Slow news day?

Most newlyweds do their homework before they go searching for a first home

Location, amenities are key for many young couples buying with future in mind

Um, yeah...what did they expect?

Pierre Sparr Alsace One

I read that Alsace wines, which I'd never heard of before, were suddenly becoming the next big thing or something, so I decided to try this one because, like, it has "Alsace" in the name, so it must be representative!

Like one of the wine critics warned, the bottle is inconveniently tall, so it doesn't fit very well in my fridge - I have to wedge it in the door shelf kind of diagonally, taking up enough space for two normal bottles.

The wine itself, however, is very interesting. It's the most complex white I've ever tasted, probably because it's a blend of five different whites, not all of which I've heard of before. It has some aspect of almost everything I've ever tasted in a white wine (except, fortunately, that weird smokey taste that is part of Viognier), and different elements are brought out when you drink it with different foods. It makes me want to actively experiment and try it with various weird things just to see what will happen. (Yes, the "What does this button do?" school of oenology...) It's certainly worth trying, as long as you can make room in your fridge for a slightly-taller-than-convenient bottle.

Things They Should Invent: Spell-checkers that can handle misplaced spaces

Sometimes when I'm typing I accidentally hit the spacebar before I reach the end of the word, resulting the last letter of the word being appended to the beginning of the next word, lik eso. Spellcheckers should be able to recognize this, and automatically correct "It i sno longer possible" to "It is no longer possible".

Things I've never done that most people probably have

The meme asked for 10, but I started typing and 25 just came out:

1. Ridden a roller-coaster
2. Had a hangover
3. Been to a wedding
4. Been to a professional sporting event
5. Been hired by a man
6. Made my own travel arrangements when travelling somewhere I've never been before
7. Had surgery
8. Eaten meat with bones in it
9. Left a job, except when mutually agreed upon in advance at the time I was hired
10. Lived with roommates
11. Been hospitalized, except when I was born
12. Successfully asked someone out on a first date
13. Bought furniture
14. Interior decorating, in the broadest sense of the term
15. Bought xmas decorations
16. Had a close friend who was more than an inch taller than me
17. Had short hair, except when I was too young to verbalize a desire to have long hair
18. Had to trim a fingernail because it was getting too long
19. Purchased any single item that cost more than $250
20. Balanced a chequebook
21. Voted for a federal or provincial candidate who won
22. Incorrectly called an election on election day
23. Had a letter to the editor rejected when I did intend the letter for publication
24. Gotten a sunburn
25. Had chickenpox

For the record

Stephen Harper officially ceased to make any sense whatsoever today. I've never agreed with him on key matters of policy, but generally I could see why he's saying what he's saying given what he believes and his position in the grand scheme of Canadian politics. But today, as near as I can tell, he just started declaring everything Paul Martin says or does as shameful or otherwise bad simply because Paul Martin says or does it, and he's turned the whole thing into a giant pissing match. He's no longer backing up his statements with reasons, he's taking it as a given that he should be calling an election without reiterating why, and I think at this early stage I think he still needs to be stating his reasons. Basically he reminds me more and more of Frank Burns every time he opens his mouth.

Standards for keeping pets

Cats and dogs can have the run of the house, or can be forced to live outside some or all of the day. a dog that lives outside gets a doghouse, a cat is left to fend for itself. However, a cat is generally allowed to roam, but a dog is tied up or fenced in. You'd never keep a dog or a cat in a cage full-time, but you might do that with a hamster or a bunny. The hamster might sometimes be allowed to run around in a plastic ball, but the bunny doesn't get a plastic ball.

These standards all seem normal to us, but I wonder how they came about? Like why don't we have cathouses in the backyard or plastic bunny balls?

Something to think about

Some people don't think it's necessary to wait for the Gomery commission to finish its inquiry before holding an election, because they feel that they don't need a judge to interpret the evidence for them. That is a perfectly valid point of view and entirely their prerogative. However, it does occur to me that we might want to wait at least until all the witnesses have given their testimony. After all, imagine if an election had been held before Jean Brault testified...

Faith, atheism, and sinning

A book I'm reading right now just reminded me of something I was told a few years ago: for some religious people, the main reason why they don't engage in acts that are generally considered to be "sins" (e.g. killing, stealing, adultery) is because their god doesn't want them to. Therefore, they find it particularly disturbing that some people are atheists, because they simply cannot see any reason why a person without a god wouldn't be killing, stealing, committing adultery etc. whenever the urge strikes them.

I can't speak for all the atheists everywhere, but for myself personally, the reason why I don't go around killing/stealing/committing adultery is that I can put myself in the potential victim's shoes. I can imagine how much it would suck to be murdered when you still want to be alive, or to have something that you need or something that's important to you stolen, or to be cheated on by someone you've promised to love forever. It never even crosses my mind, not even in vengeful fantasy, to engage in these acts because no satisfaction I could get from it could possibly be worth the pain it would cause the other person.

