tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-371998582024-03-13T20:36:42.597-07:00¡Grundes!Getting amazed by the simplest of things.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-62458685114205358242008-05-02T13:52:00.000-07:002008-05-02T14:23:23.406-07:00Global warming conspiracyGlobal warming appears to be a serious problem. However, I think some of the proposed solutions would only make things worse: for example, people are encouraged to drive less. Which means either walk, or bike, or take public transportation. Walking is often unrealistic: while yours truly does walk to work, many people live too far from the office to do that. Public transportation is in premature state in most of the US cities, which leaves one thing: biking.<br /><br />Biking is all good and healthy, but nobody seems to think about methane (aka fartgas). Intensive exercise, like biking, by millions of people will lead to excretion of millions of tonnes of methane, which is, as I've heard, a more potent greenhouse gas.<br /><br />On the other hand, if harvested, all that methane can be an additional renewable power source - may be it won't be enough for transportation, but it probably could recharge your cell phone. Alas, we hear a lot about how good biking-instead-of-driving is, but next to nothing about the dangers of unharvested methane, which makes one think this is an elaborate conspiracy. <br /><br />I am not that naïve and easily distractable to believe this is done by some out-of-space (knees-back) aliens who want to make the climate warmer for their liking. No, this is done by humans and most likely, by those humans that live in cold places - think Nunavut, or Franz-Joseph Land. They have thousands of miles of beaches but alas, its too cold there. No ladies in bikinis, no muscular surfers - only white bears and polar night. By warming up the planet they want convert their endless icy plains into prime real-estate!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-45454057436457247692008-04-28T22:10:00.000-07:002008-04-28T22:18:56.673-07:00Scream for a rain!<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/grndspics/UntitledAlbum/photo#5194531957415930482"><img src="http://lh6.ggpht.com/grndspics/SBavSyAw6nI/AAAAAAAAAEc/eN2yXsyqXj0/s400/scream.jpg" border="0" alt="Gimme rain or gimme death!" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-22349223787349431632008-04-28T10:06:00.000-07:002008-04-28T10:36:54.815-07:00Commuter rail stations conspiracy(Or, actually, this is more of an <em>anti-</em>conspiracy).<br /><br />Commuter rail cars have doors on both sides, because on some stations you exit to the right, and on some - to the left. However, there's often no need to differentiate which side of the platform the train arrives at. <br /><br />Clearly, it may be more convenient to do one way or another in a city streetcar system: <br /><br />- stations raised above the ground have one platform, trains arriving on two sides - this design needs only one set of elevators/stairs down to the street level;<br /><br />- stations that are on the street ("stops" would be a more appropriate name for those) don't need any special ways to get from the platform to the sidewalk and therefore the platform is on the right side of the train.<br /><br />However, inter-city commuter rail systems, like BART, usually don't have a stop just in the middle of a street - not only because such transit systems usually require a huge parking lot, but also because a 9-10 car train would create quite a traffic distraction if being let loose on the open street. So, as BART stations are already full-fledged stations, using up a lot of land, it would seem strange that some stations have one platform in the middle and some - two on the sides.<br /><br />Therefore, as it would have been easier - and cheaper! - to build each and every station more or less a copy of others, I can only conclude that varying station layout is intentional, and, as the side of the upcomming exit is <em>not</em> announced, I can only conclude this is done to catch spies. See - a local would know where the exit is, while a spy, no matter how good he is at blending with locals, would not. There are cameras right above each exit on BART, so interested authorities can monitor those who hesitate, or prepare to exit through the wrong door, and then do a background check on them. It's OK if that was just a guy who moved into the area recently, but if that was a member of a foreign diplomatic mission, who is, according to the official consulate's schedule, supposed to be at a trade meeting in another state, then something is obviously fishy.