meta-roj

US Attorney General John Ashcroft in testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, September 25, 2001.

Every day that passes with outdated statutes and the old rules of engagement is a day that terrorists have a competitive advantage. Until Congress makes these changes, we are fighting an unnecessarily uphill battle. Members of the Committee, I regret to inform you that we are today sending our troops into the modem field of battle with antique weapons

according to several reports in the past several days, the united states department of justice claims that it has never used the powers granted under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT act:

US Attorney General John Ashcroft in a memo to FBI Director Robert Mueller obtained by The Associated Press.

The number of times section 215 has been used to date is zero

the immediate question is, of course, if this power was so desperately needed that it was included in the rushed-to-congress 342-page USA PATRIOT act, then why, precisely, has it gone unused in the nearly two years of this “war on terror”?

US Attorney General John Ashcroft, in testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary June 5, 2003.

Hundreds of suspected terrorists have been identified and tracked throughout the U.S., with more than 18,000 subpoenas and search warrants issued

….

Our human sources of intelligence have doubled, as has the number of anti-terrorism investigations.

….

In 2002, using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act tools, we targeted more than 1,000 international terrorists, spies and foreign powers, who threaten our country’s security. We requested 170 emergency FISAs. This is more than three-times the total number of emergency FISAs obtained in the 23 years prior to September 11.

….

More than a dozen members of alleged terrorist cells in Buffalo, Seattle, Portland and Detroit, were arrested, along with more than 100 other individuals who were convicted or pled guilty to federal crimes as a result of our post-September 11 terrorism investigations

in these two years, have ALL the terrorists among us avoided libraries and businesses that keep records? did ALL the terrorists before october of 2001 also avoid libraries and businesses that keep records? wouldn’t it be considered “sloppy police work” to investigate over 1000 and arrest more than 100 terrorist suspects and NOT review the associated records? were these records available (and reviewed?) under the “outdated statutes and the old rules of engagement”?

a secondary question, and this gets back to the patriot act summer tour, shouldn’t the attorney general be using the powers granted, overwhelmingly, by congress to protect me, instead of stumping for new and expanded powers with the VICTORY act?

[Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT act follows]
(more…)

this is a very active topic in the front of my little brain, so it’s a bit refreshing to find it at least resonating with some others (so, thanks, crystal flame – is that two words?)

shortly after i made my comments about tools and results, i was visited by a very loud, very disruptive guest. i didn’t have much time to think in my own absence (duty called), and i’m still catching up on things in the electronic world, so you’ll probably notice several updates here as i do.

while weeding out the accumulted spam (and becoming more and more convinced that email is broken, i dropped a few comments in an irc channel. i present, here, the revelevant snippets (with links and edited for brevity):

<rvr> Artificial Development is building CCortex?, a complete 20-billion neuron emulation of the Human Cortex and peripheral systems, on a cluster of 100 computers – the largest neural network created to date.
<_joshua> Sadly most of the advances in neural network stuff was merely reimplementing statistics invented in the 1950’s
<rojisan> how strange that it should take that many years for knowledge to cross communications barriers between fields
<rojisan> it’s as if those poor bastards spent all their time picking each others nits and never noticed the other monkeys across the river
<morphex> somebody should teach more monkeys the game of connect-the-dots
<_joshua> computer science loves reinventing things
<ClosedGL> i think it is true in all fields where people don’t do their research properly. I think the open source movement, or rather the philosphy of code reuse might exactly break the exception; where implemented.
<rojisan> i have too much spam to dig through to really make the point, but there’s a hecklebot implication here, and something about out-of-hand rejection of unfamiliar ideas, or those ideas that are not presented in the preferred terminology
<crysflame> hm, i wonder if that’s a known bug in being strict about terminology, discussion paths, etc. you keep away the ignorant, but you lose the crossbreeding that helps your field, to some extent.
<rojisan> ah. excellent. crysflame can carry the torch for me while i continue my disaster recovery

all i can say is that yes. it’s a known problem.

i hope someone else has done more thinking on this than i have, so i’ll just leave a comment, as it were… or a request…

specialization is a good thing, but please welcome those that come to your specialty with different language, a different set of preconceptions, different applications. maybe i will be that person nosing into your turf someday.

update: fixed bad links.

