Tag Archives: Personal

… to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield?

Posted on by

Decided I was going to spend a quiet evening in, am still knackered from my exertions over the holidays and was sitting here leafing through a book of poems, Tennyson’s Selected Poems. For me Tennyson has often been a source of inspiration, perhaps its something to do with the exquisiteness of the atmosphere he creates … his works invoke an illusion of loveliness … and its altogether too easy to loose yourself amongst those words. It doesn’t seem to matter how often I read them, the words never seem to loose their mystique, in fact I’m convinced that they seem to resonate more as I time passes … or as I get older as one of my friends suggested not too long ago.

A long time ago I committed this verse to memory, its the final stanza of Tennyson’s poem Ulysses:

Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are,–
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield

I always find this verse inspiring, it always serves to remind me that my world is what I choose to make it even though life occasionally throws me the odd curve ball. But that when it invariably does I need to remind myself and believe that the answers I’m looking for are out there but that I have to strive to find them … they wont just fall into my lap.

I guess its that struggle that we all contend with, but its only through that struggle within ourselves that we discover who we are. Or at least that’s what I believe. For me this verse has always been about hope, which can be a wonderful thing. Ironically it wasn’t too along ago I read or heard somewhere that (forgive me I’m paraphrasing here because I cant remember where) hope is the quintessential human delusion – paradoxical in that it is both the source of our greatest strength and our greatness weakness.

I find that at some level I agree with the sentiment, albeit a little reluctantly. We all have hopes, which we often translate into dreams – these dreams or aspirations drive us onwards, or indeed downwards. In attempting to realise them we sometimes choose to draw inspiration from our friends, sometimes we draw it from those we love, at other times we find solace in our own thoughts, or in the cryptical words of others written in, for example, poetry … or even prose ;-). Yet all these sources of inspiration unequivocally force us to look within ourselves and confront who we are, and what is it we think we have achieved or have not. Have our lives had meaning, have we made a difference, have we made anything?

We often decide to pursue these hopes and these dreams, believing that we’ll find what were looking for in attaining them … but when you do you come to the realisation that you have attained but one goal, but where do you go from here? What’s next? and so the journey begins again. Of course its never that clean cut is it? hell, sometimes I wish it was.

” may all your dreams but one come true”

When I was younger I couldn’t understand the significance of this saying. I mean why would you tell someone you wished that all their dreams didn’t come true. The answer is so simple but so easily lost. It’s because without dreams, and the challenges they present us with, and new goals we want to attain, what else is there left to live for, right?

But for all the strength they can give us, there’s an inherent danger, or the great weakness. That we spend all our time dreaming and hoping, and never actually doing. There’s a simple way to address this though as Paul Valery so eloquently put it …

“The best way to make dreams come true is to wake up”

… and … to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield!

"…a tragic assault upon truth and justice"

Posted on by

Back from my short travels, whilst I was going to post up about what I’ve been up to, which for the most part has been a lot of fun … I’ve elected not to for now … given that my thoughts have been overshadowed with something else … it’s taken me several days to rationalise my thoughts and I’ve edited this post in dribs and drabs whilst I was away … just trying to articulate what it is that bothers me. If it appears disjointed then I apologise in advance.

What’s been bothering me over the last few days is The Execution of Saddam of Hussein on Eid. It’s safe to say the event divided opinion amongst the group of people I was with – and it was a pretty diverse group of folks from all around Europe. Not enough to completely ruin our excursion but enough to give us all pause, and a need to debate the issue. What did suprise me was that everyone agreed the trial was a farce, but the penalty he received was probably what he deserved.

Before I go on, I guess I need to qualify anything further with some caveats: I’m in no way a supporter of Saddam, or sympathiser or trying to defend any of his actions. I couldn’t possibly describe myself as a pacifist and I’m certainly not against the death penalty … which was a truth I discovered whilst working with Amnesty International when I was younger … I started off with spirited idealism which was fine up until the point I came to believe that for some crimes death was an appropriate sentence, which unfortunately wasn’t in line with Amnesty’s views and I moved on … although I do have great respect for the work that organisation does.

So if I think he did deserve to die for his crimes, why am I bothered about it, or writing this?