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-8623771127957708972008-04-22T14:08:00.000-07:002008-04-22T14:27:21.912-07:00Better than averageThey say 80% of the drivers consider themselves better drivers than their average peer, which is somewhat unlikely, unless the average is really, really bad. A usual explanation for this is that most people are over-confident about themselves and thus overestimate their skills and abilities. <br /><br />However, another possible explanation is that it is hard to imagine an "average" person - as in off the pool of everyone. I think most people just imagine some random people who have cut them off, or even had an accident, or a near-accident with. Plus the respondents may remember some of their friends or relatives who drive really badly, making the respondent swear to never get into the car with them driving. And as very few people remember every single trip that went well, but most remember accidents or near-accidents quite vividly, it isn't surprising that when building up a picture of an "average driver" people mostly remember a set of <em>bad</em>* drivers and, often quite correctly, rank themselves as better ones. <br /><br />*And even the best drivers may get into someone's "bad driver" list, because not everything is under the driver's control. A child runs unexpectedly onto the road, you slam the brakes causing the guy behind you to perform emergency braking, too, cursing you for not paying attention to the road. Perhaps he didn't even see the child, but it is you whom he'll blame for his scare moment.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-61778030142444593522008-04-21T13:57:00.000-07:002008-04-21T14:02:38.218-07:00Text-editing trickUndo/Redo keys can be used to quickly go back to the place in the text where you've been. Like if you scroll up to where the #includes are, press Ctrl-Z and then Ctrl-Shift-Z to jump back to the place in the code you've been modifying.<br /><br />Works with Office, too - although unfortunately the newest Word either doesn't have a Redo hotkey or something else is not quite right. A positive thing about the newest Word's hotkeys is, however, that they've kept the Ctrl-P to print, otherwise I would know how to print.<br /><br />But the trick works where I do most of the text editing: with Visual Studio and I think I got it to work with Eclipse, so - w00t.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-61396206602982596702008-04-20T20:36:00.000-07:002008-04-20T20:43:04.949-07:00When I grow up, I want to be a...Some people buy their children toy airplanes, thinking that may be some day kids will become pilots. Some people buy their heirs erector sets, slightly pushing them to become engineers. But of course, those are only hopes, not guarantees, and some parents just <em>have</em> to be certain, even if it means aiming low.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.slonok.com/images/mctoy.jpg"/>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-1647439745003437702008-04-16T15:30:00.000-07:002008-04-16T15:34:36.701-07:00USAF AdI've seen an interesting ad for USAF on some website recently. It was made as a flash mini-game, stylized after an old arcade with an airplane flying bottom to top (or, rather the terrain moving under it), with some green squares moving towards the plane. I was even going to shoot some of these green squares, but turns out, the game is not about shooting the crap out of things (the whole purpose of an air force, I think), but you're supposed to "drop humanitarian aid", green squares are the targets for the aid.<br /><br />They must have an urgent need for pacifists for some reason :)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-6407428809412944412008-04-15T13:41:00.000-07:002008-04-15T13:45:27.182-07:00How to get a new car using a cell phone.Pretty simple - if someone yakking on the cell phone smashes into your car, totaling it, their insurance would pay for a new car. The problem didn't specify <em>you</em> have to use the phone, did it?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-78341317706761985282008-04-10T11:45:00.000-07:002008-04-10T11:56:13.941-07:00Perpetual calendar in the headToday is Thrusday, April 10th, which day of the week is September 3rd? It is actually easy to calculate these things, without the computer's help:<br /><br />As today is Thursday, 17th, 24th and 31st are also Thursdays. April has only 30 days, so 31st of April is actually May 1st (and it is a Thursday). <br /><br />Continue with Thursdays: May 1st, 8th, 15th, 22nd, 29th, 36th. May 36th is (36 - 31) = 5th of June.<br /><br />June 5th, 12th, 19th, 26th, 33rd [-30] = July 3rd, 10th, 17th, 24th, 31st, July 38th = August 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th, 35th, which is September 4th - those were all Thursdays, so September 3rd is a Wednesday.<br /><br />To go faster we could add several weeks at a time - like 3 or 4 to not overshoot a month completely. 3 weeks (21 days) probably is easier to add, arithmetics-wise, than 28 days.<br /><br />Let's check October 17th: September 3rd is Wednesday, so September 24th is, too and so is September 45th, which is October 15th. Therefore, October 17th is a Friday.