loquacious

This I Believe: Small Things

I believe in the power of small things. Small things add up.

I do not like oatmeal. I love oatmeal with a few raisins and a bit of brown sugar.

When I danced, I was amazed at how a few formal arm shapes and a few leg positions could add up to a simple movement that took my breath away, that expressed joy and exuberance in a way I had never felt before.

A kiss is just a kiss, but a kiss every morning, at the same time, when either of us leaves home, adds up. That series of small, not that significant, and certainly not very romantic kisses, builds to a pattern of life. Its daily occurrence is a reminder of all the others.

Its forcible removal is an injustice. A phone call or even a video chat can replace some parts of a relationship, but the small, quick, light kiss at the start of the day can not be replaced. Its absence is a daily reminder that you have been put into your place in a world that does not recognize your kiss.

The small actions of individual people add up. Tides turn and regimes fall – and rise – on the summative actions of individual people. A few large people and large actions are remembered, but the situation, in the end, is only changed through the totality of action by all the people involved. I do not doubt that my every action is capable of making change occur. I do not doubt that my small actions add up, nor that they have played significant roles in changes I have observed, and also in those that I will never know about.

A small raisin, a low ronde jambe, a small kiss in the morning, a little bit of tear gas in your eye. Small things, perhaps, when compared to the scope of life or the long stretch of history.

But those small things are life, they are history. This I believe.

 

Ken Thompson

Society of New Hope (Craigville, MA)

Day 3 (April 28, 2009)

[note to readers: I wrote this while at The Power Lab, which really deserves a post of its own...I should write it one day. Let's just say it's a cross between a professional development/leadership course and an improvisational theatre piece you perform with 15 strangers. And it runs for 6 days, 24 hours/day. I wrote this piece as I despaired that I was working to maintain a fascist state.]

Juju (~1992-2009): He Paid His Kitty Rent

Dear Juju:

I don't know how to begin this letter. Your death overtook me in a way that I did not expect. We knew you were sick, but the end came quick for you, I was not prepared to let you go. I felt a grief and a sorrow that has no remedy. I've thought a lot about this over the past week.

I think you know how much we loved you, but it troubles me that there was no way of really telling you how much I appreciate all that you did for me and Otts. In your last days I really wanted you to understand that, to know what a difference it was you made in my life. Did you know? Could you know? You were a pretty smart cat, but I'll never know what you really understood.


 When you and Otts moved to the Thomas Street apartment, they charged Otts extra every month for having a pet in the apartment. We called this your kitty rent and tried to think of kitty-appropriate jobs that you could have to pay off your rent. Doughnut delivery was our favorite possibility, but as far as we knew, you never had a paying job. However, I want you to know that I think you paid your kitty rent, more than in full, over the years.

You paid in friendship. I think it still sounds odd to describe you as our friend, but you really were. Your 'puppy dog' ways made you always present in our lives, always around on our laps or under our feet or at minimum somewhere in the room keeping track of us. What friend is perfect? You were not, for sure. But it's the unique things about a friend that make them special, and you had lots of that.

Inside the apartment, you hunted for us each night. On your big legs and your clicking toenails (which we trimmed for you, like your personal kitty spa assistants) you brought your mousie toy to us each night, announcing your approach and hunting prowess with a distinctive meow, before settling your large self on our small bed for the night. You lay, a warm spot on our bed, somehow immovable, like you had swallowed a teaspoon of the sun. Our bed seems empty now, with only the two of us and your kitty brother.

At the risk of making this more about me than you, I can not get over my reaction to your death. I'm not ashamed or afraid of this grief. Grief over a death is the price you pay for having really loved someone. I'm glad to have this grief now because it affirms how much you meant to me, how much I loved you.

It seems wrong somehow that the world goes on. You were so unique and only brought happiness into the world, no sorrow, so it seems wrong that life continues. People drive their cars around, Congress talks about health care, I go to work. We buy groceries. We plan for the future. How can things go on when you are missing? Yet they do. I find this both hopeful and depressing. You are missing from the world and can never be replaced. Something unique and good is gone forever.

