Today a friend pointed me to the documentary Earthlings which seems to be already known of everyone but me. A half-enlightening experience: while I was already aware of the issues, and I already knew some facts, the images made my understanding more vivid; an unpleasant but refreshing enhancement.

But still, something in this documentary was bothering me all the way. Now I can see it: the title.

“ Earthlings ”

And the documentary goes over animals, about how humans relate to (and use) other animals. Did they not forget something?

What about the other earthlings?

Turning vegetarian after watching such a documentary completely misses the point. All in all, any human has to learn to deal with fellow living beings. That always involves killing to survive, often in nasty ways for convenience. We should just choose how to minimize the amount of inconvenience for our community of earthlings as a whole.

Topic for this week's discussions: if you were to get a mental picture (or a perception) of each living thing that is used or killed to sustain your own life, where each being would be expressing their opinion by speaking in their own distinct voice (possibly a little squeaky), how would you deal with the situation? Imagine, for example, the opinion of that branch of parsley on the cutting board if it was expressing human-like feelings and consciousness about its fate…

Life is tough.

One day, we will wake up in the morning and see a world devoid of plants. Like the dolphins, they will have left us to our own device.

Today's conversation added to the list of concerns evolving around my mind at the moment:

• will China invade Siberia when oil becomes scarce? or Iran?
• what will be the form of the next conflict between Japan and China?
• who will end up controlling North Korea?
• why doesn't the ECB propose to invest in a deep and far-fetching solution for the American mortgage crisis? Why doesn't China propose either?
• How is the obligation to carry identity documents helping against “terrorism”?
• what will be the long term evolution of the current tendency of governments to alienate citizens into criminals and “protect” them against themselves?

Evidence shows clearly that we will not be able to eat fish in the future unless strong global policing action is taken now. We know already that future generations will never enjoy cod as a popular and usual dish. Still, even so-called “developed” countries make irrational political moves about fishing and short-sightedness combined with global disinterest runs rampant.

Overfishing is a canonical example of a tragedy of the commons. In other words, everyone is responsible, and nobody cares.

A topic I was debating the other day with a new colleague was: why should we care? Another I was debating longer ago with an older friend was: should we take responsibility for other people's actions and reduce our demand for fish to induce a decrease in production?

The conclusion was straightforward: any purely rational approach based on a fundamentally individualistic philosophy (where everyone should be only responsible for their own actions) dictates unsustainable behaviors. This is a logical conclusion, leaving choices to be made:

• not be rational: let God dictate what is “good for you,” possibly reducing your environmental footprint. Possibly effective, but unpredictable.
• empathize with fellow humans worldwide and time-wide (of the future), then take responsibility for other people's actions and act. Likely effective, but equally unlikely to happen within current morals and value systems.
• not do anything.

Choose your future.

In a blog entry a professional photographer from Colorado wonders how same-sex weddings impact his business. The author crams his foot in his mouth very effectively:

Put aside for a moment your own values. Would it hurt or help your business to photograph same-sex commitment ceremonies or weddings?

Regardless of the issue at hand, the storm of comments that followed on MeFi attracted my attention by the sheer number of fallacies and ill-chosen analogies:

• “Should a KKK photographer refuse or accept to photograph black commitment ceremonies or weddings?”
• “Should a black photographer refuse or accept to photograph KKK commitment ceremonies or weddings?”
• “Should a vegetarian photographer have the right to refuse to photograph a wedding reception where fois gras is served?”

Some comments sent me giggling, but I admit my patience was not enough to read past this insightful thought: “Should they have to choose between pissing off God and pissing off a potential client?”

Ethics and businesses? With religion in the middle? Makes me giggle. and sad.

One of my favorites pastimes when procrastinating: looking up unusual ways to travel by train. Using the journey planner with the largest database that I know of, I set myself imaginary goals and I search:

• the longest journey that can be achieved within a day: Marseille-Malmö
• the longest journey in a single night train: Hamburg-Villach, Paris-Barcelona, Amsterdam-Milano
• the longest journey that can be achieved at high speed within a day: Marseille-Berlin via Brussels and Köln
• the longest journey that can be achieved without changing trains: Amsterdam-Moscow
• the longest journey with only one change: Amsterdam-Beijing via Moscow

Removed from the daily reads: Dilbert, Daily WTF, UF. Added: PhD Comics.