My concern is with the farce that was his trial and the politically motivated execution that took place on the holiest day in the Islamic calendar. I’m hardly the most devout of Muslims … like many people I’m trying to find my faith, yet as despondent as I am even I was stunned by the insensitivity of executing him on the day that they chose to. For anyone who cant understand why that bothers me, imagine the distaste you might feel, for example, as a Christian, if Mr Bush or Blair was executed on Christmas Day for Crimes against Humanity? Put it this way I know this single event overshadowed the Eid celebrations for every Muslim I know.

Before I go on I have to thank Wikipedia, it truly is an invaluable resource when researching anything these days and I’ve certainly been using it a lot particularly in finding some of the materials I reference in this discussion.

I want to start by talking about the trial.

When Saddam was captured and it was evident that he would face trial, like many people I assumed that this monster would be tried in the International Criminal Court, he would undoubtedly be charged with Crimes against Humanity and given the unstable state of Iraq, and the fact that it is currently occupied, surely it would be in the interest of justice and truth for the trial to be neutral and held under the auspices of being fair and independent – I just couldn’t see how the national judicial system would be able to provide that. As with the Nazi’s at Nuremberg the facts of Saddam’s atrocities would thus be documented for the world to see.

As a student of history I like to believe that we can learn from the mistakes of the past. The Nuremberg Trials, whilst flawed in some ways, where formed by the Allies under Truman and Churchill’s genuine hope at the time that they were keen for justice to be done, and to be seen to be done. On September the 30th 1946 the War Crimes Tribunal at Nuremberg gave its judgement on 22 Nazi War Criminals. I believe its greatest achievement was in providing a fair trial under the most difficult of circumstances to a group of men who most people felt deserved it the least. Nuremberg uncovered the horrors of those atrocities, detailed them for the world to see, the ramifications of which still haunt us today.

I was studying the aftermath of the second world war at college, and how Nazi war criminals were brought to justice, when I first I read this, and the warning it carries:

“We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well.”

– Justice Robert Jackson at Nuremberg

Interestingly I’m not the only one … I came across this article written by Curtis Doebbler, one of the defence lawyers assigned to Saddam. Doebbler describes in no uncertain terms how the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST) handled the case. He points out what I believe the fundamental flaw behind this trial:

The trial was undertaken by a court set up and controlled by the United States, an occupying power. This violates the express provisions of international humanitarian law in the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Which is compounded by the revelation he makes that …

In addition the US has allegedly written the final decision as they wrote the closing statement for the defense after the judge forced the defense lawyers chosen by the defendants out of the courtroom.

It’s seems incomprehensible to me that a foreign power that clearly wanted him dead could write the closing statement for the defense in his trial, it also makes a mockery of President Bush’s assertion that “Saddam was executed after receiving a fair trial”. Now I don’t know if its possible that Saddam could ever have received a fair trial anywhere, but at least call it what it was, a scripted show put on for the benefit of making some impotent gesture to create the appearance of propriety. The entire proceeding was a denigration of law and should rightly outrage our sense of justice … and perhaps the reason it doesn’t is because he was a monster. But even if he was should that diminish our responsibility to the ideals we supposedly believe in? It’s hard to extol the virtues of democracy if were willing to shelve them in order to get rid of a thorn in our side.

Of everything I’ve read around these proceedings nothing captivated me as much as a short interview I saw, whilst away, on BBC News 24 with Ramsey Clark who said the following in answer to the question: “The execution itself is it any justice?”

Its a tragic assault upon truth and justice, and the consequences for the future can be dire not only to the people of Iraq and the passions it will inflame and perhaps ripple beyond, but to the idea and hope for international law. The court reeked of prejudice … before the trial started the judge said we don’t need a trial we just need a hanging.

You can view the interview here on the BBC site.

Alarmingly of all the atrocities that Saddam is known to have committed his trial was based around a single atrocity, the killing of 143 Shiites from Dujail, in retaliation for the failed assassination attempt of 8 July 1982. Why is this alarming? Well why not put him on trial for the Halabja Poison Gas Attack? It also falls under the description of a Crime against Humanity, it was an even more barbaric act than the one for which he was ostensibly executed. In answering this question you come to what I think was the truth behind his trial and the reason the US and other nations were so eager for him to be tried for the single atrocity, that would appease the overwhelmingly Shiite government, and for the court not to venture into anything else. The answer lies in how Saddam came to power and the assistance he received.

