Quotulatiousness

January 24, 2019

The latest incarnation of the Canada Food Guide

Filed under: Cancon, Food, Government — Nicholas @ 05:00

It’s … not as bad as it could have been, says Chris Selley:

The Canada Food Guide reliably gets a rise out of Canadians who would prefer the government get off our lawns and stop trying to tell us how to live. And the long-awaited update, released Tuesday fully 12 years after the past one, is something of a feast for curmudgeons. In addition to new guidance on what foods we should be consuming — in brief: more plants, fewer animals — it suggests we consider such novel concepts as cooking foods ourselves more often, and eating foods with other people.

Have you considered that if you cook a larger batch of food, you’ll have more food left over to eat at future meals — perhaps having frozen the food and then defrosted it? If you struggle to drink as much water as the guide thinks you should, have you considered that you can “drink it hot or cold”?

I try to keep my curmudgeonly instincts in check. An exercise like this is bound to produce a few silly, infantilizing recommendations. Most countries like Canada have a food guide of sorts. It makes sense that a health ministry would have basic nutritional guidelines on the books to inform institutional policies, not least what kids get fed at schools. Goodness knows you needn’t follow them at home — and indeed, it would surprise me if very many of us do. Modern Western human beings do seem to love being told what to eat, but it’s generally by people with a hell of a lot more charisma than the authors of “Eat well. Live well.” Food porn this ain’t. Protein choices suggested in accompanying photographs include a few tragic slices of skinless chicken, a mighty kebab of three (3) cubes of mystery meat and nothing else, and a portion of salmon to which something brown has happened.

Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring – Extra Sci Fi – #1

Filed under: Books — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Extra Credits
Published on 22 Jan 2019

J.R.R. Tolkien wasn’t *just* a fantasy author — he was a mythology master. As a result, he ended up inventing some of the most popular genre tropes that science fiction heavily draws upon. Fellowship of the Ring introduces the theme of the “lessening of the world” and the decay of humanity.

In Canada, “total revenue per GB is roughly 70 times higher than in India and 23 times higher than in Finland”

Filed under: Business, Cancon, Government, Technology — Tags: — Nicholas @ 03:00

Canadians are used to being screwed by our telecommunications companies, but it’s worse than I thought, as Michael Geist illustrates:

Tefficient, a European-based consultancy on the wireless market, released its latest report this morning comparing pricing and usage in the global wireless market. The data, which incorporates the most recent CRTC numbers on the Canadian market, shows Canada as a global outlier when it comes to the revenues generated by wireless carriers. The report notes the unsurprising correlation between high prices and low data usage:

    There is a prerequisite for continued data usage growth, though: The total revenue per gigabyte can’t be too high – like in Canada and Belgium. The total revenue per gigabyte here is roughly 70 times higher than in India and 23 times higher than in Finland. And consequently, mobile usage is lower than average.

The charts show where Canada stands relative to other countries with carriers generating more revenue per GB than anywhere else in the world and consequently Canada lagging behind many other countries in wireless usage.

Source: https://tefficient.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/tefficient-industry-analysis-3-2018-mobile-data-usage-and-revenue-1H-2018-per-country-final-17-Jan-2019.pdf

The Sinking of HMS Glorious: An Avoidable Tragedy?

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Historigraph
Published on 27 Aug 2018

The Sinking of HMS Glorious, on June 8 1940, was one of the worst British naval disasters of the Second World War. Over 1500 losing their lives as two German battleships sunk three British ships. In this video, we will recount the events and the heroism of Glorious’ two escorts (HMS Ardent and HMS Acasta), before looking at the post-war controversy over whether the disaster was ‘covered up’ by the Admiralty.

If you enjoyed this video and want to see more made, consider supporting my efforts on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph

► Twitter: https://twitter.com/historigraph
►Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/historigraph
►Discord: https://discord.gg/f8JZw93
►My Gaming Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/Addaway

Sources:

John Winton, Carrier Glorious (Cassell: 1986)

Stephen Roskill, Churchill and the Admirals (Pen and Sword, 1977)

Corelli Barnett, Engage The Enemy More Closely: The Royal Navy in the Second World War (Penguin, 1991)

Henrik Lunde, Hitler’s Preemptive War: The Battle for Norway, 1940. (kindle edition)

Earl Ziemke, German Northern Theater of Operations 1940-1945. (kindle edition)

Record of the Hansard Debate from 1999: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-ha…

Full Casualty List for HMS Glorious can be found here: http://www.naval-history.net/xDKCas19…

From the comments:

1. Unlike the Battle of the River Plate from my last video, we do not know the precise movements of the ships, particularly the British ones, during the battle. The movements in this video should thus be taken as purely illustrative.

2. As you might be able to tell there is still a pretty intense debate over the reasons for Glorious’ sinking, particularly over what knowledge the officers on board Devonshire had or didn’t have about Glorious’ trouble. In particular there is testimony from one midshipman that the ship’s captain and Admiral Cunningham (who was on board) knew what was happening and took no action. It is only his word, so many of the historians I have read do not seem to have bought much into it, but it appears in this documentary from 1997: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yAahSUiXt4

QotD: Multiple gender identities

Filed under: Politics, Quotations — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 01:00

A few examples of possible gender identities offered in Crofton’s article include “amorgender,” which is “gender that changes in response to a romantic partners,” “mirrorgender,” which is “gender that changes to reflect those around you,” “chaosgender,” which is “gender that is highly unpredictable,” and “gendervex,” which is “having multiple genders, each of which is unidentifiable.” Genders can also be negative instead of positive — something Crofton calls “antigender.” For example, some people might identify as “antigirl,” and that’s not to be confused with identifying as “male.”

Now, lest you think that all of this sounds too simple and restrictive, Crofton also clarifies that your gender absolutely does not have to be something that’s included on this or any list, because even though “dominant culture wants us each to conform to a single gender,” you are totally allowed to have as many genders as you want, to change your gender or genders as often as you want, and to identify as a certain gender or genders like only a little bit instead of completely. Basically, anything goes — except, of course, for cultural appropriation.

Yes, that’s right. According to Crofton, certain gender identities can be appropriation, such as “the Two-Spirit genders of some North American Indigenous groups” and “autigender and fascigender, which are exclusive to people with autism.”

“Because it’s impossible to access these genders without being part of a specific cultural context, it’s inappropriate for outsiders to claim any Two-Spirit gender,” Crofton writes, adding that if even one of your genders is “culturally appropriated,” then your whole “overarching identity also becomes problematic” — a situation that can be an issue for “pangender people.”

“Pangender people, in a literal sense, identify as all genders,” Crofton writes. “The problem is that ‘all genders’ includes culturally specific genders that must not be appropriated.”

Ahhhhhhh, yes. A huge problem indeed! I, for one, cannot believe there hasn’t been more talk about how “pangender” is, by definition, culturally insensitive, and that identifying as all genders inherently means that you’re saying that you identify with at least one gender outside of your own cultural experience. The solution, according to Crofton, is for pangender people to make sure that they describe themselves as being “all available genders” instead of as “all genders.”

Katherine Timpf, “SJW Internet Publishes a Guide to Being as Many Genders as You Want without Culturally Appropriating”, National Review 2017-02-13.

Powered by WordPress