A Specific Explanation in Physics: the Constituting Tension between Discrete and Continuous Objects. Greg Wallenborn (Free University of Brussels) Explanation in physics can take several ways: mathematical demonstration, experimental causation, comparison of data with theory, model building. Models themselves are of different kinds: analogies, computable hypothesis, display by rule of thumb, … I would like however to point out a singular utilisation of mathematics in physics. From a physicist’s point of view, mathematics is not just a tool; it is also a conceptual resource (one can think about instantaneous speed, geometrical curves, vector fields, or principles of symmetry). In order to grasp the constituting relationship between mathematics and physics, it is interesting to point to a basic duality within mathematics: discretiness versus continuity. This duality has various declinations, and the first one rests upon discrete numbers of arithmetic versus continuous forms of geometry. Another important declination is the contrast between calculation that rules discrete numbers (algebra, statistics, computers) and demonstration that requires continuous arrangements (movements, topology, spatial configurations). While calculation deals with discrete numbers and is all-purpose — it runs from mathematics to sociology, from biology to physics —, geometry handles continuous objects and provides demonstrations that appear specific to physics. "Mathematisation of nature", that is the most celebrated part of physics, is actually the invention of physical theories that cross the frontier between discrete and continuous aspects of mathematics. I will argue that interesting and specific explanations in physics lie in the tension between discrete entities (particles, experimental results, e.g.) and continuous objects (trajectories, fields, experimental media). This tension is indeed exhibited in a series of historical cases: differential and integral calculus developed jointly with mechanics, operators exploited in electromagnetism, gauge symmetries in particle physics. Furthermore, the combination of discrete and continuous elements allows a theoretical polymorphism, that is the possibility of translation between some theories (Newton’s laws = Lagrange’s system = Hamilton’s equations; Heisenberg matrix mechanics = Schrödinger wave mechanics). This polymorphism is crucial in creating a convenient theoretical framework, hence providing justification for an explanation from a mathematical physics view. One should not however consider mathematical demonstration as a downright explanation in physics. Physicists need also an explanation by rule of thumb to endorse such a demonstration, to figure phenomena out. They have to encounter experimental devices in which causes and effects are split. From this viewpoint, specificity of physical explanation consists in creating "objects" that connect discrete and continuous aspects. These links are what I call "agents" for 1) they are the active node of a physical agency, 2) they represent the articulation of causal entities with mathematical representation. In a classical picture, the most elementary agent is a shock between two particles; in a quantum picture, it is a jump (?) between two energy levels. One can think of other exemplars: a test charge in a field, a phase transition, a virtual particle as a quantum exchange. Agents are ways of inserting discontinuous dynamics in a continuum, or inversely to yield a continuous object from discrete operations. In some respect, agents are created to encounter both a experimental account and a mathematical space. Their origin is thus neither purely mathematical nor purely experimental. Agents slip between mathematical demonstrations and experimental devices, and show irreducible achievements of physics. This specificity of physics is apparent in the guise of bricolage with which agents often arise: mathematical series and their limits before Cauchy’s rigorous demonstration, mechanical models of the ether before notion of field, Bohr’s atomic model before quantum mechanics, Dirac’s delta function before distribution theory, Feynman’s path integrals that still pose some mathematical problems. In summary, I will argue that agents are a kind of explanation, singular to physics, that enable to link mathematical representations to experimental causation. Urticaria (Hives) Urticaria is the medical name for hives. These are welts; pink swellings that come up on any part of the skin. They itch and each individual hive lasts a few hours before fading away, leaving no trace. New hives appear as old areas fade. They can be pea sized or join to cover broad areas of the body. While the itch can be intense, the skin is usually not scabbed or broken. In some people the hives burn or sting. Hives are very common with 10-20 percent of the population having at least one episode in their lifetime. Hives can sometimes occur in deeper tissues of the eyes, mouth, hands or genitals. These areas mat develop a swelling that is frightening in appearance, but usually goes away in less than 24 hours. This swelling is called angioedema. In many cases, a single attack of hives is due to an infection or virus and these go away within a few days to a few weeks. Some people get repeated attacks that occur as an allergic reaction to a variety of things (foods, most commonly nuts, chocolate, fish, tomatoes, eggs, fresh berries and milk, insect stings, and medications). In this case, they usually break out within a few hours of the exposure. Usually, the patients figure out the cause by themselves, and they never bother coming to a doctor. Certain people can develop recurrent hives from sunlight, cold, pressure, vibration or exercise. These are called the physical urticarias. If hives develop from scratching or firmly rubbing the skin it is called dermatographism. It is the most common of the physical urticarias and it affects about 5 percent of the population. It doesn't always itch. This condition sometimes also occurs along with other forms of hives. Some people react to anything that makes them hot or sweaty with hives. This can be sunlight, exercise, hot baths, blushing or anger. These are tiny intensely itchy hives with a big red blotch around them and are called cholinergic urticaria. Pressure urticaria shows up as a deep welt in an area of prolonged pressure. Occasional people react to the cold. Even more rare is a reaction to sunlight. Occasionally, a person will continue to have hives for many years. These hives, called chronic urticaria, can be one of the most frustrating problems dermatologists see in their patients. This is defined as hives lasting longer than 6 weeks. Patients like this come in miserable and worried with this problem, often having seen multiple specialists. Neither the patient nor the doctor can determine the cause of the hives. Patients will often say, "It has got to be something causing these hives." The truth is hard to accept for some patients. In the overwhelming majority of cases it is not "something" causing the chronic hives, it is "nothing." That is, in about 95% of chronic hives cases, the hives are "idiopathic" (a medical term that means there is no discernible cause). Because of those 5% of cases with a cause, it is worthwhile to see a physician to determine if any underlying disease is present (e.g. thyroid problems, liver problems, skin diseases, sinusitis) or if there is an allergic cause (i.e. a reaction to a drug, insect, food, etc.). This can be accomplished by a good history and physical, a few blood and urine tests and sometimes a skin biopsy. Some patients with chronic hives and elevated anti-thyroid antibodies in the blood improve when given thyroid supplement even if the thyroid function is normal. In about half of patients with chronic idiopathic hives, the explanation is that body's immune system is, in a sense,