In 1958, a year after Saddam had joined the Ba’ath party, army officers led by General Abdul Karim Qassim overthrew Faisal II of Iraq. The Ba’athists opposed the new government, and in 1959, Saddam was involved in the attempted United States-backed plot to assassinate Qassim. Concerned about Qassim’s growing ties to Communists, the CIA gave assistance to the Ba’ath Party and other regime opponents. This paved the way for Saddam to eventually become the leader of Iraq and an ally of the US. For a more detailed account read this.

In 1979 Iran’s Shah was overthrown in the Islamic Revolution led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. This alarmed the west and they needed a buffer between themselves and Khomeini and his expansionist Islamic state. That’s why they armed the Iraqi dictator with amongst other things the materials with which to build … chemical weapons, I’d insert a quip here about what happened to the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction but it isn’t as though anyone gives a flying f*** if its the Americans dishing out WMD’s to their buddies 😉 … Ok im being unfair …. its important to point out that it wasn’t just the US but a number of other nations who must share the responsibility … these nations are listed here. In fact I wonder if any of the companies listed here ever faced legal proceedings or even censure for their part in equipping the regime, or ever revealed how much money they made from these transactions ( as well as who they made political contributions too at the time 😉 )

Here’s an extract from Wikipedia:

During the war, Iraq used Western supplied chemical weapons against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front and Kurdish separatists who were attempting to open up a northern front in Iraq with the help of Iran.[16]

On March 16, 1988, the Kurdish town of Halabja was attacked with a mix of mustard gas and nerve agents, killing 5,000 civilians, and maiming, disfiguring, or seriously debilitating 10,000 more. (see Halabja poison gas attack) [10]. The attack occurred in conjunction with the 1988 al-Anfal campaign designed to reassert central control of the mostly Kurdish population of areas of northern Iraq and defeat the Kurdish peshmerga rebel forces. The United States now maintains that Saddam ordered the attack to terrorize the Kurdish population in northern Iraq,[17] but Saddam’s regime claimed at the time that Iran was responsible for the attack[18] and the US supported the claim until the early 1990s.

So perhaps the real reason Saddam’s trial was so short was that a proceeding as thorough and competent as the Nuremberg trial would have revealed in detail not only the historic truth of what happened at Halabaja, but of all the other atrocities that the US, and other regional powers, colluded with him in. That might have been a bit much for our western sensibilities to palette. Not to mention demands from survivors and their relatives for reparations, compensation etc. etc. and thats exactly what would happen since one of the results of the Nuremberg Trials was drafting of The Convention on the Abolition of the Statute of Limitations on War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity in 1968, which basically meant there was no period of limitation for crimes against humanity … to further expound on this:

Article 2. If any of the crimes mentioned in article I is committed, the provisions of this Convention shall apply to representatives of the State authority and private individuals who, as principals or accomplices, participate in or who directly incite others to the commission of any of those crimes, or who conspire to commit them, irrespective of the degree of completion, and to representatives of the State authority who tolerate their commission

It’s certainly widely believed that the proliferation of weapons in this manner was aided by the CIA as well as the knowledge to build them. At some level this would have had to have been authorised directly or tacitly by individuals in government … mmm I’m beginning to understand why the United States never signed up to the International Criminal Court (from Wikipedia):

To date, 104 countries have ratified or acceded to the court, including nearly all of Europe and South America, and nearly half of all African countries.[5] A further 35 states have signed but not yet ratified the treaty,[6] which under the law of treaties obliges states to refrain from “acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty.[7] The USA and Israel have “unsigned” the Rome treaty in order to avoid these obligations.

I guess in their own way Truman and Churchill had a better understanding or belief in the ideals of law and justice than their current successors do; Nuremberg was their testament to those ideals. Whilst the Iraqi Special Tribunal will stand as a Testament to their contemporaries.

Oh well I guess it’s ok to demonise some foreign monster … just don’t do anything to remind us how we created that monster … colluded with him in committing his atrocities … oh and please don’t tell us that some of those other monsters that helped him … well they’re still out there … getting rich off it …. some of them are even running the countries we live in probably planning their next regime change.

