March 30, 2010
I guess I can’t complain
According to the latest figures, my commute is only a bit longer than average for Toronto:
After more than six years of enlightened, environmentally-conscious left-wing government under a pro-transit mayor with a compliant anti-auto city council, Toronto has been told its gridlock is among ther worst in the world.
The Toronto Board of Trade surveyed 19 cities and found that commuting times in Toronto are the longest of the lot. Worse than London. Worse than New York. Worse than Los Angeles. Worse than Berlin or Milan. The average beleaguered Torontonian spends 80 minutes a day trying to get to and from work.
Imagine what it would be like without an enlightened, activist, pro-transit city government.
Well over half of my commuting time is spent inside the city boundaries, even though it constitutes a bit less than half the total distance. I’m fortunate that I don’t have to do my commute every day of the week . . .
Nanny state now working entrapment angle
They may be able to get methamphetamines with their breakfast cereal, but the nanny state is determined to ensure that they can’t buy goldfish:
Buying a goldfish at a pet shop used to be an innocent childhood pleasure.
But today an elderly pet shop owner told how she was entrapped into selling a goldfish to a 14-year-old schoolboy, then warned she could face jail.
She had breached a law introduced in 2006 which bans selling live fish to anyone under 16.
After a prosecution estimated to have cost taxpayers £20,0000, Joan Higgins, 66, a great-grandmother who has never been in trouble before, has been forced to wear a tag on her ankle like common criminal and given a seven-week curfew.
Her son, Mark, 47 was also handed a fine and ordered to carry out 120 hours unpaid work in the community.
The notorious criminals could face jail time if they’re brought up on similar charges in the future. The courts are doing everything they can to communicate the extreme seriousness of these crimes, and will stop at nothing to stamp out the evil goldfish sellers.
Apparently, the crime syndicate has been in operation for 28 years, concealing their evil, predatory behaviour behind such innocent-seeming activities as volunteering for PDSA (Peoples Dispensary for Sick Animals) and contributing food for the animals. The hardened criminal mastermind has been banned from contact with at-risk individuals like her own great-grandchildren and prevented from attending known criminal hang-outs like bingo halls and Rod Stewart concerts.
H/T to Kathy Shaidle for the link.
Retired US general apologizes for smear on Dutch troops
Former USMC general John Sheehan has apologized for his remarks about gay Dutch soldiers in the Srebrenica massacre:
An ex-U.S. general has apologised after saying Dutch UN troops failed to prevent the Srebrenica genocide partly because their ranks included openly gay soldiers, the Dutch defence ministry said Tuesday.
John Sheehan, a retired former NATO commander and senior Marine officer, “wrote a letter of apology,” ministry spokeswoman Anne van Pinxteren told AFP.
In it, Mr. Sheehan said he was “sorry” for remarks made at a Senate hearing earlier this month where he argued against plans by President Barack Obama to end a ban on allowing gays to serve openly in the US military.
[. . .]
Mr. Sheehan claimed that Dutch leaders, including the former chief of staff of the Dutch army General Henk van den Breemen, had told him that the presence of gay soldiers had contributed to the fall of the enclave which led to the massacre of nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys.
There were a lot of reasons for the massacre, but the sexual orientation of individual soldiers in the Dutch contingent had nothing to do with it.
The US Army’s love affair with Apple
The US Army, like every army since the dawn of history, can be a slow-moving, ponderous, and hidebound organization. Surprisingly, it’s not always behind the times:
The U.S. Army is getting very tight with the Apple Corporation, mainly because soldiers have long been enthusiastic users of Apple products (iPod and iPhone, and probably iPad as well). But Apple has tight control over what software can be used on these devices, so the military needs a close relationship with Apple just to get their custom military software on the iPods, iPhones and iPads the troops are so enthusiastic about.
This relationship enabled the army to recently run a programming contest for troops and civilian employees. The goal was to create the most effective smart phone software for the troops. Mainly, this was for the iPhones (and iPod Touch), but also for other smart phones like the Google Android. The army believes their military and civilian personnel know what applications are most needed. The troops have already decided what hardware they most need, because they have been buying iPods and iPhones with their own money.
The army sees these portable devices as key battlefield devices. Not just for communication, but for a wide range of data handling (computer) chores. The army wants to work closely with Apple to ensure the troops get the software need, as well as customized hardware. Details are largely kept secret.
[. . .]
The Touch has become the new “most favorite gadget” for the troops. It’s cheap (under $200), has the same interface as the iPhone, has several hundred thousand programs (and growing rapidly) available, and can also serve as an iPod (to listen to music or view vids). What the military sees the Touch as is the PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) that has often (in many different models) been issued over the years, but never really caught on. The Touch has caught on, and it does the job better than any earlier PDA. The Touch also has wi-fi built in, making it easier for the troops to get new software or data onto their Touch.
For use in the combat zone, troops usually put one of the many protective covers on their Touch, and, so far, the Touch has held up well under battlefield conditions. Meanwhile, some of the software written for earlier iPods, is now available for the Touch. This includes the VCommunicator Mobile software and libraries. This system translates English phrases into many foreign languages. Each language takes up four gigabytes per language, so they easily fit on the Touch. The software displays graphics, showing either the phrase in Arabic, or a video of a soldier making the appropriate hand gesture (there are a lot of those in Arabic), and this looks great on the Touch. There are collections of phrases for specific situations, like checkpoint, raid or patrol. You can use any accessory made for the iPod, like larger displays or megaphones.
Self-esteem versus self-respect
Theodore Dalrymple on the crucial differences between self-esteem and self-respect:
With the coyness of someone revealing a bizarre sexual taste, my patients would often say to me, “Doctor, I think I’m suffering from low self-esteem.” This, they believed, was at the root of their problem, whatever it was, for there is hardly any undesirable behavior or experience that has not been attributed, in the press and on the air, in books and in private conversations, to low self-esteem, from eating too much to mass murder.
[. . .]
When people speak of their low self-esteem, they imply two things: first, that it is a physiological fact, rather like low hemoglobin, and second, that they have a right to more of it. What they seek, if you like, is a transfusion of self-esteem, given (curiously enough) by others; and once they have it, the quality of their lives will improve as the night succeeds the day. For the record, I never had a patient who complained of having too much self-esteem, and who therefore asked for a reduction. Self-esteem, it appears, is like money or health: you can’t have too much of it.
Self-esteemists, if I may so call those who are concerned with the levels of their own self-esteem, believe that it is something to which they have a right. If they don’t have self-esteem in sufficient quantity to bring about a perfectly happy life, their fundamental rights are being violated. They feel aggrieved and let down by others rather than by themselves; they ascribe their lack of rightful self-esteem to the carping, and unjustified, criticism of parents, teachers, spouses, and colleagues.
The other side of the coin is rather different:
Self-respect is another quality entirely. Where self-esteem is entirely egotistical, requiring that the world should pay court to oneself whatever oneself happens to be like or do, and demands nothing of the person who wants it, self-respect is a social virtue, a discipline, that requires an awareness of and sensitivity to the feelings of others. It requires an ability and willingness to put oneself in someone else’s place; it requires dignity and fortitude, and not always taking the line of least resistance.
[. . .]
Self-respect requires fortitude, one of the cardinal virtues; self-esteem encourages emotional incontinence that, while not actually itself a cardinal sin, is certainly a vice, and a very unattractive one. Self-respect and self-esteem are as different as depth and shallowness.