overactive. The urticaria is "autoimmune". The immune system is attacking the normal tissues of the body and causing hives as a result. We know certain urticaria sufferers have other signs of autoimmune problems. Some have autoimmune thyroid disease, vitiligo, swollen joints, or certain abnormalities in the blood (especially the ANA test). A new treatment has recently emerged for autoimmune urticaria. This is the use of Plaquenil, a drug originally used for malaria. In a recent trial 83% improved or cleared completely when used for three months or more. So, in many patients with chronic hives, there is really no exposure (drug, food, insect, chemical) to blame for the urticaria. The patient must understand and accept this for their ideal management. Basically, all that needs to be done is treat the hives. The main treatment of hives is antihistamines, and they will work if they are used properly. Common reasons for lack of effectiveness of antihistamines are 1) the particular antihistamine used is not strong enough 2) the antihistamine is not used in a high enough dose 3) the antihistamines are not continued for a long enough period. The most well tolerated initial treatment is the non-sedating antihistamine Claritin. Zyrtec is similar but may sometimes cause sedation. If that doesn't eliminate the hives, a sedating-type of antihistamine (hydroxyzine, cyproheptadine or doxepin) is added at night. High doses may be needed and this will cause sedation. Fortunately, most patients will become less affected by sedation after they have taken the drug regularly for a while. If that doesn't work, some doctors may try a short course of cortisone (steroids) to clear the hives completely. Then the patient can maintain the effect with the much safer antihistamines, since steroids have significant side effects if used long term. A drug used for psoriasis and kidney transplants, cyclosporin, is almost always effective in clearing even the most severe cases of chronic hives at low doses. However, it causes significant side effects if taken for a long time. There are other medications that may be added to the antihistamines, but these non-standard therapies are not always effective. However, if the hives are not responding, they are worth a try. Examples are anti-acid pills (Tagamet, Zantac), dapsone and sulfasalazine (anti-inflammatory antibiotics), nifedipine (a blood pressure medicine), Accolate (an asthma drug), colchicine (a drug for gout), and several others. The important thing is that the patient is given enough medication (antihistamines, perhaps in conjunction with other drugs) to suppress the hives. Whatever it is that controls a patients hives, should be the daily regimen, taking the drugs every day, whether or not they have the hives on any given day. The idea is that one is preventing the hives from breaking out. Some doctors suggest that medications should be continued for long periods - perhaps even a month after the hives have disappeared. Again, the exception to this is the cortisone/steroid-type medications, which should only be used for short periods initially to quiet down the urticaria. Remember that one must work closely with their doctor to find a medication regimen that suppresses the hives until they resolve on their own.
Endangered/Extinct African Elephant African Wild Dog Prehistoric Life Algal Reefs American Lion American Mastodon Archaeopteryx Arctic Lupines Babine Lake Mammoth Cariboo Fleshing tool Climatic change Coal-Age Reptiles Coral Reefs Dawn Horse Dinosaur Eggs Dinosaur Extinction Dinosaur Metabolism Dinosaur Trackways Diversification of Organisms Dovekies Dromiceiomimus Earliest Dogs Eohippus Euoplocephalus Flying Reptiles Giant Beaver Giant Rhinoceros Ground Squirrel Helmeted Muskox Heterodontosaurus Hypacrosaurus Ice-Age Ice-Age: Animals on Vancouver Island Jefferson's Ground Sloth Kentrosaurus Lobe-Finned Fish Mamenchisaurus Moas Opisthocoelicaudia Ouranosaurus Polar Bear Panoplosaurus Ringed Seals Saiga Antelope Scimitar Cat Short-Faced Bear Stegoceras Stenonychosaurus Styracosaurus Teeth Mammoth Therizinosaurus Tundra Muskox Tyrannosaurus Western Camel White Lake Whale Woolly Mammoth Yukon Wild Ass American Alligator Asian Elephant Asian Lion Atlantic Ridley Atlantic Salmon Bald Eagle Blue Whale Black-footed Ferret Black Lemur Bowhead Whale Carolina Parakeet Cheetah Chimpanzee Coelacanth Dodo Eastern Cougar Eskimo Curlew Fin Whale Florida Manatee Galapagos Flightless Cormorant Gaur Gavial Giant Anteater Giant Armadillo Giant Panda Gorilla Great Auk Greater Prairie Chicken Green Turtle Grey Whale Grizzly Bear Humpback Whale Imperial Parrot Indian Rhinoceros Jaguar Japanese Crested Ibis Kagu Kakapo Komodo Dragon Leatherback Turtle Leopard Loggerhead Turtle Mediterranean Monk Seal Monkey-eating Eagle Mountain Gorilla Orangutan Passenger Pigeon Peregrine Falcon Piping Plover Pronghorn Antelope Przewalski's Horse Pygmy Hippopotamus Sea Otter Sei Whale Shortnose Sturgeon Snow Leopard Takahé Tapir Tiger Trumpeter Swan Vancouver Island Marmot White Pelican White Rhinoceros Whooping Crane Wild Ass Wild Yak
The Genius of Mozart His father, Leopold, began to give his sister, Nanerl, clavier lessons when she was 7 and Wolfgang was barely three. He would not stay away from her lessons. If he was playing with blocks while the music was played, he would get up and come to the piano. He would reach up and play thirds and laugh; if he missed and played two adjacent notes, the discord would make him cry. After only 1 year of learning, he would stay at the clavier for extended periods of time willingly and eagerly. He could learn a minuet perfectly in one sitting. He composed a clavier concerto before he was 6. When he was 6, his father and two friends were playing chamber music and Wolfgang wanted to play second fiddle. His father shewed him away because he had never had lessons on the violin though he had a tiny violin. Finally Leopold gave in and to the surprise of the three men, Wolfgang was able to play 2nd violin remarkably well. Leopold began to look upon the lessons that he gave Wolfgang as a daily look at what God had wrought rather than directly teaching the boy something new. Leopold was a good father. He loved Wolfgang dearly and was openly affectionate to him. He provided the musical milieu for Wolfgang's genius to flourish, and perbaps most important, recognized his creative talent as more important than his performing talent. While it is true that Leopold exploited both Nanerl and Wolfgang by dragging them back and forth across Europe to perform in the courts, he also provided the love, encouragement and demand for excellence that would aid Wolfgang's creative genius to flourish. Davenport, in her great biography of Mozart, said: As it happened, God was for once intelligent as well as kind. He planted in Wolfgang Mozart what is probably the purest, sheerest genius ever born in man, and then placed it in the care of Leopold. The resultant flowering was no accident. The Dog is the most likeable sign of the Chinese zodiac. Like his animal namesake, he is loyal with a capital "L". He is the one who people are most likely to turn to when they need help. The dog person will come through every time. That is because he/she is sensitive to others and empathizes with them, particularly if someone has suffered an injustice; he/she reacts quickly with the same feeling as though he/she had been personally offended. Friends know that they can rely upon their Dog friend to keep a promise or remain cool in a crisis. Dog types are honest, intelligent and straightforward. They will take on any responsibility that is given to them and you can be sure that they will do their job well. People born in this year tend to be easily upset and shocked more often than the other more signs. The dog is loyal, unselfish, and idealistic. They can sometimes be worriers and overly critical. Dogs go best with tigers and horses. Their secret friends are other dogs, tigers, horses and rabbits. Dogs get along worst with Dragons, whom they perceive as arrogant and all flash with no substance.