Sarcasm aside, has his death accomplished anything. Has it given justice to his victims? Perhaps in some sense it has, although I wonder if those victims can ever truly have justice whilst the representatives of powers that colluded with him and the companies that profited from their deaths will probably never face trial for their part in these atrocities. If it had been a relative of mine killed in Halabja I wouldn’t just want Saddam swinging from the gallows but everyone else that colluded with him, how could I possible rest knowing that some of those just as responsible were still out there.

His death certainly isn’t going to end the violence in Iraq, if anything, as Ramsey Clark stated it will probably “inflame passions” further. To execute him on the day that most Sunni’s celebrated Eid in Iraq (and much of the world) will be seen by many as a deliberate affront given that Shiites celebrated Eid the following day. The subtext in this decision alone is hard to ignore, to consider that it was an innocent coincidence is beyond my ability to stomach.

A video released on the internet that was recorded by someone actually present at the execution shows how Saddam was heckled and taunted by his Shiite captors right up to the moment he was hanged, I haven’t linked to the movie itself, you can find it on Google Video if you want to see it. Far from appearing frightened or defeated he was defiant right to the end admonishing the hecklers for their lack of bravery in taunting a shackled man. He managed to retain his dignity in the moment of his death not succumbing to fear or begging for mercy … defiant to the end. He actually managed to appear more dignified than those tormenting him at his execution … and that doesn’t bode well for this supposedly democratic new government in Iraq – their neolithic incompetence in this entire affair has turned a monster into a martyr and that’s a gross travesty of justice – but I guess it’s disingenuous to lay the blame entirely at their feet … its not as though they actually govern the country or make any decisions.

I think I’ll end this discussion firstly with this statement by Louis Arbour, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

“All sections of Iraqi society, as well as the wider international community, have an interest in ensuring that a death sentence provided for in Iraqi law is only imposed following a trial and appeal process that is, and is legitimately seen as, fair, credible and impartial.

“That is especially so in a case as exceptional as this one.”

and this reflection by Richard Dicker, of the Human Rights Watch.

“The test of a government’s commitment to human rights is measured by the way it treats its worst offenders…

“It defies imagination that the Appeals Chamber could have thoroughly reviewed the 300-page judgment and the defence’s written arguments in less than three weeks’ time… The appeals process appears even more flawed than the trial…

“History will judge the deeply flawed Dujail trial and this execution harshly.”

As for Iraq’s future … I have to admit that at the moment it appears bleak. The country is in the midst of a civil war, and whilst that’s not a fact politicians in the west are willing to acknowledge one only has to look at the daily body count to appreciate the tragic reality of the situation. I cant help but feel that things are going to get a lot worse, before they get better. The flawed trial, the subsequent execution and its timing have only served to deepen the sectarian divides, not only within Iraq but across the whole of the middle east.

I cant help but wonder whether that was someone’s intention all along?

MMA : Chuck Liddell vs Tito Ortiz – Rematch

Posted on by

Ok, im seriously getting fed up with people asking me for my prediction for this fight, not because I dont have one but because it’s impossible to offer a prediction without explaining the rationale behind it. Having the same conversation over and over again is getting irritating! So it’s a good job, I brought my laptop with me 😉

Chuck Liddell is the current UFC Light Heavyweight champion. Tito Ortiz is the challenger. The first time they fought each other was back in April 2004, and Liddell TKO’d Ortiz in the second round with some brutal stand up. In the world of professional mixed martial arts theres been few rivalries that have captured the imagination of fans, fighters and pundits alike.

I suppose what makes this so interesting for us as spectators is the fact that the two men have very different styles Liddell is considered to be one of the most dangerous stand-up fighters in the world. His fights rarely go the distance, I guess one of the things that makes him so dangerous is his take down defence – very few competitors have ever been able to take him to the ground, which forces them to fight him standing up. For Liddell this fight will be his seventh defence of the title he claimed by beating the legendary Randy Couture – who for me was one of the greatest champions ever!

Tito Ortiz enters the fights on the back of an impressive winning streak; included amongst this list are his two victories against Ken Shamrock which finally ended their longstanding feud. Ortiz is an excellent wrestler who practically reinvented the technique we now refer to as Ground-n-Pound. On the ground, inside his opponents guard, there is no-one more vicious – I think he practically invented the short-elbow.

