Saturday, May 05, 2012
Cry for help -- or Communist holy day? After viewing Zombie's photo essay on the May 1 Oakland Oakland "General Strike", I'd say that the answer is both. Here's one amusing caption:
The range of extreme ideologies led to some hilarious vignettes. Here, for example, a guy from the ultra-libertarian anti-federal government conspiracy site InfoWars somehow convinced a guy with a "Single Payer Health Care" hat to sign a petition -- even though one advocates the abolition of governmental authority and the other advocates the exact opposite, a totally centralized economy and power structure. WTF???These people are mindless -- but far from innocuous.
"Painful, expensive memories keep us away: rather than fight, we take flight and move on ... often to our own detriment." -- Jonathan Hoenig, in "The New Case for Real-Estate Stocks" at SmartMoney
"Sometimes people want what they think they can't have, when in fact they really could have it, or at least something like it." -- Michael Hurd, in "Do you want what you can't have?" at DrHurd.com
"Just as Americans have become increasingly skeptical of 'global warming' policy proposals based on questionable government-funded climate science, they should be skeptical about mandatory medical practice protocols based on increasingly questionable government-funded medical research." -- Paul Hsieh, in "Government-Funded Medical Research Is Hazardous to Your Health" at PJ Media
My Two Cents
The Hsieh piece cites this gem from a New York Times report: "The higher a journal's impact factor… the higher its retraction rate." I strongly suspect that the problem this piece discusses deserves a large share of the blame for the findings of Dr. John Ioannidis, who once published a paper titled, "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False".
Generally, unless I have a good reason independent of the hype to suspect otherwise, I greet any widely-trumpeted government recommendation regarding my health with great skepticism.
A blogger called "curious rat" is abstaining from the written word for a year:
You might be saying, "Harry, why would you try something like this? Giving up something that enriches our lives on a daily basis is stupid." I'll tell you why. It's because I am too involved with words. I feel like I've only examined books and magazines up close. I spend, on average, 18+ hours a day reading things. Whether they're milk cartons, subway signs, or even bumper stickers, I am way too connected to the written word.I, too, have noticed a small rash of bloggers giving up such new technology as social media or even the Internet for a year, as satirized at Curious Rat. That amount of time is patently ridiculous.
Now I want to see words at a distance. By separating myself from written language, I'll be able to see which aspects of reading are truly valuable, which are distractions, and which ones give me explosive diarrhea.
I don't deny the value of doing something like this for a shorter amount of time and possibly adjusting one's habits based on the experience: Not only have I blogged on the possible value in being less plugged-in, I take a week off from blogging each year and completely unplugged (save for phoning and minimal texting) for a few days around my daughter's birth nearly a year ago.