The Top 100®: The Big Picture From its inception in the late 1960s, CCJ’s The Top 100® has been a simple ranking of for-hire carriers by revenues. That’s a reasonable way of positioning carriers, but this approach ignores other important metrics of size, including the number of power units they own or control and the number of company drivers and owner-operators they use. This year, we decided that it’s time to take a fresh look at The Top 100® by adopting a blended ranking – one that takes into account revenues, drivers and fleet size. (For detailed information on methodology, see page 94.) Not surprisingly, parcel behemoth UPS leads in all three categories, followed by chief competitor Federal Express. But there are significant differences as well. For example, Swift Transportation is No. 9 in revenues, but it’s No. 3 and 4 in drivers and power units, respectively. So in this year’s The Top 100®, which covers results from 2004, a blended ranking lands Swift at No. 4. Similarly, Yellow Transportation was No. 8 in revenues and No. 7 in drivers but No. 12 in the number of power units. CCJ’s blended ranking puts Yellow at No. 10. (Where applicable, The Top 100® reports affiliated carriers separately, so Yellow sister company Roadway Express is No. 9 in the overall blended list.) We believe the new approach provides a fuller picture of the size of trucking companies. We also go a little deeper with the rankings. In the past, CCJ ranked the top 200 carriers by revenue. The Top 100® now ranks the top 250 carriers using our blended methodology. Plus, we rank the top 100 carriers by revenues, by drivers and by power units. And we show the leading carriers by industry segment. With this baseline of new categories of information, we will in future years be able to highlight growth and contraction in fleet size and driver force as well as revenues. Regrettably, what you won’t find in The Top 100® this year are the detailed expense figures that we have published in the past. The source of that data has been Form M, which carriers with $3 million or more in annual revenues were required to file with the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Last year, the Department of Transportation transferred responsibility for motor carrier financial and operating statistics to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, but Congress denied funding to FMCSA for the work, so most of the reports for 2004 were not processed. In its report on the DOT appropriations bill, however, the House Appropriations Committee said it did not intend for the collection and reporting of survey data to lapse. Rather, the panel wants BTS to continue these responsibilities under the budget it has for that purpose. If and when the issue is resolved and Form M data flows again, we will bring back the expense tables that have been so popular over the years. Meanwhile, we hope you will find our new approach to The Top 100® interesting and enlightening. Top 10 by Revenue United Parcel Service FedEx Express DHL Worldwide Express FedEx Ground FedEx Freight Schneider National Carriers Roadway Express Yellow Transportation Swift Transportation J B Hunt Transport Top 10 by Drivers United Parcel Service FedEx Express Swift Transportation DHL Worldwide Express FedEx Ground Schneider National Carriers Yellow Transportation J B Hunt Transport Con-Way Transportation Services Roadway Express Top 10 by Power Units United Parcel Service FedEx Express DHL Worldwide Express Swift Transportation FedEx Ground Schneider National Carriers J B Hunt Transport Werner Enterprises Roadway Express FedEx Freight
The 25 most difficult questions you'll be asked on a job interview Being prepared is half the battle. If you are one of those executive types unhappy at your present post and embarking on a New Year's resolution to find a new one, here's a helping hand. The job interview is considered to be the most critical aspect of every expedition that brings you face-to- face with the future boss. One must prepare for it with the same tenacity and quickness as one does for a fencing tournament or a chess match. This article has been excerpted from "PARTING COMPANY: How to Survive the Loss of a Job and Find Another Successfully" by William J. Morin and James C. Cabrera. Copyright by Drake Beam Morin, inc. Publised by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Morin is chairman and Cabrera is president of New York-based Drake Beam Morin, nation's major outplacement firm, which has opened offices in Philadelphia. 1. Tell me about yourself. Since this is often the opening question in an interview, be extracareful that you don't run off at the mouth. Keep your answer to a minute or two at most. Cover four topics: early years, education, work history, and recent career experience. Emphasize this last subject. Remember that this is likely to be a warm-up question. Don't waste your best points on it. 2. What do you know about our organization? You should be able to discuss products or services, revenues, reputation, image, goals, problems, management style, people, history and philosophy. But don't act as if you know everything about the place. Let your answer show that you have taken the time to do some research, but don't overwhelm the interviewer, and make it clear that you wish to learn more. You might start your answer in this manner: "In my job search, I've investigated a number of companies. Yours is one of the few that interests me, for these reasons..." Give your answer a positive tone. Don't say, "Well, everyone tells me that you're in all sorts of trouble, and that's why I'm here", even if that is why you're there. 3. Why do you want to work for us? The deadliest answer you can give is "Because I like people." What else would you like-animals? Here, and throughout the interview, a good answer comes from having done your homework so that you can speak in terms of the company's needs. You might say that your research has shown that the company is doing things you would like to be involved with, and that it's doing them in ways that greatly interest you. For example, if the organization is known for strong management, your answer should mention that fact and show that you would like to be a part of that team. If the company places a great deal of emphasis on research and development, emphasize the fact that you want to create new things and that you know this is a place in which such activity is encouraged. If the organization stresses financial controls, your answer should mention a reverence for numbers. If you feel that you have to concoct an answer to this question - if, for example, the company stresses research, and you feel that you should mention it even though it really doesn't interest you- then you probably should not be taking that interview, because you probably shouldn't be considering a job with that organization. Your homework should include learning enough about the company to avoid approaching places where you wouldn't be able -or wouldn't want- to function. Since most of us are poor liars, it's difficult to con anyone in an interview. But even if you should succeed at it, your prize is a job you don't really want. 4. What can you do for us that someone else can't? Here you have every right, and perhaps an obligation, to toot your own horn and be a bit egotistical. Talk about your record of getting things done, and mention specifics from your resume or list of career accomplishments. Say that your skills and interests, combined with this history of getting results, make you valuable. Mention your ability to set priorities, identify problems, and use your experience and energy to solve them. 5. What do you find most attractive about this position? What seems least attractive about it? List three or four attractive factors of the job, and mention a single, minor, unattractive item. 6. Why should we hire you? Create your answer by thinking in terms of your ability, your experience, and your energy. (See question 4.) 7. What do you look for in a job? Keep your answer oriented to opportunities at this organization. Talk about your desire to perform and be recognized for your contributions. Make your answer oriented toward opportunity rather than personal security. 