This is really the briefest of possible introductions to these two fighters, in fact I doubt that I’ve done them any justice. However the intro serves to illustrate the differences in the styles.

OK so here’s my prediction If the fighters remain on their feet I dont have any doubt that Liddell will win this. I think Ortiz is a competent striker but I just dont think he can stand up to the punches and kicks that Liddell will throw. With Liddell it isnt just the freakish power he has behind his blows, its the incredible speed and accuracy with which he can deliver them that makes him so exciting to watch. Liddell’s take-down defence is exceptional, which will make it all the more difficult for Tito. On the other hand Tito is a fantastic wrestler and I think he will have learnt from their first encounter. I hope he tries to avoid the stand up and focuses on getting Liddell in the clinch and taking him down to the ground – which I think Tito is capable of doing.

If I have to pick a winner it would be Liddell. I think he’s got too many advantages going for him in this one

Whatever the result theres a load of us here in Europe who’ll be watching this fight, and who knows we might be seeing a new champion crowned. I’ll write up a post-fight summary.

WSVG Quake 4 Grand Finals : Toxic vs Fatal1ty

Posted on by

I’ve known the results of the World Series of Video Games for a couple of weeks, however it was only in the last 24 hours that TSN ( Team Sportscast Network ) has made the coverage of the individual battles available.

My pre-tournament prediction was that Toxic would win, the Swede is without a doubt the best deathmatch player in the world at the moment. Fatal1ty though is the most successful professional gamer ever! He’s won more prize money from winning gaming tournaments than anyone, period!

You can watch the grand final between these two incredible players here.

Toxic does win in the end but it was much closer than I expected it to be. The skill these two guys have is amazing to watch. Enjoy!

When enough is enough?

Posted on by

Domestic violence is a societal cancer thats getting out of control. You only have to read the statistics and lessons learned compiled by nineteen police forces to get a feeling for how bad its getting here in the UK alone. Whatever form it takes, domestic violence is rarely a one-off incident, generally its a pattern of abusive and controlling behaviour through which the abuser seeks power over their victim.

  • Domestic violence accounts for approximately 15% of violent crime nationally, accounting for 31% of all violence against women and 5% of all violence against men.
  • On average, two women a week are killed by a current or former male partner.
  • One in four women will be a victim of DV in their lifetime and women experience a greater risk of repeat victimisation and serious injury.
  • Eighty-nine per cent of those suffering four or more incidents of DV are women.
  • One incident of DV is reported to the police every minute

Scary huh? A couple of days ago a friend asked me to accompany her to a hospital. My friend, Claire, is a self defence instructor and shes been doing it for a long time. The individual we visited, who im going to refer to as ‘M’, is a student in her class. I know M, we sparred together, I’ve helped with her training. M suffered a terrible ordeal a few years ago, and like many women she went through counselling to come to terms with what had happened to her. Anyway she decided she wanted to learn to take care of herself. She found an environement in which she felt safe and in eighteen or so months had made great progress. She’s a laugh to be around! I’d stopped thinking of her as a victim a long time ago.

Three or so nights ago she got into a heated argument with her new partner, and he assaulted her. I didnt enjoy that visit to the hospital, in fact I didnt enter the room, seeing her through the glass window was enough to piss me off in ways I really didnt want to think about. Claire made subsequent visits to see M, over the last few days but I chickened out of going. Yesterday morning though Claire convinced me it would be good for M to see someone other than her, and M kind of guessed I was feeling a little awkward about the whole thing. Anyway I turned up and sat down at her bedside.

What do you say? Hey, how you doing?, as if I can’t see. Then M did something I wasnt expecting at all. She smacked me across the tip of my nose with her index finger. It’s something I’ve done to her during training when I’m trying to make a point, or I think her concentration is wavering … and she needs to focus. She just said “Dont you dare feel sorry for me. You think I look bad, you should see what that bastard looks like” … I laughed, we all did. I’ve never felt so proud of anyone. She was hurt, you just have to look at the bruises to know that, but here she was laughing and joking about it. She went on to say “he beat me up, but he didnt break me – no-one’s gonna do that Nad“. We chatted for a while, laughed, joked … I didn’t feel awkward anymore.

