Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Didn't find what you were looking for?
E-mail this blog's author, Bruce Umbaugh:  |
|
 |
Thursday, January 27, 2005 |
Specialization and Status in Philosophy.
I’ve been looking at some data from the Philosophical Gourmet Report, a well-known and widely-used reputational survey of philosophers in the U.S., Canada, the U.K. and Australasia. The survey asks philosophers to rate the overall reputations of graduate programs as well as their strength in various subfields. The ratings are endogenous, in the sense that the philosophers who produce them are members of the departments that are being rated. This gives the survey some interesting relational properties and allows for an analysis of the social structure of reputation in the field. I’ve written a working paper that analyses the data from this perspective. It’s still in in pretty rough shape: there’s not much in the way of theory or a framing argument yet, and it’s way short on citations to the relevant literature. (So don’t be too harsh on it.)
[Crooked Timber]
Interesting (preliminary, I know) results. I suggest making the generic "contemporary" field a bit more fine in grain and seeing what results (havng my own suspicions). But glad to see this and look forward to giving it closer attention.
9:47:19 PM 
|
|
January 27, 2005.
Everyone thinks they're hiring the top 1%.
[Joel on Software]
Joel goes on to give an entirely glorious explanation why "everyone" is wrong about this. Go read it.
9:35:24 PM
|
|
Dial M for Merger. If SBC Communications buys AT&T, the reunion of two players in the old Bell system could set off a round of mergers in the rapidly consolidating phone industry. By KEN BELSON. [NYT > Business]
9:23:16 PM
|
|
Yea!
Ellen writes to note that her
presents Web site is again active. This has
long been one of my favorite diversions on the whole derned InterWeb.
Interested parties should also check out this
interview with Ellen from the DecadeofWebDesign site.
11:44:36 AM
|
|
Utah Censorware Network Deliberately Bans Google Translate.
Further regarding persistent censorware problems, let me echo the material below, since it's an official admission of a topic I've been emphasizing for years. In order for censorware to achieve its control, even sites such as language translation are problematic, because they're a "LOOPHOLE". I exposed this myself many years ago, but unfortunately my decryption-based research was very poorly publicized and had minimal impact, due to various grudges. Emphasis added below.
From the EDTECH mailing list [url deleted and embedded]
EDTECH Editor-Beil Nov 14 2004, 12:12 pm
From: Guy Durrant
Filtering in Utah is done by a statewide subscription to N2H2/Bess. We are not required to use N2H2, but I suspect most districts use this as it is available to them at no additional cost. The state picks up the tab.
The state filters the "Translate this page" option which comes up with some search results. The reason for this is that students could search for sites which the N2H2 filter will block, click on Translate this page, and if the original page was in English, it was "translated" and displayed, filter notwithstanding. It is unfortunate, because the translation feature was quite a boon to ESL and foreign language teachers. The images part of Google http://images.google.com is not blocked in Utah, but many of the sites it presents are.
Guy Durrant
Technology Director
Daggett SD [Infothought]
5:54:26 AM
|
|
Wal-Mart's Telling 'Statement'.
On Wal-Mart's corporate website, under News and then Statements (the site makes it almost impossible to link directly inside, no doubt on purpose), is this gem:
As you may know, Wal-Mart makes an exception to its anti-union stance in that bastion of freedom, China. See this BBC story for the basic facts. (The Chinese "union" is controlled by the government, and "represents" workers accordingly.) Then read Harold Myerson's Washington Post column (reg req) to understand the meaning of it all, which I summarize with this apt quote: " When a company such as Wal-Mart is so plainly comfortable with authoritarianism abroad, it tells you something about that company's values at home."
[Dan Gillmor on Grassroots Journalism, Etc.]
Earlier coverage in this space.
5:49:31 AM
|
|
Need Sports? Go Gorlok. So hockey probably isn't going to be around this season. The Rams are done. Spring training for the Cardinals hasn't started yet. The winter is pretty crappy in the Midwest this time of year. So what is a sports fan at Webster to do in St. Louis? How about taking in a Gorlok sporting event? I was sitting outside the gym the other day lacing up my shoes getting ready for practice when a girl sat down beside me. [The Journal]
5:44:17 AM
|
|
Anti-porn, anti-IP (Alan Wexelblat).
If you have been kind enough to read what I've written on Tech IP you know that one of my current concerns is the US Government's campaign to stifle speech it doesn't like. I think this is critically interesting because a key facet of intellectual property is the ability to disseminate creativity to an audience. The more mediation there is in this process - be it the FCC or the Content Cartel - the more problems will arise.
One of the public faces of this campaign has been Howard Stern versus Michael Powell. That has had several amusing moments; I really did expect Stern to sing "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" when Powell announced his resignation. However, on a quieter side, the government has also been clamping down hard on the porn industry. Yes, I'm about to defend porn producers - as has been said, popular speech isn't in need of defense; it's the unpopular stuff that needs defending.
In this case, the creators are Extreme Associates, producers of some fairly edgy material. Their stuff apparently includes simulated rapes, bodily fluids, and even simulated snuff (murder) films. Not exactly family fare and as you'd expect the government picked what ought to be a fairly easy target for its first major porn prosecution in over a decade. To just about everyone's surprise, not only did the government lose, but they got slapped hard by the trial judge (Gary L. Lancaster) who effectively threw out the entire Federal obscenity statute.