An interesting feature of several languages is the impact of negation on the meaning of verbs.

Technically, a negation makes true things false, and vice-versa. This is different from a change in meaning.

More specifically: many verbs reflects concepts that can be put on a scale of meaning, ranging from a meaning to its opposite going through the absence of meaning. Compare:

• to feel cold
• to not feel cold
• to feel warm

Or a single verb:

• to swallow
• to not swallow
• to regurgitate

As exemplified here, negation does not (and technically should not) imply opposition. The truth value of an action or a description (or any other kind of verb) is about whether the positive meaning of the verb is asserted, or not. From a grammar standpoint, the opposite value of the verb is not summoned by the use of negation.

That said, several verbs are often assumed to have their meaning changed to their opposite when negated. Or, rather, the absence of another verb with the opposite meaning invites the use of negation to express that opposite meaning. This is unfortunate, as such uses of negation introduce ambiguity about what is the intended meaning of the resulting construct. Compare:

• to like: I like potatoes
• to not like: I do not like potatoes

The latter case is often understood (and intended to be understood) as a rejection, whereas technically it should merely mean absence of interest. Two scales of understanding are thus possible:

• to like - to not like (lack of approval) - to dislike (aversion, antipathy)

or

• to like - ??? (lack of approval) - to not like / to dislike (aversion, antipathy)

Incidentally, "dislike" is often understood to have two possible meanings, reflecting this ambiguity from the other side of the scale; as per Onelook

dislike

a feeling of aversion or antipathy

dislike

an inclination to withhold approval from some person or group

In the case of like / dislike, a lengthy and wordy construct is sometimes used to clarify the position on the scale: “I do not like potatoes, but I don't dislike them either,” or “I do not like potatoes, I mean, I would rather not have them.”

Now, as clear as this idea of a scale of meaning is — from an asserted meaning to its opposite, going through its negated truth value — there are some verbs where the distinction is much less clear. For a few examples, most language users (in several languages, not only English) often do not distinguish negation and opposites. To illustrate the point, take the verb "want" as a case study:

• “I want to love you”
• “I do not want to love you”

In the latter sentence, what is the intended meaning? Technically, the negation changes the truth value, and should only remove the "intention" carried by the verb. However, in this archetypical example the most common use is to carry the opposite meaning: “I want to not love you.”

On the same line of thought, which of the following are intended to carry opposites, and which are merely negated?

• I do not like chocolate
• I do not like my mother
• I am not happy
• I am not unhappy

(Language is tricky. Semantics are even worse.)

Any suggestion for additional "tricky negations" is welcome!

But before we go there, a reminder:

stupid, adj

lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity

Now, enjoy:

if homosexuality is such a sin, why did god make them that way? believe it or not, sexual orientation is not just a matter of preference, it is biologically proved to be a genetic mutation, and actually, the heterosexual gene is the mutated gene.

(reference not given to protect the anonymity of the idiot)

And another reminder:

idiot, noun

a person of subnormal intelligence

In case someone misses the point: past my opinion that mixing "god" and "genetic mutation" in the same train of thought borders on intellectual incorrectness, I find it interesting to notice here that god would have created homosexual beings initially (with their homosexual genes), intending genetic evolution to take care of introducing heterosexuality later — although homosexuality would prevent reproduction in the first place, and therefore genetic evolution.

Bleh.

You scored 36% I to E, 10% N to S, 23% F to T, and 52% J to P!
You are more introverted than extroverted. You are more intuitive than observant, you are more feeling based than thinking based, and you prefer to go with the flow rather than having a plan. Your type can best be summarized by the word "Healer", which belongs to the larger group of idealists. You have a capacity for caring that is deeper than most. You strive for unity, are fascinated by the battles between good and evil, and can be something of an idealist. Only 1% of the population shares your type.
As a romantic partner, you are usually supportive and nuturing, however, you have a high need for individuality. Harmony is extremely important to you as you are very affected by conflict and tension, which also makes you resist confronting your partner directly about problems. When you get angry, you usually blame yourself, rather than your partner. You can also be stubborn and unyielding when you feel you are being criticized or mistreated. You feel the most appreciated when your partner listens to you carefully. You need to be understood. You need to hear your partner express their feelings, the more often, the better.