She told me what had happened, I wont go into the details suffice to say that its a tragedy that women who have suffered abuse, try to move on with their lives only to end up being abused in another relationship. It stems from the men’s need to exert some kind of control over the women, things like telling them who their allowed to be friends with, what they’re allowed to do and when etc. This was the only time this guy had assaulted her. Once is, one time too many. M stood up to him, she didnt back down, or simply let him hurt her. She tried to defend herself and did an ok job of it. She didnt hurt him as much as he hurt her, shes 5′ 2″ and he’s 5’11”, but thats not the point. Sometimes it isnt important whether you win or loose its that your willing to make a stand, your not prepared to give in to fear and capitulate, or let someone do whatever they want to to you. When your backs up against a wall, you simply cant afford to.

I’m pretty sure what im advocating isnt consistent with what many councellors and clinical psychiatrists would advocate. I hate though that many of the women in M’s position end up being pumped full of pills and clinical drugs as a way to help them deal with whats happened to them. Fundementally though were never going to find the answers to our problems in the bottom of bottle of anti depressants, or even in the bottom of a bottle booze. What it does is numb your mind … trust me I’ve been there.

To get over something like that you need to regain your sense of self worth, you need to feel empowered, to feel like your in control of your life, and that the shadow of fear isnt cast over every facet of your being. It’s hard to deal with that … its hard to conquer fear, I don’t think anyone truly does, you just learn to do what you need to in spite of it.

I’ve spent christmas day in some strange places in my life, this christmas im gonna spending part of it visiting M with some of our gang, we all know she’s ok and were all proud of her, and how’s shes dealt with this. As for the guy that put her there … well I hope he enjoys the view from his cell, from what I hear he’s going to spending a long time in there.

snipit.org – intelligent bookmark management and information sharing

Posted on by

Alan Dix, has been running his snipit service for a while now. It’s an intelligent bookmarking service that is a cross between web bookmarks and a web notepad. You can use it to snip web pages, or selected content on a web page ( text, images etc. ), you can then share this information with other users. Snipit also examines each snip and tries to work out what kind of thing it is. If it recognises the snip it suggests things you may want to know about or do to the snip.

You can register for a free account at www.snipit.org

the human brain and the web ( how similar are they? )

Posted on by

Had an awesome evening with a wonderful friend the other day. Amongst all the other things we chatted about, Alan tried to explain to me how he felt the human brain and the web were very similar. We were having this discussion at La Tasca, a spanish tapas bar in Star City. I’m not going suggest that I fully understood what Alan was saying at the time, it was getting very late and one of the waitresses was distracting me 😉 ( Hey Alan, thats my excuse and im sticking to it ).

Anyway, knowing Alan as well as I do. I figured he must have published his little theory at some point, and naturally he has and you can read all about it here. We kind of got onto this discussion because during the course of our ramblings that evening I’d mentioned Strong AI, and de Garis’ work on the now defunct (presumably?) CAM Brain building project.

Alan picked up on this and said “Did I ever tell you about my theory of … “. I think the ability to share ideas and teach others in an off hand, easy, and almost anecdotal manner is something that seperates great teachers from good teachers. If I had sum Alan up I’d have to say that he’s not only a wonderful friend, an incredible mentor, but one of the finest academics and professors I have ever had the privilege to learn from.

Anyway getting back on track …. Alan’s theory revolves around his postulation that the entire internet as we currently know it has roughly the same computational power / capacity as a single human brain. So what does this mean? Well we spent a while debating whether this meant that mimicking biological processes artificially could result in the same kind of emergent consciousness human beings have. It’s safe to say we were dubious about this, and although I’d love to offer my own words on why … Alan summed it up wonderfully in his article …

Philosophers of mind and identity have long debated whether our sense of mind, personhood or consciouness are intrinsic to our biological nature or whether a computer system emulating the brain would have the same sense of consciouness as an emergent property of its complexity … we are nearing the point when this may become an empirically testable issue!