[this is going in the business model of the hour, simply because someone else should spend an hour on it]

years ago, i got involved (well, instigated) a preservation and urban renewal project that still, in a very mild form, ongoing. today, it’s basically a watchdog operation, and there isn’t much to watch. anyway, this effort brought me into a very interesting set of meetings and networks, with architects and historians and other very learned people. it also happened to coincide with a city-wide effort to establish a long-term city plan.

one of the keystones of this plan was a raze-and-redevelop operation in what used to be an urban shopping area. long since abandoned by shoppers, the large, beautiful, architected buildings (as compared to cinder-block boxes), stood largely vacant. the city’s plan for the area was to tear down a large number of these buildings and restore an existing theater into a “broadway quality” venue. i didn’t like this plan very much. at the time, i looked around at examples of successful urban redevelopment and saw that artists (in general) were the key.the classic example is greenwich village in new york – and it’s a pattern that repeats itself often: the area gets rundown and cheap, the artists move in, the place gets cool, the rents go up, and the artists are driven out because they can’t keep up with the new rent on their tiny apartment.

at the time, i made several comments about artists being the cockroaches of urbania – and i mean that in a positive sense. in that nothing can kill them. they move in to places where no one else will go.

so i suggested a plan where the few needs of the artists would be met through grant/incentive packages by the city, “in the zone” – 24-hour access to coffee, hardware and artist supply retail, groceries, and public gathering places. the reasoning was: provide these things, and the artists will fill your vacant buildings, do interesting things in them, make them cool, create a community, and over time (and yes, this will take time), the area will “revitalize” itself.

now, coming from the post-bubble perspective, perhaps geeks are the new artists – or artists are becoming more geeky. in any case, i want to add something to this formula: wireless, free internet access.

for the price of a couple coffee shops, a liquor license or two, and property-tax rebates for a few (and only a few!) retail operations willing to “take a chance” on the neighborhood, plus blanket coverage of the area with wireless internet, the geeks (and artists) will move in. post-bubble, a lot of amazingly skilled geeks are now living on artist salaries (that is, they make some money when they can, where they can), and the opportunity is just amazing – or at least i think so.

is anyone doing it? has any city or state government sprung for a few dozen access points?

today’s business model of the hour is inspired by a SOOPER SEEKRIT project.

i can’t say anything about the actual project, of course, but, the inspired business model works like this:

i have amazing googlejuice. it’s so amazing, it often amazes even me. lest there be any doubt, if you need info on gem stones (blue beryl) or weather data (rss weather feed and weather feeds) or donating hair (wigs for kids), heckling (hecklebot – now distributed and mobile!), contemporary literature (exquisite corpse robert irwin), drumming (maryland taiko), photography (linkholm studio), mac bugs (open firmware u), philosophy (neil peart religion), social software (friendster fake testimonials and dead blog), movie quotes (when was the last time you went wahoo), corporate secrets (formula for coke), pop psychology (hiding feelings quotes), and, of course, the music business (jam band blog), then i’m right up there on the front page. ok, that’s enough to make a point…

not quite as juicy, but i am also your source for information on foreign policy (wmd found – page 2 and global terrorism index world market research center – page 2), fine art (gunter blum – page 6), sports photography (sports shots – page 2), the concert ticket industry (the string cheese incident lawsuit – page 3), and domestic (united states) politics (support for the patriot act – page 7.)

of all these, the only one i understand is the wigs for kids link – since i’ve been doing that for years now, and that page has been around for a long time building juice. but, let’s not let a little lack of understanding prevent us from doing Great Things!

anyway, the point is that i should start selling comment space. you can rent my googlejuice. comment on an appropriate post in this blog, for the low, low price of… say, $25. and you can ride on my glorious coattails all the way to search engine nirvana.

ah, isabel… (what a namesake, but that’s a different story)

isabel knocked down a small tree, and, after most of the storm had passed, and i was feeling a bit confident, we lost power.

so, everyone has survived, with the possible exception of some of the neighborhood wildlife (seem to be missing some squirrels – that might be imporant to some readers).

cleanup isn’t so bad, just time-consuming, and obviously the power is back, so i have much catching up to do.

ok, i’ve noticed that i’m exploring some recurring themes here in this public space, and one of them is determinism. another is the geek paradigm, and the third is the rant that started this whole blog – domain experts.

today, i’m going to bring these threads together into a braid (three theads is a braid, right? anyway….)

this is a rock.

