The Once and Future Blog

A simple challenge between three friends was the trigger for starting this blog although it was just one aspect of a nine part challenge. Another part was completing a full 42.2km marathon. I was the only one to complete the marathon and I particularly enjoy reminding them both of that.

I’m fortunate to have known these guys for twenty years. Not everyone can say that. I hope that I won’t be able to say I’m the only one to have completed a full marathon in the allotted time (six hours) for much longer.

I’m just an ordinary person. You’ll find no letters after my name. This absence of letters however does not lessen my ability to reason or to form chains of logic. It doesn’t make my thoughts or idea’s inherently less worthy. The only measure of an idea is the evidence which supports it.

Many people would not consider me an educated person. You don’t need letters after your name to be educated. All you need is to be willing to be educated and to actually make an effort to educate yourself. Initially this might start with the things that interest you. Later on it’s important to try to understand about the things that don’t interest you.

It’s perhaps most important to educate yourself about the things you don’t agree with. I know many people who consider themselves educated. They have letters after their name. Yet they regularly espouse the ridiculous because they rarely bother to read opinions which differ from their own.    

As important as it is to understand yourself, only through understanding others, empathising with their view, are you able to really appreciate the nature of many of the world’s problems. It’s so rarely black or white. It is almost always black AND white.

In my experience people often suppose that to truly make a difference you have to be a political, business or religious leader. I accept that those leaders can drive change but they are still just one person. Alone they can’t achieve anything. Change happens when other people see what a leader does. This changes perspective which in turn alters behaviour. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

In reality anyone can drive change. All that is lacking is the motivation to. The internet lets us shout out to the world, or to whisper to it. I wonder if we can only experience the types of changes in the world that many of us would like to see if everybody starts doing this. It doesn’t matter if you whisper or you shout.  

I’m going to keep writing.  Mostly because I want to live in a world that is better than it is now. I want my son to live in a world that is better than it is now. I’ve realised with age that if I truly want that then I have to fight for it. Fighting has a bad rep. Fighting doesn’t have to be with fists. You can fight with words, you can fight with ideas. You can fight with non-violent action. 

There is also strength to be gained in struggle. If for no other reason than this the struggle is its own reward. I’m going to continue to raise awareness for others while I go along the journey myself. I want to be questioned. I want to be criticised. I want to be challenged. If I was to look back on the content I’ve produced today in five years I want be disappointed with it. If I was still happy with it then how would I have grown?

In the coming year the content will evolve. In particular I will make an effort to promote those people and organisations which I believe do a good thing. I think it’s important to do so. We don’t do it often enough. I don’t think we should be paid for it.

For this reason in the future I’m going to intersperse my efforts with pieces about people who are doing helpful or useful things, and about why I believe the things they are doing are helpful or useful. I Hope this will bring people together so that they might do other useful things together in both the internet space, and in my local community.

Lastly I want to thank those who have read these pieces. I can see you, referred to me from Stumped, Facebook and Yahoo. I’m sure you’re all comforted that not only is Big brother watching, balding middle aged Australian is in on the gig to. Happy Christmas and best wishes for the future to all.

The End Of The World As We Know It

When I started up this blog one of the things I wanted to avoid doing was publishing ‘click bait’. The title of this post seems at odds with that goal. For that I apologise. However to entitle this piece in a way that exaggerates the issue fits in nicely with the pieces content. Today I ramble about catastrophizing.

The term itself has been around for quite some time but Catastrophizing has only recently graduated into the lexicon of mainstream folk. To catastrophize is to “view or present a situation as considerably worse than it actually is” (1).

Most of us have been guilty of this kind of behaviour at one time or another but I’m going to suggest that I wouldn’t be catastrophizing when I say it’s on the increase of late. Simply look at the news. Listen to our politicians. It’s all disasters and emergencies all of the time.

The recent behaviour of some students at Yale over Halloween costumes is particularly noteworthy. A group of students confronted one of their professors, Nicholas Christakis, over an email expressing an opinion which differed with the student body’s position on Halloween costumes. The video footage is confronting.

“In your position as master,” one student says, “it is your job to create a place of comfort and home for the students who live in Silliman. You have not done that. By sending out that email, that goes against your position as master. Do you understand that?!”

“No,” he said, “I don’t agree with that.”

