In a bizarre turn of events, it seems that bigots in the deep South have taken to using the term “Canadian” in place of other, more obvious racial slurs for black people. I really don’t have a whole lot to say about this - it’s so utterly ridiculous on its own.
[ironically racist stereotyping] I wonder if the world would be a better place today if the Confederacy had successfully seceded, and the rest of civilization had just ignored them as an ignorant backwater. [/ironically racist stereotyping]
Some very disappointing news: it seems that federal funding for a demonstration nuclear fusion reactor called ITER (all $160M of it) is gone, as of 2008. The reactor is to be the first that can successfully produce more output energy than the input, so it’s a pretty massive step forward. If nuclear fusion can be successfully commercialized, I’d say that several of the world’s biggest problems will disappear overnight, so this is incredibly frustrating. While it is an international project, without the U.S.’s commitment it will likely proceed at a much slower pace - after all, the project began in 1985, but has already had a turbulent funding history. (Interestingly, Ontario was probably going to be the site of the reactor, before the Canadian government pulled the plug on funding in 2003.)
While I don’t know where the money trail leads, at least a chunk of it ended up with the Department of Energy, funding R&D for near-term solutions (presumably commercializing thin-film solar and other renewables). Even still, it’s shameful that we need to choose between short-term and long-term answers regarding energy policy. Realistically, is there any other issue that is more pressing at the moment?
One of the commenters at the linked article noted that the entire 2007 National Science Foundation budget was $6 billion, while the war in Iraq was budgeted more than $150 billion. Political myopia is nothing new, but its patently obvious that the Iraq war is inextricably linked with energy. But I’m repeating myself…
(Also, if you have any interest at all, a skim of ITER is actually pretty fascinating. Wikipedia that shit.)
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. It may be a trite platitude, but it is the inevitable conclusion I’m forced to come to when I see 90% of the design that is focussed on helping people in the developing world. While designers often recognize the basic issues that need addressing, there is almost always a fundamental misunderstanding about the means of the target market, and more importantly, a painful ignorance of existing solutions. Everyone wants to come up with something new and fresh, instead of seeking out models to better distribute knowledge and solutions that are applicable today.
The newest invention to incur my wrath (or at least, disappointment) is the winner of the (dramatically titled!) Innovate or Die competition, called the Aquaduct. The idea is a plastic bicycle that can be used to transport large volumes of water, which is then filtered through an activated carbon filter (via a peristaltic pump driven by the pedals, that can also be run while the bike is stationary). While the idea is well-executed, and touches on a number of very important issues (the difficulty in transporting water, and the scarcity of fuel and environmental ramifications of burning wood to boil water, for instance), they seem to ignore an important, very fundamental issue. Most people can’t afford a bike at all, let alone a new, custom-designed plastic one (which I imagine would make repairs nearly impossible) with all the additional complexities and expenses of the filtering system.
Instead of giving every family in the community a water-filtering bicycle, wouldn’t it make more sense to pool resources and dig a well in order to eliminate the commute in the first place? Or if that isn’t an option, what about using simple, inexpensive Q-Drums to transport water, which can then be filtered through a stationary, gravity-based slow-sand/clay/dung water filter made from locally available materials for virtually nothing?
Design won’t save the world by itself, people. It takes restraint to acknowledge that sometimes, the best solution is also the simplest one.
Great. I almost lost it when I saw that each bottle of water cost $2.35. Not only are they perpetuating the environmental catastrophe that is bottled water, they get to double their margins by pandering to the faux-guilt of affluent suburbanite trash. Congratulations, Ethos!
If you have any feelings whatsoever about the cause, ask for a fucking cup of tap water (or better yet, bring a travel mug - Starbucks cups can’t be recycled), send your $2.35 directly to the charity of your choice, and quit being a fucking tool.
(Tangentially, I feel that I need to laud San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Ann Arbor for banning the sale of bottled water at city events. While I don’t know the specific arrangements in the other cities, in Ann Arbor, re-usable plastic bottles will be sold and filled with tap water, instead. There’s something fundamentally evil about the commoditization of basic human necessities.)
