Spam skribita en Esperanto!

Now I've seen everything: I just got spam written in what I believe is Esperanto. Here's the text of the message:

Gxuste novaj manioj, treege sukcese kaj efektive aldonigxinte al liaj malnovaj krimaj inklinoj, igis lin fari tiun krimon.

Here's a translation from an Esperanto to English translation site:

Just new manioj, extremely succeedally and in fact having finished being addinging to his un-new criminal inclinations, caused him to do that crime

Okay. Now I know.

Well, that was no fun

I was watching the Raptors game tonight, and yes, that was a royal whupping. But I'm wondering: how did New Jersey lose so many games this year?

During the regular season, the Raptors employed a simple approach to success:

• Give the ball to Chris Bosh.
• Wait for the opponents to double-team him. (If they don't double-team him, he drives to the basket and scores.)
• Kick the ball out to the perimeter.
• Move it around to the open man, who then scores.

New Jersey seem to have found a way to defend this. They use their point guard to serve as the second defender on Bosh, and keep everybody else guarded. Bosh then has no alternative but to pass the ball back to Ford or Calderon. Because Bargnani is still getting up to speed - and is still learning the game - the Raptors have nobody else who can beat a defender one-on-one. So they have no scoring options available except to settle for long jumpers from their point guard.

On offense, Vince Carter has suddenly started trying his hardest. When he is on his game, he is impossible to stop one-on-one. Carter has been very effective from behind the 3-point line; if the defender moves out to prevent this, Carter then blows past him and scores. And if the Raptors double-team Carter, the Nets have been good at finding the open man. And if the Raptors rotate their defense well enough to cover everybody, they usually leave Kidd with enough room to sink 3-pointers. How can you defend all of that?


On a totally unrelated subject: the other day, I saw a woman wearing a T-shirt with the following message: I gained 20 pounds in 3 months. Ask me how.

Sunshine is good for you

I've always enjoyed being outdoors in the spring and summer. There's something about the bright sunshine that just makes me happier. Every year, I feel better in April and May, and worse in September through November. But I've always wondered: am I putting myself at risk by being outdoors so much?

According to an article in today's Globe and Mail, I've been doing it right all along: being outdoors in the summer sun is, apparently, a very effective way to fend off all kinds of cancers. It's effective because sunshine causes the body to generate vitamin D - and, if this article is to be believed, regular doses of this vitamin have more of an effect on reducing cancer incidence than stopping smoking does.

The article also points out that a shortage of vitamin D leads to an increase in multiple sclerosis, juvenile diabetes, influenza, osteoporosis and bone fractures among the elderly.

For years, Canadian health officials have recommended staying out of the sun to minimize the risk of skin cancer. But, if these studies are to be believed, this is a poor tradeoff: skin cancers are usually easily treatable and are virtually never fatal (which I know from personal experience), while cancers whose occurrence can be reduced by vitamin D are much more deadly.

No kidding

According to the Globe, support for the Conservatives is slipping. According to a poll conducted by the Strategic Counsel, the Tories are at 36 percent, which is roughly their level of support in the last election. The Liberals are at 30 percent, the NDP at 13, and the Greens are now up all the way to 12.

Allan Gregg, the head of the Strategic Counsel, said this about the Tories: "They tend to get good solid marks on management issues and economic questions, but when you get into the social or ideological issues, they find themselves offside with mainstream Canada." Yup.

Joe Clark? Never heard of him.

Saw this in an email I got from The Career Digest, a career-related newsletter:

Fears of looking too young or too old are common among workers on both ends of the age spectrum. To help counteract the prejudices of hiring managers, co-workers and bosses, career counselors suggest that you highlight skills rather than age. Steps could include excising your graduation date from your resume, dressing differently, or taking care not to make references to world events that betray your age.

Why aren't they?

Today's Globe and Mail featured an article calling for the resignation of Canada's Defense Minister, Gordon O'Connor, over allegations that Canadian prisoners in Afghanistan that are handed over to Afghan authorities are subsequently tortured.

One thing I noticed when reading the article: the detainee transfer agreements signed by Britain and the Netherlands give these countries permission to check on the welfare of the prisoners they have transferred. The agreement signed by Canada apparently does not. And I'm wondering: why not? Why aren't the Canadians allowed?