The student explodes, “Then why the fuck did you accept the position?! Who the fuck hired you?! You should step down! If that is what you think about being a master you should step down! It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here. You are not doing that!” (2).

Let’s just for one moment ignore the quite ridiculous idea that a university professor, who is also a master, should not be creating an intellectual space at a university. This student is calling for a professor’s resignation over a simple difference in opinion.

It is particularly important that the policy with regards to Halloween costumes had not changed. Students were still discouraged from wearing dreadlocks at Halloween because it might mock someone’s cultural or religious beliefs. The actual ‘Halloween checklist’ can be found here (3).

Examine your Facebook feed. Note the number of sponsored articles noting the worst PM ever, the worst case of sexism ever, the worst case of impacted bowels ever. My personal favourite offerings are the; you’ll never believe what happened next in this obviously staged video. We’ve all clicked them.

Mainstream media is quite often nearly as bad. Right now elements of our media are describing the latest storm which just hit Sydney as the worst storm this century. We are just fifteen years into this one hundred year century. One news outlet has stepped it up even further reporting that the storm is unprecedented (4). The thousand odd people injured in the storm which struck Sydney on January 1 1947 might disagree.

That example illustrates just how easy it is to determine when someone is catastrophizing. Simply compare the recent event with history. It places the event quite neatly into context and often debunks the worst cases of catastrophizing. It’s also a wonderful way to appreciate just how fortunate we are to be living in the times in which we are living.

In addition to this I’d encourage people to actively debunk, and criticise where appropriate, the constant bombardment of ridiculous articles we receive through social media. I extend this to my friends on social media.

If you’re going to espouse the obviously stupid, I’m going to point out just how obviously stupid it is. If you’re going to forward articles which encourage weak ideas then I’m going to point out just how weak those ideas are. If that upsets you then perhaps you should consider who you might have upset with your comments. While you’re at it contemplate that we could absolutely have a society in which no one is ever offended. All we’d have to be willing to do is give up the right to free speech… and cartooning. 

We all say things we regret. Social media often amplifies our mistakes in this regard.  It’s worth noting that the professor, Nicholas Christakis, later tweeted that “no-one, especially no students exercising right to speech, should be judged just on basis of short video clip.”

We should all listen to the professor. Furthermore we should accept that while to criticize is important, acknowledging when someone has accepted our criticism and perhaps adjusted their stance is also important. As courageous as we should be when expressing our opinions it’s perhaps more courageous to change them.  

(1)   http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/catastrophize

(2)   http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/

(3)   https://www.thefire.org/college-students-should-be-scared-to-celebrate-halloween/

(4)   http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-16/tornado-hail-destructive-winds-hit-sydney/7032370

Reason Can Trump Fear

I was awake late at night when the first reports emerged of a mass killing in Paris. As disheartening as the scale of the deaths was I felt a particular sense of dread for what I knew was bound to happen over the next few days. This sense of dread centred around two anticipated outcomes.

The first of these outcomes was the reaction of the French government and other world leaders to this latest attack. The second was the cavalcade of knee jerk reactions from the media and social commentators to a problem which is not new, unprecedented or simple.

Actions speak louder than words. The actions of world leaders show that they do not understand the nature of the problem. Their reactions to those who are using violence to advance their ideology simply miss the mark. In many cases it advances the cause of those who challenge our ideology. To best explain this we first need to understand the nature of the problem.

There are those in the world who do not accept certain views and human rights which the majority of the world’s population hold as self-evident. This has ever been the case. There have always been renegades. I expect their always will be. Sometimes one era’s renegades become the next era’s orthodoxy.

The most well-known renegades of our era subscribe to a fairly specific interpretation of the Islamic religion. It would be wrong to assume though that all renegades believe in Islam. It invites catastrophe to assume that all Muslim’s subscribe to the same specific interpretation of their holy book. They clearly do not.

These people are introducing their ideology to the existing world ideologies which prize individual liberty and equality in roughly equal measure. They would replace this with a social structure devoid of reason which would be deeply unpleasant for many and for women in particular.  

These people are stateless and it does not actually advance their goals to have a state. To say that Islamic State is the enemy only shows that you do not understand the nature of the problem. Islamic State is just a vehicle, a shell, just as Al Qaeda was before it and perhaps the Taliban was before Al Qaeda.

As they are stateless there is no physical battleground as such. Rather the battlefield is one of ideas. These renegades have taken the principals used when waging a guerrilla war against an occupying nation state. They have morphed them into a strategy which resembles a guerrilla war of ideas waged on a global scale.

