shoes set to drop in coming weeks.
All of which means, basically, nothing, because no-one cares about Australian politics, least of all Australians.
1
Heck, if we can't stop ineligible people from holding Federal office here in the US, what hope do you have?
What, I was talking about Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, which was clearly unconstitutional.
Posted by: Rick C at Wednesday, August 30 2017 11:56 PM (ECH2/)
2
Can you imagine the fuss if someone read over the US Constitution and realised that Mike Pence, Chuck Schumer, and a dozen other senior elected officials were all ineligible for their positions?
Here it's just... Meh.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, August 31 2017 01:28 AM (PiXy!)
3
Is there a punishment for this? Is there a way to actually remove them from office, or prevent them from running in the next election?
Posted by: Rick C at Thursday, August 31 2017 05:45 AM (ECH2/)
4
It's gone to the High Court (equivalent of the Supreme Court). The statutory remedy is removal from office and a fine of £100. Which shows how little attention has been paid to this rule, as Australia has been on decimal currency since 1966.
Many of those involved were born in Australia, but have dual citizenship according to the laws of another country - which may not even have a procedure for renouncing citizenship.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Thursday, August 31 2017 12:19 PM (PiXy!)
Call for Mr Betteridge. Mr Betteridge to the courtesy phone please.
Unless you've been sleeping peacefully under a rock for the past week - in which case, congratulations - you'll be aware that Google fired an employee. With over 70,000 employees under the Alphabet umbrella, this is something that must happen every day of the year, but in this case it was handled so ineptly that the resulting chaos resembled a bored teenager setting off a cherry bomb in a nest of crazy ants.
What happened was this: James Damore, a biologist working for Google in some unspecified capacity, disagreed with Google's methods for meeting its diversity quotas and wrote a memo suggesting adjustments to the company's approach. Damore, being a nerd, evidently forgot that if Rule 1 of Corporate America is CYA, Rule 1a is Don't rock the boat.
The usual suspects leaked this internal memo to the ever-hungry outrage mobs and the mainstream media - if there is any distinction these days - and the relatively dull memo was immediately spun into a latter-day Mein Kampf. Within a day, the CEO of Google publicly announced the firing of the suddenly inconvenient Damore.
When the CEO of a major public company has to personally address the firing of a single, fairly low-level employee, who has broken no laws nor done anything that - without the leak - anyone outside the company would have even known about, it means that the corporate structure has screwed up, badly.
And the nature and scale of the panic exhibited by Google makes it clear that engineers are no longer running the show.
And that is a huge problem for Google.
We implicitly trust engineers because we know they view the rest of humanity with benign indifference, as long as we don't gum up the works. Engineers want to build things, and they enjoy seeing the things they build getting put to use. An engineer-led Google could be trusted implicitly with your email, because they were far more interested in shaving another fifty milliseconds off the response time of the search box than they were in anything you could possibly be mailing back and forth, short of a solution to the Goldbach Conjecture.
The Outrage Mobs, on the other hand, don't care about building things, don't think in fact that anything should be built, but are passionately interested in what you say and what you think and what your motives are.
And if the mobs are gaining power inside Google, as they seem to be, that means there is no longer that implicit trust, that rather, we can expect sooner or later the backlash will take the step from fellow employees to customers.
Which would be utterly disastrous for Google, of course, but as I said, the mobs aren't interested in building things.
Google have so far responded with profound ineptitude to what should really have been a trivial internal problem solved by a chat with HR. What they do next could save or doom the entire company.
If I were playing the market, I'd go long on Amazon and Microsoft right now.
1
I haven't trusted Google in a LONG time. Hell, ever since gmail came out and they explicitly stated they would violate your privacy algorithmically to show ads at you.
The problem is they've got their tentacles intertwined with so much of the internet that they are impossible to avoid. Whether it's the cultural expression like "Google it" or how many websites use the google apis, the most thorough web spiders, the co-opting of the entire history of Usenet into "Google Groups", Android Phones, Chrome, you name it, they've infiltrated everything.
