Syria
Debate military intervention in Syria on LikeDebate. This is a parallel debate to the Intelligence Squared US debate tomorrow.
The National Park Service just released a new version of their Draft Dog Management Plan for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).
After the response to the previous version the NPS said that they'd consider allowing dog access in additional areas and more importantly that they would reevaluate the 'poison pill' provision that enabled changing the rules in the future without further consultation. Additional access was considered and rejected. 'Compliance-Based Management Strategy' has been rebranded as 'Monitoring-Based Management Strategy' and while they've technically dropped the poison pill the language is still pretty dire up to and including year plus closures:
"When the level of compliance is deemed unacceptable based on violations and/or impacts to resources, primary management actions such as focused enforcement of regulations, education, and establishment of buffer zones, time and use restrictions, and SUP restrictions would be implemented. If noncompliance continues, secondary management actions including short-term closures (typically one year or less) would be implemented through the compendium."
That 'typically one year or less' is just such a throw away line, like it's a minor punishment and not 7 dog years or more.
Here are my full comments on the new plan (comment ID 875407-55416/35):
Dear National Park Service,
I commented on the previous Draft Dog Management Plan/ Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (comment ID: 457979-38106/85) and as requested will focus on the changes made between then and the current draft.
My chief concern with the previous draft was the provision that allowed the NPS to degrade off-leash ‘ROLA’ areas to on-leash or banning dogs entirely without further public consultation. The latest draft has removed this language, but the new ‘Monitoring-Based Management Strategy’ doesn’t strike me as a material improvement.
The compliance section of this strategy begins with focused enforcement of regulations and education. It should stop there. Instead it goes on to mention buffer zones, time and use restrictions, and SUP restrictions and then goes on to short-term closures that are typically one-year or less.
While the previous draft was worse, the prospect of losing access to the limited off-leash areas that will remain after the implementation of this plan for a year or possubly more isn’t a material improvement.
I live in San Francisco and frequently visit the GGNRA with my family, which includes a toddler and well behaved dog. I completely support a reasonable allocation of the available space between visitors who want to bring their dog and visitors who would prefer a dog-free experience.
Given the tone of the plan and the history of the NPS seeking to ban off-leash dog access altogether I cannot help but fear that any provision in the plan to curtail dog access will end up being used.
Please remove the language around further regulating, restricting, permitting and closing the ROLA areas. Focus on enforcement and use your limited resources to handle the minority of irresponsible dog owners rather than closing down access for everyone.
Sincerely,
Robert Ellison
P.S. The sand ladder at fort funston is an unstable and dangerous trail. Introducing leashes would increase the risk of injury to people and dogs alike.
(Published to the Fediverse as: Response to updated GGNRA Draft Dog Management Plan #politics #ggnra #nps My written response to the updated GGNRA Draft Dog Management Plan )
"The patent system in the USA is so distorted it's now more lucrative for companies known as 'patent trolls' to sue manufacturers rather than actually make anything. The problem's so serious that President Obama has got involved -- and British companies are targeted if they do business in the US. Rory Cellan-Jones investigates and finds one of the world's biggest trolls in his lair in Dallas."
Patently Absurd is available to stream for the next six days (the BBC never took me up on the offer for a new hard drive).
(Published to the Fediverse as: BBC On Patents #politics #patents The BBC's 'Patently Absurd' program on patent abuse which is of course no longer available. )
Debate military intervention in Syria on LikeDebate. This is a parallel debate to the Intelligence Squared US debate tomorrow.
Eolas invalidated (some more).
Joel on Software on Destroying Patents.
(previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously)
Barclays just got fined $453m for manipulating the electricity market in the US, following a £290m fine for fiddling Libor while HSBC is off money laundering with seeming impunity.
A $453m fine for Barclays is equivalent to $600 for the average US household, although if the average US household got caught manipulating markets they'd probably be in jail.
These relatively small fines aren't enough to really change behavior.
Unless we change how the fines are used. Put $453m in an incubator that funds banking startups and you can have 40 scrappy well funded companies trying to take the banks down. A handful of those will succeed and really do some damage. Every time a bank misbehaves it will be sowing the seeds of its own destruction.
(Published to the Fediverse as: HOWTO: Punish Banks #politics #banks #barclays A cunning idea to use corporate fines to fund startups that will be the eventual demise of the corrupt but too big to fail miscreants. )
The Institute of Economic Affairs has announced the 'Brexit Prize', a competition for the best blueprint for a UK exit from the European Union. First prize is 100,000 Euros, so it's worth a shot.