Like a physical guerrilla war the guerrillas do not seek to engage in structured combat. Rather, they infiltrate key areas, winning over the population and melting away when confronted with force. They have two key weapons in their arsenal. Fear inspired by violence, and the seductive lure of an imagined paradise. It’s a potent combination.  

The latest mass killing is an example of inspiring fear with violence. The goal is to make us all so terrified that we will change the way we live and the tenants which we live by. They hope we will become so terrified that we will submit to the kind of government surveillance which erodes the very liberty which we all now enjoy. 

With every new security measure, every new power granted to security agencies by governments at the demands of a terrified population, we move further away from the ideologies which have made us what we are. We move further towards the rigid structure that these people would impose upon us.

The only way we can fight this is to accept that the world is not perfect largely because the people in it are not perfect. There will always be those who resort to violence. We should not exchange freedom for security. If I am to die for that then so be it. I will not live afraid. I will not seek the comfort of the cage.

More insidious than the weapon of fear inspired by violence is the ‘carrot’ in the renegade’s ideology. Imagine the young, poor male teen. His job prospects are poor. He is not particularly well educated. He grapples with the depressing life ahead of him. Even if he gets a job it seems more like slavery than an opportunity. He’d like to meet a nice girl but the laughter of the women he courts rings in his ears.

But there is an option. He is special. He has been chosen. He can join the fight against an unfair order, one that has failed him. He can wield death and he’ll even receive a wife to do whatever he pleases with. More if he is successful. No more laughing women. He has a purpose. If the worst should happen and he dies, paradise beckons.

Imagine the young poor woman. Just walking through the door leads to objectification. She must be slim, but she can’t have an eating disorder. Sexy is the ideal, but you can’t be a slut. You should raise kids but you should also have a high powered career. You can indeed have everything. You’re somehow less if you don’t. It’s your fault. To the disaffected young women they would offer the safety of a cage. Its silken black confines hide all. Thus neatly obscured from the judgemental they can simply go about their business.

Many simply do not understand the lure to join organisations like IS yet we must. If we are to fight this we must accept that it is our responsibility to offer our young people a better option than one offered by IS. It is our responsibility to educate them on the fairly obvious flaws of their ideology.

There are so many flaws. Belief in an imagined immortal despite the absence of proof is no reason to die. Men should not treat women like property. Women should not be property. Women shouldn’t be buried up to their neck and stoned to death. No one should be sentenced to death for sorcery.

Prior to the Second World War some military strategists believed that the strategic bombing of civilian populations could lessen a peoples will to fight. That view was absolutely categorically disproven. All the evidence showed that the bombing actually hardened the populations resolve against the people bombing them.   

When western jets bombard targets in the Middle East they will hit militants and innocents. When they hit the militants its will only harden their resolve. Remember, these people believe that paradise awaits them if they die.

What’s worse is that every time a jet hits an innocent there is a cost. Can you imagine the rage of a father, holding his broken child in his arms? Or the rage of the sons and daughters of parents killed by errant guided missiles. Baptised by their tears, a terrorist is born with every innocent death. Despite what the hawks in the military would have us believe NOTHING worthwhile is resulting from our military involvement in the Middle East.

Our world leaders must accept that they cannot tackle this problem using conventional military force. All western forces should immediately leave the middle-east. This is not a problem which can be solved with violence. It must be solved with reason. To try and retaliate with violence only exacerbates the problem

Remember that reason has been largely responsible for building the world we live in today. The scientific method has delivered to us living standards undreamed of even a hundred years ago. My car can talk to me! I can own a watch like Dick Tracy. Science fiction is morphing into reality right in front of us. Amortality beckons.

Resist the knee jerk. Resist the call to hate. Resist the urge to dehumanise. The renegades of today’s world are still human. They are not lost to us. It is up to us to prove to them, through our actions, that our ideology is the better one. To convince these people that our imagined future is superior to an imagined god.

Sexy and I Know It

Every now and then I read a piece so ridiculous, so obviously stupid that upon reading said piece I’m torn between incredulity and laughter. An example of such a piece can be found here (1). I’d encourage everyone to read the piece but to surmise, the author seems to imply that ‘geek culture’ has a history of excluding women. I’ve got so many issues with this view I hardly know where to begin but I guess I’ll start with its most laughable assumption which is that Steve Jobs is or was viewed as sexy.