1) you use this to pound grain to make flour to make bread.
2) you use this to beat on someone’s head and take their bread.

same tool, same result, different approach.

today’s lesson: it’s all in your approach.

in this example, we know that the first approach had to come first – someone has to make the bread before someone can take the bread. sometimes that’s not so obvious.

this object lesson comes from three incidents i either witnessed or was party to in recent days. they both concern relatively intelligent people, who, at this time, shall remain nameless. i have great (in one case) or at least some (in the others) respect for these intellects. recently, i’ve lost respect for them in the “vision” department.

in all cases, these people are intelligent enough to have established some credibility (and this is a good thing). they also come to the discussion with a set of preconceptions and experiences that shape their opinions (and this is an inevitable thing). the problem arises when they are faced with new, different, or unfamiliar approaches to something they think they know. since they think they know these things, they already have all the answers (and this is a bad thing).

probably the most important cost of this situation is that an off-the-cuff comment from an otherwise intelligent and credible individual can completely stifle the discussion. “bad idea. won’t work.” from the right person is enough to end the train of thought – without contributing any substance (and this is important – remember, we’re talking about approaches).

i, personally, happen to be just arrogant and unreasonable enough to dismiss otherwise credible people that say these things to me, because, in keeping with the geek paradigm, i know best how to do what i want to do – these people are simply wrong. that’s ok. everyone is entitled to be wrong once in a while, and i’ve certainly been wrong myself (twice, actually, but that’s material for another entry 🙂 ). what is important for me to realize (and demonstrate on a continuing basis) is that i may be wrong, but i’m engaged. i know i don’t know all the answers, and my answers adapt over time as i discover new, relevant material.

what bothers me is that these otherwise intelligent, credible people might actually have something constructive to contribute – either directly (such as by suggesting a new approach, or a relevant model) – or indirectly, by asking intelligent questions and forcing the consideration of new material.

in a dialogue, being “dismissed” like that is fine. particularly if your “domain expert” is a busy person and has other material to focus on. where this is not appropriate is in a public forum where these off-the-cuff comments result in the end of the multilogue. everyone shuts up, because the expert has spoken.

we all struggle to develop and express our ideas, and we are likely to fumble around and pick the wrong metaphor or example to make a point. that metaphor or example may sound like something you already know, but be careful when jumping to conclusions. maybe this person is just trying to give you an example in terms with which they think you’re comfortable. engage. or, at the very least, if you’re not going to engage, then disengage in a polite, non-stifling manner and let the rest of us flail around until we realize you were right all along.

it is all in the approach.

perhaps the problem isn’t interesting to you (and i mean you as a “domain expert” or “geek”) – but please, be very careful throwing your opinions around – especially those that are not well-considered. with credibility (power) comes responsibility. and i hate to knock you down a notch, but you don’t have all the answers, and the rest of us are trying to make some progress out here.

really, this is nothing new…

george bernard shaw (1856 – 1950)

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

and just for fun, i’m going to throw in a little pop culture too (because shaw appreciates good company)….

ed solomon, maybe (you figure it out)

Everything they’ve ever “known” has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, they knew it was flat. Fifteen minutes ago, you knew we humans were alone on it. Imagine what you’ll know tomorrow.

update (2003.09.20): something i probably should’ve included in the original post: if you have credibility and your approach isn’t appreciated, you are very likely to be ridiculed ferociously. fair warning: beware the heckle.

the ap has a story running in several papers, including the post and courrier of charleston, south carolina.

the quick version: not only does the usa patriot act contain several “slippery slope” provisions, the department of justice is actively pushing creative use of the provisions of the patriot act to prosecute non-terrorists.

full-text of the ap piece by david caruso is in the long version, here is a choice bit:

Prosecutor Jerry Wilson says he isn’t abusing the law, which defines chemical weapons of mass destruction as ‘‘any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury” and contains toxic chemicals.

— remember that the next time you pick up a bottle of something that says “Warning: harmful or fatal if swallowed” and make sure you do your citizenly duty and inform the department of justice about the manufacturer.

so, remember, good citizens of america, your government has shown you the way (by example).

it’s time to get creative about prosecuting the prosecutors.
(more…)

ok, this one completely escaped me, until i managed to drag one of my old-school usability experts into this space. the comment (and trackback) windows are now resizable. an easy fix, but these things you gotta noticed to do something about…

see the geek paradigm for a possible explanation of strange default settings. heh.

i thought this might be an interesting statistic, considering isabel…. and so, i present for your weather-geeking amusement….