I firmly believe that there is nothing after life (and so the rhetorical conceit of this letter should be clear). The measure of who you are is solely based on the life that you have lived. Although there is no one and no thing anyone has to prove themselves to in this world, I can vouch for all the joy, happiness, and love you brought into the world. I'll always remember your warmth, your smell, your purr, the way you'd nuzzle your head on my chin when you were very happy. Mostly, I'll never forget the way you looked me in the eye when we talked. I really felt like you were listening and understood.

"The greatest gift of life is to know love." I'm sure you remember this song, we played it all the time. I really believe that that is true, and you both gave and got that gift. You paid your kitty rent.

I will love you always.

Ken

Easy things to do to help the environment

Lately been kinda of obsessing about power consumption of my electronics, which made me think about some of the other things I do to try and save energy/help the environment. Here are  a few of the things I do, almost all of them are pretty small and alone might be insignificant, but they seem to add up to something much larger.

I'm hoping this doesn't seem like a lecture, I mean this more to be helpful..maybe there are a few things here you haven't tried, and might work for you.

Electronics: I turn off (power down) electronics off when they aren't in use. This especially means computer monitors and speakers, which consume a lot of power even when not in use (but on). You can put your computer into sleep or hibernate mode whenever it's not in use or off. I turn my work computer completely OFF every night.

Power Adapters: a lot of things use power even when you aren't using them, largely because they have power adapters on them. Whenever possible, I try to unplug the power adapters (especially computer or phone battery charger adapters...don't just leave those plugged in, they are pulling and using power all the time). A trick you can use is to put all your adapters/power chargers into one power strip, then just turn off the power strip when none of the devices are still in use. If you want to be really thorough, unplug your computer too when not in use -- it also still draws power. You could extend this to items like your microwave and TV as well, but not even I am that ambitious.

Home heating: we do not use the heat at night. we do not leave the heat on when we are out of the house. [we live in a pretty temperate area, which make this easier.] we do not have any airconditioners.

Recycling: Seattle has mandatory recycling, but I have been pretty crazy about this for years. We also now have City pick-up composting, so basically nearly everything we have gets recycled. According to one carbon footprint calculator, recycling everything you can cuts your home-based carbon footprint by up to 50%.  I also only buy recycled paper products.

Packaging: I try to buy things with as little non-recyclable packaging as possible. So I'll intentionally buy things with less plastic wrap on them, or fewer layers of plastic. Reseable bags are also great.

Re-Use: Trying to get better about this. one thing we do is wash and re-use sandwich bags. I don't throw away any re-usable object - I either leave by the curb (if large) for someone to take if they want (always works within 24 hrs) or I take stuff to Goodwill and let them decide if it's reuseable or not.

Car: I keep the tires inflated and get it tuned up twice a year.  I've also made it a personal goal to never live more than 15 minutes from work. This keeps my total miles driven pretty small each year.

Stairs: I take the stairs at work for any trip of 3 flights or less (and freqeuntly for more...there are only 6 stories in our building).

Plastic bags: yes, we now take bags to the store, though I kind of feel like a freak for doing so. We're trying to find a cost effective alternative to plastic grocery bags for our kitty unmentionables.

Food: ok, here is where I'll probably lose a lot of people, but here is the truth: eating vegetarian consumes a lot less energy and fuels (and fewer pesticides to boot) than eating meet. A recent UN report says that twice as much greenhouse gases are consumed for a meat meal than a vegetarian meal (and 7 times more than a vegan meal). Think of all the transportation and refrigeration it takes to get meat around, how much more wrapping and handling it takes. Not to mention all that grain that needs to be produced just to fatten up the animals. So think about what would happen if you just cut your meat consumption in half. If you  eliminated half your meat eating (home and out), you'd be reducing your food related carbon footprint by 50%.  I don't think there is any single better thing you could do that would have that scale of change.

Except maybe giving up flying. Air travel is increadibly bad for the environment - on the carbon calculators air travel is my single largest contribution- larger than an entire year of driving my car or all of my household-related emissions for a year. I have't figured out this one yet. My in-laws live 4000 miles away on an island.