Posted by: Mauser at Sunday, August 13 2017 03:23 AM (TYvUn)
2
This could be the beginning of a preference cascade. I've seen a LOT of people commenting on blogs--including, for example, ESR's--that they're taking this as an opportunity to divest from Google products: switching browsers, search engines, email, etc.
Posted by: Rick C at Sunday, August 13 2017 06:07 AM (ITnFO)
3
Yep. All else aside, it's clear that the company is focused on things other than engineering, and that's all I care about from them.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Sunday, August 13 2017 01:13 PM (PiXy!)
4
Microsoft is no better. I know this because of the 0xB16B00B5 scandal, when an awful excuse for a human, Matthew Garrett, made them fire an unnamed employee. At least they never released his name. But then it was a while ago.
Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Sunday, August 13 2017 02:30 PM (pjL8P)
5
As for divesting from Google, I've done what I could years ago, when the so-called "doodle" became too obnoxious.
Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Sunday, August 13 2017 02:31 PM (pjL8P)
6
Microsoft is flawed, but they have kept the company under control. Google blew it this past week. Badly.
I used to run my own mail server, even my own DNS server, but using Google was too convenient. I think it's time to dust them off again.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Sunday, August 13 2017 03:58 PM (PiXy!)
7
I'm thinking, "0xB16B00B5?" Is that like the F00F bug?
And then - oh. Yeah. I do remember that.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Sunday, August 13 2017 04:09 PM (PiXy!)
8
DuckDuckGo has been mentioned as an alternative.
Posted by: muon at Tuesday, August 15 2017 03:59 PM (vMYTH)
9
DuckDuckGo is pretty good. I turned it off yesterday when I was frantically searching for better information on the differences in automatic serialisation between releases of PHP (it's a complete crapfest), but I don't think Google actually gave me better results.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Tuesday, August 15 2017 05:33 PM (PiXy!)
10
The search function is not anywhere near the biggest problem with Google, precisely because you can easily substitute it. But what are you going to do with mail addresses that are stuck in a large number of websites? You want a bored SJW at Google to change passwords for your bank accounts or have your ISP shut down your account? Because you can easily do this and more by having an access to one's e-mail.
Posted by: Pete Zaitcev at Wednesday, August 23 2017 03:59 AM (pjL8P)
11
Yes, email and Android are the really sticky problems here.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at Wednesday, August 23 2017 04:41 PM (PiXy!)
Amid the more visceral chaos of the world this year, there has been something of a contretemps involving the Shakespeare in the Park production of Julius Caesar, to wit, that they had placed a Trump-like figure in the part of Caesar.
Those who know anything about the play - or about history - will know one key fact about Julius Caesar, which is to say, he gets stabby-stabby murdered by a gaggle of Roman senators.
Back in the last millennium, I had a minor role in a failed high-school production of Julius Caesar, not so much because I was interested in amateur theatrics, as because it got me out of sports practice for several weeks. The production was being done by the 8th grade, but they were short-handed, so a couple of us 9th graders pitched in seeing as we had studied the play the previous year.
So every week for a couple of months I spent one afternoon in rehearsals. Since my part was a small one and I'd learned it the first day, I took the time to memorise the rest of the play.
And this is the second thing people should know about Julius Caesar, both the play and the man: It's a tragedy.
Was he a tyrant? Perhaps, but less so than many who came later. Was he a great leader? Indubitably. Was it a good idea to kill him?
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Caesar answer’d it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest–
For Brutus is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men–
Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
He hath brought many captives home to Rome
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
The play is unequivocal on this. Though its discussion of the honour of the various characters is subtle and complex, its position on that question is clear enough. When Marc Antony says, So are they all, all honourable men, what he is saying - and the audience will know this - is that in his opinion not a one of them is deserving of the dignity of a final cigarette.
So to me the interesting question was, how does this production handle this question? Does it present Trump as a noble but flawed figure? Does it present Brutus the same, the assassination a tragic error that he must, for honour, pay for with his life? The parallel with Trump here would be painfully clear - that the fruitless Russia investigations and the inane and incessant calls for impeachment are folly that can only lead in disaster for all involved.
Or does it play it broadly and bastardise one of the greatest works of English literature in service of convenient political point-scoring?