Friday, January 6, 2012
Storyboard Podcast: The Curse of Cow Clicker
Storyboard Podcast: The Curse of <cite>Cow Clicker</cite>: New York Editor Jason Tanz joins Adam Rogers on this week?s Storyboard to discuss how Ian Bogost's game satire Cow Clickers became his most popular game to date and Bogost?s views on this bizarre experience.
Short Films Expose Cities’ Subterranean Spaces
Short Films Expose Cities’ Subterranean Spaces:
What lurks beneath our cities? That question has spurred a few intrepid urban explorers to take cameras into the bowels of urban areas to find out.
From hot springs to sewers to catacombs, there are cities beneath cities that are an irresistible temptation for curious videographers. Check out these short films to catch a glimpse of the unseen underground.
Above:
Crack the Surface
Filmmakers SilentUK take us underground into the world of Urban Exploring in England. An interesting piece with rare interviews of explorers, paired with epic underground footage. This short form series is the first of its kind showing viewers the incredible cobweb of underground passages lurking below, and what fuels these neo-explorers.
Morning Links
Morning Links:
- New Florida Marlins acquisition Mark Buerhle can’t live in Miami because he own an 18-month old Staffie, and Miami-Dade County has a dumb ban on “pit bulls.” I explain the numbskullery of breed-specific legislation here.
- Ken at Popehat draws the line between recording police, take-down notices, and SOPA.
- Alabama minister sues after his photo was posted to the local sheriff’s “most wanted” web page. It was posted after a tip from an informant.
- U.K. couple cleared in the midst of a shaken baby trial after post-mortem exam reveals the child had rickets.
- Veteran photographer threatened by L.A. cop for violating the cop’s “right to privacy.”
- Tumblr of the moment: Ron Paul meets Ron Swanson.
- The threatening letter that the FBI anonymously sent to Martin Luther King, Jr.
Problems with the Squeeze Iran Strategy (And a Reluctant Hat Tip to Ron Paul)
Problems with the Squeeze Iran Strategy (And a Reluctant Hat Tip to Ron Paul):
Robert Wright in the Atlantic, expert on everything
from God to foreign policy, notes that, apparently just for
absolutely random reasons that have nothing to do with an actual
educated and wise overall perspective on history and policy,
because God forbid he have to admit Ron Paul is actually
intelligent on foreign policy in a way no one else in national
politics is, Ron Paul is right that we seem to be deliberately
pushing Iran toward war:
A week ago Ron Paul tried to convey how the ever-tightening
sanctions on Iran--which may
soon include an embargo on its oil--look from an Iranian
point of view: It's as if China were to blockade the Gulf of
Mexico, he said--"an act of war".This is sheer conjecture; Ron Paul is no expert on Iran. But now
someone who does have relevant credentials has
weighed in, and the picture he paints is disturbingly reminiscent
of the one Paul painted. It suggests we may be closer to war than
most people realize.Vali Nasr, in addition to being a highly respected expert on the
Middle East, belongs to a family that, according
to Lobelog's sources, has "a direct line into Iranian Leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's inner circle." In a Bloomberg
View piece that is getting a lot of attention, Nasr
reports that "Iran has interpreted sanctions that hurt its oil
exports, which account for about half of government revenue, as
acts of war." Indeed, the Iranian leadership now sees U.S. policy
as "aimed at regime change."In this light, Iran's recent threats--notably that it will close
the Strait of Hormuz in response to an oil embargo--shouldn't be
dismissed, says Nasr. "The regime in Tehran is ready for a
fight."The good news is that Nasr thinks war can be averted. The bad
news is that to accomplish this America and other Western powers
need to "imagine how the situation looks from Tehran"--not exactly
a favorite pastime among American politicians these days.....Iran's nuclear scientists have recently evinced a tendency to
get assassinated, and a mysterious explosion at a military facility
happened to kill the general in charge of Iran's missile program.
These things were almost certainly done by Israel, possibly with
American support. If you were Iranian, would you consider
assassinations on your soil grounds for attacking the suspected
perpetrators?Well, we know that some notable Americans think assassinating
people on American soil is punishable by war.
