First and foremost: an uncritical read of this book will leave you feeling cynical and a bit cheated. It ranks up there with E.O. Wilson’s Sociobiology and Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene1. It would be very easy to find yourself getting defensive about the material presented in here; especially if you believe humans to be some special exception among animals.
Meanwhile, with a more critical approach, you will find that you cannot get Robert Wright’s The Moral Animal out of your head: it is insightful, intellectually rigorous, even-handed, and at times palpably funny. Plus, you will find that it informs a great many (all?) of the human discourse (verbal or otherwise) that you encounter daily — how certain traits and behaviors came to be and the functions they serve.
Don’t ask about their intentions though; we need to remember that evolution is goal-less, after all. Put most succinctly:
We are built to be effective animals, not happy ones.
Via afoundobject.
Fahrenheit 451 was seminal for me, the book that turned me into a believer in free speech, a cause I’ve devoted my life to. It’s pretty heart-breaking to hear Bradbury repudiate the political subtext of the book. [...] On the other hand, I’ve had my own books subjected to critical scrutiny in which critics pointed out symbolisms and subtexts that I wasn’t aware of when I was writing.
Argh. The ultimate question of who ultimately “owns” those subtexts and whether the reader writes them in or if the author can reject them.
The above image will not be appearing in this NowPublic.com story. When I first saw the request, I was a bit flattered. Neat, I thought. Then I read the story and thought Hmm… seems to miss the point.
In the spirit of the Creative Commons license that I use for my Flickr’d photos however1 I figured that it would be okay anyway as long as they gave the due attribution. And I followed that up with my rebuttal.
The photo will not appear on the site however because they require folks to register as users first.
Did I hear someone say Totally Weaksauce?
In any event, my rebuttal would go something along these lines:
Regardless of how many resources it takes to produce either vehicle, the H2 (on the road) produces far more CO tonnage than the Prius. The argument that you’re going to drive a mile-for-mile more environmentall-friendly vehicle in the H2 is a garbage argument. Especially when they start adding the “miles to the life of the vehicle” aspect in there. 300,000 mile life expectancy on the H2? Highly doubtful when driving habits are factored in.
That being said, my rebuttal should scarcely be taken as a pro-Prius argument. Between the Sudbury-mined nickel, the on-going debates about battery disposal2, and the not-quite-resolved high-voltage hazards posed to first responders, it seems silly for me to bother mentioning drivers’ habits again. Those Priuses trucking along on the highway at 85mph with a single occupant? Yeah, those guys are getting their fuel economy returns in a big hurry.
As usual: walk if you’re close enough, public transport if you’re not, and ask your friends and co-workers about rideshare options.
via washingtonpost.com (via Pete)
Chernobyl-based birds avoid radioactive nests
earth - 28 March 2007 - New Scientist Environment
The video of the lunar transit? Pretty damn cool.
Tantek’s Thoughts — 2007 February
via DF: three theories on human interface design
11 Ways to Optimize Your Mac’s Performance
via TUAW: strategies for optimizing an older machine (or “How to squeeze five more years out of that G3 iBook…”)
Via Jalopnik: “Hybrids drive their way out of car-pool lanes“:
Giving free solo trips in the commuter lanes has successfully clogged up those commuter lanes that were intended to ease traffic. Also, the way stickers are allocated was flawed — it was based on when new hybrid owners received their license plates in the mail. There’s no guarantee when plates will arrive — often, it could take as long as three months. Perhaps the DMV should’ve based it on when the car was purchased, making it clear if people qualified. Instead, when the current program ended, the DMV had 700 more applications than stickers. Some owners out there won’t be happy campers.
So my hat is off to California… Sort of. This practice of permitting hybrid drivers to utilize the HOV lanes is a horrifying practice and those states that are out there doing it should stop it. While we can all be delighted that gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles typically exhibit greater (and in some cases far greater) fuel economy than your typical internal combustion engine, someone tooling around solo in one of them is still not really doing us any favors. Just because you’re sucking less gasoline than the rest of us is a nice start. But you’re still contributing to sprawl, still contributing to traffic, still requiring as much petrol for your tires and engine lubricants… And what about that “other” battery that you happen to have? And what about all the factory resources expended to manufacture your hybrid?
So if California’s goal was to introduce people to the hybrid vehicle concept… Well, then I guess they’re getting nice checks in the mail from Toyota and Honda? (I didn’t realize that the HOV lane was a marketing tool!) Anyway…
The hybrid is a nice start at cutting back the carbon emissions. But for wholesale reduction plans, nothing beats the “reduce” plan. And there’s no quicker way to cut it back than to carpool. Or use public transportation. Or walk.