Cost-wise, I think we're coming out ahead. The reduction in the electric and/or heating bill and gas consumption is somewhat offset by some more expensive purchases (recylced paper towels...yikes!)  and the more frequent car tune ups.

Election 08 Prediction: will poll averaging work? Obama wins easily if so.

Hi. It's 7am here on the Pacific coast. I've analyzed the available polling for the past week in each of the swing states. If the method I developed works (for all the reasons it might or might not listed in this post), here's what it looks like the results will be:

Obama: 353 electoral votes
McCain: 185 electoral votes

My method actually isn't good at predicting ND (3 EV's, there weren't enough recent polls), so I could be off by 3.

Here is my breakdown on who wins which swing states:

Obama:
NC
FL
VA
PA
OH
NH
OH
IA
CO
NM
NV

McCain:
GA
IN
MO (this is the closest race)
MT

and like I said, ND has insufficient data.

It's worth reiterating that this predictive model is only as good as the polling data (and the manipulation/weighting the pollsters do to adjust the data). It will actually be interesting if this method does not work this year, because it worked perfectly to predict the winner of each state in 2004 (though not the margin of win).

Given the problems that surfaced in the Democratic primaries (noted here and here), it's not at all clear that current polling methods are effective at getting to the entire electorate. Rural minorities seems to be especially undercounted.  And by now, I'm guessing everyone has heard about the cell-phone-user-only undercount, as well as the so-called "Bradley effect" - which many have recently discounted, but as we saw in the primaries, it was incontrovertible (I think) that certain white voters seemed to prefer Hillary Clinton to such a degree that you could not help but think that race had something to do with it. There was also recently the fascinatingly complex poll that estimated that Obama would likely lose 6% of his potential vote due to racial bias.

UPDATE: well, obviously, the system worked. Except for IN. Nobody got that right. Interesting to consider why....

Predictive power of polls (aka, who will win on Tuesday?)

So, in true nerd fashion, I wondered whether the 2004 presidential election polls actually had any accuracy in regards to who would win, on a state by state basis.

So, I downloaded all the non-partisan polls from 2004 from each of the 'swing states' in that election, from www.electoral-vote.com (a truly excellent polling site).

What did I learn? Well, my technique was to see what would happen if one averaged all the polls for a given state that were conducted in the 7 days prior to the election. I wanted to see if the average of these polls would accurately predict who would win that state.

I ran this analysis for all the 2004 swing states, and all those that ended up with a 5% or less spread between the candidates (CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, NV NH, NM, OH, OR, PA, WI). In 100% of cases, the averaged poll lead did go to the eventual winner of that state. I'm not saying the margin of win was correct, but the actual winner was accurately predicted by the average of all polls in the state.

What does this mean for the coming election? Well, with some caveats (which follow) it means we should be able to average all the results of polls available on Tuesday morning and predict the winner, state by state, and therefore the overall election.

The caveats here are: 1) this only works if the way polling is done has not changed substantively since the last election; 2) if voters are being as honest this year as 4 years ago about who they will vote for; 3) if there is not some other unaccounted for factor that has not been taken into account here (such as more young/first time voters this time around, or more cell phone users who weren't captured by the pollsters, etc).  Still, overall, given that this method worked 100% for the last election, it seems probable to me that it will work this time as well.

We'll see.

5th Gay Murder in Nassau, Bahamas

I don't think there has been any reporting yet confirming that a fifth gay man was brutally murdered in the Bahamas (fifth in the last year), but it unfortunately seems to be the case. It's not known whether this was a hate crime (really, it's not known whether any of them were hate crimes, due to what appears to be the world's slowest police work) but the murder of 5 gay men in a community the size of Nassau really should be considered remarkable by someone in authority you'd think.

This makes the murder rate for gay men in Nassau something like 1 in 1000, whereas the overall murder rate for heterosexuals in Nassau is about 1 in 2500 (which is already an astoundingly high rate). Why are gay men more than twice as likely to be murdered in Nassau than the general population?

See my post on the prior four murders here.

