All Blog Comments

moe - Miss Cali Thinks Gay Marriage Is Not Right, But Does That Make It Wrong?

moe — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:25:21 +0000

mic check

milesian - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

milesian — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:18:14 +0000

Kree, you fleshed out the idea of luck in sports vs lottery perfectly in terms of expectations. I couldn't have said it better myself, and indeed I didn't. I think I said something about masters and victims or something.. 0_o Hey at least I sounded smart ahahahah Well, the expectation to win Super Bowls is one thing, but expectations for football players are quite another. I think this is where people get confused about how "luck" fits into the victory equation. After all, Eli and Tyree exceeded many people's expectations, and certainly the Giants did. It's almost not surprising that they couldn't make sense of it. Now if only people were as reasonable as you, Kree, I would have been spared from spending time on this post, fun as it was. Hell, all they would have to do is a little independent thinking... too much to ask, it seems. Still, I wouldn't go as far as to say the Giants "did not get lucky," but rather that they earned the luck. Steve observes that "just about nobody ever wins the Super Bowl without some help from luck," and I agree with him. It's all a matter of being READY to capitalize when luck comes knocking, which you expertly conveyed with your comment. I guess what we're missing is a definitive exposition on just what the heck "luck" really is....

milesian - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

milesian — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 22:57:26 +0000

Hmm interesting, I hadn't thought of God and sports in that way before. I just thought that crediting God is common parlance in sports, that it is less an affirmation of personal faith than it is an implicit acknowledgment of good fortune, or even luck. This is how this post came into being, anyway; I thought that whether Tyree is a devout Christian, or if God exists, was beside the point. Of course, as a non-religious man, I didn't even consider God as a motivational factor. Duh, what a rookie oversight.. thanks for calling me out on this, Leo! Hahaha unfortunately I have pledged to zealously guard God's contact information, failing which He might smite me or cast me out or something 0_0

kree - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

kree — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:49:25 +0000

The giants did not get lucky. Their victory was realized through a collective effort from coaches, players and the guys watching from up in the luxury boxes (operations). All of these people are really skilled. That's why they're paid millions. They are expected to win superbowls (which brings me to my point): If you're expected to do something, then how could you "get lucky" by accomplishing it? See, I can play the lottery and if I win, then yeah...I consider myself lucky - that's because I don't expect to win in the first place. But as a professional NFL player, you expected to win when you get out on the field, and when you do win...you're not just "lucky". Everyone on that field was born with a talent. After birth, they grew older and capitalized on opportunities, made it into the NFL, and won a Superbowl. That kind of success is not realized through luck. It was made into a reality through their abilities to capitalize on their natural physical advantages, and professional opportunities presented to them. Luck is being in the right place at the right time, and achieving something without any expectations. These guys clearly have expectations of winning. They have been working towards this their whole lives and their success is a product of the team's hard work.

Leo Pizzini - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

Leo Pizzini — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:28:38 +0000

Sometimes the feeling of luck or God are what a player needs to relax and get into the "zone" and likewise the affect of that response on an opponent can impose the impression of having bad luck and cause that player to elevate their game to compensate or crumble. Different people are motivated by differnt things and different emotions. Some are motivated by there personal feeling of doing it with their own will or for their own glory. Luck / Opportunity is seized or wasted and that has an impact, but still, you must get yourself in a position to be lucky or unlucky... and that point that you make is great. The evidence to your Giants specific point is evidenced by their NFC best record in 2008 following their 2007 super bowl. I would like to ask God a few questions myself, so if you could forward his contact information, I would appreciate it.

milesian - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

milesian — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:30:43 +0000

Steve, you are beyond the people I target with this post. Usually, when people say "just got lucky," that's really all they mean. To them, luck is an end, not a means. Cases in point: the Giants were good at winning close games? They just got lucky. They had a good D line? They just got lucky. They beat the 18-0 Patriots? They just got lucky. No credit whatsoever. You know this. I agree with you though: everyone needs luck to win the Super Bowl. My point is that you better be good enough to capitalize on that luck when it comes knocking, as the Giants did.