(from okcupid)

Here is an exercise for the linguistically-inclined — try to find in your native language a single word that carries the following meanings:

• menen: to give one's opinion about something (ik meen dat dit waar is = I give my opinion that this is true)
• opvallen: to make oneself easily noticeable (deze student valt niet op = this student does not make himself easily noticeable)

The broader topic being: what does it mean for you when you cannot find a simple construct in your native language for something that has a basic lexeme (word) as semantic root in another language?

1. surprise, curiousity: “oh, you can speak Dutch? How nice!” Hidden meaning: it's surprising; unusual for foreigners to be interested in our language; but I really can't understand a word of what you're saying.
2. condescension: replying in English. Hidden meaning: ok, you've shown you can make yourself understood, now stop annoying us with your broken grammar and unusual vocabulary, let's switch back to English please!
3. tolerance: “ik vind je franse accent écht mooi!” Hidden meaning: we can communicate well, but remember that you're still a foreigner.

What's next?

A thought emerged from the conjunction of several pieces:

1. reading a study about our expanding digital universe (via UF),
2. considering our daily amount of spam e-mail received and processed by spam filters,
3. decaying a mixture of thoughts about memes, urban legends, and so-called not-for-kinds pranks ,

and the thought was: given the multitude of offers for penis enlargement pills, there must be at least some offers that fool men into absorbing chemicals with unexpected or humorous side-effects, on top of taking their money without any measurable return on investment — and because they are buried in an ever-growing pile of crap, nobody notices.

And so I searched. I looked at the web sites, selecting those that actually advertise the list of chemicals they use, focusing on those that do not also clarify the role of each chemical. I came short of finding anything worth of a laugh, but the following offer caught my attention: "herbal pills" at $200 (for 6 months).

(I will leave the exact brand and web site address undisclosed so as to not bring them more attention than they deserve.)

When looking up its "active ingredients" on other sources we can find:

• Vitamin E : effects not well-known,
• Soya protein concentrate : variable effects effecs on male testosterone, contains a mimicry for estrogens with poorly-understood effects,
• Mucuna pruriens (a tropical legume also called "velvet bean") : increases libido in men and women, cures Parkinson's disease,
• Asteracantha longifolia (= Hygrophila auriculata according to GRIN) : used in India as a diuretics and to cure liver diseases (sometimes also as an ingredient for love potions : If a man mixes the powder of the milk hedge plant, and the Kantaka plant with the excrement of a monkey and the powdered root of the lanjalika plant, and throws this mixture on a woman, she will not love anybody else afterwards ),
• Pueraria tuberosa (a vine also called Kudzu) : reduces both hangovers and alcohol cravings, cures migraine, enjoyed by livestock as forage,
• Withania somnifera : used as aphrodisiacs, diuretics and for treating memory loss, also used as a sedative,
• Tribulus terrestris (also known as "goathead") : used to boost sex drive through mild increases in testosterone levels,
• Albizia Lebbeck (a tree also called "siris") : used as an astringent, to treat boils, cough, to treat the eye, flu, gingivitis, lung problems, pectoral problems, also used as a tonic, to treat abdominal tumors; the bark is used medicinally to treat inflammation and the tree has known psychoactive effects,
• seeds of Argyrerin speciosa (= "Argyrerin nervosa", also known as Hawaiian baby woodrose ) : known psychoactive effects
• Valeriana wallichii (a sub-species of Valeriana) : shares effects with valeriana officinalis as a sedative, can also be used as antispasmodic and tranquilliser (some other usage information is also available).

A long story made short? We can see here psychoactive pills that increase testosterone and libido while decreasing anxiety, and possibly act as sedatives… and that are probably addictive: the ideal love pill for women (and possibly men) who want to transform their male partner in an amenable sex toy.

(warning: humor follows)

Conclusion 1: a group of women fed up with the male focus on the size of the penis created a business profitable to them, profitable to women in general, and that would give them a good laugh about how credulous their customers are.

Conclusion 2: under the cover of a fishy pseudo-pharmaceutical industry that uses a canonical male anxiety to drive its business, the whole "enlargement pill enterprise" may be an initiative of the Global Female Conspiracy to drive the male population under their control.

YMMV, but for sure there is no enlargement.