So I find it kind of creepy that for some people the consequences of their actions on others are a minor factor (if a factor at all) in their choices of behaviour, and the main thing standing between them and murder is their god. However, I'm sure these people find it equally creepy that god plays no role in my decision-making, and the only thing standing between me and murder is that I think it would hurt the other person too much.

This does raise the question: suppose a religious person with this particular attitude loses their faith for whatever reason. Do they still have a reason not to murder? Or do they develop the habit of prioritizing the effects of their actions on other people? Or is the law enough to stop them?

Fire!

Apparently a building just up the street from me is on fire right now. I can't see anything from here though, but for some reason I feel the need to stay up and see what happens even though I can't see anything.

Personally, I work better with constant email interruptions

This article postulates that constant use of email reduces mental capability based on subjects' performance on IQ (I just typed ICQ - how telling is that?) tests where they were and weren't allowed to check their email.

There are two things I'm wondering about this study:

1. How closely does the act of taking a test simulate natural working conditions for whatever jobs these people do? My natural working conditions involve staring at a screen, typing, and constantly switching back and forth into different windows in order to look stuff up. I can check my email without breaking my rhythm. However, it would probably break my rhythm if I were writing a test on paper.

2. Did the subjects of the test learn to do their jobs before or after the advent of email? Personally, I learned out to translate several years after I started using email and ICQ, so all my translation has been done with constant electronic interruptions. I find interruptions a refreshing break from the sustained close attention of translation. My most productive day this month was the day the white smoke was released from the Vatican, during which I was checking Google News every 5 minutes and constantly exchanging email updates. It's a lot easier for me to buckle down and work in highly productive bursts when I know I'm going to be interrupted in five minutes, although this certainly may vary from person to person.

Darkly Dreaming Dexter by Jeff Lindsay

This is such a good book! The main character is fascinating - he's a psychotic serial killer who works as a forensic lab technician using his knowledge of criminology gained from his job and from his late policeman father to put on every appearance of being normal, while sating his need to kill by becoming a vigilante, killing only those deserve it. Then one day, a copycat serial killer turns up, and Dexter tries to track him down to help his police-officer sister's career, all while trying to hide his own psychotic proclivities.

It sounds strange that I would enjoy a book about a serial killer, but this is very well done. It has only the absolute bare minimum gore and sensationalism necessary, and the author manages to portray the protagonist (who is also the first person narrator) in such a way that it seems realistic (at least to me, although I don't know that many psychotic serial killers) but I still didn't mind being in his head.

I thought I had the whole mystery figured out abuot two-thirds of the way through, but it turned out I wasn't even close. Then we're thrown a couple more twists at the very very end, making the conclusion most satisfying. The author bio on the back flap says he's in the process of writing another book about Dexter, and I can't wait!

Political action for Canadians

Speaking solely in my capacity as a politically engaged citizen, I would recommend that all Canadians email Stephen Harper, and your MP if you live in a riding with an opposition MP, and tell them whether you would prefer to postpone an election until the Gomery inquiry is over.

I'm not providing links because it reduces credibility when people take political action based on a random blogger's suggestion, but you can find all the necessary contact information by typing "Stephen Harper" or the name of your MP into Google. If you do not know the name of your MP, google the name of your riding and "MP", or enter your postal code here.

Things They Should Invent: reusable post-it notes

So often I throw out a post-it note with only one word written on it, and it feels so wasteful. If only you could erase and reuse them, like a etch-a-sketch, but easier to write on than an etch-a-sketch.

Consumer guilt

I got my computer in 1999 as a high-school graduation present. I was planning to replace it when it turned five, but then I decided to put that off until this coming summer, since when I get a new computer I will be getting Sims 2 (my current processor is too slow for Sims 2), and having a new addictive computer game is not a good idea when you're working full-time AND taking night classes.

But now that the date I planned to replace my computer is approaching, I'm starting to feel guilty about doing so because I don't actually NEED a new computer, and I don't want to become all consumerist, buying new things because they're new and shiny.

My old computer is turning six this summer, it doesn't have PowerPoint (which could be a hindrance to working from home - it hasn't been a hindrance yet, but I want to work from home more than I do now), and it processor is too slow for me to buy current games. I'm also running Windows 98, which MS either already has or soon will stop supporting. The computer gets sluggish enough that it needs rebooting every ten days, which isn't TOO too bad, and it takes about 2-3 minutes to reboot.

But I'm feeling really hesitant to replace it because, other than my lack of PowerPoint and my inability to play Sims 2, I'm not actually having any problems with it. Rebooting it every ten days isn't any trouble, and I don't mind waiting 2-3 minutes for it to reboot. I guess part of the thing is that I'm kind of emotionally attached to this computer - it contains the entire records of my transformation from adolescent to grown-up. It has all my DOS games from childhood, my ICQ history shows the formation of the most important relationships in my life, and it contains literally all my university schoolwork. I became the person I am now on this computer. Of course, I don't have to actually throw it out, I can keep it around as long as I want. And I certainly am going to keep it around, at least until I can transfer all the important files to my new computer. (Anyone know how to transfer ICQ history from one computer to another so that it can still be read on a new computer?) So maybe I should replace it before it dies, so I can still salvage all the stuff to which I am emotionally attached. I see no sign that it's going to die soon, but I have no way of knowing when/if it will die suddenly.