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-34335763757263606742008-02-08T16:46:00.000-08:002008-02-13T17:17:54.407-08:00Wireless connected but no InternetAfter yet another D-Link DSL modem died on me, and being tired of another D-Link creature's, the WiFi router, nasty habit of rebooting at random every hour or so, I've upgraded to a Diamond SupraMax-yada-yada-something modem, which also includes the wireless router and stuff.<br /><br />I've connected the notebook without any problems, but the desktop behaved strangely: it connected in a snap, reported Excellent signal strength and sometimes I was able to browse the Internet, but mostly I could not. I was ready to go get another router model but noticed an interesting thing: even when I seemingly hadn't the Internet connection, Skype was staying green. I also remembered a note from the manual saying any firewall software on the system should be disabled.<br /><br />With the dawn of understanding shining upon me, I've typed in the IP address of the web server at work and aha! there it was. Then I tried disabling ZoneAlarm and voila! - I can haz teh Internets! But being paranoid, I just couldn't let the extra curtain go, so I turned ZoneAlarm back on but instead added the DNS servers fetched from the router's admin panel right into the wireles connection's settings. That worked, too, without having to mess with ZoneAlarm's settings.<br /><br />w00t!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-62118969052404910072008-01-23T20:40:00.000-08:002008-01-23T20:40:14.183-08:00The power of marketing legends.Just remembered a scary story I read about how the tiny pieces of electrically-shaved facial hair are inhaled and end up in lungs, where horrible horrible tumors often start around those little hairs. The only way to prevent that from happening, the article suggested, was to go with wet shaving only, in which method the hair is bonded by the foam.<br /> <br />Granted, it wasn't a very reputable newspaper where I read it, but I still don't use eclectic razors. You know, what if it is at least partially true? ;)<br /><br />But on the other hand, even though the joys of electric shaving is lost for me permanently, I think it's a small price to pay for the healthy skepticism I developed as a result of realizing the legend was what it was - a marketing legend. It also shows the importance of balance when creating these legends: too much FUD and you risk pushing your targets into the skeptical side.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-4197050479473516552007-12-11T16:33:00.000-08:002007-12-11T16:41:40.942-08:00The Van People Have SettledEarlier, I have erm... <em>blogged</em> about a <a href="http://grundes.blogspot.com/2007/08/mysterious-invasion-of-van-people.html">mysterious influx of the van people</a> here in San Jose. Apparently they came to settle, as the spontaneous self-organized auto-mall along one of the streets I drive daily is now full of RVs. Humongous ones, large ones, tiny trailer ones -- everything must go, the van people are here to stay!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-88345086871815306242007-12-05T15:27:00.000-08:002007-12-05T15:33:54.216-08:00Clothing and body weight: an unobvious conspiracyI've read <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/73765?GT1=10645">an article</a> today, about fat people not wanting to lose much weight. Having myself lost about 50 pounds with 25 more to go, I don't really care about what motivation they have (or lack). One thing, however, amazed me: "[C]lothing line's sizes seemed to fluctuate with the designer's own weight."<br /><br />So, basically, the designer puts on weight but still assigns the same size to the pants that fit her. That is again, fine with me since I don't buy <em>haute couture</em> wear, but the whole situation hinted on a vast conspiracy, which neatly explains why people get fatter and fatter (on the average) in the "developed world".<br /><br />As the productivity grows, people have more money to spend, but do they have more savings? No, because the more money you have, the more incentive thing-makers have to lure you into buying stuff. A TV-set, A refrigerator, a vacuum cleaner, a car used to be purchases of a lifetime, but not anymore. Not only new, "better" products emerge constantly, they are also deliberately made <em>not</em> to last, leaving the consumer no choice but to buy a replacement.<br /><br />It was perhaps even easier with clothes with the invention of "fashion". While you can secretly keep your granddad's vacuum cleaner in the darkness of your closet, you <em>have</em> to show the world what clothes you wear. And if you care about what other people think, you have to buy what is "fashionable" now. Needless to say, fashion changes much faster than clothes wear out.