As per King Jame's Bible:

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

(note: “ass” in this context means “donkey”)

Of volgens de Statenvertaling:

Gij zult niet begeren uws naasten huis; gij zult niet begeren uws naasten vrouw, noch zijn dienstknecht, noch zijn dienstmaagd, noch zijn os, noch zijn ezel, noch iets, dat uws naasten is.

Take note: this says nothing about your neighbor's husband, which technically does not “belong” to her/him either.

I shall thus covet my neighbor's husband or boyfriend without shame. Happy bible!

... as an annotation in issue #1845 of Irregular WebComic!.

As a fan of Hofstadter I recognize that this explanation work is truly a mastery of pedagogy. It introduces Gödel's theorem and its impact smoothly and clearly, making it understandable to anyone with a basic understanding of science.

Instead of watching Discovery Channel, read the Irregular WebComic!

In 1793, as it just overtook power in France, the new government decided to open the tombs of the French kings in Saint-Denis and throw a thousand years of history into a pit as a celebration of their victory.

In 2001, the Taliban destroyed the two gigantic Buddhas of Bamyan, erasing 1400 years of historical significance with a few kilograms of plastic.

Now I wonder; why putting so much effort in erasing their own past, if their position in their present time was accepted, justifiable and welcome?

• fact: an Italian word spelled “ciao” is used in many latin-based languages in Europe with a similar meaning. It is used as an interjection when people part, or as a sign of surprise.
• fact: in several European languages other than Italian, this word is actually used in writing by speakers, and spelled differently than in Italian — often localized to make the spelling match the pronunciation rules of the language.
• Linguistically, the fact that people decide to change the spelling of a foreign word, despite widely distributed knowledge of its original spelling, can be interpreted as a takeover: the word is transformed so that it "belongs" more to the local language, so that it "looks" less foreign than it actually is. This effectively hides its origin: for instance, while “ciao” can morphologically be recognized as Italian, the French version “tchô” cannot.
• Incidentally, one effect of this takeover by several languages in Europe is the multiplication of the number of different words used to express the same cognate (basic meaning).
• fact: this word is not part of the dictionaries for the languages where it is used (other than Italian), or its official spelling is the Italian spelling.

Hence some interesting questions:

• do you recognize the word “ciao” when you see it written using this Italian spelling?
• how many different spellings do you know for it?
• which spelling would you teach to (say) a child who learns the word for the first time? Why?

Do you think these questions are important? Why?

Hopefully, I recovered quickly, with the good advice of the doctor who took care of me and the help of the medicine I had to buy after my visit.

Now, the interesting part is that the health center didn't ask me to pay anything when I left them, although I did state clearly that I was not living in the USA and that I didn't have insurance with them. The person in charge of taking my address apparently was not aware that they may need a special process to deal with me if they wanted anything from me. I knew when I left the place that something was not being taken care of with the due amount of exceptionality.

Arjan Ederveen states very well my feelings at that time:

Ik voelde wel dat er iets was, maar wat dat dan was, dat was me niet duidelijk. Wel dat er iets was, maar wat dat was? Dat wist ik niet.

Well, I eventually realized. I never received a bill, and neither did my health insurance. I basically walked away from the USA with a negative balance at a health center, and they didn't care — or they didn't know how to deal with it — and I couldn't care less.

Because I'm a good boy and I was raised to be honest, I called the health center today, to ask if I owed them anything. They redirected me to their billing services, where I could speak with a very sweet person who thrived to help me. Unfortunately, something was amiss:

— (me) I'm calling from the Netherlands, I've been to one of your health centers in Wisconsin, and I never received a bill for the services I received. Do I owe you anything?

— (her) thanks for your request, sir. Are you calling to request your balance?

— no, I'm calling because I think I owe you something and I'd like you to tell me how you want me to pay you.

— oh, ok. May I ask you your last name, first name, date of birth, street name and telephone number, please?

— sure, here they are [ ... ].

— thank you sir. Your balance is 159.60. Is this right?

— I have no idea. When I left the health center, they told me I would receive the bill by mail but I didn't. My insurance company is going to take care of it, so I honestly don't care too much. However, I'd like to receive the bill.

(rumbling sounds)

— oh, indeed, it looks like we don't have a reference for your insurance. Would you mind reminding me what is the name of your insurance company?

— well, I'm not sure it's going very useful to you, but it's called CZ ...

