Interesting Links for 07-12-2011

[andrewducker]

• Why TechCrunch is boring, SAP is not, and the world has gone mad
  (tags: business technology process )
• Google now graphs functions you search for.
  (tags: google graphing math )
• Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation
  (tags: circumcision mutilation babies )
• An interview with Vincent Connare, creator of Comic Sans
  (tags: font comicsans interview microsoft )
• If You’re Busy, You’re Doing Something Wrong: The Surprisingly Relaxed Lives of Elite Achievers
  (tags: productivity success work passion achievement )
• On the impracticality of making a cheeseburger from scratch
  (tags: food )
• The 25 Funniest Autocorrects Of DYAC’s First Year- - #14 and #8 damn near killed me.
  (tags: funny autocorrect )
• Hillary Clinton declares 'gay rights are human rights'
  (tags: rights lgbt usa )
• When you adopt a grizzly bear. Dammit. I want one now.
  (tags: bears cute )
• A push to end male-succession for peers in the UK. (Or they could get rid of them entirely)
  (tags: uk politics inheritance lords )
• RIPE trying to push retroactive contracts onto customers.
  (tags: RIPE internet contracts )
• Red Cross says violent videogames may violate Geneva conventions. (Completely lost the plot)
  (tags: games redcross war ComputerGames )
• H&M; Puts Real Model Heads On Fake Bodies.
  (tags: photoshop models cgi advertising )
• What to expect from the anti-gay marriage brigade (Anyone for bingo?)
  (tags: lgbt marriage )
• How To Cook Perfect Rice Without A Rice Cooker (and store it for months)
  (tags: rice cooking recipe )
• The problem isn’t you. The problem is the problem.
  (tags: advice problems )
• Don't Be A Free User
  (tags: business free money )

Comments

[thejeopardymaze]

A cheeseburger cannot exist outside of a highly developed, post-agrarian society. It requires a complex interaction between a handful of vendors—in all likelihood, a couple of dozen—and the ability to ship ingredients vast distances while keeping them fresh. The cheeseburger couldn’t have existed until nearly a century ago as, indeed, it did not.

As much as there is to hate about industrialized agriculture, that is one of the upsides, and why I haven't ever been able to understand the diehard localvores. The issues should be centered around economic and environmental justice instead of culinary purity, and besides, I love chocolate (but only the good kind).

[thejeopardymaze]

Red Cross says violent videogames may violate Geneva conventions

If I am not mistaken, this is coming from a group guilty of misusing funds and resources.

[holyoutlaw.livejournal.com]

Re DYAC: Read down the comments to JAB's summary.

[andrewducker]

Oh, thank you. That was great.

And yes, Fuckweasel is a great colour.

Red Cross

[zornhau.livejournal.com]

I suppose that there is an argument that having regular troops commit war crimes normalises it. However, I think what we're seeing is an example of the way NGOs tend to take decisions based on what's good for the organisation - publicity, money etc - rather than for their mission.

[channelpenguin.livejournal.com]

"Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation" YES! Because there is no consent, no proven reason, and what is removed is NOT non-functional. They never used to use anaesthetic either - do they now?

[kerrypolka.livejournal.com]

Yes.

[momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com]

He still ducks out at the last minute and says 'hey if you choose to do it it's not mutilation'. Bullshit.

But a good article nonetheless. A fairly recent book on baby healthcare I got for my daughter said something about 'There's no medical reason but if you have cultural reasons then OBVIOUSLY it's fine.' (My capitals, obviously.) Sheesh. Talk about liberal pussyfooting.

[andrewducker]

Choosing to alter your own body isn't mutilation, certainly not in the same sense that having it done to you is. If people want to alter their own body in any way they want, I don't care.

And yes, I hate the latter too. "Cultural reasons" is not a magic card you can wave to make everything ok.

[momentsmusicaux.livejournal.com]

It's different, but it's still mutilation. People are free to do it, but I still find it deplorable.

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

Just so I can understand your point of view, which of the following are mutilation (in no particular order)?

Piercing your ear.
Piercing your ear with one of those ones that makes a massive permanent hole.
A tattoo.
Cutting your nails.
Cutting your hair.
Permanent hair removal.

[strawberryfrog.livejournal.com]

Some of those are mutilation, if you do them to someone without consent.

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

I agree, but I wasn't asking in that context. Momentsmusicaux's view seemed to be that altering your own body by surgery is mutilation whether or not it is consensual. I was asking about those actions in that context.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

FWIW, I think part of the disagreement may be what poeple mean by "mutilation": I think sometimes it's used in a synonymous-with-deplorable way, and sometimes in a severe-modification-with-some-negative-connotations-whether-or-not-justified way.

But obviously the important question is what sorts of body modification people think is acceptable, not which ones they would choose to call "mutilation", although using that word can be a useful way of getting people to understand why something is undesirable.

[naath.livejournal.com]

I don't think anything is "mutilation" if the person it is being done to has honestly and freely consented to the procedure. It's certainly a different thing in any case and a useful distinction to make.