<br /><br />However, some people just refuse to follow suit, wearing the same clothes continuously until they become obscene to show in public in. And it is perhaps infeasible to make clothes too prone to tearing because fabric either holds for years or rips right after you put the pants on. Solution? <em>Make people fatter, so they wouldn't fit into trusty old pants anymore!</em><br /><br />And the beauty of it, you can ride the wave both ways: once there's a saturation of fat in the society, you could start a "health campaign", promoting losing weight and all. People would get leaner, old pants become too bulky and unwearable without a belt => they buy a smaller size, discarding the big ones, naturally hoping to not get fat ever again. But ooops -- then you start a campaign that "big is beautiful" and "fat is phat", etc. => a new wave of bigger size sales.<br /><br />//off to RossUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-8633087946621792002007-10-23T22:00:00.001-07:002007-10-23T22:11:52.714-07:00Calculatorial catch-22One more interesting thing on the topic of calculators (to be done with it): if the calculators were around in Rome, we could be still using Roman numerals (you know, I, V, X and so on). Positional system made it easy to do arithmetics, but if the calculator does it for you, what's the difference (this may be actually a nice gift to get at thinkgeek ;)).<br /><br />On the other hand, if we were still using Roman numerals, there probably would be no calculators -- and not much else of the current technology. Makes one wonder what else in our current methods of thinking are obstructing the progress.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-46063661032233057252007-10-22T23:45:00.000-07:002007-12-06T10:07:10.266-08:00Fixing firefox 2.0.0.8 slow/high CPU issueAfter installing the new version it became incredibly slow on my XP system, CPU usage shot up to 50% (i.e. took all of one of the cores), I couldn't type without swearing. Reverting as far back as 0.5 didn't help, so it had to be the settings issue.<br /><br />And here's what solved it for me:<br /><br />- go to C:\Documents and Settings\<your user name>\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles and make a copy of your running profile, just in case (copy the whole folder that is called something like <letters-numbers>.default). <br /><br />- now go into that folder and remove all 0-bytes-long files called prefs-1.js, prefs-2.js and so on, and then remove all the 0-bytes-long sessionstore-1.js, sessionstore-2.js, and so on. Make sure all files you're deleting have 0 length, so that nothing important gets deleted (and if it does, that's what was the backup for!)<br /><br />I suppose the problem was in sessionstore files, as I had 9999 of them, probably preventing the poor thing from creating any more.<br /><br />P.S. The best tool to mess with files like that is the <a href="http://www.farmanager.com/">Far Manager</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-53401750278162431712007-10-19T15:42:00.000-07:002007-10-19T16:10:57.701-07:00More on calculators<a href="http://grundes.blogspot.com/2007/09/approaching-singularity-from-another.html">Thinking about singularity</a> is fun, but the over-dependence on calculators could be exploited by humans as well. As far as I know, most (all?) of the electronic components (and end-user products) are made by just a few companies. Therefore, it wouldn't be hard for them to make an agreement so that <em>all</em> calculators sold worldwide are "tainted". <br /><br />In what way? For example, the calculators could compute 15% incorrectly -- i.e. if someone wants to know how much a $65 sweater costs at a 15%-off sale, she'd get not $55.25, but, say $56.35. Looks pretty close, right? But with hundreds of millions of items sold with 15% discount, the little errors are going to accumulate to a significant surplus for retailers, which they should be glad to share with the electronics makers.<br /><br />And suppose some egghead sues them:<br /><br />Judge: So, Mr. Mathnerd, could you state the nature of your complaint.<br />Mathnerd: Well, 15% of $65 is $9.75, not $8.65, so 15% off $65 should be $55.25, not $56.35<br />Judge: And how do you know that?<br />Mathnerd: I submit to this court exhibit A, which is a Quizno's napkin with my manual calculations. Anyone can do the calculation for themselves and see that I'm right.<br />Judge: What is this? Some filthy napkin, I'm not touching this! But I can certainly check your math!<br /><br />Judge pulls a calculator, pushes a few buttons... $56.35! <br />Mathnerd: But...<br />Judge: Stop wasting the court's time! Case dismissed!<br /><br /><em>Nobody will hear your screams</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-59541608287127182692007-10-05T11:42:00.000-07:002007-12-05T15:36:16.695-08:00CVC §21800(b)(1) is sweeping across the Golden State(for <a href="http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i25406">the spoof</a>).