Of course, this does not mean that the web or a new super computer in some way is like or equal to the human mind. What it does mean is that the specialness of the human brain is not because of simple capacity or speed. If size were all that matters in cognition, we have already been beaten by our own creations. Really the specialness of our minds is in their organisation and the things that make us human beyond simple information: compassion, pain, heroism, joy – we are indeed fearfully and wonderfully made.

ea_spouse : Follow Up

Posted on by

I received an email from Erin Hoffman ( aka ea_spouse ) who filled me in on what has happened since she originally penned the article that I discussed a few blog posts ago. I’ve quoted a bit of the email below:

Your blog post was very thoughtful, thank you very much for sharing that as well. As we move forward it is critical that positive work environments get a spotlight shown on them as much as the negative ones, so your account of your workplace is very important in displaying to the rest of the world that breaking the backs of developers isn’t necessary for business or product delivery.

I think Erin is right in that although there are many really negative stories out there, there are also positive ones and its important for people to also present those as examples of how you can run a software business without breaking the backs of the developers charged with building products and services

Erin made public her identity last April, and since then has worked with others to set-up a quality of life focused organisation called http://www.gamewatch.org. I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for Erin and what she has accomplished so everyone, please, if you have a moment do take the time to visit the site and their forums at http://www.gamewatch.org/phpBB2/

"… Why cant a woman be more like a man?"

Posted on by

I can’t figure out women! What I did discover late this evening is that any proficiency in the martial arts affords one the unique ability to be able to put both ones feet in ones mouth at the same time! Anyway I’ve decided to come to grips with my inability to grasp how their minds work by trying to compare them to something familiar yet equally frustrating to deal with … and I didn’t have to look far … Pointers! Interestingly if replace the word pointer for woman … it all starts to make sense!

I suppose watching My Fair Lady when I got home didnt help … but I did laugh my head off when it got to this song …

HIGGINS
What in all of heaven could’ve promted her to go,
After such a triumph as the ball?
What could’ve depressed her;
What could’ve possessed her?
I cannot understand the wretch at all.
Women are irrational, that’s all there is to that!
There heads are full of cotton, hay, and rags!
They’re nothing but exasperating, irritating,
vacillating, calculating, agitating,
Maddening and infuriating hags!
[To Pickering]
Pickering, why can’t a woman be more like a man?
PICKERING
Hmm?
HIGGINS
Yes…
Why can’t a woman be more like a man?
Men are so honest, so thoroughly square;
Eternally noble, historic’ly fair;
Who, when you win, will always give your back a pat.
Well, why can’t a woman be like that?
Why does ev’ryone do what the others do?
Can’t a woman learn to use her head?
Why do they do ev’rything their mothers do?
Why don’t they grow up- well, like their father instead?
Why can’t a woman take after a man?
Men are so pleasant, so easy to please;
Whenever you are with them, you’re always at ease.
Would you be slighted if I didn’t speak for hours?
PICKERING
Of course not!
HIGGINS
Would you be livid if I had a drink or two?
PICKERING
Nonsense.
HIGGINS
Would you be wounded if I never sent you flowers?
PICKERING
Never.
HIGGINS
Well, why can’t a woman be like you?
One man in a million may shout a bit.
Now and then there’s one with slight defects;
One, perhaps, whose truthfulness you doubt a bit.
But by and large we are a marvelous sex!
Why can’t a woman take after like a man?
Cause men are so friendly, good natured and kind.
A better companion you never will find.
If I were hours late for dinner, would you bellow?
PICKERING
Of course not!
HIGGINS
If I forgot your silly birthday, would you fuss?
PICKERING
Nonsense.
HIGGINS
Would you complain if I took out another fellow?
PICKERING
Never.
HIGGINS
Well, why can’t a woman be like us?
[To Mrs. Pearce]
Mrs. Pearce, you’re a woman…
Why can’t a woman be more like a man?
Men are so decent, such regular chaps.
Ready to help you through any mishaps.
Ready to buck you up whenever you are glum.
Why can’t a woman be a chum?
Why is thinking something women never do?
Why is logic never even tried?
Straight’ning up their hair is all they ever do.
Why don’t they straighten up the mess that’s inside?
Why can’t a woman behave like a man?
If I was a woman who’d been to a ball,
Been hailed as a princess by one and by all;
Would I start weeping like a bathtub overflowing?
And carry on as if my home were in a tree?
Would I run off and never tell me where I’m going?
Why can’t a woman be like me?

… ok ok I’m sorry … all this vitriol aside … I hope I figure them out one day! It just ain’t today …