I’m interviewed by Popular Mechanics for this weeks blogcast, about the recent Orion award.
Birds Of A Feather
Gerry Adams is meeting with Hamas.
Reminds me of the old joke about the guy walking down the street in Ulster, when he feels the barrel of a gun against the back of his neck.
“Now would you be Protestant, or would you be Catholic?”
Thinking quickly, he says, “I’m a Jew!”
There’s a pause, and then, “Begorrah, and I’m the luckiest Palestinian in Belfast.”
And then there’s the variation.
“So, then would you be a Protestant Jew, or a Catholic Jew…?”
New Boss
Ron Radosh reviews Bruce Springsteen’s return to musical roots. In a technological century, I am gratified to see more and more musicians unplug.
Creating More Terrorists
I’m sure that any minute, we’ll see editorials railing against radical Islamists about this:
FAR-RIGHT extremists have adopted the tactics of Islamic jihadis by posting videos on the internet in which they threaten to behead British Muslims.
The films show balaclava-clad white British men brandishing guns, knives and clubs, calling on all Muslims to leave Britain or be killed. One appears to be a soldier who has served in the Gulf.
In one film, a man tells Muslims to “go home” or risk being burned alive. He threatens, “I’ll cut your head off”, and claims to have “comrades” across Britain who have “had enough”.
Any minute now.
[SOUND=”Crickets Chirping”]
[/SOUND]
Iranians Love America
And aren’t that thrilled with their government. Someone at the WaPo (in the travel section) got off script:
What took place over the next fortnight astonished me. Everywhere I went — from the traffic-choked streets of Tehran in the north to the dusty desert town of Yazd in central Iran, to the elegant cultural centers of Isfahan and Shiraz — I was overwhelmed by the warmth and, dare I say it, pro-Americanism of the people I met.
Ponder the irony of that last statement for a moment. While much of the rest of the world seems to be holding their collective noses at us Americans, in Iran people were literally crossing the road to shake an American’s hand and say hello. Who knew?
Initially, when Iranians asked me where I was from, I’d suggest they guess. But this game quickly proved too time-consuming — no one ever guessed correctly. So instead I would simply mumble “American.” And then their faces would light up. For better or worse, Iranians are avid fans of America: its culture, films, food, music, its open, free-wheeling society.
Which reraises the question. How to punish a rogue, tyrannical government without harming its people?
The Real Reality-Based Community
“Hatewatch” over at Winds of Change has a nice roundup of links, including one called Idiotarian Seethings. Control-F twice on that phrase to get to the meat, though the whole thing is fun, as usual. I particularly liked this bit:
Early in July, NRO’s Jonah Goldberg did his part to entertain the right-wing blogosphere by tracking down this piece of comedy gold, wherein an ambitious DU denizen attempts to demonstrate that 9/11 was a conspiracy by failing to collapse steel rabbit fencing. The true entertainment only starts, as is often the case in these swamps, when other budding scientists attempt to explain why they too are moved by his demonstration. By all means, enjoy yourselves.
But there’s a serious point here for political discourse, one that often gets lost in the growing populism on both the left and the right: experts are good. Not everyone can do or know the things that they do. It’s not just that being an expert causes you to have the knowledge that you need to evaluate things within your field – it’s that immersion in a way of thinking that seems to be related to particular objects gets you in the habit of thinking a certain way. It’s why chess masters can ‘see’ a board and topologists can ‘see’ a knot. Not to be overly pedantic, but it seems like certain objects are easier to understand by thinking in certain ways. An expert has developed cognitive habits as well as broad knowledge. That why an amateur and an expert can know exactly the same amount of things and can be exactly as smart, and the expert might have insights that the amateur might never stumble into.
Of course, that’s beside the point in two ways. First, this guy isn’t an amateur in anything – he’s just an tool (click through if you want some entertainment). Second, however, this anti-expert populism (most often expressed in blog triumphalism) isn’t distributed evenly across the left and right of the political spectrum. To be more specific, when the right challenges ostensible experts, it seems that the people doing the challenging are actually better at the matter at hand than the people being challenged: Allahpundit and Dr. Shackleford are very, very good at Photoshop and that Reuters idiot is very, very not.
Meanwhile, on the left, we’ve got American Apparel checkout workers and Starbucks baristas going toe to toe with MIT architects on the weight that reinforced cross-sections can bear – a matchup hilarious but for the passion with which the checkout workers and baristas insist that they have an opinion that they’re entitled to. The urge to debunk the reasoning of experts is dangerous across the board, a seed that can blossom into full-blown anti-intellectualism. It just seems that when the right does it, they end up being right. And that’s a difference worth noting.
Of course, expect the usual idiotarian seethers in the comments section to seethe at this.
Why Buy The Cow?
When you get the milk for free? Mark Steyn can’t figure out why the Jihadis even bother to abduct journalists:
Did you see that video of the two Fox journalists announcing they’d converted to Islam? The larger problem, it seems to me, is that much of the rest of the Western media have also converted to Islam, and there seems to be no way to get them to convert back to journalism.
…One can understand the agonies the politically correct multicultural journalist must go through, distressed at the thought that an infelicitous phrasing might perpetuate unfortunate stereotypes of young Muslim males. But, even so, it’s quite a leap to omit the most pertinent fact and leave the impression the Sydney constabulary are combing the city for mullets. The Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby wrote the other day about how American children’s books are “sacrificing truth on the altar of political correctness.” But there seems to be quite a lot of that in the grown-up comics, too. And, as I’ve said before, it’s never a good idea to put reality up for grabs. There may come a time when you need it.
Read the whole thing.
Prelude To Jihad In America
Walid Phares notes the most recent rejoinder to those who keep their heads in the sand, and don’t believe that we are at war with an enemy whose ultimate goal is world domination:
…the
Cost Versus Price
Mark Whittington has a useful overview of COTS. The only problem is in this paragraph:
The Falcon 9 is designed to launch up to 24,750 kilograms into low Earth orbit for a cost of seventy eight million dollars, according to the SpaceX web site. That compares to a cost of two hundred fifty four million dollars to launch 25,800 kilograms into low Earth orbit estimated for the Delta IV Heavy, a competitor to the Falcon 9 built by the Boeing Corporation.
No. Those numbers are the price, not the cost. Confusing the two words is one of the reasons that people get confused about whether or not we’ve made any progress in reducing launch costs over the years (partly because we don’t really know what launches actually cost, particularly in Russia, but also with the Shuttle, due to opaque bookkeeping).
Price is what is charged to a customer. Cost is the amount of resources that the launch provider has to devote to providing the service. If cost is less than price, then the provider makes money; if it’s the other way around, then the provider is operating at a loss. I’m sure that SpaceX costs (at least its marginal costs) are less (and probably quite a bit less, to account for the business risk factor of developing it) than the published price, or there would have been no point in going into the business. I’m also sure that Lockheed Martin is not losing money on Atlas launches.
In both cases, of course, the average cost is highly dependent on flight rate. This is one of the reasons that EELV prices have gone up dramatically over the last few years. In fact, I used that example in my piece in The New Atlantis a couple years ago as an explanation to why vehicle design is at best a secondary issue of launch costs, while flight rate is a primary one. There’s an appalling amount of ignorance, even within the professional space community, as to the reasons for high launch costs, not to mention low reliability (see comments in this post for an example), which is one of the barriers to improving the situation. And of course, the problem is made worse by the lack of recognition of their lack of knowledge. As the old saying goes, it’s not what we don’t know that hurts us, it’s the things we know for damn sure that are wrong.
But Wait! There’s More!
Well, actually, there is no more. Arthur Schiff has died.