Category 5 Atlantic Hurricanes by duration at Category 5
(with links to tracking maps)

this is total time at category five (not continuous time) and based on 6-hour advisory periods. isabel is still active, but as of this posting time, and the 10pm advistory, duration at cat5 is 48 hours.

see you in a week, isabel….

update (2003.09.14 / 08:02): during the overnight, isabel managed to maintain strength, now 54 hours at category five. other interesting news – three prediction models now put this pretty beast in my back yard on friday. my intuition leads the models, but this could really screw up my plans for that weekend.

update (2003.09.16 / 04:50): it looks like the good news has come, and isabel isn’t likely to come back to category 5. that brings the final verdict to #3 since-we’ve-been-keeping-records.
(more…)

i’ve been working in and around music for what seems like a long time (but, i have to maintain some perspective on the matter.) i am far from an expert. i am far from the “final answer” in all this. what i do bring is, i think, a different perspective. and today i’m going to attempt to share some of that perspective with you.

this is probably good for me, since i find presenting my material (particularly material that i’ve put a lot of thought into) difficult. i guess on some level, once i’ve fully embraced a way of seeing a problem or a solution, it seems odd to me that you don’t already see it the same way. at the same time, i’m probably notorious for tangential, oblique and seemingly barely-related perspectives. so, this is a bit of an exercise, and hopefully, in that exercise, i’ll have something to contribute to the ongoing discussion on the subject of music.

i’ve decided to focus very narrowly today, and address a “foundation” concept in my work with music and performance. that concept is: where is the money? and i limit the scope of this question to the performers and creators.

in a review of the history of music, a few things become clear (to me, anyway).

first, and critically important, is that people will make music. the drive in humans to make music is simply incredible and, i think, unstoppable. i don’t mean to step on any archaeologist toes, but something tells me that music is right up there with and maybe even a bit ahead of language at the birth of civilization. we’ve been making music since we realized we could bang on (or blow into) hollow logs and make interesting sounds (in any case, certainly long before the concept of a lawyer or a copyright ever existed).

second, this drive is also unevenly distributed. some of us don’t have a gift or talent for making music, and some are simply astounding. some of us have a huge drive to make music, and absolutely no talent to back it up (sorry, keith). some of the most talented among us have horrible stage fright, or simply no opportunity to develop their skills. the universe conspires in most interesting ways.

third, music is a specialization. it takes a lot of time, dedication and even some (occasionally expensive) tools to make music. the challenge for musicians, is to provide for the basic necessities of life (food, shelter, groupies) and still have enough left over for the music (strings, drumsticks, gas money). so, there’s the problem. how do you make enough money as a musician to be a musician?

in general, i find that there are three ways to make a living making music: performances, patrons and recordings.

performances: certainly the oldest tradition of the musician is the performance. this approach has the lowest barrier-of-entry – you can literally pick up your instrument (or clear your throat) and start making music. busking on a busy corner on the left bank, or playing in a stadium full of 60,000 people. no matter the scale, the point of performance is that you (the performer) meet your audience. and, if you’re talented, entertaining, or have whatever it takes to reach the audience you’ve found yourself facing, then maybe, just maybe, they will throw you a coin. long, long ago, maybe they would invite you to stay in the village for dinner and give you a little food for the road. if you were really good, maybe someone in the village would make you some new shoes (gas money) so you could make it to the next village.

patrons: there’s also a long tradition of patronage for the arts. this can take many different forms – you can track down a composing prodigy, and put them up in one of your country estates and give them expensive hand-crafted instruments and let them do what they do for the glory and status. you can commission a song for someone’s 37th birthday party that includes a few juicy tidbits from their life. or you can hire a composer to make the soundtrack for your big hit movie. the common thread here is that the musician generally has to be “established” in some way to get the good gigs. so the “barrier to entry” problem here is how to hone your musical skills to the point where anyone would be your patron?

recordings: the birth of the recording industry is generally credited to the 1877 invention of the gramophone. with a little bit of a stretch, we can push the date back to 1857 with the phonoautograph (but that is a stretch, since it didn’t really offer a way to play back the recording). so, we have 126 (or 146, if you’re feeling generous) years of “recording industry.” in that 150 years, the recording has become the centerpiece, the raison d’être for most [american] musicians.

there is no shortage of businesses that are created to support and/or exploit (see the american idol clip above) musicians and performers. the challenge for these businesses, and for society as a whole is to keep the musicians fed, clothed, and doing what they do best – entertain and engage us.

the musicians among us will do what they do, whether they get paid or not.