entropy

so i have a hella load of work but prefer this:

intelligent design claims that since the universe tends towards chaos (entropy), orderly human existence is a phenomenon that can only be explained by a supernatural commanding entity, such as god. i don't know enough about phyzix to refute this via scientific reasoning, but i'm hoping someone does.

anton reminds me that entropy is not simply "the universe is tends towards chaos". i ought to learn how the laws of entropy are different in the macro v. microcosmic scales. and dimensional differences.

with a layman experience though, i think we can argue that the universe tends towards a chaos that on chance forms particles that once formed, maintain its own intrinsic order. for instance, entropy is not strong enough to split atoms without excessive, say cosmic, force. the laws change at this level.

i could also be over-simplifying intelligent design theory but this is what we'll start with

Dover, PA

yay for John Jones III for protecting our constitutional rights!
Intelligent Design Derailed

i do miss the ny times for their more intellectual news. they highlighted some of the judge's reasons for his decision and this statement was particularly lucid:

"The judge found that intelligent design violated the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking supernatural causation and by making assertions that cannot be tested or proved wrong. Moreover, intelligent design has not gained acceptance in the scientific community, has not been supported by peer-reviewed research, and has not generated a research and testing program of its own."

"nyc transit strike

is pissing me the fuck off
http://www.nysun.com/article/24385
this blog, like all the rest, is more for my benefit, so i remember this crap, than anything else
their issues include:

1. salary
the sun reports that "The starting salary for a NYC Transit train operator is $52,644 a year, before overtime. In the new contracts that the city's municipal unions negotiated this year, the starting salary for a New York Police Department officer will be $25,100 a year, which goes up to $32,700 after six months. A New York City firefighter's starting salary will be $25,100 and sanitation workers will get $26,000 to start". This is also higher than the base salary for most nyc desk jobs, and even many entry-level finance jobs in the new york city financial sector. It is more than sufficient to support yourself on such a salary and with healthcare, even enough to support a child. What the fuck are they spending their money on.

2. pension
the mta wants its future workers to begin paying 6% of their salary into pension for their first 10 years of work. i believe that was the last offer. however, the last offer for a raise over three years is 3% raise the first year, followed by 4%, then 3.5%. they can go bitch to president bush about the taxes so i'm going to calculate for before taxes from the posted starting salary. the government is unwisely pushing to cut taxes anyway, despite the current deficit.

assuming no change (and i'm presuming no wage increase)

starting salary 52,644 52,644 52,644 52,644

pension contribution 1,053 1,053 1,053 1,053

salary - pension 51,591 51,591 51,591 51,591

making their 4 year total to be 206.364
granted there are many many other factors (including things that are even to their benefit such as tax deductability of pension payments) but i believe this is accurate for a simple representation

with the new plan: (i'll assume wages after the year for easier calculation)

starting salary 52,644 54,223 56,392 58,084

pension contribution 3,159 3,253 3,384 3,485

salary - pension 49,485 50,970 53,008 54,599

making their 4 year total to be 208,062. roughly a 10% raise following 3 years.

3. health care
the mta is requiring only new employees to pay 1% to their health care. that is considered to be very reasonable at this time.

4. retirement age
originally the mta had wanted to change the retirement age of only new employees to 62 rather than 55. my dad retires at 65. who the hell retires at 55. i can understand cops and firefighters, doing high-stress work every single day, retiring at 55. but transit workers? which leads us to our next issue

5. working conditions
they claim working conditions are unacceptable. there are rats in subways. well gee, then go be a cop. you can check out maggots in dead bodies. or a firefighter, fire or rats? has any transit worker gotten seriously bitten by a rat and become ill or had an infection? there are risks to the trade. i think a 30k entry-level salary OVER a cop is enough to warrant that they deal with the rats.

6. that one billion dollar surplus
i have heard was a result of real estate values unexpectedly increasing. it is a one-time thing. given the fact that mta customers have experienced 2 fare hikes over the last 4 years i think it's fair to give them the break. aside from the fact that it doesn't really help monthly card riders.

finally there is roger toussaint's impressively pointless fluffy statement on the transit workers union blog: clicky "And it is a fight over dignity and respect on the job." where the hell did this come from? it reminds me of those people who disrupt conversations that don't go the way they like by just saying "you're disrespecting me". this is utter idiocy.

Which Harry Potter love match are you?

You scored as Dumbledore.

Dumbledore	96%
Sirius Black	88%
Harry	83%
Seamus Finnigan	79%
Oliver Wood	75%
Snape	75%
Remus Lupin	71%
Fred/George	67%
Hagrid	63%
Lucius Malfoy	63%
Percy Weasley	58%
Ron	58%
Draco	54%
Voldemort	29%

created with Quizfarm:
Which Harry Potter Love Match Are You? (for women)

Ford advertisements in gay publications

So the American Family Association is considering a boycott against Ford because Ford is keeping its car advertisements in gay publications. Like zomg oooh ford has cooties.

Ford faces backlash over gay ads

Particularly hypocritical of the AFA is this statement: "All we wanted was for Ford to refrain from choosing sides in the cultural war, and supporting groups which promote same-sex marriage is not remaining neutral, Wildmon said." Sorry buddy but first of all putting an ad in a magazine is not necessarily condonement of what the magazine discusses. it's simple economics. if there is a consumer group who can afford their cars (or even a group who can't!), ford will go for it. unbiased solicitation. if ford decides not to print an ad in a gay-interest magazine, strictly because they want only gay people buying their cars, well then we have a case. but when the hell is that going to happen. ford would even put an ad in the afa magazine if afa let them. (but oh no, those ads will carry over cooties from the gay publications). ford would put an ad in cosmo, but that population ain't gonna buy their cars regardless.

placing of an ad in a magazine strictly to gain consumers is remaining neutral. not placing the ad because ford doesn't want to be associated with the gay community is not remaining. neutral. wildmon has it ass-backwards.

oh, and i propose a boycott against institutionalized marriage. fuck the afa.

homewreckers

why is it that when couples break up and either of them start dating someone else almost immediately, people immediately assume that that new person wrecked the relationship? for example, nick lachey, jessica simpson, and cacee cobb. people are calling cacee a homewrecker. i agree she's a nasty-looking thing, but that nick-jessica relationship wasn't going anywhere in the first place. so i went and posted on purpleolfblog :)

i'm going to use the "he cheated on her" perspective just to make the pronouns easier to deal with. seriously, first of all what gives you the right to own or call dibs on another person. in a relationship, every second you are constantly deciding to be with each other in a certain capacity. and not only that, you are deciding INDIVIDUALLY and without coercion. how can you decide for him? how can you have the gall to limit his choices on who he wants to see? you wouldn't want him to do that for you would you? you wouldn't want him to prevent you from making friends with his uber hot best friend, or from making other male friends of your own. this isn't pure jealousy, it's selfishness.

also, why the hell assume the new girl is a relationship "wrecker"? is the guy so out of touch with himself that he can't make a proper decision on who he "really needs"? what gives you the right to assume that that right person is you? is the guy so weak that he can't resist the new girl's charms? that is sometimes the excuse they use in rape. do you really want to keep thinking that way?

relationships that are supposed to work will. if they don't it is the fault of no one but the people in it. if you can't find any other explanation, well, you're just nasty and nobody likes you and all the other people are just better than you. too bad.