Yes, it’s true. Prostitution is bigger and (probably) older than humanity. A recent study by Michael Gumert demonstrates a “mating market” operating among Indonesian macaques in which males pay for sex by grooming females. The sophisticated system involves many factors, as high-ranking males pay less for sexual access, low-ranking females are cheaper than ones further up the hierarchy, and the number females available for sex directly affects the price each one commands. Sounds a lot like the situation at Queen and Sherbourne, eh? There’s not much more to say, but I’m sure this system will be studied rather intensively in the near future. I’ll leave you with a couple pictures from Gumert’s paper, showing a male grooming a female, and then the female begging for more as the male gets down to business.
It’s kinda old news now, but if you haven’t heard, China has moved to ban plastic shopping bags. People there are using about 3 billion of the bags a day, so the benefits of a ban are probably pretty great. What I find truly fascinating is the ability of an authoritarian government to institute environmental changes. While here in Canada the smallest changes result in huge backlash, the Chinese government has simply said that they would confiscate a store’s merchandise and profits if they are found handing out plastic bags. Imagine the outrage here if the City of Toronto proposed the same penalties. I’d be pretty torn, which is the whole issue. Meaningful environmental change will probably require infringements on a lot of the “freedom” we feel we deserve. It’s going to be interesting.
As the sun slowly sets, the masses in the crowd fidget in their mile-long queues, eager to enter the pavilion for the season’s spectacle. It is the winter festival in the great cultural centres of the world, and the celebrations of the past summer are a distant memory for most. Those in attendance keenly pay their dues, and shuffle into the building, clutching their colour-coded tickets in anticipation of the coming event.
The wads of bills pile up in the tills. Runners sprint to and fro, shuttling sacks of cash. Some of the millions will be tithed to fill the coffers of the designers and organizers, while the rest will become a part of the evening’s masterpiece. A number of particularly enthusiastic attendants have brought exotic foreign currencies this time, an expression welcomed by the event artists, for it meant new papers and inks to experiment with. The rates for this season’s donation are dear, but it would be worth it.
The attendees filter into their tiers. In the ‘white’ section at the rear, it is nearly impossible to see the art past the throng of humanity, but those at the front have paid their way – it is rumoured that this season’s wealthiest donor had provided an armoured truck filled to the bulkheads with vintage $2 bills to secure his gold ticket. As the last of the audience members settle into their spots, a hush falls across the crowd. The designers have entered the field.
Torontonians love to bemoan the inadequacies of the Toronto Transit Commission, and react with righteous incredulity every time a new $0.15 fare hike is introduced (”outrageous!”), but I wonder how many think about the fundamental reasons behind the problems. Despite new taxes, the TTC is still facing substantial budget shortfalls in the coming years, a grim prognosis in a time when growing the system is critical. The knee-jerk response is always to “trim the fat” and point out (minor) bureaucratic incompetencies as the root of all the problems. On a global scale, however, the TTC is one of the leanest in the world, especially when you consider its immense scale and limited density.
How lean? More than 70% of the TTC’s revenue comes from fares.
Compare that to NYC transit, where about 60% of the budget comes from fares, by far the highest percentage in the United States.
Or Vancouver, where it’s 36%.
Or Los Angeles, at 35%.
Or Boston, at 23%.
Or the 21% (!) for Seattle.
The problem with the TTC isn’t fat in the system. It’s our government’s failure to recognize what every world-class city seems to know implicitly - public transit is important.
It’s always interested me to think about the different contexts experienced by the great thinkers and inventors of the past. I think it’s ignorant to say that that people in the past were less intelligent than we are today - they may have known less, but they tackled the problems of their day with just as much cunning as we do today…the problems are just a bit more complex now.
Keeping that in mind, it’s so satisfying to see great ideas from the past being revived with the integration of new technology, materials, design, and engineering. One awesome example is that of sailing ships - harnessing the power of wind to get you where you need to go? Fucking brilliant! (And don’t even get me started on airships).
A German company called Beluga is using an enormous 160 sq. meter kite on a computer-controlled mast to pull a 132 m ship. (Reuters link) It’s expected to reduce fuel consumption by 20%, and even larger sails could reduce that even further to 30-50%. That represents truly immense reductions in emissions on commercial freighters, and - more importantly for owners of shipping fleets - immense cost savings.
I expect we’re going to see a lot more of this cyclical development that reinvents the past as we try to wean ourselves on fossil fuels. Humanity survived just fine without them in the past, and I expect we can learn to live much better without them in the future.
Also, please note that apparently ‘beastiality’ remains the top search term that leads to this website. We’ve certainly carved out a unique niche in the Internet.
(’mystikal’ also led here, however. How the fuck did that happen?)
