Barnson.org

John McCain blames the run-up in oil prices on “Reckless Wagering”. Barack Obama is proposing legislation to stop the fuel price rise driven by “a few energy lobbyists and speculators.” The Wall Street Journal has a different theory, though, that defies the dogma of speculation.

I agree with the WSJ.

I have been studying foreign exchange markets for the past few months. In intra-day and inter-day trading, you can see the swings caused by speculation. There are even some longer-term trends fueled by speculation. However, these trends are tiny compared to the money policy embraced by a nation and its central banks. These central banks are the engine driving the price of money around the world; speculators are akin to a handful of horses, tied to the engine, trying to hold it back.

They have some small effect, but the train moves on where it is going, directed by the money-engineers driving it in response to expected conditions ahead.

The historic plunge of the value of the dollar in the past two years has not been fueled by speculation. It has been fueled by an intentional weak-dollar policy on the part of a Federal Reserve trying to blunt the effect of crushing national debt and fight inevitable inflation.

So, too, is the case with oil prices. That weak-dollar strategy turned investors to commodities, adding a few extra horses to try to hold that locomotive back. But, by and large, the prices are rising because demand is overwhelming supply.

Unless some new facts come to light, it certainly appears that we are finally approaching the summit of Peak Oil: global demand is outstripping diminishing easy supply. I caveat “easy” supply, because it seems to be true there is plenty of oil left in the world, but it is much harder to get to than the easy oil-strikes of the past century. And I fully expect that we’ll see quite a few advances in oil extraction in the next ten to twenty years that will help keep pace with peak oil demands, at least for a while.

On the plus side, it appears that higher energy prices have begun to highlight the false economy of moving manufacturing jobs overseas, and high shipping costs are bringing some jobs back to the USA.

Energy costs are expensive enough that I’m seeing the impact in my monthly budget of paying three times as much for gasoline as when I made that budget. I cannot wait for the day that UltraMegaCorp finishes the new data center planned just 8 miles from my house, and I can begin to ride my bike to work on a regular basis. In fact, I think the rise in fuel prices may be a long-term net win for the USA, but the cost to my wallet gives me pause about taking one for the team.

If you have ever been involved in implementing a klunky solution to a difficult problem, you’ll appreciate this story: http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Stalled-Server-Room.aspx

At work, we have an odd tradition: once every few months, we go buy several pounds of bacon, and fry it up at Dave’s house for lunch. Not much point to it, really, but today we had some weird Japanese contest show called the Extreme Championships on the TV. It got funnier the more beers spread around the room, and the bacon smell permeated Dave’s house.

Yep. 7 people, 5 pounds of bacon. Good lunch!

I voted for Bush. Twice. Two times.

First time, it was because honestly, he seemed like the better choice. He did a good job in texas, people liked him, he reached across the aisle, and yeah.. he shared osme of my moral beliefs.

Second time, it was more complicated. I watched Farhenheit 911 the night before.. I was thiiisss close to Kerry.. but the man, dammit.. every time he was asked about his plan, all he could do was say “Bush did…” – his entire campaign was about anti-Bush.. and at least GW was FOR something..

Turns out, GW is the worst president we’ve probably ever had.. whoops..

So.. if Hilary had gotten the democratic nomination.. I might have found myself in the same predicament. McCain, I Like him.. he was, at one time.. really cool.. and I like to think he is pandering to get his base back, but really.. just wants to be that cool guy again. Hilary was over-political, dirty-fighting, cold-n-calculating, accusatory, and unable to engage in any real positive messages except her health care plan (which, admitteldy, I really liked). So I might have found myself torn and going with the GOP (of which I am a registered member) yet again.

