Media Criticism

One Quote Says It All

Mary Mapes is still whining, this time to Howie Kurtz (who seems to be largely humoring her). But what tickled me was the bottom line:

Despite her career implosion, Mapes hopes to stay in journalism.

“It’s what I’m good at,” she said. “I like making a difference.”

“Making a difference,” ever since Woodward and Bernstein, has become the cliche reason for people to go into the profession of journalism. But judging by the results, “making a difference” seems to be more important than “improving the situation,” or understanding logic or reality.

Space

More Sinofantasies

Mark Whittington manages to conflate both a strawman and a feverish delusion in a single post:

Allow me to present a scenario. The United States follows the suggestions of Jon, Rand, and others and stops the NASA return to the Moon.

This should have been “Allow me to present a strawman,” (Mark’s debate tactic of first resort).

Neither Jon, nor I (I can’t speak for Mark’s favorite bogeymen, those “others”) have suggested that NASA not return to the moon. We have merely pointed out that the means by which they’ve chosen to do so will result in tears, just as it did the last time.

For the delusion, one can go read the rest of the post. It’s hilarious.

I’m busy, so I’ll leave it to the wolves in my comments section to tear it to pieces.

Administrative

Minor Disaster

I just got to the airport, and discovered that my driver’s license isn’t in my wallet.

I had to use a company badge for ID, and got a thorough screening in security, and have no idea how I’ll rent a car in LA. Unless Patricia can find it at home and overnight it to me, I may be without a car there. I’ve no idea where it is, though it may be on my nightstand, taken out of my pocket after my last trip.

What a way to start a trip.

[Update in the evening in LA]

Yup. I had taken it out of my shirt pocket, where it resided during my trip home the last time, and put it on my nightstand (where Patricia found it upon getting home from work), and then neglected to put it back in my wallet the next day. She’s Fedexing it to me, so I’ll have a car by Thursday. One useful definition of hell is being in LA sans auto.

The only reason that it was in my shirt pocket, instead of in my wallet, is that under the new idiotic security regime, one never knows when there will be a demand for papers, and it’s more convenient to pull the license out of a shirt pocket than to have to pull the wallet out and dig for it there.

And I don’t currently have a passport because it mysteriously disappeared on a trip shortly after September 11, when I got pulled out of line for a severe screening (for no obvious reason–I’d like to think that it’s because I look sort of swarthy and semitic, but that theory is blown out of the water by the fact that one of my co-screenees was a young blonde woman). I had the passport before the screening–when I got off the plane at the other end, it was gone.

Thanks a lot, Homeland Security!

Science And Society

Math Is Hard

And not just for Barbie. This article says that math problems are getting too big for our brains.

Well, that’s one of the thing that transhumanism is for. This part bothers me, though:

Math has been the only sure form of knowledge since the ancient Greeks, 2,500 years ago.

You can’t prove the sun will rise tomorrow, but you can prove two plus two equals four, always and everywhere.

This begs the definition of the words “knowledge” and “prove.” Two plus two can be proven, I suppose (inductively from one plus one equals two), but only within the confines of the mathematics that you’re using. It’s not “sure” or “knowledge” in any absolute sense.

What they really mean is that some of the tougher mathematical problems are not amenable to classic deductive analytical proofs, but are more reliant on brute-force computations, possible now because we have machines that can perform them in a useful amount of time.

Media Criticism

One-Two Bird Flu Punch

The Media and the health authorities talk about “it” mutating as if the viruses were all getting updated by wireless like in I, Robot (sorry for the spoiler). In fact, commencing a pandemic will not make a second ensuing pandemic less likely (although it will empart partial resistance). The birds still all have the flu and if flu can jump species once, it can do it twice with the need for a whole new vaccine (else why wait until it breaks out to produce one?). This is what happened in 1918-1919. It was the second wave of the flu that was the deadly one.

I saw this weird quote from 11/3, Prof. Donald Burke in WSJ (subscription required–search on flu and extinction):

At one extreme the case fatality ratios seen in Southeast Asia could be maintained (57 deaths in 112 cases, about 50% mortality), in which case the human species might face extinction.

Last I checked, you need 100% mortality for extinction and it is pretty hard to spread a virus that is 100% fatal to the entire global population before all the carriers die.

World Bank put an $800 billion price tag on bird flu if a pandemic hits with that being 2% of world GDP. They see SARS style disruption. CIA says world GDP is $55T according to purchasing power parity and 2% of that would be $1.1T.

Story has taken on a life of its own. Out of my league. Now if only they would take aim at heart disease that kills 17 million every year.

Political Commentary

Huh?

Bill Kristol has an interesting, but to me an ahistorical piece in the latest Weekly Standard on how the Bush administration must somehow “return” to its first-term partisan roots:

…contrary to the media myth that Bush has been uncompromising and ideological, the strategy that the president has pursued for most of 2005 has been an attempt at accommodation. It has reflected a hope that he could move beyond the polarization of the 2004 campaign and appeal to the middle. It’s understandable that Bush would be tempted by such a strategy: Who wants to go down in history as a polarizing president? But the strategy has been a mistake.

“…for most of 2005”? I have to ask–on what planet was he during the first Bush term? Bush has been kissing up to the mushy middle since his first presidential campaign, when he proclaimed himself a “compassionate” (read, big-government) conservative. He led a politically-correct war on “terror,” in which he refused, until recently, to even recognize it as a war against radical Islamists. He has retained Norm Mineta at the Department of Transportation, who continues to fight sensible airline security policy, waging guerilla bureaucratic warfare against armed pilots, refusing to profile, and perpetuating idiotic confiscations of nose-hair trimmers. He tried to buy the union vote with the steel tariffs, in defiance of free-market principles and against the interests of manufacturers of items with steel content, and the consumers who purchase them. His administration has been weak on the Second Amendment, and even weaker on the First, with his signing of a campaign-finance bill that he said prior to the act was unconstutional, thus being derelict in his duty to defend the Constitution, all to placate the so-called “moderates” and McCain wing of both the Republican and Democrat parties.

Between the 2000 election and the 2004 election, Rove became the master of polarization politics. And now, with this year’s ill-fated experiment in trying to govern from the middle surely over, polarization along ideological and party lines is a fact of life. Ethics classes won’t ameliorate Democratic hostility to Bush. Nor will firing Rove.

Nor will keeping a politically correct transportation secretary, or saying that “when someone hurts, the government has to move,” or expanding entitlement programs, or nominating cronies without a paper trail to the Supreme Court, or completely dismantling the notion that the Republican Party has any further interest in smaller government. But these are not new–they’ve been going on since the campaign in 2000. The notion that Bush has ever been some kind of extreme right-wing conservative is laughable to anyone but the hard left (whose views, sadly, have permeated the media). If Bill Kristol’s advice is for him to become more of a Reagan conservative, it’s good advice, but it’s advice that he needed five years ago.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!