8. Please give me your defintion of [the position for which you are being interviewed]. Keep your answer brief and taskoriented. Think in in terms of responsibilities and accountability. Make sure that you really do understand what the position involves before you attempt an answer. If you are not certain. ask the interviewer; he or she may answer the question for you. 9. How long would it take you to make a meaningful contribution to our firm? Be realistic. Say that, while you would expect to meet pressing demands and pull your own weight from the first day, it might take six months to a year before you could expect to know the organization and its needs well enough to make a major contribution. 10. How long would you stay with us? Say that you are interested in a career with the organization, but admit that you would have to continue to feel challenged to remain with any organization. Think in terms of, "As long as we both feel achievement-oriented." 11. Your resume suggests that you may be over-qualified or too experienced for this position. What's Your opinion? Emphasize your interest in establishing a long-term association with the organization, and say that you assume that if you perform well in his job, new opportunities will open up for you. Mention that a strong company needs a strong staff. Observe that experienced executives are always at a premium. Suggest that since you are so wellqualified, the employer will get a fast return on his investment. Say that a growing, energetic company can never have too much talent. 12. What is your management style? You should know enough about the company's style to know that your management style will complement it. Possible styles include: task oriented (I'll enjoy problem-solving identifying what's wrong, choosing a solution and implementing it"), results-oriented ("Every management decision I make is determined by how it will affect the bottom line"), or even paternalistic ("I'm committed to taking care of my subordinates and pointing them in the right direction"). A participative style is currently quite popular: an open-door method of managing in which you get things done by motivating people and delegating responsibility. As you consider this question, think about whether your style will let you work hatppily and effectively within the organization. 13. Are you a good manager? Can you give me some examples? Do you feel that you have top managerial potential? Keep your answer achievementand ask-oriented. Rely on examples from your career to buttress your argument. Stress your experience and your energy. 14. What do you look for when You hire people? Think in terms of skills. initiative, and the adaptability to be able to work comfortably and effectively with others. Mention that you like to hire people who appear capable of moving up in the organization. 15. Have you ever had to fire people? What were the reasons, and how did you handle the situation? Admit that the situation was not easy, but say that it worked out well, both for the company and, you think, for the individual. Show that, like anyone else, you don't enjoy unpleasant tasks but that you can resolve them efficiently and -in the case of firing someone- humanely. 16. What do y
An YouGov opinion poll for Sky News carried out just after the election was announced, found that 63% of those questioned stated that they had found the recent campaigning "boring". Do you find the campaign boring? Or are you sick of this complaint? What, if anything, would inspire you to take more interest? Are the parties avoiding the issues important to you? Send us your suggestions to liven up the campaign using the form on the right. BBC NEWS: VIDEO AND AUDIO Dr Martin Farr answers your questions Dr Martin Farr, political historian at Newcastle University answered your questions on voter apathy. Click on the link to watch the video. This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far: It's no wonder people are bored with election coverage and campaigning. We've had four years to watch the parties at work and a few weeks of frantic point-scoring and self-publicising is probably not of much interest to the general public. Hannah, London Not boring, just predictable with the main parties rolling out the same old rhetoric time after time - making grand promises, and not delivering. Gareth Stafford, Chesterfield, Derbyshire This is the stuff Hollywood producers would fight over John Emson, Watford, Hertfordshire Boring? I beg to disagree, this election has everything. The release of the documents today on Iraq has only added to the spice! This is the stuff Hollywood producers would fight over. John Emson, Watford, Hertfordshire How can it be boring when I wake up to find the party sign outside my house has been ripped out of the ground and thrown into the road? Only an election can bring that sort of passion and stupidity at the same time. David Mercier, Kent, UK Of course it's boring - look at our choice of candidates, none of them can really answer a question properly. They are so out of touch with reality, it's a disgrace. Maria Cornell, Leominster, UK Bored, no. Exasperated and utterly fed up with the spin and drivel, yes. We have no means of making a formal abstention, so it really isn't any wonder that the British populace are expressing their distaste by simply not voting. It's not apathy, it's disgust. Kate, Bristol In student union elections we have an option of 'Re-Open Nomination', in case none of the candidates is any good. I think we should have that option at the general election, seeing as listening to the different parties is like theme and variations rather than anything original! Helen, Cambridge, UK We're just all getting too cynical about the whole process Steve, UK Not boring, we're just all getting too cynical about the whole process. I blame the media, we're bombarded by this stuff 24/7. No wonder we're switched off. Steve, UK "Parties only target marginal seats." I live and work in one of the top ten marginals. I have had no Labour or Lib Dem campaign literature and neither party has canvassed me. The Tories have tried a little harder. Labour in particular should be ashamed. They have either given up or are complacent. Neither explanation does their candidate any credit. Molly Twomlow, Monmouth, Wales As this is the first time I have voted in a general election, I think that it would be better if there was more television coverage, debates etc so that I can make an informed decision. At the moment I'm wondering what the difference is between the different parties. Adele Barakat, Hyde, Cheshire I think it would be wrong to say that the election campaign is boring, they aren't meant to be a fun fair ride. However, I am having trouble believing any party this time round. So much pettiness and not enough real issues discussed. Hence I am going for the tactical vote. I know who I don't want in. Charlotte, Maidstone Boring, no. Crucial, yes James, Norwich Boring, no. Crucial, yes. I personally can't wait for the Question Time special tomorrow night to see them fighting it out, although a joust would be even better. I personally think Tony Blair is the best prime minister we have had or are likely to have. British voters seem to very quickly forget the disasters of the Tory years. James, Norwich Boring yes, but at least it doesn't go on for two years like in the US. After four weeks of this, the snooker World Championship will seem like an adrenalin rush. Michael, Glasgow Election campaigns are not boring, far from it. I enjoy watching and listening at every opportunity. But I do find the new Conservative poster rather distasteful. They're not known as the nasty party for nothing. Kathy, Exeter As an American, I must admit that I have hardly noticed the election even though I'm in the UK. The campaign needs more formal "town hall" style debates. A half-hour show on the radio this Sunday just isn't enough. It should be covered on prime time TV, and needs to be 90 minutes long at least so that voters can hear the candidates answer some tough questions. Alan, London I think the election campaign would liven up if there were more debates, more interviews with the likes of Paxman. I like nothing more than seeing