A Novel Idea
I found a rather novel idea today. A person by the name of Darrel Ince is requesting scientists to release the source code for applications used in their research. It’s mostly directed at the Al Gore’s Apocalypse group of “scientists” but is a good idea in general. From the article:
Computer code is also at the heart of a scientific issue. One of the key features of science is deniability: if you erect a theory and someone produces evidence that it is wrong, then it falls. This is how science works: by openness, by publishing minute details of an experiment, some mathematical equations or a simulation; by doing this you embrace deniability. This does not seem to have happened in climate research. Many researchers have refused to release their computer programs — even though they are still in existence and not subject to commercial agreements. An example is Professor Mann’s initial refusal to give up the code that was used to construct the 1999 “hockey stick” model that demonstrated that human-made global warming is a unique artefact of the last few decades. (He did finally release it in 2005.)
A software application is, in essence, little more than a series of mathematical algorithms. No scientist will be taken seriously if they come to a conclusion but refuse to publish the math. Seriously try to get a scientific paper published without including the algorithms you used to come to your conclusion. You’re research paper will hit the shredder faster than the speed of light (Which will require some research into how that happened).
But somehow when the math is done on a computer nobody thinks it needs to be published. Software is never perfect. Computers aren’t good at doing most tasks outside of basic arithmetic. Doing floating point math on a computer without writing a library specifically aimed at the task is an estimation at best. At least if the code is published other people can see the logic being performed and find any bugs that could lead to an improper result. The scientific process need to remain an open debate otherwise it’s no longer science.
I would also go so far as to publish the exact specifications of the computer the software was run on. There have been quite a few problems found in processors that lead to incorrect answers under specific conditions.
Gunnies and Gamers
There is a rather interesting story linked on Says Uncle. The story is an article in the Escapist where they find it funny that gunnies are complaining about the Call of Duty Effect. The story itself isn’t nearly as interesting as the comments made on it though. It does show quite a divide between gunnies and gamers.
I’m one of those people who happen to be in both categories. Granted I’m far more of a gunnie than a gamer these days but when I was younger and had a combination of more free time and less money I played a lot of games. I was also pretty involved in what could be called the gamer culture. Yes I was on clans (That’s gamer speak for teams) for many different video games. I competed in Command and Conquer Red Alert, Team Fortress Classic, MechWarrior 3, and MechWarrior 4. It was a lot of fun and gave me something to do without having to spend a lot of money (You can get a lot of entrainment time out of a single game). I still retain ties with many of my former team mates who are still gamers through and through.
I don’t have to explain my involvement as a gunnie as that is the major theme of this blog. Needless to say I’ve always found the divide interesting between the two groups. On one hand you have the gamers who think through their playing of video games that they are experts on many different weapons platforms. On the other hand you have gunnies who are very angry that somebody who plays video games dare claim to have knowledge in the field of firearms. Then you have the gamers who get mad when gunnies explain the fact that their game derived knowledge of video games isn’t so much knowledge but wrong.
What is funny is the divide between the two groups is warranted. Gamers claim to have detailed knowledge in the use of firearms even though most have never touched a gun. Then you have gunnies who simply call the gamers idiots and don’t take the time to properly educate the gamers on firearms.
I have a proposal. First you gamers out there please understand that if your knowledge on firearms comes from video games you have no understanding of firearms. Second you gunnies out there stop calling gamers idiots when they talk about guns in your presence and take time to properly educate them and even offer to take them to the range. We can all get along if both sides realize that they’ve been acting like idiots.
Heck if there are any gamers out there who want to try some guns out I’m more than willing to take you. The only conditions are you have to be willing to drive to the Twin Cities area, be at least 18 years of age or accompanied by a parent, and obey all range and safety rules which you will be briefed on.
Are IDPA and IPSC Good Practice
Caleb over at Gun Nuts Media has a great post dealing with the old argument that IDPA and/or IPSC will get you killed. I agree with his post entirely. His post states that no IDPA and IPSC are not going to teach you tactical skills, they are going to give you practice at handling a firearm under stress. I think that kind of skill is far more important for your average armed citizen than learning how to enter a house while coordination with fellow team mates. I may have to defend myself some day but chances are I’m never joining the SWAT team.
I think it was Massad Ayoob that said IDPA isn’t good training, it’s good practice.
Brady Bunch Cost California Pizza Kitchen 100 Customers
Says Uncle let’s us know that compliance with the Brady Bunch can cost you a lot of customers. The Brady Campaign didn’t have any luck with Starbucks but they certainly had some luck with California Pizza Kitchen in getting the restaurant to ban openly displays firearms on the premises. Unfortunately for them it cost them 100 customers who moved their open carry meeting to somewhere that likes their money. This is what you can look forward to if you decide to deny people their constitutional rights.
Let’s Make a Registry for Everything
After scaling the Walls of the City I saw the city introduced legislation to register ice cream truck workers. Shortly afterward I climbed the way to escape.
Seriously what the fuck?
Good on You Starbucks
Previously I mentioned the Brady Bunch were trying to cost Starbucks money by shoving a petition under their nose to ban open carry in their establishments. I’ve since learned from Alphecca that Starbucks has further shown the Brady Bunch’s irrelevance by telling them to sodomize themselves with retractable batons (I may be paraphrasing slightly here):
“Starbucks does not have a corporate policy regarding customers and weapons; we defer to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding this issue,” Starbucks’ customer relations department said in response to the Brady Campaign’s request.