My plan: Beat Puerto Rico to becoming the 51st state.
I was just about to send this in when I read the instructions:
"At both stages, potential entrants should ask Amelia Abplanalp on [email protected] – for an entry number, preferably at least seven days before the closing date. Entrants should create two pdfs. One of those documents should only have the entry number as an identifier. The other document should have the entry number, name and contact details of the entrant on the cover page..."
It goes on like this and sounds like some EU directive relating to banana curvature. And don't you contact someone at an email address rather than on one? Must be an early April Fools' joke...
(Published to the Fediverse as: Brexit Prize #politics #eu #brexit My (strangely losing) entry for the Brexit Prize, make the UK the 51st state! )
How to make war on patent trolls (The New Yorker), Obama wants to crack down on patent trolls. That’s not enough. (Washington Post) and When Patents Attack... Part Two! (This American Life).
And then call your congress person.
(previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously)
A quick question for the two thirds of Americans who see gun rights as being protection from tyranny. Your government has just refused to rule out killing you by drone in the US without due process (never mind that US citizens outside the country are already fair game). If not now, then when?
You realize that by the time ATF has seized your weapons and you're all locked up in internment camps for gun enthusiasts it will be too late, right?
If the Attorney General deciding that under circumstances he won't reveal it's OK to kill you without a trial doesn't cross the line then what does? Seems like the dictionary definition of tyranny to me.
I've got to admit that I wouldn't like to try taking down the government via violence. They've got drones. Not to mention aircraft carriers, nukes, F-35s and whatever it is that's festering on Plum Island. Personally I'll stick with voting and blogging.
So if you're not actually going to overthrow the government can we drop this ridiculous 'need' for guns and move on?
(Published to the Fediverse as: Drones and Gun Control #politics #guns #drones At what point would you actually use those precious second amendment rights to fight off tyranny? )
Code.org wants every student in every school to learn how to code. The have an inspirational video of software luminaries saying how easy it is to do and then somewhat contradicting themselves by saying they can't hire enough engineers. If addition, subtraction and ten minutes on a web tutorial was enough then Facebook and Microsoft could hire just anyone. The project comes off as being just a little bit self serving. Sure, we need more skilled software engineers but we also hardware engineers and biohackers and makers not to mention doctors and lawyers and accountants.
Rather than getting everyone to code, how about just stopping Oklahoma from banning science teachers from failing students who fail to learn science: “but no student in any public school or institution shall be penalized in any way because the student may subscribe to a particular position on scientific theories,”.
I'm not in any way against learning to code. But you can't code without a reasonable grasp of mathematics. And you're not going to be successful as a professional developer if you can't communicate. And when your code inevitably goes horribly wrong then debugging is the very essence of the scientific method. Maths, literacy and science come first, are relevant to many careers and the US isn't doing a particularly great job of delivering the goods.
Get the basics right and plenty of students will become developers.
(Published to the Fediverse as: NailMathAndScienceFirst.org #politics #education #code.org #evolution It's very popular to insist on every student learning to code, but in fact they'd be better off mastering some basic math, English and science first. )
I'm not the biggest fan of banks. Not content with crashing the world economy my own bank took the time to personally defraud me. The EU is currently planning to cap banker bonuses and this is just nuts.
It feels like an attack on the UK, where the lions share of our economy is banking and people coming to see the Queen.
It feels anti-capitalist - why bankers? Why not footballers or movie stars or orthodontists?
But mostly it feels like the wrong form of revenge, too easy to circumvent and ultimately likely to be toothless. Banks may say they have to pay outlandish bonuses to attract the best talent, but really it means the industry is ripe for innovation. Regulators should figure out and then remove barriers to entry (and throw up barriers to unfair competition, and hold competitions to encourage innovation) so that startups and software can eat the financial services sector.
Too big to fail all at once, but not too big to be disrupted into irrelevance.
(Published to the Fediverse as: Instead of punishing bankers why not disrupt them? #politics #banks #eu Instead of ignorable fines why not punish bad bank behavior by sowing the seeds of their eventual irrelevance? )
What is the San Francisco Rent Board Fee?
Change in Presidential Vote from 2000 to 2020 by US County
Does closing the Great Highway cause an increase in traffic accidents?
Facebook shouldn't own your social graph
Intelligence Squared Two-Party Debate
Pew: Two Thirds of Americans Support National Popular Vote
San Francisco November 2024 Ballot Measures