Monthly Archives: September 2009

Sep 24 2009

A Review of Taubes’ “Good Calories, Bad Calories”

From Entropy Production:

Entropy Production: All Medical Science is Wrong within a 95% Confidence Interval
or: A Review of Taubes’ “Good Calories, Bad Calories”: Recently I read a very impressive book by Gary Taubes, previously a reporter for the journal Science. The work in question is, “Good Calories, Bad Calories.”‘ In the book, Taubes collects research to challenge the common knowledge of nutrition: that fat is bad for you, that we should eat polyunsaturated vegetable oils, that we should exercise for sixty minutes a day, etc.

…

One cannot help but wonder how a number of the weak hypotheses that Taubes explores came to become common knowledge in the field of nutrition? Taubes paints a picture of a few egotistical researchers who were able to effect what was essentially scientific fraud, by fitting their bias to the data rather than examining it critically. In Taubes words (p. 451), “it is difficult to use the term “scientist” to describe those individuals who work in these disciples [ed: nutrition, chronic disease, and obesity], and, indeed, I have activity avoided doing so in this book.”

This article is a fantastic summary and commentary on Gary Taubes enlightening book. I highly recommend purchasing and reading the book. It changed my life for the better (starting with article that Taubes wrote for the New York Times Magazine). Since reading the article / book and following (for the most part) it’s tennets, the following has happened to me personally:

  • I’ve lost 50 pounds
  • My blood cholesterol has dropped from 220 to 160
  • My trigycerides have dropped
  • My blood pressure has dropped

If you are overweight or borderline diabetic, you NEED to read this book.

Sep 24 2009

Microsoft Says Google Chrome Frame Makes IE Less Secure

From Slashdot.org:

Slashdot Technology Story | Microsoft Says Google Chrome Frame Makes IE Less Secure:
The release of Google Chrome Frame, a new open source plugin that injects Chrome’s renderer and JavaScript engine into Microsoft’s browser, earlier this week had many web developers happily dancing long through the night. Finally, someone had found a way to get Internet Explorer users up to speed on the Web. Microsoft, on the other hand, is warning IE users that it does not recommend installing the plugin. What does the company have against the plugin? It makes Internet Explorer less secure. “With Internet Explorer 8, we made significant advancements and updates to make the browser safer for our customers,” a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars. “Given the security issues with plugins in general and Google Chrome in particular, Google Chrome Frame running as a plugin has doubled the attack area for malware and malicious scripts. This is not a risk we would recommend our friends and families take.”

I’ll let some of the responses speak for me… The whole response from M$ is just laughable. Here’s some thoughts:

… stones/glasshouses …

… Friends don’t let friends use Internet Explorer anyway. …

… What do you expect; “This is great now our customers can access standards-compliant sites and have a faster, smoother web experience”? …

Of course it doubles the attack rate of malicious scripts… It makes Javascript run twice as fast.

In other news, Microsoft has said that Moores Law is a security risk, because viruses can install themselves twice as fast every 18 months.

‘Nuff said.

Sep 16 2009

Drinking age of 21 doesn’t work

From CNN.com:

Commentary: Drinking age of 21 doesn’t work – CNN.com: One year ago, a group of college and university presidents and chancellors, eventually totaling 135, issued a statement that garnered national attention.

The “Amethyst Initiative” put a debate proposition before the public — “Resolved: That the 21-year-old drinking age is not working.”

…Most of the rest of the world has come out in a different place on the drinking age. The United States is one of only four countries — the others are Indonesia, Mongolia and Palau — with an age as high as 21. All others either have no minimum age or have a lower age, generally 18, with some at 16.

Young adults know that. And, in their heart of hearts, they also know that a law perceived as unjust, a law routinely violated, can over time breed disrespect for law in general.

Exactly correct. In a country that was founded on the ideals of freedom and responsibility, that it can be acceptable for someone to be old enough to die for one’s country, but not old enough to raise a tankard of ale in tribute to that same country is insane. That it’s legal to drive at 16 (which causes WAY more deaths every year than drinking), and consent to sex at 16, and vote at 18 (which has a direct impact on the future of the country), and smoke at 18 (which is WAY more unhealthy than drinking)… that you are considered an adult in every way in this country, but you can’t have a beer is just plain stupid.

Sep 14 2009

The Supreme Court’s Chance to Dump McCain-Feingold and Aid Free Speech

From The Washington Post:

George F. Will – The Supreme Court’s Chance to Dump McCain-Feingold and Aid Free Speech – washingtonpost.com: Last March, during the Supreme Court argument concerning the Federal Election Commission’s banning of a political movie, several justices were aghast. Suddenly and belatedly they saw the abyss that could swallow the First Amendment.

A friend and I were talking a while ago and he made the argument that we needed term limits because Congress makes election law that affects their own election, and he pointed directly at McCain/Feingold as a prime example. Let’s take a closer look.

Don’t blame me. McCain-Feingold orders people to shut up when political speech matters most. It bans “electioneering communications” (communications “susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate”) paid for by corporations in the 30 days before primaries and 60 days before general elections. Corporations include not only, or primarily, the likes of GM and GE; corporations also include issue advocacy groups, from the National Rifle Association to the Sierra Club. So, yes, if a book published (as books are) by a corporation contains even a sentence of election-related advocacy, the book could — must — be banned by the federal government, and not just during the McCain-Feingold muzzle period.

I think he’s right, and I think George Will is right. McCain/Feingold must be thrown out as unconstitutional. The very reason for the first amendment is to protect political speech as a check against the state.