politicians under fire, and seeing how they cope with the pressure. Phil Lowe, Chesterfield I think that the campaign is fascinating. What drives Michael Howard, at 63, to go to such lengths to obtain power? He seems to be oblivious of what he is revealing about his own character. What makes Tony Blair think it worthwhile to continue after all the abuse of himself and his family? J Westerman, Leeds Most people's votes do not matter and parties only target the marginal seats Philip Bottomley, Ashtead, Surrey Not one poster in our neighbourhood. Of course it's a Tory enclave so nobody bothers. Perhaps the lack of interest is due to the current system - most people's votes do not matter and parties only target the marginal seats. Small wonder it's such a bore and we're all turned off. Vive proportional representation where we all get a say and democracy is re-established in this country. Philip Bottomley, Ashtead, Surrey I don't understand why anyone can find this election boring or why many people seem to think that the party policies are all similar - what a load of rubbish - there are massive differences if you bother to listen and look. Just take taxes as one example - vote Labour or Lib Dem and we will certainly see tax rises - vote Tory and we will all see some tax cuts - clear enough for you!! Steve Plank, Bracknell, UK Not boring, but Labour and the Tories have made it despicable. Especially Michael Howard. He has behaved deplorably. I am very interested, but unfortunately it's same old same old from Labour, and what appears to be hate and scaremongering from the Tories. This isn't an election campaign, it's a schoolyard brawl. I'm glad I don't support either of these two bullies. Jennifer Hynes, Plymouth, UK What the politicians need to do is to become more accessible to the people Gemma Robinson, Haywards Heath As a 15 year old currently attempting to follow the campaign with the enthusiasm the politicians are trying to encourage, I have to admit , despite knowing that who is voted for may well affect my future, I fail to be impressed. The policies seem abstract and confusing. I can find little that will have a direct affect on me. What the politicians need to do is to become more accessible to the people; to explain directly, clearly and without spin or lies, how the policies will affect them. Gemma Robinson, Haywards Heath Not boring, but certainly repetitive. It would help if all parties at least attempted to draw in voters outside of their target groups by having policies on all major issues. For instance, the Conservatives have based their whole campaign on five key policies - th
Bread may be the staff of life, but few spend time making it. This is a shame, as bread is not that hard to make, and a simple hand-made loaf can provide pleasures beyond those of machine-made or store-bought break. This article describes how to make bread using a recipe passed from father to son.
What you will need 2 3/4 cups (about 650 ml) of warm water Some flour (about 8 cups, though it varies). Regular, unbleached white flour works well. Whole wheat flour rises slowly, due to the lack of gluten, but a mix of 1/2 whole wheat and 1/2 white flour gives good results. Two packets of dried yeast. Three tablespoons (about 45 ml) of sugar or malt extract A bit less than a tablespoon (about 10 ml) of salt (optional) Shortening--butter, oil, lard, anything that's greasy and edible A big bowl Two bread loaf pans A big horizontal surface--a countertop works well Paper towels A spoon and a knife An oven A rack of some sort, or just the top of the stove Some butter for later Procedure Mix the water and sugar and, if desired, salt in the big bowl. Add the yeast. Go post a couple of messages to K5. When you come back, the yeast should have grown to form a stinky scum on the water. Add flour and stir. At first, it will look like clumps of flour in liquid. Keep stirring and add more flour. Eventually, it will become a sticky, spongy mass. Dump some flour liberally on your countertop or other horizontal surface. Remove the sticky mass with your hands and plop it onto the flour. Sprinkle flour over the top. Now comes the part that puts many people off: kneading. For some, this is too much like work. Yet it's a satisfying kind of work. You can imagine it's the face of somebody you don't like. For each step of kneading, push down on the dough with the heels of your hands and spread it out. Then turn it over, sprinkle with flour, and fold it in half. True hackers will recognize that this uses the power of exponentiation; every iteration multiplies the number of layers by two. Twenty times, for about a million layers, is about right. Stop kneading when it stops sticking when you fold it over. Wash the original bowl. It doesn't matter if it's still a bit wet. Put the kneaded dough into the bowl. Cover it with a damp paper towel. Go off and post some more to K5 while it rises to at least twice the original size. It may take twenty minutes or two hours. Do not continue until it has risen. When it has risen, punch it down. Yes, use your fists. It should make hissing noises like something from the Sci-Fi channel. Then use your fingers to slap it down, pick it up, and squeeze it. It shouldn't be too sticky at this point, but it it's a little bit sticky, that's OK. Smear shortening liberally over the inside of the two bread pans. Divide the dough into two and spread each half into one of the bread pans. Cover again with wet paper towels and wait for it to expand again to twice its size. Smoosh the dough down again, and pinch it so that it has a bit of a crest longitudinal to the pans. Heat the oven to 375 F (190 C). Put the pans in and bake for about 35 to 40 minutes. You can check visually for doneness. If it looks like bread, it is. Remove the pans and turn the bread out from the loaves. If you grease them enough, you should just have to turn the pans upside-down. If not, use a knife to separate them from the sides and shade the pans until the bread falls out. Put the loaves on the rack or the top of the stove to cool. What do to with your bread Even before the loaves have cooled, cut off the heel of one loaf, slather it with butter, and eat it. It ruins the next several slices, but it's worth it. Then take the second loaf over to your next-door neighbor. Explain that you have just made bread, and you can't eat two loaves, and would you like some? This is a really great way of making friends of your next-door neighbor. Sometimes it works too well, though. Once, when I did this, the lady of the house tried to seduce me later on. After the bread has cooled, eat it as you might eat ordinary, inferior, not-made-by-you bread. But for a special treat, try it cold with butter and limp bacon. (Trust me on this one, even if you normally like your bacon crisp.) For true nirvana, eat with butter and freshly cut chives. Variations The basic bread recipe can be adapted in any number of directions. As is, it makes a pretty good dough for Bavarian Pizza (sliced tomatoes, smoked ham, Emmenthaler cheese, and nothing else). Some people add shortening to the bread dough. Others swear by milk, so try replacing some of the water with milk. Personally, I prefer a low-fat vegan bread, with only vegetable shortening on the pans. You can make long skinny loaves for French bread: dump a couple of cups of water on the loaves when they're hot in the oven. The following two variations were reverse-engineered and made even better by my father and me from the Neil's Yard bakery in London, England. For both of them, use 1/2 whole wheat flour and 1/2 white flour. Herb Cheese Bread To the standard recipe, add 1/2 lb (250 g) mild white cheese (e.g. Colby, Farmer's), diced and mixed in during kneading, and perhaps a tablespoon each of basil, oregano, thyme, sage, and marjoram. Three Seed Bread To the standard recipe, add a double shotglass (about 3 ounces) each of flax seed, poppy seed, and sesame seed. It's especially good if you toast the seeds first. Enjoy. Sponsors Managed Servers Managed Clusters Virtual Hosting -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Login Make a new account Username: Password: Note: You must accept a cookie to log in. Advertising by Blogads Rock Out-Block Out with Shure Earphones Replace your standard earbuds and upgrade your personal listening experience to Shure Sound Isolating Earphones. Precision-crafted components deliver rich, detailed sound while comfortable isolating sleeves block outside noise. Hear your music like never before - visit shure.com for a demo! Read More... Spy Thriller of the Decade! "Today's finest espionage writer unleashes an instant classic." — Lee Child "[Gayle Lynds is] a kick-ass thriller writer" --- London Observer "Strongly recommended." --- Library Journal And a hot red Jaguar plays a starring role! Read More... Have you unlocked all your car's power? Castrol SYNTEC motor oil offers superior performance for the higher power and speeds of today’s engines. WIN the SYNTEC 2005 Ford Mustang GT customized by Funkmaster Flex! Enter now at Castrol.com/CustomRide Read More... THE FUTURE OF FUEL, THE FUTURE OF FORD With one of the worst fuel efficiency records of any car company, Ford is trying to “go green.” As another oil crisis looms on the horizon, can they turn talk into action? Read More... Reserve your ad now Poll The staff of life Beer 30% Bread 31% So what is this "staff" stuff, anyway? 