Seattle Vegetarian (and Vegan) Restaurants / Dining / Food

This is a list of some of my favorite places to eat. Most of them are not, in fact, exclusively vegetarian. If you've been searching for vegetarian-only places in Seattle, you've already probably found the (rather short) definitive list of them somewhere else on the web.  

Upon reflection, the places on this list are as much about the atmosphere there as the food...as there are actually approximately one million good restaurants in Seattle now.  I have been to all these places many times, and have found them consistently good (except where noted).

Vegetarian Only (vegan noted when I noticed)

Moonlight Cafe. just outside the International District, getting into the Central District near 20th and Jackson, this Vietnamese place has mastered the art of the faux-meat dish (and so, most everything is vegan as well). It's really pretty amazing. There are some amazing dishes here, the likes of which one could never make at home. Try the sesame beef, the fish hot pot, or the salmon.  About $7/entree.  Make sure you are ordering off the (extensive, must be 100 items) vegetarian menu. Actually, I've never seen anyone order off the real meat menu, I'm not even sure why they have it. In a strip mall, but again, it's the food. No atmosphere.  (206) 322-3378 http://www.lostinseattle.com/LIS/restaurant/moonlightcafe.html

Carmelita. In the Phinney Ridge neighborhood, an exclusively vegetarian place, with quite a few vegan entree options. I've eaten here many times, and to be honest, it's really hit and miss. I'm not sure what to point you towards. The pizzas are actually pretty good, and the humus plate is the only substantive meal, order that if you are hungry. Or it would make a great appetizer to share for the whole table.  Entrees: about $15 as I recall. Nice atmosphere. (206) 706-7703. http://www.carmelita.net/

Cafe Flora. Probably the largest vegetarian institution in Seattle. Does a great breakfast. Southwest influenced cuisine. It's a little bland for my taste, but some people swear by it. If you are only in Seattle for one or two days, I'd try other places first.  Nice atmosphere. http://www.cafeflora.com/

Hillside Quickie. In the U Disrict and also on Capitol Hill/15th. Really, amazingly good sloppy sandwiches and other dishes. Sort of down home/souther kind of a feel. Perfect for lunch, not bad for dinner. No atmosphere, but really great food -- again, not the kind of thing I'd ever even think of making at home.  Despite the name, not quicker than a regular restaurant.  I believe the vegan options are numerous. http://www.hillsidequickie.com/

Not Vegetarian Exclusively.

A note on the criteria here: as above, there are a ton of good restaurants in Seattle. I find a lot of them to have one or two bland vegetarian options. And they tend toward a corporate blandness in their style and service that I also don't find that appealing. The list below is mainly slightly quirkier places with friendly staffs that have a bit of character and really good, flavorful food.  Except for Marco's, they are not convenient to downtown. But they are worth the trip.

Nice Dinner Spots: (ie. a nice evening out/nice atmosphere)

Marco's Supper Club. Italian joint in the near-downtown Belltown neighborhood. Not a ton of veggie variety on the menu, but everything I've ever had there has been superb. And the service has always been impeccable. Also, it really is a superclub, in that the table is yours for the evening, they are not going to try and rush you out. Courses are served slowly, one at a time. So take your time, get some wine, and spend 3 hours here.  With wine, about $50 each if  you do 3 courses and desert. Stand alone entree: about $15.  Well worth it if you have $50 to spend in one place on on one evening.  Reservations recommended, and they even have a small outside area for eating in the summer.  Great ambiance. (206) 441-7801 http://www.marcossupperclub.com/

Tamarind Tree. Theoretically Vietnamese, but it seems more pan-Asian at times. A few vegetarian items, but the thrill here is those that there are, are terrific. Start with Tamarind Tree roles. Yummy. Also recommended are the mango salad (with lemongrass tofu....to die for), and the Bahn tray: basially, you make your own salad roles. Fun and yummy. Also not very expensive for such a nice place, $8 entrees.  It's always busy after 7, any day of the week. Make reservations if you can.  On 12th and Jackson, just outside the International District. http://www.tamarindtreerestaurant.com/index.php