Of course this is only the trial level and there are sure to be appeals but this is a decision worthy of examination. I am not a lawyer myself and I'm relying a lot on a very thoughtful writeup by an LJer who goes by the name "alanesq" (pure coincidence I assure you).
The essence of the argument in dismissing the charges is that the government cannot assert an interest in preventing people (adults) from owning the material; therefore, to prosecute someone for production of something that is legal to own is itself a violation of due process and the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. Interestingly, Lancaster drew heavily on the SCOTUS logic in Bowers v. Hardwick. That case, which overturned anti-sodomy laws, essentially cut the legs out from under all attempts by the US Government to prosecute laws regulating private behavior between consenting adults on a "public morality" basis. Thus, even though the Extreme Associates material may be obscene in the public sphere, private sale to adults and private viewing in the adults' home doesn't generate any compelling problems for the government. Thus, no grounds to prosecute.
Alanesq believes that the decision has a weakness in relying on the 14th Amendment rather than directly tackling the 1st Amendment freedom-of-speech issues. I agree that is a problematic area, as there is precedent for the notion that obscenity may not be protected expression. I think that these issues will be more directly addressed in Nitke v Ashcroft, which I suppose will soon be retitled Nitke v Gonzalez and which opens up a whole realm of torture jokes.
The PA attorney hasn't announced whether they'll appeal (which would go to the Third Circuit I believe). I haven't a clue which way the 3rd is likely to lean - anyone want to speculate? On the one hand, Extreme's Zicari issued a pretty public challenge to Ashcroft and there are a couple of other minor prosecutions that are at risk if this decision stands. On the other hand, the Feds may not want to risk setting a larger precedent that invalidates their whole obscenity law framework. If Bowers actually has the wide-reaching implications that some conservatives fear, then it may not be possible to patch the cracks in the dam.
PDF of the decision in Extreme Associates
[Copyfight]
5:44:09 AM
|
|
DOJ steps up Longhorn scrutiny. Microsoft will meet with representatives from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) next month for the first of several briefings intended to ensure that its upcoming Longhorn operating system complies with the terms of the final judgment in the government's antitrust case against the software maker. [InfoWorld: Top News]
5:41:49 AM
|
|
"I don't know the facts, Terry".
ABC News' Terry Moran came armed to this morning's presidential press conference with a gotcha question of sorts for George W. Bush. About Bush's goal of bringing freedom and democracy to all the world, as he articulated in his inaugural address, and convincing allies of the need to "continue to work together to help liberate people," as Bush stated during his press conference this morning, what about our ally Jordan, Moran wanted to know. Here's the exchange:
Q: Last month in Jordan a gentlemen named Ali Hattar was arrested after delivering a lecture called "Why We Boycott America." He was charged under Section 191 of their penal code for slander of government officials. He stood up for democracy, you might say. And I wonder if here and now you will specifically condemn this abuse of human rights by a key American ally. And if you won't, sir, then what in a practical sense do your fine words mean?
PRESIDENT BUSH: I am unaware of the case. You've asked me to comment on something that I didn't know took place.
I urge my friend His Majesty to make sure that democracy continues to advance in Jordan. I noticed today that he put forth a reform that will help more people participate in future governments of Jordan. I appreciate His Majesty's understanding of the need for democracy to advance in the greater Middle East. We visited with him at the G-8. And he has been a strong advocate of the advance of freedom and democracy.
Now let me -- let me finish. Obviously, we're discussing a process. As I said in my speech, not every nation is going to immediately adopt America's vision of democracy, and I fully understand that. But we expect nations to adopt the values inherent in a democracy, which is human rights and human dignity, that every person matters and every person ought to have a voice. And His Majesty is making progress toward that goal. I can't speak specifically to the case. You're asking me to speak about a case that I don't know the facts -- (chuckles).
Q Fair enough. But if I can just follow up, will you then -- does your inaugural address mean that when it comes to people like Mr. Hattar, you won't compromise because of a U.S. ally and you will stand --
PRESIDENT BUSH: Again, I don't know the facts, Terry.
Here is the Human Rights Watch statement on the Ali Hattar case. President Bush may not know the facts yet on this one, but one can only imagine how many more Ali Hattars are out there. Is Bush willing to demand that even our allies respect human rights and democratic principles? Or are some governments exempt from such scrutiny? If Bush hasn't considered the answers to this questions yet, he should start.
[Salon.com]
5:37:17 AM
|
|
DHB looking to open our Eyes to the Prize again (Jason Schultz).
Those crazy kids from Downhill Battle are at it agin. They've just announced a nationwide campaign to screen the award-winning documentary Eyes on the Prize in major cities all over the county on February 8 as an act of copyfight civil disobediance:
At 8pm on February 8th we will celebrate the struggle and triumph of the civil rights movement with screenings of Eyes on the Prize Part 1: Awakenings. Eyes on the Prize is the most renowned civil rights documentary of all time; for many people, it is how they first learned about the Civil Rights Movement (more about the film). But this film has not been available on video or television for the past 10 years simply because of expired copyright licenses. We cannot allow copyright red tape to keep this film from the public any longer. So today we are making digital versions of the film available for download. Join us in building a new mass audience for this film: organize or attend a screening in your city, town, school or home on February 8th. [Copyfight]
5:35:45 AM
|
|
|