37% Votes: 85 Results | Other Polls Related Links Also by epepke Display: ThreadedMinimalNestedFlatFlat Unthreaded Sort: Unrated, then HighestHighest Rated FirstLowest Rated FirstIgnore Ratings Newest FirstOldest First How to Make Bread | 141 comments (114 topical, 27 editorial, 0 hidden) i love... (2.00 / 4) (#9) by loomingleaf on Sat Mar 15, 2003 at 07:06:45 AM EST ...making bread! have +1 from me! "It makes you wonder what you're putting on your hook when you keep catching the same fish." ........ Whole Wheat Help (5.00 / 3) (#12) by On Lawn on Sat Mar 15, 2003 at 07:59:15 AM EST At our house we make 100% whole wheat bread, and there are some tricks that are needed to keep it from being cakey. There is no way to make 100% whole wheat bread unless you grind it fresh (more on that later). Also, whole wheat has just as much gluten as white wheat. Bread rises (as I understand it) becuase the gases from the yeast eating the carbohydrates and fill up little bubbles i
Welcome To Boring Business Systems As a locally owned company founded in 1924, focusing only in the Central Florida area, our heritage and experience enables us to better understand the needs of the market we serve. In this competitive world and industry, we understand that there are many options for the products and services we offer, and we know that we must excel to earn your business. Boring Business Systems has continued to grow by providing solutions that increase the efficiency of our customers while being very competitive. For over 80 years now, we have made it our business to meet and hopefully exceed, your business needs. WELCOME Dull Knife Memorial College was officially renamed Chief Dull Knife College in September 2001. The College is named in honor of one of the Northern Cheyenne's most respected historical leaders, Chief Dull Knife, also known as Chief Morning Star. Chief Dull Knife, fighting with great courage and against overwhelming odds, led his band of Northern Cheyenne back to our homeland to maintain the sovereignty of our tribe. Reflecting Chief Dull Knife's determination, the College's primary mission is to provide educational and cultural leadership to its constituents. Located on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation in southeastern Montana, Chief Dull Knife College offers a variety of Associate in Arts and Associate in Applied Science degrees as well as certificate programs. The College is accredited by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities and serves the Northern Cheyenne Reservation and surrounding communities. Please feel free to review our web site and learn more about our tribal college.
JOIN THE FIGHT! UNITE with your brothers and sisters to spread the word : SPORTS SUCK!
BELL CURVE The Inequality Taboo It's time to start talking about differences between groups of people. BY CHARLES MURRAY Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT When the late Richard Herrnstein and I published "The Bell Curve" 11 years ago, the furor over its discussion of ethnic differences in IQ was so intense that most people who have not read the book still think it was about race. Since then, I have deliberately not published anything about group differences in IQ, mostly to give the real topic of "The Bell Curve"--the role of intelligence in reshaping America's class structure--a chance to surface. The Lawrence Summers affair last January made me rethink my silence. The president of Harvard University offered a few mild, speculative, off-the-record remarks about innate differences between men and women in their aptitude for high-level science and mathematics, and was treated by Harvard's faculty as if he were a crank. The typical news story portrayed the idea of innate sex differences as a renegade position that reputable scholars rejected. It was depressingly familiar. In the autumn of 1994, I had watched with dismay as "The Bell Curve" 's scientifically unremarkable statements about black IQ were successfully labeled as racist pseudoscience. At the opening of 2005, I watched as some scientifically unremarkable statements about male-female differences were successfully labeled as sexist pseudoscience. The Orwellian disinformation about innate group differences is not wholly the media's fault. Many academics who are familiar with the state of knowledge are afraid to go on the record. Talking publicly can dry up research funding for senior professors and can cost assistant professors their jobs. But while the public's misconception is understandable, it is also getting in the way of clear thinking about American social policy. Good social policy can be based on premises that have nothing to do with scientific truth. The premise that is supposed to undergird all of our social policy, the founders' assertion of an unalienable right to liberty, is not a falsifiable hypothesis. But specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm. One such premise is that the distribution of innate abilities and propensities is the same across different groups. The statistical tests for uncovering job discrimination assume that men are not innately different from women, blacks from whites, older people from younger people, homosexuals from heterosexuals, Latinos from Anglos, in ways that can legitimately affect employment decisions. Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 assumes that women are no different from men in their attraction to sports. Affirmative action in all its forms assumes there are no innate differences between any of the groups it seeks to help and everyone else. The assumption of no innate differences among groups suffuses American social policy. That assumption is wrong. When the outcomes that these policies are supposed to produce fail to occur, with one group falling short, the fault for the discrepancy has been assigned to society. It continues to be assumed that better programs, better regulations or the right court decisions can make the differences go away. That assumption is also wrong. Hence this essay. Most of the following discussion describes reasons for believing that some group differences are intractable. I shift from "innate" to "intractable" to acknowledge how complex is the interaction of genes, their expression in behavior, and the environment. "Intractable" means that, whatever the precise partitioning of causation may be (we seldom know), policy interventions can only tweak the difference at the margins. I will focus on two sorts of differences: between men and women and between blacks and whites. Here are three crucial points to keep in mind as we go along: 1. The differences I discuss involve means and distributions. In all cases, the variation within groups is greater than the variation between groups. On psychological and cognitive dimensions, some members of both sexes and all races fall everywhere along the range. One implication of this is that genius does not come in one color or sex, and neither does any other human ability. Another is that a few minutes of conversation with individuals you meet