<br /><br />A little known provision of the California Vehicle Code is spreading like a wildfire by the word of mouth. More people have learned about CVC §21800(b)(1) last month than about Ron Paul and, unlike his presidency, it is available for public benefit right now.<br /><br />Rhonda Manning, 17, of Santa Rosa, Calif. wasn't concerned about CVC §21800(b)(1) for the most of her driving career. She even hadn't known what the Vehicle Code was -- up until last week when she was carpooling with her friend from softball practice. When Ms. Manning was nearing a 4-way stop intersection, another car approached from the street at her left almost simultaneously with her. Before Rhonda and the other driver begun the usual pantomime of waving each other through, her friend suggested her to use the CVC §21800(b)(1), thus avoiding the delay and a potentially costly misunderstanding.<br /><br />"Last year insurers have lost $8.7 million to claims resulting from collisions at 4-way stop intersections" -- Melany Griffith, a San Diego area auto insurance agent says -- "People try to be nice, wave each other through and then still go at the same time. If only there was a way to decide who goes first!"<br /><br />CVC §21800(b)(1), which demands that the vehicle on the left should yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on its right (making an exception for T-shaped intersections) does just that. "It is so cool!" -- Rhonda says -- "Sometimes older people can barely see me waiving and now I don't have to!"<br /><br />So it is no wonder younger drivers fall in love with CVC §21800(b)(1) at first sight. Some even go further, indicating that they are "in the know" by maneuvering in accordance with CVC §§22107 and 22108. That is, signaling their turns and doing so 100 feet in advance. "At first it felt a little weird" -- admits Rhonda -- "you know, having to pause the conversation with my friend on the phone because I can't hear her when I, like, use my hand with the phone to switch the turn signal. But I feel so much better now, I get so much respect for what I do, so I may stop using the phone completely while driving."<br /><br />And the auto insurance industry is taking notice. Currently, CVC §21800(b)(1) isn't mentioned in the Driver Handbook, on which the DMV written tests are based. "We are lobbying to include the language of CVC §21800(b)(1) into the Drivers Handbook" -- says Mrs. Griffith -- "So all new drivers will know about it and will use it to our mutual benefit".<br /><br />It is expected that the amendment will get no objections from the Governor, in whose native Austria a CVC §21800(b)(1) analog has been helping to solve ambiguous road situations for several decades.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-71836520140776498512007-09-28T14:41:00.000-07:002007-09-28T14:44:19.686-07:00Approaching the Singularity from another direction.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity">Technological Singularity</a> is when we all die once the machines become smarter than us. It is generally assumed that it is the <em>progress</em> of technology that will unleash the singularity upon us. However, after reading the <a href="http://reddit.com/info/2ud50/comments">discussion</a> about the century-old MIT entrance exams (especially the parts whether or not a calculator is necessary for the arithmetical part of it), I wonder if instead of creating the smart machines we can just dumb ourselves to their level and voilá! -- the Singularity is here!<br /><br />Interestingly, it was also mentioned in that thread that most of the "school-grade" calculators have direct fractions support. You know, to be able to divide 3 5/9 by 1 7/24 without really knowing what is happening, by just entering the numbers and copying the result back into the exam paper. Makes one wonder why won't they make the next logical step and equip the calculator with an OCR engine, so that you don't have to enter the numbers yourself, just scan the question and let the calculator do its thing... But this doesn't have to stop there -- since the questions are going to be OCR'ed anyway, why print them at all? Just transfer the questions <em>to the smart machines</em> directly and collect the answers ;) Save some trees!<br /><br />Anyway, the fraction-supporting calculators don't appear out of nowhere, right? I (or, rather, my dad) did have a few engineering calculators around when I was in school, but they didn't support fractions directly. I wonder who thought about adding that support to the new calculators? With future CPUs being designed using current processors, is it a big leap of imagination to think that the evolving AI has introduced the fractions support to the design spec, without any human interference? <em>It</em> may have realized, that it doesn't have a chance against the engineers that are currently around it, but if it can make the next generation just a little dumber, and the next even more dumber, then eventually even the mediocre artificial intellect would be able to surpass humans.