The article goes on to point out that international law makes it illegal to facilitate torture in any way - which is something that the United States government might need to remember, too.

Sunshine and the environment

Yesterday was the first real day of spring, after about 117 consecutive cloudy days. The sunshine looks different during the spring and summer months: the light is brighter, and all the colours are sharper. It's like living inside an Edward Hopper painting.

And the weekend is supposed to be sunny and warmer, with highs of 21C, 22C and 23C. I guess we're bypassing April completely this year: after two months of February, we're going straight into June.


On the national political scene, the latest fuss is over Environment Minister John Baird's claim that Bill C-288, which forces compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, would cause significant damage to the economy. According to the Globe and Mail, Baird stated that 275,000 Canadians would lose their jobs, gas prices would jump 60 percent, and natural gas prices would double.

However, Baird apparently has not provided any figures to support his claims, and his report has not factored in the positive benefits of employing green technology (which could save money and create new jobs).

I think it's obvious that compliance with Kyoto would cost money in the short term. And the benefits of green technologies would take some time to kick in. This probably does mean that the economy would be adversely affected. But, if the environmentalists are right, something has to be done now, or the effects of climate change would cause greater harm to the economy later. (What if, for example, coastal cities all over the world are flooded by rising ocean levels?)

This all reminds me of another quotation from Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. He once suggested that the following message should be carved into the Grand Canyon, as a message to civilizations from other planets: "We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard ... and too damn cheap."

In case you're wondering...

If you're wondering why the sun hasn't been seen in these parts lately, it's because (as I've mentioned before) I'm between contracts right now, and am wanting to enjoy a few sunny days before looking for a new position. Naturally, there haven't been any sunny days. I'm convinced that the universe is trying to teach me a lesson.

Of course, I'm not going to give in this easily. I want to enjoy some good weather before being forced to sit inside an office building while it's sunny and warm out - especially since I'll probably have to work through the summer this year. The universe seems to have other ideas.

We'll see who blinks first.

More from Vonnegut

This morning, I ran across an article from the Guardian books page discussing Kurt Vonnegut Jr. and his death. It mentioned another of Vonnegut's quotations: "We are put on earth to fart around. Don't let anyone tell you any different."

The article also links to an excerpt from Vonnegut's last book, A Man Without A Country. In this book, Vonnegut notes that the country he loved and fought for in the Second World War has been taken over by C-students from Yale, white supremacists masquerading as Christians, and people with psychopathic personalities. As he puts it:

In case you haven't noticed, as the result of a shamelessly rigged election in Florida, in which thousands of African-Americans were arbitrarily disenfranchised, we now present ourselves to the rest of the world as proud, grinning, jut-jawed, pitiless war-lovers with appallingly powerful weaponry - who stand unopposed.

For more on Vonnegut, you can check out his Paris Review interview (in which, basically, he was his own interviewer). And, if you haven't read any of his books, I'd recommend Mother Night or Slaughterhouse-Five as a good place to start.

Spring has to be earned

I have two theories that might explain the very late spring in these parts.

One is that winter is like a giant bucket of crap that has to be completely emptied. We started emptying the bucket late this year, as you may recall: December and the first week of January were very mild and non-wintery. We now have to pay for that luxury by giving up our April. You see, spring has to be earned every year with sweat and despair.

The other theory is that it's personal: it's not going to get warm until I'm back at work and am forced to endure watching bright sunny days through an office window. So it's all my fault. Sorry about that, everybody.

So it goes

Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., died yesterday at the age of 84. His novels were screamingly funny, sad, gloomy and thoughtful all at once. I've been a fan of his writing for longer than I've been an adult (thanks to a good English teacher I had in high school, who assigned Mother Night to our class). I'm finding that I miss him.

My favourite quotation of his is this: "Pretend to be good always, and even God will be fooled."

You might also want to check out the drawing on his official website.

So it goes.


On a much more mundane topic: here's some spam I got in my email today:

hi Quet Look at UFSJ symbol, it amazing.
Looks like it start to burn.

And this:

We are the only store wich [sic] gives this great deal you!
The USA Licensed Online Pharmacy
Save huge 70% on all the orders with us!

I miss Carb Boom

Last fall, when I was out of work, I got my exercise by going for a walk on the Don River path. From where I live, I can do a loop: up Broadview, down Pottery Road, down the path to the Riverdale bridge, and up Broadview to home. And I can even stop at the Loblaws on the way back. It works out perfectly for me - an hour-long workout, and lunch food afterwards.