steve - A Conversation with God re: The Lucky New York Giants

steve — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:37:25 +0000

"Just got lucky" Really, it's all in how you say things. YOu can say that they just got lucky, but you could also say they were really good at winning close games, which is also true. The 2007 giants were inconsistent, but they had a good D-line. With a good D-line, you have a decent chance against any team, even if it's the "best team ever". Anyway, just about nobody ever wins the super bowl without some help from luck.

milesian - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

milesian — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:11:38 +0000

Thanks Megan, you're a peach! Sadly, the reason Obama needs more voices like mine is because people do not think for themselves. They can, but they just don't. Like sheep, they get mindlessly herded back and forth between partisan stables at the herder's whim. Tired of being dragged about, the more strong-willed sheep decide to stay in a pen of its choosing, even when it's burning down. Meanwhile, the cynical sheep rejects all herding and stands on its own pasture, directionless, left behind by the herd and eventually starves to death. A democracy like ours deserves better than the present picture.

milesian - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

milesian — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:55:04 +0000

Frankly, I'm less concerned about Obama as a person, and more with his policies, rhetoric, and calculations. Maybe I really should worry more if he is a Muslim, a smoker, an illegal alien, or if he pals around with terrorists. But I don't. I just want to get on with governing the country. With the notion of "civic nationalism," Steve pretty much hits Obama's lofty aspirations dead on. Yet I have little faith that people can even understand its significance. After all, Obama courageously sat in with Jay Leno in an attempt to reach average Americans in a venue suitable to their taste. In response, he was mostly met with ridicule and dismissive smirks. I, for one, listened to what the president had to say, how he said it, and WHY. Beyond encouraging a "civilized public sphere," I believe Obama has also laid out how he thinks decisions should be made. This is a critical part of the promised "change" in Washington, namely that of post-partisan politics. Because the mainstream uses the term mindlessly and often in ignorant slander, I have attempted a few expositions on Obama's vague notion of post-partisanship, as can be found in this blog here and here, however incomplete. And here, I also applied the tenets of post-partisanship to his appearance on Jay Leno. In this, perhaps Obama hopes on in vain, but his ideas will carry on in spite of reality. If Americans cannot find value in them, then others may one day to their great advantage.

milesian - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

milesian — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:08:30 +0000

Thanks for commenting! In politics, the "best interests of the US" are always in the eye of the beholder. It is difficult, if not impossible for anyone to formulate a "real solution" for anything, as only history can tell. In the present, the only thing to do is try different options through the painful process of elimination, all the while balancing pragmatism with conviction. I do not take issue with conservative values, but that is all Republicans care to display these days. Nothing else seems to factor into their policy calculations, namely sensible reflection or pragmatism with regard to war-making. That worries me, as it should more people. I am not opposed to fighting. Liberals who think war is pointless are kidding themselves. In fact many of them don't know what they're talking about either. That caller on the Mark Levin show was very well-rehearsed with Obama's talking points, yet that got him nowhere because he obviously did not think it through. That drove me NUTS. NUTSSSSSSSSSSS Anyway, I highly recommend the links throughout my post detailing the neoconservatives and their ilk, along with this superb primer. The coalitions they build are powerful and influential, including the phantom "Israel lobby." They are the wellspring of right-wing rhetoric regarding our entire Middle East enterprise, providing the intellectual basis for the Bush Doctrine and our immense military postures. Again, I only ask that we pick reasonable fights, those which stand a chance beyond fighting. At present, we fight an endless army of hardened militants, a war that cannot be won by force alone. I think this fact should be self-evident by now. Osama bin Laden knew this damn well from the very beginning, which is precisely the reason he lured us over there. Finally, I do not share your confidence in discrediting conservative talk radio. Nor do I think their ability to think critically is lacking, and yet their grasp of reality is questionable. The Democrats weren't kidding that Rush Limbaugh has become the de facto leader of the GOP.. I hear both, loud and clear, and it's true. Maybe the influence of talk radio is a dirty little secret among peers, but in society, it's there and very, very palpable in the mainstream.