But.. nope. I am a Republican, and I am voting for Barack Obama. He is positive, lightning-quick, well spoken, informed, savvy, and able to sit down with those world leaders and be respected. He is new blood, and, if he wins, he may be, finally, the return to presidentiality we have yearned for. Face it.. Johnson was seedy, Nixon was a loser, Ford was a lame duck form moment one, Carter was a wet noodle, Reagan was good but “likeable” and fuzzy, Clinton played the sax and a fat intern and GW went form lovable laughing stock to dangerous man-child with his finger on the f**kin Button..

JFK, Lincoln, FDR, Teddy, Adams, Washington, Jefferson (George AND Weezie) – they all had that Je Ne Sais pas, that ting about them.. and Obama may well have it too.. so.. yeah.. I am Republican, and I am voting for Barack Obama.

A man in New Zealand was excommunicated from the LDS church for indecent acts with one boy under age 12, and several others aged 12 to 16, including an act including a bull mastiff dog. The church excommunicated him without notifying law enforcement…

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4584766a11.html

Does a church have an obligation to report illegal activities disclosed in the confessional? Legally, in many US states, they do not:

http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/clergymandated.cfm

Ethically, however, should a clergyman be required to report known or suspected child abuse?

Utah is weird.

There, I said it. It’s just a plain weird place to live. I went to a picnic the other day, and the most distinguishing characteristics about it were the utter lack of any minorities, any alcohol, and the undercooked hamburgers busily worked over by a tall white guy named Brian. There were hordes of smiling white faces eating rare burgers with perfect teeth, while fat, pink babies crawled or toddled on the grass.

I grew up near Washington, D.C. Ethnic and habit diversity is something I’m used to. The monoculture of race and habit is unsettling.

Utah is also weird for its unique restriction on the distribution of “hard liquor”. Only three places are allowed to sell hard liquor: state-owned liquor stores that make an enormous profit, “private clubs” that in any other state would be called “bars”, and restaurants which derive more than 50% of their gross profits from the sale of foodstuffs other than alcohol. You aren’t allowed to have an open container of alcohol anywhere in public in Salt Lake City, Park City, and a number of other municipalities.

Like I said, weird.

A “private club” is an odd beast. Basically, to enter any bar in Utah, you have to fill out a lengthy form, show ID, and pay a club membership fee (minimum $5 or more). This makes bar-hopping a very expensive and time-consuming proposition for visitors. There are also specific rules about how many guests a private club member is allowed to bring with her into the bar. The oddest thing is these rules are codified into laws, with like actual jail time attached if you bring 8 friends with you into a private club rather than 7 or fewer.

Anyway, yesterday the Utah State Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission invited the public to comment on the issue. The quotes that sticks out to me, though, came from opponents of allowing “bars” in Utah. Their arguments were:

1. That not requiring name, address, phone number, and emergency contact information at bars would make it more difficult to prove drunk drivers had been drinking because there would be no written record of their entry to a bar,
2. That maintaining a list of every person who drinks at a bar in Utah is required for law-enforcement purposes,
3. That removing the “private club” restriction would send a mixed-message to youth; while we’re spending millions of dollars on the DARE program to convince children not to use alcohol or drugs, we’re also liberalizing our bar laws and thereby promoting the use of a “potentially dangerous controlled substance” (her words),
4. And finally, that we should not send the message that Utah’s moral standard on liquor can be abrogated for money from tourism and business.

My questions are: Do other states have a problem proving the guilt of a drunk driver using a Breathalyzer or traditional drunkenness tests? Are those who go to bars any more likely than the general public to commit a crime where their private-club record will help the case? Doesn’t DARE stand for “Drug Abuse Resistance Education”, and can’t responsible adults imbibe from time to time without it being “abuse”? Does the “moral standard” of those who oppose the private clubs modification really require that they make it as difficult as possible to get a drink in Utah?

I’m with Governor Huntsman on this one: get rid of the ridiculous “private club” requirement to serve liquor in Utah. It is a burden on visitors and those who wish to legally imbibe. It’s an arbitrary distinction that amounts to nothing more than a drinking tax imposed by those who want to bend the rest of the state to the will of the religious majority.