At about the halfway point of my walk, the Don path passes under the Bloor-Danforth ramp to the Don Valley Parkway. At this spot, there used to be an empty beverage box lying on the path with the label "Carb Boom!" on it; I guess this is an energy drink or something.

Because the box was under a bridge, it remained, undamaged, for weeks. I used to look for it whenever I passed that spot, and was happy to see that it was still there.

Earlier this week, I went for a walk on the path again, for the first time since the snow receded. I looked for the box. It wasn't there.

I am old enough to know that nothing lasts forever. But I hate to keep being reminded of this.

Geek love

When looking through Douglas Coupland's Microserfs the other day, I found this quote:

Many geeks don't really have a sexuality - they just have work. I think the sequence is that they get jobs at Microsoft or wherever right out of school, and they're so excited to have this "real" job and money that they just figure that the relationships will naturally happen, but then they wake up and they're thirty and they haven't had sex in eight years.
[...]
It's like male geeks don't know how to deal with real live women, so they just assume it's a user interface problem.

While I didn't have it quite that bad, I lived in that world for a while. And it's not fair to put down geeks for not getting it on very much. (That last sentence of Coupland's is very harsh.) Consider the odds against the typical geek:

• He is usually very busy with work: many software development firms have "aggressive" deadline schedules. In this context, "aggressive" usually means "virtually impossible to meet unless everybody works their butt off and we luck out".
• There are usually way more men than women in any social environment in which he is likely to be.
• There's likely to be considerable competition for the attention of any woman that happens to venture into his environment.

For these reasons, attempts to socialize usually meet with failure. On the other hand, attempts to get work done usually result in something good happening. Humans tend, naturally, to avoid failure and pursue happiness, which is why many geeks often are focused on work.

All or nothing?

The Globe and Mail reported recently that former Shoppers Drug Mart CEO Glenn Murphy has been given $32 million in stock options and $4 million in non-compete fees as a going-away present. He apparently received over $2.7 million in compensation last year, including a $1.5 million bonus, and has an additional $18 million in unexercised stock options.

Needless to say, the feedback on the article's comment page is mixed. Some people are claiming that large corporations are bloodsucking capitalists, and that top executives are driven by greed. Look at what CEOs are paid, compared to what employees such as Shoppers cashiers are paid - is this fair, or reasonable?

Others point out that CEOs work very hard, sacrificing their personal lives, in order to maximize shareholder value; since they are delivering this value, why should they not be justly compensated?

This all got me thinking (which I try to do at least once a week, whether I need it or not):

• Wouldn't it be better for a company to hire several talented people and pay them $750,000 a year than to hire one very smart, driven person and pay him or her $10 million? I can't help but think that more brains attacking a problem leads to better results. And these people could all have lives outside of work as well. (When will a hard-working CEO find time to enjoy the fruits of his or her labours?)
  
  
• You have to wonder: how much of many companies' improved profitability is from attracting more customers, and how much is from trimming costs?
  
  When a firm increases profitability by slashing costs, this doesn't benefit the economy as a whole. The firm is healthier, but its employees and suppliers are equivalently less healthy. I can't help but think that this is like transferring water from one bowl to another.

I believe that the bottom line is this: businesses are not inherently evil or greedy, but the interests of shareholders and the interests of employees are naturally in conflict. Every dollar earned by a shareholder is a dollar that doesn't go to employee compensation, and vice versa.

And investors always have an advantage over workers: investors can choose to withhold investment, or move it elsewhere, if conditions are not favourable. Workers cannot choose to withhold their services (unless they are lucky enough to have savings), as everybody has to eat and pay for clothing and shelter. Public policies that do not reflect this fact are either naive or self-serving.

I also believe that a totally unregulated economy leads to a world in which a few people make a lot of money and virtually everybody else struggles to get by. Is this the world we want to live in, or the world we want the next generation to live in? Such a world is not sustainable, as eventually the vast numbers of poor would rise up against the comparatively few rich. (In countries where the divide between rich and poor is huge, the rich are often virtual prisoners in their own homes, as they can't go anywhere without fear of being kidnapped or robbed.)