will tell you much more about them than their group membership does. 2. Covering both sex differences and race differences in a single nontechnical article, I have had to leave out much. I urge that readers with questions consult the fully annotated version of this essay, which includes extensive supplementary material; it is available here at Commentary's Web site. 3. The concepts of "inferiority" and "superiority" are inappropriate to group comparisons. On most specific human attributes, it is possible to specify a continuum running from "low" to "high, " but the results cannot be combined into a score running from "bad" to "good." What is the best score on a continuum measuring aggressiveness? What is the relative importance of verbal skills versus, say, compassion? Of spatial skills versus industriousness? The aggregate excellences and shortcomings of human groups do not lend themselves to simple comparisons. That is why the members of just about every group can so easily conclude that they are God's chosen people. All of us use the weighting system that favors our group's strengths. The technical literature documenting sex differences and their biological basis grew surreptitiously during feminism's heyday in the 1970s and 1980s. By the 1990s, it had become so extensive that the bibliography in David Geary's pioneering "Male, Female" (1998) ran to 53 pages. Currently, the best short account of the state of knowledge is Steven Pinker's chapter on sex in "The Blank Slate" (2002). Rather than present a telegraphic list of all the differences that I think have been established, I will focus on the narrower question at the heart of the Summers controversy: As groups, do men and women differ innately in characteristics that produce achievement at the highest levels of accomplishment? I will limit my comments to the arts and sciences. Since we live in an age when students are likely to hear more about Marie Curie than about Albert Einstein, it is worth beginning with a statement of historical fact: Women have played a proportionally tiny part in the history of the arts and sciences. Others have found similar proportions. Even in the 20th century, women got only 2% of the Nobel Prizes in the sciences--a proportion constant for both halves of the century--and 10% of the prizes in literature. The Fields Medal, the most prestigious award in mathematics, has been given to 44 people since it originated in 1936. All have been men. The historical reality of male dominance of the greatest achievements in science and the arts is not open to argument. The question is whether the social and legal exclusion of women is a sufficient explanation for this situation, or whether sex-specific characteristics are also at work. Mathematics offers an entry point for thinking about the answer. Through high school, girls earn better grades in math than boys, but boys usually do better on standardized tests. The difference in means is modest, but the male advantage increases as the focus shifts from means to extremes. In a large sample of mathematically gifted youths, for example, seven times as many males as females scored in the top percentile of the SAT mathematics test. We do not have good test data on the male-female ratio at the top one-hundredth or top one-thousandth of a percentile, where first-rate mathematicians are most likely to be found, but collateral evidence suggests that the male advantage there continues to increase, perhaps exponentially. Evolutionary biolog
A Very Very Very Long Explanation I am a Quaker. Well, not precisely. I am a radical non-theist Quaker. Many times a day I find myself explaining this to a variety of people, many of whom follow up my clarification with "You mean like the Quaker Oats guy?" In fact, the vast majority of people at my school are under the perplexing belief that Quakers died out. When I queried one of these people on the reasons behind his assumption, he said "Well, I thought they couldn't have sex." No no, those are Shakers, silly person. But returning to the point, I have increasingly become aware of an extreme ignorance of what is a fundamental part of my life. This lack of knowledge becomes increasingly more annoying with each passing day, and I want to put a stop to it. Also, many-a-time in posts I wrote for this blog I find myself stating that I see no problem with being a Quaker and an Atheist, and evertime I say it I cringe, because, to someone who knows little about Quakerism, that statement makes me sound like an idiot (atheism in NOT a religion, and saying it works well with a traditional religion is... well.. stupid). So I come here to resolve this issue once and for all, prepare yourselves for a lesson in Quakerism. Quakerism began in England in the 1700's. It was and still is officially called the Society of Friends... with individual members of the religion called Friends. George Fox is credited with it's founding, and he was intense. He used to come to people's houses to preach to them and tell them that they were going to hell for not following his religion. He once said (doing this from memory) "I am thankful to God for the stubornness he gave me to know when I am right." And he drew a lot of attention. Under the current King of England, there was no freedom of religion, and so the Quakers were forced to flee to the New World. There they played an important role in forming the Underground Railroad, and creating an area where one could worship, or not worship, freely. The actual religious beliefs of Quakers have greatly evolved over the centuries. It began with the radical notion that God is inside everyone, that he (and later "it" as the deity became, in some practices of the religion, asexual) could be heard by anyone, and that a person did not need the assistance of a priest to hear him. This is referred to as the "Inner Light." The idea is that the light of God is within all people, even the really evil ones. Over time it developed from "God is giving us this light" to "God is the light, and he's in everyone." And today a minority of the religion, at least at my Meeting, dismiss the God part all together. On a hunch, I looked up Quakerism in Wikipedia, and found an interesting classification of Quakerism. It says that there are two types of Quaker Meetings (a community of Quakers is called a Meeting), Programmed and Unprogrammed. Unprogrammed Meetings exist in the more liberal areas, such as Massachusetts, while the programmed ones inhabit places like the Bible belt. Programmed Meetings consist of the traditional sermon, which I find incredibly hypocritical, and unprogrammed are formed around silent worship. Says Wikipedia: Programmed worship arose among Friends in the United States in the 19th century in response to large numbers of converts to Quakerism during the national spiritual revivalism of the time. Worship at a Friends Church resembles a typical Protestant worship service in the United States. Typically there are readings from scripture, hymns, and a sermon from the pastor. A period of silence is also included in most Programmed Friends worship services. Most Friends in the southern and central United States worship in this way. Since I've grown up in the so-called unprogrammed Meeting, I'll focus on that that. My Meetings are formed entirely of silent worship. Though it is referred to mostly as "expectant waiting." Basically, people are waiting for a leading - a divine message - that will solve a problem they face. I find this notion to be silly, the solution comes on its own when one enters the hour long community-enriched silence, letting each person work out their problems in peace, but religion has always functioned on such repainting of one thing for another. When someone experiences a "leading" during a meeting, he or she may stand up and break the silence to impart whatever they realized onto the rest of the community. In my Meeting there are usually about 5 speakings - sometimes called ministries - during the hour long period. People talk about all sorts of things, a few of which really stuck in my mind. One member spoke of the silence as an entity of its own, and how we are born of it, and how we return to it upon death. We also get religion oriented messages, though