Kingfish Cafe. On Capitol Hill/19th, but not near much of anything. Southern cuisine, which as we know is not very vegetarian compliant. Once again, only one or two entrees are veggie, but the salads and desserts and sides are SO good, worth the trip. On the downside: no reservations, and there is often a very long wait on a weekend evening, sometimes even on weekdays.  Entrees run about $15.  The coconut cake is to die for. (206) 320-8757.http://www.thekingfishcafe.com/

Swingside Cafe. An Italian place in Fremont, though you'd never know it from the name. Very homey, cosy, converted house that seats not many at all. It's been a while since I was here, but they have a couple of signature dishes that are vegetarian -- try the aglio olio. (206) 633-4057. http://seattle.citysearch.com/profile/10774466/#

Slightly less expensive Dinner, more downscale, also good for Lunch:

Seattle has great Thai food. Here are some of my favorites, most have the $8-$10 entree.  Ayutthaya (206) 324-8833 (Pike/Pine neighborhood; Harvard and Pike); Noodle Ranch (206) 728-0463 (Belltown, actually more pan-asian, the thai salad is great).

Jamjuree (206) 323-4255 (on 15th Ave/Capitol Hill), I will single out for special mention in the Thai category. Food always good here. There's at least one vegetarian special each week, I usually just get that and am never disappointed. http://www.jamjuree.com/

Agua Verde: cafeteria-esque Mexican, probably my favorite Mexican place in Seattle, in the University District on the ship canal. You can rent a kayak here as well. If you go for lunch, arrive before noon or after 1:30 as it is packed at noon. Evenings (especially weekends) can be bad too.  This is because there is absolutely no other place of any merit in the U District. (206) 545-8570; www.aguaverde.com

Lunch:

Venus Cafe: in a nameless neighborhood (S. Lake Union?) north of downtown, this little joint, attached to the Mars Bar, has a bunch of great salads and sandwiches and a nice waitstaff. (206) 624-4516. http://www.cafevenus.com/

Than  Bros. Pho: the lunch deal of the century, they have a great veggie pho (a vietnamese noodle soup) for $3.85. Which I should warn you is the sole vegetarian option. On Broadway on Capital Hill. Good for a cheap dinner as well, but completely lacking in atmosphere. (206) 568-7218

 

Breakfast:

And by breakfast, I mean weekend breakfast/brunch.

Hi-Spot Cafe.  In Madrona, at the end of Union street. Great little cafe, with a great staff. Sometimes a wait, especially around 9 or 10am. Everything you might want for breakfast. (206) 325-7905. http://www.hispotcafe.com/

Portage Bay Cafe.  In the University District on Roosevelt Ave (also now in South Lake Union), a great place to go for breakfast/brunch. I love the 'pancake bar:' all the pancake toppings you could ever want, all laid our for you to help yourself.   They've changed their menu now, there are more veggie items on the lunch and dinner menu, but I haven't had them so can't vouch for them. (206) 547-8230 http://www.portagebaycafe.com/Home.html

The Brain Science Dot: hidden forces in human thinking

I'm not quite sure what to call this dot, nor really sure what it means, yet.  But I think it does fit somewhere into the world of the major dots I'm trying to connect, under the assumption that there are some key interacting forces in our culture (and maybe the world) that are driving current affairs and might provide some kind of hints as to what direction things are headed in, or conflicts that may await us.

If I'm moving toward something here, it's that we're not really all that much in control of ourselves and our perceptions of the world. According to many books I've been reading, there are unseen battles going on in our heads, which we are largely unaware of. These battles impact our ability to think and the actions we take.  Without doubt, these have always been around, and as a believer in evolution, they no doubt at one time served an important evolutionary purpose (or at least they did not have an evolutionary downside). I think what I'm starting to wonder is if there now might be some serious downsides to how our brains work, given the world we now live in.

Just a few thoughts here, I'm sure it's not all adding up to anything yet (damn my brain...maybe it's purposely trying to thwart me?).