The author suggests that “These days entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg are portrayed not only as rich and powerful but somehow sexy, with their most geekish characteristics - the very traits that once might have marked them as slightly apart from the traditional gender roles - now reinterpreted as emblematic of masculine dominance”.

This view that Steve Jobs was viewed as sexy during his life is easily debunked by the total absence of his appearance on any of the “most sexy man’ lists that are regularly published by trash mags everywhere. Mark Zuckerberg you could perhaps make a case for although the absence of Bill Gates, who is arguably more ‘geeky’ than either of them, from the ‘sexy man’ lists disproves the idea that I.T. geeks have magically become sexy. 

Ashton Kutcher and Michael Fassbender on the other hand, yeah, those guys are sexy. They are on many lists. This is where the author is confused because Hollywood, through a number of movies, has done its very best to make Steve Jobs appear sexy in order to sell more movies. Steve Jobs himself was never sexy. I’m not sure how the author has confused to two. I’m actually embarrassed for him.

Only slightly less silly than the idea that ‘geeks’ are sexy is the idea that geek culture has somehow excluded women. I started to play detailed board games which recreate historical conflicts (war-gaming) when I was twelve. I started roleplaying shortly after. I used to play laser tag competitively. I could go on and on. My geek credentials are solid.

I’ve always been into sport and I have a good set of shoulders so unlike many other men with similar interests I’ve usually had a girlfriend. I learnt very early on to never – ever mention any of my geek interests on a first, second, third, fourth or twenty second date. I married a geek. She’s awesome.

The idea that geeks have somehow excluded women from geek culture is just farcical. In my detailed experience relatively few women are interested in the pursuits which characterise geek culture. When women are present the overriding emotion of most geeks is betwixt awestruck and awkward. Geeks would love to have more female geeks to geek out with. The online comments to the piece overwhelmingly agreed with this view.

Cranking up the stupid dial to maximum once more at the beginning of the article the author suggests that the first computers were actually clerks who were known as computers. These ‘computers’ manually worked out ballistic tables with desk calculators. I’m not sure that everything which shares the same name can be easily compared. With this in mind I’d like to express my utter relief that computer science has moved beyond the need to employ small furry rodents to manipulate the cursor on our LCD screens.

Returning to the more serious what gets me most fired up about this piece is that somewhere in here the author actually has a point. Unfortunately this point is quickly piled under a mountain of useless, baseless bunk. For reasons unknown women are underrepresented in computer science and the representation of women has fluctuated significantly over the past thirty years.

The University of British Columbia conducted a 2002 study which examined the reasons around the low percentage of female information technology students (2). The study observed that males and females viewed computers very differently. It suggested that institutions needed to tailer workshops to both male and female students in order to address the gender balance gap.

Who’d of thought the education providers would have some part to play? Not Brendon Keogh a videogame critic whose completely unsourced word spew was the ‘fascinating’ essay which inspired the insipid offering by Jeff Sparrow which this piece criticises (3).

Robert Mitchel has also published some work on the issue (4). Mitchel examined the number of computer science degrees earned by female students over a thirty year period. When talking about the relatively low number of female graduates he notes that “If social pressures and cultural attitudes were to blame, one would think the numbers would have been consistently low. On the other hand, if social attitudes had changed for the better over the last four decades, one would expect to see a gradual improvement over time.”

The oscillation of the numbers over time clearly disproves unsubstantiated assumptions such as the marketing of computers in the 1980’s and the like being the source of relatively fewer female graduates. This is what often happens when the focus is on statistics instead of pandering to a half supposed thought bubble.

And pander we shouldn’t. It’s in everyone’s best interests to close the gender gap in computer studies. Just as it’s everyone’s best interests for gender equality in the workplace and gender equality when raising our children. What we don’t need is academics bullying, and that’s exactly what I’d describe it as, a cultural group which struggles more than most to be accepted but is all too often just pilloried.

(1)   http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-06/sparrow-the-history-of-geek-culture-and-its-exclusion-of-women/6918518

(2)   http://www.webcitation.org/67YOr88gp

(3)   https://overland.org.au/previous-issues/issue-218/feature-brendan-keogh/

(4)   http://www.computerworld.com/article/2474991/it-careers/women-computer-science-grads--the-bump-before-the-decline.html