From a post today on another board, I decided to archive my opinion. Like I’ve said before, I learn what I think when I read what I write:

I would guess a bunch of the “abstinence is evil” crowd has an STD and/or has had an abortion. Regardless, we should use them as our model of acceptable behavior. :blink:

Abstinence-ONLY education (Title V) is evil insofar as it leads to an increased rate of sexually-transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy among teens. Note I’ve never had an STD or suggested abortion as you impugn. Abstinence is not evil; abstinence-ONLY education in its current form — bribing school districts to abandon comprehensive sex education that brought down the epidemic rates of abortion and STDs of the late twentieth century — is evil.

Title V restricts discussion of or advocacy for any birth-control method other than abstinence. Violation of this restriction by even a single teacher in a district endangers the entire district’s federal funding. Is it the American way to pay schools to silence conscientious teachers who favor comprehensive sex education and don’t echo the party line?

What do you think the people in New York have been taught – abstinence? Hardly.

New York is an urban area, with a birth rate and STD rate among teens consistent with other demographically-similar cities. New York rejected the federal abstinence-only education grant because of the strings attached: federal interference in local education efforts. “Abstinence-ONLY” funds are statistically ineffective at reducing teen birth rates and STD rates, while comprehensive sex education — including abstinence — leads directly to a 60% reduction in teen birth rate, with a modest reduction in STD rates.

New York’s rejection of the Federal purse with strings attached was a smart move if the goal is to reduce teen birth and STD rates. Abstinence-ONLY education is ineffective policy, at best. Since abstinence-ONLY’s introduction in 1996, teen pregnancy has been on the rise. Comprehensive sex education, which was common until the 1996 Title V introduction, showed dramatic results in both STD reduction and teen-pregnancy reduction according to several CDC statistics.

Comprehensive sex education programs introduced in the 1970s and 1980s rebuilt the dam bridged by the rampant promiscuity of an earlier era. Today’s modification into “abstinence-ONLY”, at best, is a finger in the dike attempting to hold back the flow of STDs and unwanted pregnancy, with negligible results.

Scientists made a valuable discovery recently: they cataloged the changes in a bacteria’s DNA as it underwent a major evolutionary shift.

This is substantial for scientific, cultural, and religious/doctrinal reasons.

Scientific: This bacteria made a cross-species leap. In approximately 31,500 generations, a mutation developed that allowed E. coli to metabolize citrate. A distinguishing feature of E. coli from other bacteria is its inability to metabolize citrate. This is akin to a human being suddenly developing the ability to safely metabolize rotten meat without sickness, like a vulture, or a cat developing the ability to learn to speak English. It’s a radical shift in a species due to an extremely unlikely mutation that took tens upon tens of thousands of generations to manifest.

Cultural: From the article:

In the meantime, the experiment stands as proof that evolution does not always lead to the best possible outcome. Instead, a chance event can sometimes open evolutionary doors for one population that remain forever closed to other populations with different histories.

Lenski’s experiment is also yet another poke in the eye for anti-evolutionists, notes Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago. “The thing I like most is it says you can get these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events,” he says. “That’s just what creationists say can’t happen.”

Religious/Doctrinal: From LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie’s famous “Seven Deadly Heresies” speech:

Should we accept the famous document of the First Presidency issued in the days of President Joseph F. Smith and entitled “The Origin of Man” as meaning exactly what it says? Is it the doctrine of the gospel that Adam stood next to Christ in power and might and intelligence before the foundations of the world were laid; that Adam was placed on this earth as an immortal being; that there was no death in the world for him or for any form of life until after the Fall; that the fall of Adam brought temporal and spiritual death into the world; that this temporal death passed upon all forms of life, upon man and animal and fish and fowl and plant life; that Christ came to ransom man and all forms of life from the effects of the temporal death brought into the world through the Fall, and in the case of man from a spiritual death also; and that this ransom includes a resurrection for man and for all forms of life? Can you harmonize these things with the evolutionary postulate that death has always existed and that the various forms of life have evolved from preceding forms over astronomically long periods of time? …