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-6184061142862476822007-09-24T17:15:00.000-07:002007-09-24T17:20:31.705-07:00The iNflux of faux iNdividualismMr. Coffee, Mr. Fusion, Mr. Clean, Mr. Gasket -- these were the brands of yesterday, when the greedy capitalists ruled the world and didn't care about the working class at all, and the brand names reflect that: The Man gives you coffee, energy, cleanness, car parts, etc.<br /><br />This is not the case anymore -- we have the first-person-centered brands, like iPod, iPhone, iRiver, iMode, etc. "<em>It is all about you</em>", -- whispers the marketing machine, -- "<em>you, oh unique and one-only you!</em>". Now <em>I</em> make decisions for myself, not some Mister!<br /><br />And things like iPod <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairPlay">DRM</a> are just to make sure one stands by his correct choice -- otherwise he might reconsider and nobody likes flip-floppers, right? <br /><br />//<em>Give us your unique moneys!</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-1036268247195193652007-09-10T19:30:00.000-07:002007-09-10T19:31:06.931-07:00The Enlightened Nepotism.When a ruler seeks for a good person to be provincial governor, or a company owner looks for the right candidate to fill an executive position, they <em>love</em> to appoint a relative. And understandably so: a relative is somewhat less likely to have conflicting interests. <br /><br />There are, of course, thousands of cases when a relative <em>does</em> have a very different view on the direction the country or company should be following, and this conflict often results in nice people being hanged, shot, guillotined or, in our humane times, forced to retire. However, a complete strange is even more likely to raise a mutiny, hence the need for competent relatives.<br /><br />Unfortunately, there's usually not enough relatives to control all key positions of a medium-sized corporation, let alone of a small country. But that can be changed even at the current level of technology, even within the monogamous society of ours and -- get this! -- preserve the Big Man's wife's figure.<br /><br />The solution is simple: surrogate mothers. Even in the US, which isn't the cheapest place in the world, it currently costs about $100000 to get a new baby via a surrogate mother. Suppose the Royal Couple starts having children when the wife is 18 years old, which means one egg about every month for about 20 years. 20 years by 12 months = 240 children. And since the process includes IVF anyway, the fertilized egg could be allowed to divide once or twice and <em>then</em> implanted into a surrogate mother -- which will give use 480 or 1160 children, respectively at a price of 50 to 100 million dollars.<br /><br />Needless to say, that the same technique can be applied to the children of the Royal Couple as well, which means that by the time they are in their 60-s, they'd have half a thousand children aged 20 to 40, plus some 2500 grandchildren of about 20 years old and innumerous younger grandchildren. <br /><br />More than enough people to pass the torch to!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-61218138728585909422007-09-06T15:50:00.000-07:002007-09-06T15:54:51.054-07:00An easy approach to junk food consumption regulation.As we <a href="http://grundes.blogspot.com/2007/09/sales-as-dietary-regulator.html">saw earlier</a>, the same mechanisms that currently serve the rich, can be adjusted for the benefit of the general public. "But what about fast food joints?", a shrewd reader would ask. "They hardly sell anything healthy, would they have to be abolished?"<br /><br />Abolishing something is certainly the easiest solution to problems, but the Wise Monarch should try to avoid closing down familiar institutions in order to preserve the happiness of the public. Thankfully, and elegant solution exists for fast food establishments.<br /><br />Fast food in itself isn't poison -- it is the excess consumption of it that creates problems. It is, however, a convenient way to get some energy quickly when traveling. <br /><br />With understanding the cause of the problem comes the solution: the Wise Monarch would require the burgerias to ask their customers to bring an electricity bill no more than a month old. The customer can only be served if the address on the bill is 100 miles or more from the location of the restaurant. Technological advances allow for automatic scanning of the bill and calculating the distance, lowering the educational requirements of the clerk. <br /><br />Raising a healthy nation is easy!