steve - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

steve — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:27:02 +0000

"...conservatives have raised some interesting questions about who he is and how he defines allegiance to America. " Honestly, I'm not at all sure what you're talking about. I've heard Obama called a Muslim. I've heard people accuse him of not being a citizen. I've heard it said that he attended a radical "madrassa". I've heard a lot of innuendo too, like in the above passage. None of it has amounted to anything, and it's a long shot that it will at this point. It's one thing to talk about policy disagreements, it's another thing to be raising questions of this nature, especially when they so clearly have no basis in reality. I think that Obama defines allegience to America in terms of a great and old tradition of civic nationalism. I believe what he represents is the idea that America is not defined by any one religion, or ethnic group, or set of beliefs, but that it is defined by the idea that different people can come together in a civilized public sphere, engage in rational discourse and come together to make moral decisions about the common good. Civic nationalism, rather than ethnic nationalism (the veneration of "our" religion, and "our" culture" and "our" way of life as being attacked by Jews/Commies/Queers/Muslims/terrorists/Hispanics), is what our country needs more of.

Mordred - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

Mordred — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:41:53 +0000

Very interesting. I agree that preemptive military action/destruction by the U.S. will not solve the ongoing unrest in the Middle East. I even believe that at the heart of it, everyone (even the conservatives) either knows, believes, hopes, or wishes that a real solution can be found. As I have had the privilege of discussing with you at some length, Barack Obama is a very smart person. Not that that means he's going to act in the best interests of the U.S. or the American People, mind you. I didn't hear the radio talk show you were referring to. I consider myself and open-minded conservative and I have to admit that some of these conservative radio talk show hosts are little more than rabble-rousers, employed more for their ability to entertain than for their critical thinking skills. (I especially love it when they personally endorse sponsors' products on the air in 3-minute infomercials.) Radio stations sink or swim by advertising revenues, which are tied to ratings. The inflammatory comments of these talk-show hosts often border on the ludicrous. However it could be argued that the points of view of some liberals are scary as well, and they have their share of militant spokespersons (many not on the radio) whose comments sometimes border on lunacy--whose definition of democracy bears a striking resemblance to anarchy. While I don't agree with criticism levied against Obama, conservatives have raised some interesting questions about who he is and how he defines allegiance to America.

MFackenthal - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

MFackenthal — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:12:45 +0000

Miles, Can you guess what my response is going to be? ... Call the show yourself and mention your blog. Obama needs more voices like yours. ~Megan~

milesian - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

milesian — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:09:03 +0000

Steve comments, and the world listens!!! Thank you, and DAMN WELL SAID. Russia knew damn well we couldn't do jack about Georgia, as Iran similarly knows about the election. The only people who don't know are these right-wing idiots. Actually maybe they DO know better, but they know the PEOPLE don't know better. This is how dirty political points are scored. The GOP using the media is one thing.. what really PISSES ME OFF is Iran using the GOP as its unwitting mouthpiece...... After all, if the neocons can't have Activist Obama gallivanting about the globe, reelecting Ahmadinejad is probably the next best thing for their agenda: [Daniel Pipes of the Heritage Foundation said,] “I’m sometimes asked who I would vote for if I were enfranchised in this election, and I think that, with due hesitance, I would vote for Ahmadinejad,” Pipes said. The reason, Pipes went on, is that he would “prefer to have an enemy who’s forthright and obvious, who wakes people up with his outlandish statements.”