There are a lot of things in the world where there is no pressing medical reason to do them, but also no pressing medical reason to NOT do them; so personal preference is the important factor. I think that if you want to over-ride someone's personal preference for doing something you have to do more than say "that thing you do, it is not necessary" you need to also say "it is harmful" (and have proof to back it up). If something does come with risks then one must weigh the risks against the benefits; I do think that when you are doing this for someone else (an infant, say) then you need to be sure you are thinking about the benefits *to them* and not *to you*... but that doesn't mean you should never do anything risky, or consent to risky things on behalf of a child. "Cultural reasons" is a "benefit" the question is what is the strength of this benefit and what is the strength of the risk involved, these questions are hard to answer for other people.

[artkouros.livejournal.com]

I just don't get the uproar over male infant circumcision. I agree it's unnecessary, and bizarre, but I was circumcised, and most guys I know are circumcised (American, you know) and I don't know anyone who feels the sort of angst expressed in this article.

Sometimes I wish I wasn't circumcised, but mostly I just wish I had a bigger dick.

[andrewducker]

Of course, if you were raised in a culture where chopping bits off of babies is normal then it's going to seem weird that people make a big fuss about it. Culture's like that :->

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

+1

If 95% of people weren't circumcised wouldn't you have a bigger issue with it?

I used to have a problem that I was circumcised (all the fault of the maternal grandparents IIRC) but got over it sometime after leaving school. Whilst at school I had enough things I felt different about and cared more about each one. Having one less would have been nice.

[andrewducker]

If we were at the 95% level then I'd be pushing for illegality :->

It's not something I actively think about unless prompted by something like that article, so I wouldn't say it bothers me on a day-to-day basis. I just object to it on principle.

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

You're right, it's not that high, though the percentage shouldn't make a difference to whether you thought it should be illegal surely?

It's not something that bothers me at all any more, but it's certainly not something I'll be passing on.

As for stats: "The 2000 British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyle found that 16% of 16-44 year-olds were circumcised, the rate being 20% in those aged 40-44 and 12% in the 16-19 year age group"

So it's in decline but not dropped out completely. I wonder how many of those were for medical reasons.

[andrewducker]

I wonder what it is in the 0-5 group. The problem with pushing for illegality is that you're going to end up with strong believers doing it anyway, but in back-street situations, rather than clinical settings. This has the strong likelihood of making things worse rather than better for a subset. So thinking about it, it might be better to just let it whither away through social pressure rather than anything else.

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

I personally find it hard to push for illegality. I don't think it's physically damaging (unlike female circumcision) and the best route would likely be social pressure as you say. You make a good point about keeping it out of the back street. Just imagine something going wrong and someone not taking their child to hospital for fear of being charged. Not a price worth paying.

Slightly off topic, I find the fact we have Halal practices allowed in this country quite unsettling. The idea that there are ways that are illegal to kill animals due to cruelty, but are allowd for religious reasons fills me with ... well...unsettledness.

[andrewducker]

I don't think it's physically damaging
Chopping bits off isn't physically damaging?

(I know what you mean though - the damage is less severe and less functionally harmful than female circumcision.)

The thing about Dhabihah (and Shechita*, which it is very closely related to) is that up until a few decades ago most slaughter was carried out in that kind of way. Getting people to care enough about animal welfare to rank a couple of minutes of possible animal suffering above human beliefs is going to be tricky.

I did a quick check, and the only countries that ban it are Sweden, Norway and Switzerland, which means that all kosher meat in those countries is imported.

*Do you like how I went away and looked up technical terms?

[drainboy.livejournal.com]

I did mean physically damaging in terms of any sort of long term debilitating damage. The same as losing some other flat of skin that didn't have a lot of function (an ear lobe maybe? or a flap of skin on the knee?). Maybe it is more physically damaging than I give it credit for though.

Personally I think importing something that is illegal to make in a country should be illegal. I'm sure you'll find at least a dozen examples of things that are counter to this point :)
I'd also extend that to things like importing labour intensive things from countries with labour laws we'd find unconscionable (not just slightly different and technically illegal, but illegal to a significant extent).

[ajr.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's physically damaging

It is, actually. Even under normal cases, there's a general loss of sensation to some degree, and in one case I know of (a chap I knew a few years back), severe loss of sensation. It might not be anywhere near as physically damaging as female circumcision, but it is still damaging.

But then, I'm (a) British, and (b) not Jewish, so I think lopping off bits of people's penises for non-medical reasons is absolutely crazy.

[lizw.livejournal.com]

The problem isn’t you. The problem is the problem.

This is actually remarkably good advice for an issue I'm having right now. Not even the article (good though that is), just the phrase. Thank you.

[andrewducker]

I'm glad it was useful - I was worried that someone would take it to mean that the problem was never the person.