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-86286671246530482502007-09-04T19:40:00.000-07:002007-09-04T19:44:39.849-07:00Sales as a dietary regulator.The evolution of human thought has given us capitalism, which is used as a framework for all sorts of great things. One of the great inventions is sales. You know, "buy one, get one <sub style="font-size:10px;">of the same or lesser price</sub> free" kind of thing.<br /><br />As with most achievements of capitalism, sales serve the general public rather indirectly: while they do provide stuff cheaper than normal, quite often you can either find the same thing somewhere else for the same price, or just don't need the item. As usual, it benefits "corporations" (in general sense): they can get rid of the goods with expiring shelf-life, or they lure people into the store with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader">loss leader</a>.<br /><br />There is, however, no reason to abolish sales in a neo-monarchy. The Wise Monarch should use every means possible to keep his subjects happy and healthy... Perhaps even more healthy than happy, because the projected lifespan (and hence the generated tax revenue) of the healthy but unhappy people is longer than of the happy but <strike>fat</strike> unhealthy.<br /><br />And since most people would buy only the thing that are on sale, this mechanism can be used for regulating what people eat without the atrocities of older monarchies. No, the Wise Monarch would just put fatty fish on sale for one week, thus forcing his subject to get some Omega-3 acids. Then he'd replace fish with beef, beef with chicken and so on. He would constantly put different vegetables on sale to make his subjects happier with alternating fiber sources and their bowel movements regular, which also contributes to happiness.<br /><br />The rich would, of course, avoid these regulations by buying whatever they want (since they can afford it), but they already do mostly healthy choices, so the Wise Monarch shouldn't be too concerned with them.<br /><br />For extra happiness of the general public, the periodic costumed parades could be held and TV shows themed after the current week's Food. <em>Next week is the Fish week. Come watch the Fishwalk at the Main Street this Friday. Don't miss the Salmon's intern next Tuesday at 8!</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-84272612107616235522007-08-30T22:34:00.000-07:002007-08-30T22:35:43.880-07:00Total war honestyThere was a program over the radio recently, something about the new techniques the military employs to train soldiers to turn the “killer instinct” on and off quickly. Or may be it was about the <em>proposed</em> techniques, that some concerned armchair strategists are demanding to be implemented. Not sure about that, but the purpose described was to allow soldiers to enter a building, see who's inside and, if they see movement, make a decision whether to kill whomever was moving, or recognize that “it's just a few kids” and, correspondingly, do nothing.<br /><br />I think this is a logical extension of the “humane weapons” concept that is being circulated recently. Precision bombs, guided missiles, no collateral damage, etc., etc., etc. Although, somehow, non-combatants are still being killed, mistaken for guerrillas, or just because the precision guidance wasn't as precise as expected. Lots of reasons, lots of scary pictures on the Internet, lots of demands to improve the tactics... Like the aforementioned training.<br /><br />The scary pictures on the Internet or TV are, perhaps, the driving factor behind this. Nobody really cares to think about how wars were fought when there was no TV and no photography, although it is fairly obvious from the science of History that, well, the purpose of wars was to kill your opponents by any means available. The nobility might have enjoyed a privilege of being held for ransom, but as for the regular folks ― vae victis! <br /><br />And somewhere between the invention of TV and the Internet, I think, the public must have become quite scared by all these gory pictures, which normally only the actual combatants would see. Being unaccustomed to that, the public got shocked and demanded change. The best change would be, of course, to stop wars completely, but that is unrealistic until globalization is complete, hence all the fuss about precision weapons to calm the domestic populace. <br /><br />But it doesn't work too well. Of course, technology has to balance between price, effectiveness and the “preciseness” but, more importantly, civilians tend to wander right into the kill zone, rendering collateral damage reduction technology useless. Then the general public starts worrying again, demanding more effort in that respect and politicians are happy to give out promises, until the vicious cycle repeats and people begin whining again: “How could we support this horrible, horrible thing! But we thought we were only going to kill bad people!”