The other reason I don't want to buy a new computer is because I don't really want to be the kind of person who disposes of something just because it's old and there's a newer model available. My computer has served me very well for many years, and I don't want to treat it like a trophy wife. If I didn't have enough money to buy a new computer I wouldn't be bemoaning the fact that I couldn't afford one or trying to scrimp and save because it so badly needs replacing - the worst I'd be doing is casually worrying about what I'd do if my current computer died, but as I mentioned before I have no particular reason to believe that might happen. It just feels too materialistic to go around buying something new and expensive just because my perfectly serviceable current model is old. Financially I can afford to be materialistic - especially about something so important to my day-to-day life as a computer - but karmatically it doesn't feel so good to do so.

Unformed Harry Potter theory

Hermione went on a vacation with her parents to France, and might have gone to other places with them too, I can't quite remember.

I don't think this has fully played its role in the series. She recognized that some people were speaking French at the Quidditch World Cup and mentioned that they might be from Beauxbatons, and later she identifies what Boulliabaisse is, but this hardly contributed anything to the book - all it contributed was JUST before the existence of other wizarding schools were announced, Hermione says "Didn't you know there are other wizarding schools?"

I think Hermione's travels with her parents will contribute something futher to the series at some point, even if it's just one or two minor pieces of information.

How the church can embrace moral relativism without losing face

I know the church currently does not wish to embrace moral relativism, but when it's ready, I've thought of a good sell.

The concept has already be established that humans are fallible and can be led into temptation. So all the church would need to do is mention, when appropriate, that if one does find oneself led into temptation, one should attempt to cause as little harm and damage as possible. They wouldn't have to have any great fanfare or make a big announcement about the change in policy, and they wouldn't even have to change the rules about what constitutes a sin. Just whenever the topic comes up, mention that, while it's preferable not to sin or give into temptation at all, if you just aren't strong enough to resist, it's better to reduce harm as much as possible.

I always knew no good could possibly come of a mustache

Toronto's 20 Most Wanted.

Look how many of them have mustaches!

My feet might be famous

The picture in today's Fixer shows a pair of shoes that look exactly like mine. I have no way of knowing if it's really me or not, but I do remember seeing a photographer in that area, although I couldn't tell what exactly was being photographed.

Pope round-up

This post is a compendium of random thoughts that occurred to me as this new pope was being elected. Keep in mind that I'm a left-wing atheist who left the church 10 years ago, so if you don't wish to read commentary on catholicism from my perspective, you might want to skip this post.

1. The "just a humble worker" statement would have been much more effective without that regal red cape around his shoulders.

2. I think no matter what your stance on abortion, euthanasia and related issues, you might want to be concerned about the views expressed here. It seems to me that he's saying he thinks abortion/euthanasia/etc. are bigger, more important issues than war. No matter how you feel about abortion et. al., he should be going around trivializing war like that!

3. The more they go around denouncing moral relativism, the more I think it's a good idea. If everything is absolutely black and white, sin or not sin, there's less motivation to actually be the best person you can, particularly if you adhere to that one passage in the bible that apparently means that everyone is necessarily a sinner. But if all sins are relative, some are worse that others, you get bonus points for attempting to minimize harm, and some things that are generally sins are acceptable under certain extenuating circumstances, people have more motivation to be on their best behaviour and consider the consequences of their actions rather than simply going through the motions of confession/forgiveness. Although this might be why the current church regime is so opposed to moral relativism in the first place.

4. In all the brouhaha, I picked up the factoid that divorced people are to be denied all catholic sacraments. I don't think this is fair, because, under common law at least, both spouses' consent is not required to get a divorce. It seems that living apart for two years is grounds for divorce, and once one spouse has filed for divorce all the other spouse can contest is the terms of the divorce, not the divorce itself. So imagine your spouse suddenly, without warning, abandons you. They don't tell you where they're going or anything, they just disappear. If you make an attempt to have them tracked down, they accuse you of stalking and get a restraining order. Two years later, they file for divorce on the grounds that you've been living apart. When you are summoned before the judge, you can either agree to your spouse's divorce application, or you can contest the grounds of divorce (for example you could try to make it be based on abandonment or cruelty or adultery rather than irreconcilable differences), or you can contest the way you split up all your possessions/sue for alimony etc. If you refuse to show up in court or sign the papers, the judge will grant the divorce on your spouse's terms. There is no mechanism for saying "Your Honour, I do not consent to getting divorced. I love my spouse very much and want to do everything possible to save our relationship." That simply is not an option. One spouse requests a divorce, eventually it will be granted. Because a divorce could happen without someone's consent and despite their best efforts, it is terribly unfair to deny divorcé(e)s the sacraments. You don't go around condemning someone to hell because their spouse was an asshole to them.

5. The more I think about catholicism, the more it reminds me of an abusive relationship.