surprisingly, most leadings have almost nothing to do with religion. I remember a man that stood up in the Meetings one day and recalled a phylosophy class he took in college. In one of the meetings of the class, the instructor explained a scenario: "Suppose that you are in a room, " he said, "and suppose that there is a big red button, and then suppose that if you press this button, a farmer in Mongolia will die. Would you push the button?" Everyone said no. The instructor continued, "What if you were offered one thousand dollars?" Everyone still said no. "A million?" Maybe one fourth of the class stayed silent, thinking it over. Then the instructor said "What if, if you didn't push the button, 10 other farmers would die?" Mixed responses. Finally, the instructor posed the question, "And what if, if you did not ppush that big, red button, the person you love the most in the whole world would die? What if it was 10 farmers that would die if you pushed the button? One hundred? One thousand? What would you do?" And with that the person speaking at the meeting sat down, and the silence absorbed the Meeting once more. To end the Meeting someone, usually one of the more respected members (called elders) turns to the person next to them, and shakes their hand. The handshaking will then echo around the room until everyone's hand has been shaken a few times, then the committee-appointed clerk of the Meeting will stand up and read a list of community announcements. After that my Meeting officially ends, though many people go and socialize in the main hall of the adjoining building. Quakerism, as a decision-making community, is structured much like an anarcho-syndicalist commune. Everything is structured by committee, or syndicate, and all decisions must be made by the committee as a whole, i.e. a consensus must be reached. This reasserts the Quakerly belief in equality, that one voice cannot be drowned by others, even when it is only one person opposed to a decision while another 20 are for it. I find that Quakerism works much better once you remove God from the equation. Quakerism as a way of life is, for me, ideal. Pacifism is a big part of the Quaker ideology, and has certainly shaped my views of the world, and that certainly has nothing to do with any deity (aside from the "we do this because God tells us to, " but again that is replaced with ones own drive to be pacifist). The concept of silence also plays a large part in my life, though I'm sure Seth would disagree. Also, the feeling of belonging in such a powerful way to a community is wonderful. Reading through the Wikipedia entry, I stumbled upon a statement that echoed precisely what I have been noticing among some people at my Meeting: Many Quakers feel their faith does not fall into the traditional categories of Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant, but rather it is an expression of another way to experience Christianity. Although Quakers throughout most of their history, and in most parts of the world today, have considered Quakerism to be a Christian movement, there are some Friends today (principally in the unprogrammed Meetings of the United States and the Unite
Why Spam Sucks ``Spam'' is a derogatory label attached to bulk email, that is, email which is sent in huge quantities to people who did not ask to receive such mail. Typically, the practice is done to present some sort of crass commercial advertisement. Spam Doesn't Work Contrary to the claims and promises of those who are trying to make a business out of "advertising" at everyone else's expense, spam doesn't work. Why? Several reasons. Spam is blocked automatically by software c|net: Worldtalk secures email c|net: Bigfoot announces new features c|net: New spam filters arrive Network providers will block entire networks that generate spam c|net: Spam makes Netcom block free emailer Further, the spam that does actually make it to its destination is often deleted unread, included in a complaint letter to the originating host's postmaster, and used as the basis of blacklists of companies, products, and services to be boycotted. Spammers are Leeches Spammers take advantage of the economics of the Internet. In a nutshell, we pay to connect, and we pay for our own level of service, including the speed of our connection, the amount of equipment needed to relay mail, news, web, and other traffic, etc. By "advertising" through email, spammers shift the cost of advertising to the recipient. Further, because they so commonly relay through an unsuspecting third party and/or forge domain names, spammers even push the costs of cleaning up their mess to another party. Another thing to consider is how large ISPs and organizations with a large number of users being hit by a spam have their email relays backed up, causing delays in service, and problems in taking care of the organization's own needs. Effectively, spammers are denying the company of their own Internet services because of overloading the machines that process the mail with advertising junk. c|net: Hotmail porn spam reported c|net: Web firm takes on Cyber Promotions c|net: Spam clogs Netcom lines Everyone Hates Spam Another common claim among spammers is that some relatively large percentage of users like to get spam. This could not be further from the case. In the survey below, a full 94% of respondents say that it is proper to complain to sites sending email spam, and/or their ISPs. That's leaving only six percent, to be shared among everyone who is annoyed, but not enough to complain, or annoyed and don't know how to complain, to the few people who actually do like to receive it. (That number is so low, I have to wonder if anyone besides other spammers actually like to get the junk. I bet not.) And ask yourself: if so many people like to get spam, why is it that the spammers so commonly forge their addresses, and try to mask their identity and origin? Further, why aren't any "real" advertising or PR firms using the technique? Spam survey results Spammers Aren't Marketers Spammers aren't marketers. You don't hear too many cases of someone who has been successful in advertising and marketing moving into spam. That's because such cases don't exist. You don't see too many reputable advertising or PR firms sending spam. That's because they don't. A friend of mine noted that ``push media is a failure of the imagination.'' He's incredibly correct in this observation, and the issue of spam is case-in-point. Charged with making a buck off of ``this Internet thing,'' people have scurried around looking for a way to separate Internet users from their money. Unable to understand the potential that the technology of the Internet has to offer, or the richness of a new medium, the marketers sought technology that would turn the web into little more than a television. Enter: push media. Now even web surfing can be a mindless, passive experience. (Duh.) Unable to get even that far, spammers try to do the same to your email box, in such a way that they have no consequences for their actions. Undeliverable mail piles up and complaints come pouring in to the poor sucker who happened to have the domain name that the spammer thought of, or who happened to be running a mailhost through which the spam was bounced. By the time the dust has settled from this mess, the spammer has cached his check, and is on to his next target. Unfortunately for the poor sucker, that extra work can either hurt the business, in its ability to service its customers' requests (such as was the case with Netcom), or even worse, push the small, struggling company over the edge and out of business. Spammers are intolerable parasites, completely unbridled in their own desire for the Almighty Dollar, and don't care what they break in pursuit of their self-serving goals. These lack the technical competence to understand the damage they cause, and lack the marketing expertise to understand why spam is a bad business model. And so, I conclude with a note to every spammer on the 'net, and those that are still trying to figure out how to do that: Get a clue, get a life, and get off the 'net. See Fight Spam on the Internet! for more information on spam, why it's evil, and how to deal with it.