My reasoning causes me to conclude that if death has always prevailed in the world, then there was no fall of Adam that brought death to all forms of life; that if Adam did not fall, there is no need for an atonement; that if there was no atonement, there is no salvation, no resurrection, and no eternal life; and that if there was no atonement, there is nothing in all of the glorious promises that the Lord has given us. I believe that the Fall affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself, and that the atonement affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself.

I agree exactly with Elder McConkie’s line of reasoning, but to the opposite conclusion.

So this fall, as usual, I’m the audio engineer for a three-day conference in Salt Lake City with several hundred attendees, and about three times that number listening live online. While the quality seems fine, I’m looking for alternatives to bring the best experience to listeners.

Here was last year’s setup:

• Two laptops: one Windows, one Linux.
• Windows laptop runs Cakewalk Sonar, recording an archival-quality 16-bit, 44.1KHz stereo feed from a combination of various mics. I think the only change I’ll make this year is to give the room mics a bit more boost so that the audience sounds as large as it is… last year’s recordings sounded like there were maybe a half-dozen people in the room.
• Linux laptop runs BlackICE pumping audio to an ICECast streaming MP3 server over the hotel’s wi-fi link. This is a live feed, and ran all weekend long with only one hitch.
• Mackie twelve-channel mixer.
• Podium mic and two condenser room mics to provide atmosphere.
• Two wireless hand-held microphones: one for presenters who prefer to walk rather than stand behind the lectern, a second one used by my gofer to field questions from the audience.
• One wireless body mic; I’ve never been very impressed with this one. It just sounds muted compared to the high-quality hand-held stuff and lectern-mic. These days it functions as an adjunct mic in case I need to separate the room feed from the online feed.
• Line-in from the AV stand next to the projector for multimedia presentations and movie showings (last year, I had a nasty ground loop on this line; I think I’m going to make this link wireless so that I avoid that particular electrical phenomenon. You can’t get TRS-balanced output from a laptop.)
• During downtime, I would compress and upload archival audio to the web site. This is a very labor-intensive process that I’d rather save until a few days after the conference, but I’ve done it for the past three years.

Now, this year, I’m thinking that I should have a similar setup, but with a totally new twist: Blog Talk Radio. This site would allow me to schedule the presentations in advance, provide automatic archiving, as well as allow call-in telephone numbers and an online chat room to field questions for Q&A sessions.

This would require a third laptop, but I could have my assistant screen questions on the chat room and announce them to the guests in the ballroom during Q&A, or even have the call-in on the sound system in the room (though, of course, we’d have to ask them to turn down their radio and pay attention to the phone instead).

The huge plus-factor for BlogTalkRadio, for me, is that I’d already have an audio archive of the sessions online, created real-time while we’re recording. This would save me the step of having to compress and upload the archival recordings during the session, so that I could hang with other guests and take a potty break now and then. A few days after the conference, I could store the MP3 archives on the web site like usual.

Any alternatives that might work better, or enhance the experience?

Additionally, I’d love advice on how to avoid the ground-looping problem on the long line from the laptop to the mixer. That 60Hz hum is obnoxious. My initial thought is to go buy a line-level wireless transponder. My second instinct is to keep the laptop up next to the presenter, use a long VGA cable, and have a mixer with a balanced output up at the presentation-table. This setup would let me use a balanced connection for that long run, and, with luck, eliminate any ground-loop issues. Or, maybe, I should just go buy a Direct Box.

Hey, guys, sorry for the weirdness on the web site today. We had some emergency downtime last night. I could only fix the web server just enough so that all the sites ran before I had to take off for Logan for the day. All is back up now, and seems normal.