Forward Biased (Less-than-current Events)

Wrapping up A.D. 2005

I'd like to start off the new year by, firstly, ending the old one.  (Just thought it'd be courteous to let y'all know why you now have to get used to writing "2006" and all.  It's me.)

No, seriously—it's very important to me to sort of celebrate Thanksgiving all over again tonight.  In many ways 2005 is, or was, a year in which so many things happened for which I am extremely grateful that I cannot possibly enumerate them all, much less express adequate gratitude.  But, without becoming overly sentimental or schmaltzy, I have to acknowledge a few things, most of which "things" are actually people.

I have been consistently amazed by the events that have occurred since last June when, in a burst of insanity, I decided that the blogosphere needed could survive the addition of my voice to the hundreds of thousands already clamoring for attention.  As I mentioned ten days ago, I still remember seeing my Sitemeter turn over the 100^th visit, then the 1000^th, and then, incredibly (drum roll, please)...the 10,000^th (which turned out to be Phoenix).  While acknowledging that Forward Biased is but a very small part of a very large blogosphere, I am still amazed that that "very small part" grew as quickly as it did.  And every possible way by which that growth can be measured boils down to one essential thing: people, and that means you.  So thank you, each one of you, whoever you are, for reading, and especially for returning and reading again.  The fact that you have deemed this little weblog to be worth your time, time and again, in spite of inconsistent posting frequency and questionable quality, keeps Your Humble Host™ amazed, inspired, encouraged, and, well, Humbled as well.

I especially thank those who have become my online "family," frequent commenters such as First Known Regular Reader™ Rob, 10,000th visitor Phoenix, established bloggers such as Steel Turman, colorful characters like Imp, and, on occasion, even Big Guys like Bill Quick.  I'm fortunate indeed to be able to count bloggers such as Individ, DaveG, CERDIP, and Mike Hendrix as friends, and to have someone like Bill Quick as a reader.

A special "thank you" goes to Paul Hsieh of GeekPress, whom I consider my "blogfather" of sorts, as it was his help and friendship that most directly inspired me to take the plunge into blogging myself.

People like Eric Cowperthwaite of Eric's Grumbles Before the Grave have been of tremendous help to me behind the scenes when, newbie that I am, I didn't know how to do this or that, and who also introduced me to the Life, Liberty and Property Community and Munuviana.

Many thanks go to Pixy Misa for founding the MuNu community, and to all Munivians for so warmly and enthusiastically welcoming me into their ranks.  Pixy, if you read this, please forgive me for not having yet set up the new blog you so generously have provided for me as for each Munuvian, but my one ironclad resolution for the new year is to make time to do that very thing.  Please don't mistake my not having done so as meaning that I'm ungrateful for what you've done—it means only that I've been unable thus far to keep this blog going, keep up with life in general, plus learn Movable Type and develop my new site.  I will certainly do so quickly soon, and am infinitely thankful for your giving me the opportunity in the first place.

I also owe thanks to whomever nominated me for the 2005 Weblog Awards, and for all the readers and other bloggers whose linkage qualified me as a finalist.  I still can hardly believe that happened, and, as always, I owe it to those regular readers who have honored me with their loyal, repeated visits.

I'm also grateful indeed that some aspects of my health have improved or become more stable over the past year.  I consider myself more fortunate than many to have skilled doctors whom I both like and trust, and whose treatments have been effective in many ways.  Not so many years ago the causes of my problems were undiagnosed and elusive, frustrating both me and those entrusted with my health care.

I'm very grateful that, in spite of having married before I grew up, Jeni and I have "beaten the odds" and remained married for over 29 years (30 years this April).  Yes, we still love each other very much, and are committed to keeping our vows to remain faithful for better and for worse, in sickness and in health, as long as we both shall live.

I'm grateful that, in spite of the many reasons I have for being discouraged and depressed, that I can look at life with optimism and enthusiasm (well, most of the time  ;o)  ).

It's very late now, I'm very sleepy, and I'm going to have to wrap this up in spite of the fact that tomorrow morning I'll think of several people and/or things that I should have included here.  But, again, the one thing I want most to emphasize is that I'm grateful that you, whoever you are, are reading this.