You know I’m actually starting to like Starbucks. Good on you guys.
What Wussies
Seriously everybody is going on about the horrible snow storm that hit the east coast, even other countries are commenting. I don’t know about the rest of the country but here in the northern part of the midwest we call these massive snow storms “winter.” And to prepare for this “winter” we do a few common sense things like ensuring we have a supply of food, have needed snow gear in our vehicles, and wear heavy coats. You guys in the new global warming sector should look into those items.
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
Well it’s a another week which means there is another hot topic for bloggers. This week is the military’s “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. Since it’s a slow news day I figured this is a good way to get the daily post count above two.
Anybody who has read this blog or listened to Truth About Guns (New episode is in the works by the way) knows I’m a libertarian. That’s libertarian with a lower case “l” by the way. This puts me square under the belief that peoples’ rights have the utmost importance. On of those rights is to ability to do as you please so long as you don’t violate another person’s rights.
I see no reason gays can’t join the military and server along sight straights. Yes it may make some of the straight service men and woman awkward but frankly that’s just too bad. Is somebody’s life making you feel uncomfortable? If so feel free to cry me a river and toss your complaint into it.
I have gay friends. They are every bit as capable as anybody else. None of them have an inability to control their sex drive. All this bull shit about gay people serving ruining our military is hogwash. There are already gay people serving, they just can’t openly state they’re gay.
Of course people are mentioning the fact they won’t want to shower with other people of the same sex who are gay. My response, don’t complement yourself so highly. Gay people don’t go around ogling people of the same sex any more than straight people ogle people of the opposite sex. That means a majority of gay people are going to be checking out your ugly ass any longer than you check out an ugly person of the opposite sex. I’m sorry to be the one to inform you that you’re just not that attractive to everybody of the same sex who is gay. If they do check you out who cares? Really what does it matter? Does it make you uncomfortable? Maybe you should remember that the next time your ogling a member of the opposite sex.
I know there are a ton of people who disagree with me and that’s OK to, I respect your right to have a differing opinion. Hell I’m even willing to debate the subject so long as your argument doesn’t involve simply being homophobic. But in the end this thing is an entire non-issue. We already have gays serving in the military and the only thing abolishing “don’t ask, don’t tell” is going to do is let this people be open about it. All “don’t ask, don’t tell” accomplishes is forcing a subset of the military population to lie.
More Open Carry Drama
Says Uncle has a post about more open carry drama occurring, this time in Michigan. The group Michigan Open Carry decided to have a meeting at a Pondarosa which the owner was fine with. Well that is until some of the members started showing up with rifle:
Officials from Michigan Open Carry say the owner of Ponderosa greed to let them hold a meeting at the restaurant. But he says he didn’t expect the meeting to be held on a busy Saturday — and certainly didn’t expect the men to bring more than handguns.
“At first, we looked the other way on the handguns,” said owner Dennis Holleran. “And then some gentleman shows up with an assault rifle, and that was just too far over the top.”
The owner called the police who came and ousted the Michigan Open Carry members. Of course there are hard feelings going around as would be expected. A lot of people are saying the open carry advocates were well within their right to carry and therefore what happened was unconscionable. But they are also forgetting another right, the right of a property owner to determine what happens on his or her property.
I personally can’t say the owner of the Pondarosa was out of line. Something was happening on his property that he was uncomfortable with so he took measures to make it stop. I don’t believe he should have called the cops before asking the people to leave but alas it’s his place and he can do as he pleases.
If somebody doesn’t want me to carry a gun on their property then I won’t go there. The owner sets the rules and I can chose to either abide by them or not go there. Likewise a property owner has the right to say he will allow me to carry a handgun but not a rifle. We as gun owners need to realize that we have a right to keep and bear arms and property owners have a right to determine what they will and will not allow on their property.
Of course these rules are different for governments in my book since that land is owned by the tax payers. Because of this I don’t think government has the right to determine what rights they will respect and what rights they won’t respect. But that’s an entirely different topic.
On another point relating to the topic at hand I want to say the police handled this situation very well:
But LPD say no one was arrested and notes they’re now working cooperatively with Open Carry to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
“I think the taxpayers of Lansing want us to respond to gun calls. But at the same time, we need to be aware of individual rights.”
So kudos to them for not making a big fuss out of this and understanding they need to be aware of peoples’ rights.
This is Retarded
No seriously it is. There is a web site dedicated to stopping people from using the word retarded. Retarded is a legitimate medical term for Christ’s sake. This is no different than deterring the use of the word idiot, moron, or stupid. All of those words are legitimate medical terms referring to an improperly developed mind and are used in derogatory manners.
Trying to stop the use of terms in place of flowery hippie phrases is one of by biggest pet peeves. It’s akin to saying a child isn’t poor, they’re at risk at hope. I’m sorry (OK I’m not) to be blatant about this but no matter what word you create to replace retarded it’s eventually going to be used in a derogatory manner because people like to insult each other. The best thing you can do is ignore it and eventually people will move on to another word.
These campaigns are stupid. I personally pledge to keep using the word retarded as well as every other word I use to insult things.
