|
Wednesday, July 10, 2002
Oh, my...
As seen on Ain't It Cool News, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "an independent, nonpartisan public policy organization," has issued a report on how Homeland Defense should deal with biological weapons. They call their suggested methodology "The Buffy Paradigm." That's right, they're talking about the TV show. To quote an excerpt from the report:
I, however, would like you to think about the biological threat in more mundane terms. I am going to suggest that you think about biological warfare in terms of a TV show called ?Buffy the Vampire Slayer,? that you think about the world of biological weapons in terms of the ?Buffy Paradigm,? and that you think about many of the problems in the proposed solutions as part of the ?Buffy Syndrome.?
I'd like to interject with a question here -- Vampires are considered mundane terms!?
Anyway, after describing the show, the report continues:
Now, if this use of a TV series to describe biological threats and biological warfare seems somewhat unusual, I invite you to consider the more conventional alternatives. We can speculate on scenarios, delivery methods, and lethality, we can conduct studies and exercises, and we can write doctrine until hell freezes over, but our chances of really being much better than Buffy are simply not that great
...
One real question is whether the US government will ultimately be much more successful in its response efforts than the characters on Buffy.
Somehow, I find that assessment rather disturbing. On the whole though, looking at the TV series for inspiration in how to vanquish unknown threats, this isn't a bad idea.
They certainly could've done worse. I mean, imagine if they modelled their defense policies on... say... Star Trek. Send a bunch of expendable types to investigate the threat, while examining their data safely from the ship and hoping for a deus ex machina solution by the fourth act? Or maybe Next Gen, just talking them to death... The possibilities are endless.
Cool. This Slate article today about why vouchers may be bad for Christian schools parallels arguments I made over 1 1/2 years ago. [Yes, I only wrote the article above last year. Here's my original post from December 2000 for purposes of dating my composition.]
Tuesday, July 09, 2002
Okay, this is odd. I feel as if my writing has gotten worse since I got this new keyboard -- and I'm not just talking raw typing skills (trouble finding the keys) but stylistically as well. I think it's somewhat noticeable in my last entry (the sentence about the sun and sky).
Otherwise, not much going on here the last few days. Job searching, homework, reading about John Adams... Little to write home about, much less to post up here. But I found a few interesting tidbits:
I read an interesting article yesterday about how daily behavior changes once one gets an always-on broadband connection to the Internet. Seems to map to my experiences. If you're interested in more details, you can read Pew Research's full report.
A quick tip for anybody making purchases online. I just bought a new purse from eBags. When I got to the checkout page, it had a field for coupon code. I opened a new browser windows and searched Google for coupon code ebags. I had to look at 4 or 5 sites, but I eventually found a code that gave me 20% off, saving me $12 on the purchase. [I also could've saved 10% with free shipping, or buy one get the second half-off, and had I been using standard shipping or buying two items, I might've used these discounts instead.] Anyway, if you're buying online and there's a field for coupons, give a shot searching online for some discounts; it can save you money.
That's about it for now. Pretty dull stuff, huh? Maybe I'll have something more interesting to post after I finish the John Adams book or get further in my work.
Sunday, July 07, 2002
Miscellaneous meanderings:
Woo-hoo!!! Just got my grades for the first two classes: B+ and A-. So far, out of the 16 credits I've earned in the program to date (5 classes), I've got a cumulative GPA of 3.71. Yay. Happy, happy me.
Weird weather we're having around here. The entire sky is whitish-gray, but it's not clouds -- it's all smoke from some fires up in Canada. So, it looks like a cloudy sky, but you can still see the sun high in the sky, but it's a blood-orange colored sun. It feels almost apocalyptic...
Yesterday afternoon, Ian & I went to two different parties held by different groups of our friends. I got lots of compliments regarding my hair ("Pardon me for asking, but are you a natural blue?"). It was a lot of fun, and the food was exquisite all around.
One thing I hate about myself is that I'm such a dunce at remembering faces. I'm really embarrassed by the number of times I've introduced myself to the same people, and I still can't remember their names afterwards... Another strike against me if I ever go into politics.
Yesterday morning, I got a new keyboard for my computer -- one of those ergonomic split keyboards. [My hands were starting to ache from my small laptop keyboard, and I want to forestall any RSIs.] I'm still getting used to typing on this thing [I accidentally erased this entry once already.] And, of course, now that my laptop is sitting further back on my desk to accomodate this new keyboard, it's harder to read, so I may need to put in an external monitor as well. It's always something, I guess.
I've been looking for a new purse for before I start interviewing. Although I love my current purse (an Etienne Aigner), it's looking rather beat-up -- the lining has ripped in several places, and the shoulder strap is tearing and I'm afraid it might just break off. After checking online catalogs for other Etienne Aigners as suitable as my current one, yesterday, I found a great purse at Filene's: Aurielle A1461. Unfortunately, the Cambridge Filene's only had that model in a burgandy, and the Saugus store didn't have it at all. And, as this site shows, it's out of stock in their catalog. So now I'm phoning up area Filene's to see if they have the purse in black...
Here's an odd thought. When I was a young child, ads for Apple Jacks breakfast cereal went "A is for apple; J is for jacks: apple-y tasting Apple Jacks." Today, the commercials have supposedly clueless adults asking kids why they call the cereal Apple Jacks since it tastes nothing like apples.
As far as I can tell, the flavor of the cereal hasn't changed over the years, so why did they used to say it tasted like apples, but now say it doesn't? My guess has to do with the fact that people eat more natural foods nowadays. I mean, thirty years ago, wasn't most apple juice sweetened? Nowadays, most apple juice is sold unsweetened; maybe that accounts for the difference in tastes.
Any other possible explanations for the complete reversal in description?
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 Elisabeth Riba,
All Rights Reserved
|
LiveJournal