After the alleged Iranian plot to assassinate a Saudi Ambassador in
Washington was uncovered, Bill Kristol (whom you may recall from
our previous run-up to a disastrous war)recommended that
we attack Iran.But I'm guessing that if I tried this Iran-America analogy out
on Kristol, he might detect asymmetries. For example: We're us,
whereas they're just them.Underlying our Iran strategy is the assumption that if we keep
ratcheting up the pressure, the regime will eventually say uncle. A
problem with this premise is that throughout human history rulers
have shown an aversion to being seen by their people as
surrendering. Indeed, when you face dissent, as the Iranian regime
does, there's actually a certain appeal to confronting an external
threat, since confrontation tends to consolidate domestic support.
As Nasr puts it, "the ruling clerics are responding with shows of
strength to boost solidarity at home."This doesn't mean Iran's rulers haven't wanted to make a deal.
But it does mean the deal would have to leave these rulers with a
domestically plausible claim to have benefited from it, and it also
means these leaders can't afford to be seen begging for the deal.
When President Ahmadinejad visited New York last year, he gave
reporters unmistakable
signals that he wanted to negotiate, but the Obama
administration chose to ignore them. After Ahmadinejad "went home
empty handed," reports Nasr, power increasingly shifted to Iranians
who argued for confrontation over diplomacy.Even so, Iran's foreign minister made another appeal to re-open
talks only days ago, suggesting that they be held in Turkey. But,
as the New York Times reported,
western nations interpreted this overture "as an effort by Iran to
buy time to continue its program." Got that? If Iranians refuse to
negotiate it means they don't want a deal, and if they ask to
negotiate it means they don't want a deal....
There are historical analogs to this
sort of thing, U.S. provocation and refusal to use diplomacy
intelligently contributing to the start of a war, and the outcome
was bad for all concerned. While the insulting way Wright frames
this infuriates the Paul fan in me, it's nice to see this outlook
expressed, especially in the Atlantic, a magazine that
loves nothing more than long feature articles war-gaming our
looming and necessary wars with nearly everyone in the world.
Yes, intelligent application of empathy can actually help forge
a foriegn policy that contributes to peace and prosperity, and it's
not an accident that the only national politician who gets that
talks sense on Iran.
Is The One-Child Policy On Its Way Out?
Is The One-Child Policy On Its Way Out?:
After spotting a new government poster in Beijing showcasing a smiling family with two kids, Evan Osnos speculates:
[T]he Party propagandists may be on to something. Two-child families may not be so far
over the horizon after all, because of a growing consensus that economic pressures demand a change. "China’s shooting itself in the foot" with the one-child policy, Wang Feng, a director of the Brookings-Tsinghua Center for Public Policy in Beijing, told Bloomberg recently in a valuable piece on the big-picture demographics in the developing world. The policy is probably costing China at least half a percentage point off the annual growth rate, which will become more important as growth slows and a rapidly aging society saps the economic engine that has driven China’s rise for a generation. After growing at a steady clip for three decades, China’s working-age population has stalled, and the demographic dividends of that expanding workforce are running short. When do demographers expect the working-age worm to turn? 2013.
New York mayor learning to code
New York mayor learning to code: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he will join thousands in taking an online computer coding course.
The First Climate Change Trade War Breaks Out?
The First Climate Change Trade War Breaks Out?:
Union has begun imposing a requirement that all airlines landing in
Europe must show that they have bought carbon emissions permits
equal to the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the aircraft.
Airlines without the proper number of allowances would be fined up
to $130 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions and could be barred
from European airspace. In November, the International Civil
Aviation Organization issued a statement urging the E.U. to exempt
international airlines from its carbon rationing scheme. The ICAO
was backed by 26 countries, including the U.S., Russia and Japan,
who argued that the plan violates international law.
In December, the European Court of Justice ruled against U.S.
carriers who are contesting the plan. As Euronews
reported:
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has warned that Washington
will take action over the move. Proposed legislation in the
American Congress could make it illegal to comply with the EU
law.
The U.S. is not alone in objecting the new carbon tax on
international travel. China and India have declared that their
airlines will
refuse to pay for the permits. India may ask its airlines to
refuse to supply E.U. regulators with emissions data. In the
meantime, USA Today is reporting that Delta,
United-Continental, and U.S. Airways
are adding a $3 surcharge to tickets for flights to Europe.
From the E.U. point of view the question is: why should their
airlines be put at a competitive disadvantage because of their
compliance with carbon emissions restrictions? This airline tariff
fight could be the first shot in the future trade wars that result
from climate change protectionism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)