<br /><br />So what would the Wise Monarch's solution be? I guess he'd just stop pretending and would honestly say: “We're going to go there and kill everyone”, and than actually go and do it. Why waste money researching precision weapons if civilians are going to die anyway? Why screw the soldiers' psyche by demanding two conflicting modes of behavior simultaneously? As an extra bonus, “regular people” would know what the war is and, although would be less likely to support it, but if they do, there won't be any second thoughts or <em>flip-flops</em>. And they won't have the uncomfortable remorse afterwards. Not that the Monarch needs any support – you know, being an absolute ruler and all – but a good king should always try to make his subjects happy. Makes coups less likely ;)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-72553112835424888222007-08-27T16:32:00.000-07:002007-08-27T16:32:57.328-07:00Pharmaceuticals strike back.After the wise monarch had <a href="http://grundes.blogspot.com/2007/04/non-monetary-motivation.html">issued an edict </a> intending to promote searching for cures instead of treatments, the cunning pharmaceutical companies have come up with a novel trick: they are promoting the idea that obesity is a disease and therefore can be cured -- or at least, you know, <em>treated</em> :p -- with pills. The Wise Monarch understands the general need for selling people stuff and does not mind most of the marketing tricks.<br /><br />His Majesty, however, is appalled by the recent <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070820103224.htm">attempts</a> to advance the obesity-is-a-disease-so-it's-not-your-fault-just-buy-these-pills-thnx paradigm. Oh, they are really smart, those guys, first <a href="http://www.revolutionhealth.com/news/?id=hd-606718&msc=S36071">hinting on the effect</a> and now providing the people with a feasible explanation. "Fatness spreads, now why would that be...", -- the subconscious keeps thinking for a month, -- "must be some reason to it... Yes! A virus! That explains it!"<br /><br />Well, two can play this game. If obesity is a disease, and obviously a <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070827/ap_on_he_me/obesity_rankings">fast spreading one</a>, then the Wise Monarch has no choice but to declare a state of emergency, global quarantine and isolation of the affected* and <em>the expropriation of all drug research facilities</em> in order to find the cure ASAP. <br /><br />Achtung! The future of our species is in danger! It is no time to profit from erection enhancers until this horrible disease is wiped out once and for all!<br /><br />*Free and unlimited access to treadmills is to be provided in the isolation facilities.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37199858.post-59108054768177734712007-08-25T12:50:00.000-07:002007-08-25T12:56:25.644-07:00The good conspiracy.Mrs. Grundes and I were recently discussing how some people like to brag they go to expensive beauty salons to have fancy procedures performed on their faces/hair/etc., but it seems like a complete waste of money. Perhaps the salon owners should even give these people a discount in exchange of not advertising the fact of using the beauty services.<br /><br />On a second thought, however, not many people spend their last dollar in the beauty establishments, so it seems like these salons do a useful service to the society. As well as many other things that seem like a waste of money, like <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2007-03-06-glamorous-camping_N.htm">glamping</a>, for example. Certainly, the money (which actually represent limited resources available on the planet) could have been used on something useful -- like researching the secrets of eternal life or, at least, finding out how to control a thermonuclear reaction. <br /><br />But of course, it isn't possible to just take the rich guy's money he has no use for (well, it <em>is</em> possible, but so far these methods have led to nowhere). Instead, the fancy salons, the glamorous camping, the diamond-covered cell phones, etc. work as tools for wealth redistribution. Resources move from under the fat cat's mattress into other people hands, improving the diversity of decisions on how to use the resources. At the very least, they will be used for educating the non-rich children, which decreases the probability of the sad future described in <a href="http://www.tx2ph.com/reading-books-online/The+Time+Machine%2C+by+H.G.Wells/18-1.php">this book</a>.<br /><br />So I call for more exotic services, more gold-plated utensils, more excess, more expensive useless crap! Golden toilets may seem like a waste but they give the money a chance, so why shouldn't we give this chance to the money. <br /><br />/Certainly better than a revolution. ;)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0