— let me see.

(rumbling sounds)

— well...

— as I said, it's a local company and you probably don't have them in your records. Actually, I contacted them and they think it's best that you send me the bill, then I pay you directly, then I claim the amount to them. That's the reason why I'm calling today.

— oh, I see.

(rumbling sounds)

— ok, may I ask you your address again?

— sure. As it's a bit complicated, let me spell it for you. First, the street name is as follows - (spelling) - then you put the street number, which is ..., then the postcode is ..., then the city is Rotterdam. In the Netherlands.

— what is your state?

— well, there are no states in the Netherlands. It's a country.

— oh, I see.

(rumbling sounds)

— ok sir. Thank you sir. Can you confirm, I put this long name, then the number, then the zip code which you called a postcode, then this city name and then the Netherlands?

— yes, that is correct.

— N-E-T-H-E-N-A-N-D ... I'm sorry, how do you spell it again?

— N-E-T-H-E-R-L-A-N-D-S. It's a country.

— oh, right. Thank you. I will have this in the mail shortly for you. Is there anything else I can do for you?

...

Well, at this point I am just hoping that she got the zip code right, and that she will put enough stamps for the mail to get outside of the USA borders. The mere thought of calling them again is frightening me.

Not knowing how to organize my thoughts on the topic, I called for De Bono's Six Thinking Hats :

White hat (objective)

Public transportation stops at 20:00 on Dec 24th and 31th.

NS and other OV-companies say that the demand is too low to create a night service on these days.

People use more cars on those nights than usual. Many accidents are caused by people driving after a party.

Red hat (intuition)

Would the service exist, many people would use it. (supply would drive demand)

Some employees are probably willing to choose to work on these days by preference (no other plans, needing the money, etc). These could support a night service.

Black hat (critical)

Many accidents are caused by people driving after a party.

The cost of having more medical staff at hospitals than usual (and more police staff) outbalances the savings of not providing public transportation.

OV-companies should promote public transportation (due to environment concerns, and to reduce traffic congestions), by providing extensive service, including those nights.

Yellow hat (positive)

The current system allows OV staff to join their family or friends for the evening.

It encourages people to stay close to their home and bond with their neighborhood.

Green hat (creative)

People spending the night far from their place could make arrangements (hotel) to stay there until the morning. For that purpose some hotels could offer discounts.

Like what happens in some bars, the OV-companies could call for volunteers (with pay) within their staff to run a night service on those days, at lower frequency than usual.

Passengers could be made aware that the staff is making "extra effort" on those events and possibly contribute to making the experience more agreeable for everyone (e.g.: paying extra fee for tickets, with extra used to offer presents to the employees)

Blue hat (meta)

(empty)

Using Maslow's hierarchy of needs, evaluate how you were happy in 2007 and what you're up to for 2008:

1. Have you been healthy in 2007? Are there major illnesses preparing for 2008?
2. Have you had sex in 2007? How do you plan to have sex in 2008?
3. Have you had a home in 2007? How do you plan to have one in 2008?
4. Did you feel safe, protected against crime in 2007? How do you plan to feel safe in 2008?
5. Did you have a safety net against accidents or illness in 2007? How do you plan to have one in 2008?
6. Did you have a steady source of income, or otherwise a resourceful environment in 2007? How do you plan to have that in 2008?
7. Did you have close friends in 2007? How do you plan to have/keep close friends in 2008?
8. Did you have close emotional or intimate partners in 2007? How do you plan to have/keep partners in 2008?
9. Did you have a supportive and communicative family in 2007? How do you plan to have one in 2008?
10. did you respect yourself and other people in 2007? How do you plan for respect in 2008?
11. are you proud of yourself and what you did in 2007? How do you plan to be proud in 2008?

How to use this quiz for 2007: answer the questions in order. Then take the number of the first question where you answered no. That is your happiness score out of 10. Now, try to improve this score in 2008.

If you answered yes to all the questions, then you've been happy already! Keep going for 2008.

Only inertia and prejudice, not economics nor the lack of good educational ideas, stand in the way of providing every child in the world with the kind of experience of which we have tried to give you some glimpse.

Seymour Papert (also on wikipedia) & Cynthia Solomon, Twenty things to do with a computer, MIT A.I. memo nr 248, June 1971