steve - Iran Knows: Republicans Want Obama to Fail in the Middle East, Too

steve — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:16:20 +0000

The really ridiculous thing in all of this is how the mainstream media, who are supposedly so "objective" and "impartial", are letting themselves be used as a rightwing megaphone. The media is the reason why our politics have degenerated so far. They'll give exposure to anyone who yells loud enough. As long as your message is simple, clear, and bold, you get airplay. Nuance, complexity, insight, the kind of things that are conducive to...well...thought, nobody has any patience for that. The truth is that any overt action toward influencing developments in Iran that Obama could take would probably be counterproductive. In the past 60 years, the America has overthrown a democratically elected government of Iran, installed and supported a brutal police state, incited Saddam Hussein to make a land grab whch resulted in a 7 year war that killed a million people, and invaded the countries on Iran's east and west border. They don't really think of us as friends. Barack Obama meddling in Iranian affairs is liable to have a effect little better than Osama Bin Laden endorsing a candidate in teh US elections. John McCain doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. He goes on like he's some kind of great statesmen, and here he is scoring political points by attacking the President for doing the right thing. The Republicans really don't seem to understand that saber rattling, chest pounding and overcompensation are not always the best way to go in diplomacy. Seriously, whenever something unfavorable happens, their immediate reaction is to puff themselves up like blowfish, even if they have nothing to back it up. Look at Condi Rice during that whole Russia-Georgia thing awhile ago. Going on tv and carrying on about how we weren't just going to stand idly by in response to this; no, we're not going to take this lying down. This demands action. blah blah blah And what did we end up doing in Georgia? Nothing. Why was this? Maybe because we already had all our forces committed in Iraq and Afghanistan already. None left over. So what did Condi's brave words amount to? A lot of empty talk.

milesian - Buyers Be Aware: The Real Apple Premium

milesian — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:44:43 +0000

YES, YES and YES, absolutely right. Thanks for your expert contribution. So, would it be a stretch to say that Apple has an interest in keeping things this way? Namely, limit hardware and software choices, limit its target audience, and generally being as un-Windows as computerly possible? I say yes. The easiest way to achieve this, of course, is to hike up the price of its machines. Limiting market adoption directly achieves all the above goals. Nevermind improving its OS to compete on the same level as Windows; just price above the storm. Price meriting the product indeed.... just brilliant. As it turns out, charging outrageous premiums is the jackpot strategy for Apple. Enough consumers are more than willing to pay any price to get their lusty, "PC" frustrated hands on those sexy, exclusive Macs.

Brian - Buyers Be Aware: The Real Apple Premium

Brian — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:19:13 +0000

The primary reason why Macs "just work" is they drastically limit what the user can do. With limited hardware and software choices, Apple is able to test almost every possible configuration before product launch. Compare that to windows which attempts to run anything you throw at it; scanners, printers, external hard drives, etc... Apple's ease of use also stems from their decision to aim mainly for the somewhat computer literate home user / creatives. Apple doesn't try to accommodate power users (one button mouse! WTF?!) or gamers (little to no BIOS tweaking). Very few people run Apple for servers or embedded devices. The other issue the hurts windows is its popularity. Malware writers will focus on the most popular OS. As a result, windows users have to contend with all that badness, virus scanners, and frequent software updates. All those software updates can lead to head-aches for applications that interoperate.

milesian - 2009 NY Giants and the Plaxico Trap

milesian — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:49:12 +0000

For the record. This post made a small blogsphere splash on June 2nd, with 1275 pageviews firing off a 59 comment discussion over at Bleacher Report. Here is the link. That morning, a patrolling ESPN blogger gave my story a shot in the arm. The guy even copped my headline: Did Giants get caught in Plax trap? It was a fun ride ^_^

MFackenthal - Buyers Be Aware: The Real Apple Premium

MFackenthal — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 18:06:59 +0000

oops, I meant post partisan. LOL

milesian - Buyers Be Aware: The Real Apple Premium

milesian — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 06:17:11 +0000

Hey everyone, try out the Facebook Connect feature I just installed here! Instead of commenting anonymously, you can login with your FB credentials and be known. I think your comments will show up on your FB news feed too. Great way to show off all your hard work here ^_~ Oh and FYI, I also just reversed the comment sorting such that the latest comments go on top.