• Randomness: our brains are hardwired to see patterns and meaning where there is none. Randomness may actually be threatening to our brains, so we actively ignore it, causing us to misinterpret the world.
• Evil is Easy to Get Used To: based on Zimbardo's book, The Lucifer Effect, shows how easily it is we can accept 'evil' things that would otherwise shock us, based largely on whether we think that authorities have approved such actions. Calls into doubt whether any of us have any real moral compass of our own, when other pressures come into play.
• More than One Brain: it's not even clear that we're in charge of our own brains. They make up some of their own shit part of the time. Our brains are particularly bad at managing times when they are receiving contradictory information.
• We can't trust our own Perceptions: and finally, even the inputs we think we are getting are not very trustworthy. Of what does get in, the brain is editing and/or filling in the missing parts, sometimes to disasterous results. 
• We're completely unaware of our biases: check out this great website, which can tell you more about your unconscious biases than you really ever wanted to know. They are beyond our control. How can we be just if we are unaware of the reasons for the judgments we make?
• Lakoff has written extensively about the (invisible to most of us) frames that guide our lives, opinions and decisions.

So, are we in control of ourselves? Can we shape our own futures -- and especially, can we change our perceptions/how we are?  I think it's the idea that all of this is invisible to us, that we're unaware of it, that I find so interesting. It makes working logically through problems much more difficult if there are forces at play that logic has no bearing on.

When I was working as an artist, I was always most fascinated with unsurfacing ideas or notions that lay beneath the surface of the human psyche, to get people to be willing to question ideas or assumptions which they found so apparently obvious that they had never thought to question them. I guess that interest continues still.

Book: The Drunkard's Walk: how randomness rules our lives

Leonard Mlodinow
2008
272 pp
Rating: 4 out of 5

Quite a fascinating book, which I am sure I will not do credit to here, at least partially because the discussion of some mathematical concepts got a little beyond me at times. But mostly very readable, I would not want to frighten anyone away from reading the book because of some challenging math/logic problems.

The book's thesis is that humans are not very adept at understanding randomness. We seem to be built to recognize patterns, and so randomness is a little hard for us to recognize when it happens. The author points this out in several ways, but the two that stick with me are:

1. Things that are actually random can sometimes appear to have a pattern. Think about it, if random things happen enough times, at some point they will appear to be happening in a patterned way. It's built into the definition of randomness!  But we are easily (and gladly, it would seem) fooled into thinking there is an actual pattern.
2. We just really want to see patterns where there are none. Mlodinow points out many experiments that have pretty much proven this. We especially want (and try to) see patterns that confirm our existing biases when confronted with absolutely randomized series of events.

The book starts with a rather brilliant examination of why people tend to fixate on what are really pure coincidences as somehow meaningful or part of a pattern, or even worse yet, having some kind of direct causal link when there absolutely is none. I've always thought that of course, in an infinite universe, anything can occur, so of course 'miraculous' seeming coincidences are going to naturally (if you will) occur all the time. I find that most people are not very appreciative when one brings this up. Mlodinow explains that too.... as beings that tend to excel (again, proven in experiments) when we feel more in control of any situation, randomness is seen as tremendously disempowering.... and therefore threatening.

I think this is giving me an idea for a new dot... one that has to do wtih limitations of our own brains/perceptions, and how they interfere with us accurately understanding the world around us.

Gay Olympians

There were over 10,000 athletes competing in the Olympics. Exactly 10 of them were out gays and lesbians (9 lesbians, one gay man). Statistically, if you assume 5% of the population is gay or lesbian, there should be 500 gay and lesbian athletes at the games. So where are the other 490? Two possibilities: 1. They are there, they just aren't out. 2. Gay and Lesbians are still not welcome in athletics, so they are never given a chance to excel in this area.

Lesbians may well have had a different experience with their female PE teachers and coaches (which might also partly explain why 9 out of 10 out Olympic athletes are women), but for gay men, male athletic mentors are extremely hetero-normative. There isn't much space in male sports, from a very early age, to exhibit even androgynous qualities.

My guess is that both reasons are true. I happened (accidentally, if you can believe it) to be in Barcelona when the summer games were there in 92. Believe me, the gay clubs were full of athletes. Well, I presumed some of them were athletes, the weren't wearing numbers at the time.