[apostle-of-eris.livejournal.com]

Male circumcision may be arguable, but it is not anywhere near in the same category as clitoridectomy.
If you want to argue against circumcision, go ahead; if you insist it's "no different" from clitoridectomy, you have problems.
I only mention this because I tried to make that distinction to someone who seemed very vested in denying it.

[seph-hazard.livejournal.com]

Yes, this.

[andrewducker]

I haven't seen anyone saying they were the same, and I certainly wouldn't agree with them if they did.

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

A lengthier discussion of why model's faces are important would be more interesting.

It shouldn't matter, if I'm buying a pair of trousers or if someone is buying a bikini top, whether the model even has a face or if they're pictures from the neck down. But, of course, it does to (some) people.

[soon_lee]

The rice cooking thing seems unnecessary: I've always used a rice-cooker & it works very well.

And the complaint that a rice-cooker takes too long is disingenuous: if I'm having rice for dinner, the first thing I do is get the rice cooking. Its cooking time is my opportunity to prepare the rest of the meal.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

yup.

I tend to find rice takes exactly as long as the sum of everything else, so it all just works.
when I bother to cook rice, that is. Mostly I forget or am just too damned lazy

[andrewducker]

I don't have a rice cooker, or space for one. My kitchen is tiny.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

I used to have a microwave rice cooker that was the Best Thing Ever.* It was a plastic container, shaped like a casserole, with a closely fitting lid and second container that fitted inside the first. The second container was perforated. Place rice inside second container, half fill with water and put in the microwave. The rice was first boiled and then steamed. As the water was absorbed into the cooking rice its level dropped until it was below the level of the inner pot and then it started to slowly steam the rice. It was pretty difficult to over cook the rice.

It also had a shallower bowl that fitted into the top of the rice steamer so one could steam vegetables and so on.

I miss it.

My current method for cooking rice is this.

I heat a small amount of oil in a pan and then add the rice. Stir it about a little. Meanwhile I boil a volume of water equal to the volume of rice in a kettle. Once boiled I pour the boiling water over the hot oiled rice**. The water flashes to steam. I put the lid on and turn the gas off. The rice will cook away gently boiling / steaming itself with out over cooking and keeping warm in the pan. Once all of the water has been absorbed the rice will keep warm and recycle moisture so it won’t burn or turn to mush.

As the rest of dinner is nearly ready I can test the rice and if I’ve added too little water I can top it up with a touch of boiling water from the kettle.

It’s not infallible but it very rarely fails and as a method it usually fails safe i.e. when it doesn’t produce perfect rice on time without further intervention the rice is usually slightly under done and only requires a touch of extra hot water.


*Perhaps not ever but it was pretty darn good.
** I sometimes add a stock cube.

[andrewducker]

Thank you, that was very useful! (And now I've bought a microwave rice cooker)

[soon_lee]

If you have a microwave, I can recommend a microwave rice cooker. My mum swears by it and she was brought up proper - she learnt to cook rice using a pot over a coal fire.

[andrewducker]

Ooh, yes please!

[soon_lee]

Wrong end of the stick: what I meant is that microwave rice cookers work well, and I can recommend using them, not that there is a brand I can recommend.

[andrewducker]

Aaah, in that case I shall wander over to Amazon and see if I can find a well-reviewed one!

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

don't be a free user.
hmm.

depends on the service. I use Google stuff fully aware they're hawking my data. That's mostly ok because, frankly, I would severely struggle to find better that I'd be willing to pay for.
I pay for Apple, quite happily, knowing they aren't hawking my data. I like their stuff. it works for me. Apple technology has saved my life more times that I can be bothered remembering.

Then there's LibreOffice and what I think of [totally incorrectly] as ubuntuware - in general, things that are free and roll as standard with ubuntu, who I trust.
a lot of services look useful, but I would use them once then forget about them. The one exception to this is DropBox, which is also completely priceless - and of course has an optional pay model.

and I'm currently looking for Skype alternatives, because of a deep-rooted and very basic distrust of MicroSoft. My feelings on MS have softened considerably, and continue to do so [I think Metro looks fantastic, and hope it succeeds], but I do not want to be in a position where I have to rely on their products. The call quality of Skype, completely unrelatedly, has gotten a bit rubbish over the last wee while.


Peers: I don't give a hoot about hereditary peers, but if they must exist, yeah, include the women. That's just basic.
I am, though, totally in favour of unelected life peers - a great many of whom are genuine experts in fields far beyond politics. Which is kind of valuable in a system consumed by career politicians.

iPhone autocorrect is one of the terrific unexpected comedy bonuses of the last few years.
and by the Gods it can be painful :)

[0olong.livejournal.com]

I think the 'free user' thing is all about services, no? And software is only a service in a very limited sense...

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

probably.

I do mostly agree with the 'get what you pay for' ethic, and it seems relatively obvious that you're doing yourself no favours if you rely on a service that isn't guaranteed to still exist next week.

it is a little annoying when useful services are bought and vanished, though.

it would be nice if cool free stuff could just stay cool and free. Shame the world doesn't work that way.