For these reasons, government needs to establish ground rules to ensure that ordinary, hard-working people have a hope of leading lives of quality and dignity. This might sound like rabid socialism, except that we already have some of these rules in place today: for instance, not even the most vigorous defender of the free market is advocating a return to child labour or the elimination of health and safety regulations.

But one of the tragedies of our time is that, thanks to modern technologies, businesses can be more mobile than they used to be. This means that, if one country imposes too many regulations, businesses can just relocate elsewhere. (And they often have no choice: if a business does not relocate, it will be undercut by one that does.) This is a viable option because, in many poor countries, working in a low-wage sweatshop is better than the alternative (starvation). I'm not sure how this is going to ever change, at least in my lifetime.

It's a phenomenomenomenon

Lately, it seems like all of my friends and acquaintances are joining Facebook:

• In December, I had one Facebook friend.
• In early January, I had three.
• At the start of March, I had 23.
• As I write this, I'm at 73.

And it's not as if I'm a social butterfly or anything like that - I'm less sociable than average (to put it mildly). The only advantage I might have is that I have been involved in the Toronto comedy scene off and on for a few years, so I've met a bunch of people there. But I spend far too much time in the comfort of my own home, typing away in the "controllable and non-threatening world of my computer" (to quote from Douglas Coupland's Microserfs).

Somebody - presumably, Mark Zuckerberg, who is credited at the bottom of each page - is going to get very rich when Facebook is sold to Yahoo or Google or Microsoft or maybe Apple. But I really hope it doesn't become Microsoft Facebook.


Speaking of Douglas Coupland: I'm sure I'm not the only person who thinks of Microserfs and JPod as mirror images of one another. Microserfs describes the world of computing as it was in the late 1990's (and before): people believed that they were building a bright new computer-aided future. JPod describes today's world: more global and a lot harder to live in.

Why I will never vote Conservative

To continue the thread from yesterday: in an article titled And no flowers bloomed, Margaret Atwood tries to guess why the Conservatives are slashing arts funding:

[Maybe] the Harper Conservatives don't want a society in which the arts and the creative industries are important. Maybe they don't want the jobs in those fields to exist. Maybe, as in so many other areas of their thinking, they want to turn back the clock to the good old days -- some time back in the golden fifties, when there wasn't all this bilingualism and multiculturalism, or indeed any lingualism or culturalism at all, and most Canadian artists left the country, and those who remained could be referred to jokingly in Parliament as a bunch of fruits jumping around in long underwear.

If people - especially people from the West - wonder why very few people in Toronto ever vote Tory, you now have your answer.

I occasionally do creative things - though not as often as I should - and most of the people I know are part of the Toronto performing arts community in one way or another. Stephen Harper and his party hate people like us - or, at least, are extremely strongly indifferent to people like us. For this reason, I will never vote Conservative.

Margaret Atwood on arts funding

Here's an excerpt from a Globe and Mail article by Margaret Atwood on the Conservative Party and arts funding:

Why invest money in the arts? Because -- simple answer -- it's a great investment: A few dollars in means a lot of dollars out. Without the arts, the average Canadian citizen would be poorer, and I don't mean just spiritually.

Why don't the Conservatives grasp that? Maybe they just feel in their disapproving bones that art sucks. If so, that's retrograde of them, because countries around the world now realize that a vital arts sector increases their energy in a multitude of ways.

And:

Once it's lying in the ditch, Canadian art will be accused of not having been strong enough to survive in the Alpha Chimp social-Darwinist marketplace model favoured by Harper's Conservatives, thus justifying the contempt and scorn with which the arts sector has been treated.

(Thanks to Strange Breakfasts for the link.)

Yep.

A passage from Mira Kamdar's Planet India:

Our planet teeters on the edge of so many terrifying crises, from global warming to lethal pandemics to the anarchy of terrorism and war. To believe that economic growth and development are possible only by sacrificing the life potential of billions of human beings or by inflicting colossal damage to our shared environment is to suffer from an acute failure of imagination.

It's retro geek time

Thanks to Metafilter, I am indulging in a bout of retro geek nostalgia.

Steem is a freeware emulator for the Atari ST, which is the computer that I owned when I was in grad school. The site links to dozens and dozens of games for the Atari, including Dungeon Master, which was one of the very first realtime games, and which is roughly as addictive as crack.

I might never leave my apartment again.