It is my continual goal to make it worth your while to keep doing so.

I sincerely wish you and yours a very happy and prosperous new year!

Merry Christmas

This is the Christmas Story.

Well, the most familiar one, anyway.

Now, to be clear about something:  it matters not whether you are personally religious, or whether you believe this story is true.  We celebrate Christmas, and this is what Christmas is all about—and if that offends you somehow, get over it.

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

(And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)

And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.

And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David.)

To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

And so it was, that while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.

And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.

And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.

And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,

Glory to God in the highest, and on earth, peace, good will toward men.

(Luke 2:1-14)

Everyone have a Merry Christmas!

We engineers look at an idea...

...and ask, how will it work?

The accountant looks at it and asks, "How much will it cost?"

The businessman looks at it and asks, "How can we sell it?"

The liberal arts grad looks at it and asks, "Do you want fries with that?"

In the spirit of that (very old) joke, and in the True Spirit of Christmas the Holidays ChristmaHannuKwaanzaKah um, whatever¹, I give you The Carol of the Burger Flippers, or as it is more commonly googled, "Ding Fries Are Done!"  (From American Angst: readers cautioned—not exactly a profanity-free zone.  But laugh-out-loud funny.)

I work at Burger King making flame broiled whoppers
I wear paper hats
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?

Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done

I gotta run
I gotta run
I gotta run
I gotta run

Don't bob for fries in hot fat
it really hurts bad
and so do skin grafts
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?

Where is the bell?
Wait for the bell
Can't hear the bell
Where is the bell?

Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done

I work at Burger King making flame broiled whoppers
I wear paper hats
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?
Would you like an apple pie with tha-at?

Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Ding fries are done
Diiiing...friiiiies...aaaaare...dooooooone

[Bonnnnggg!]

¹Now, don't get all worried about us.  We celebrate Christmas unashamedly around here, sometimes for months at a stretch.  But there are very few subjects I take so dang seriously that I can't crack an occasional joke about them.

It only hurts when I laugh...or breathe

Glenn Reynolds asks if we bloggers are a sickly lot, and links to this story by Dr. Helen. 

I think she's onto something.

Winston Churchill once said, "85% of the world's work is done by people who don't feel very well." Perhaps this saying applies to bloggers. Is it my imagination or do a lot of bloggers seem to be people who don't feel very well? Every time I read a blog now, it seems like an illness has taken over the writer to the point where they're at a hospital or doctor's office. Heck, even sex-blogger justonebite is having medical problems. I hope she gets well soon--I really like her blog--although maybe illness will keep her blogging even more than usual. I know that feeling sick keeps me at the computer for extended periods--mainly as a way to distract myself from my body.

...I used to do a lot of mental evaluations for people getting Social Security Disability. When I was healthy (prior to my heart attack), I could not relate very well to the clients who came in with their various illnesses, it seemed foreign to me--from the allergies, chemical sensitivites and fibromyalgia to the heart problems, cancer and strokes. However, once I had a heart attack, I understood the vulnerabilities that people suffered. What I could not understand was giving up the essence of who one was in terms of their working life to receive a social security check.

Which brings me back to blogging. There is something refreshing about the ability to post one's thoughts and tout one's wares (such as documentary films, books etc.) over the internet while barely being able to hold a fork to one's mouth before rushing to the bathroom to throw up from some stomach bug you picked up from your kid's school a few days before. I wonder how many other bloggers are out there posting on a regular basis and keeping the world amused because it is one of the few outlets that requires little physical exertion? I could be wrong but it seems to me that if one is vibrant with good health and stamina, they would be out snowboading, skiing or just enjoying the outdoors. I know I would. Anyone else out there blog to distract yourself from feeling bad--whether physical or mental? It would be nice to know I had some company.

I think she hits several good points.  Nothing annoys me more than people—including doctors—who, because of their own excellent health, cannot empathize with those who don't have quite such excellent health, and think most of us are pretty much just lazy malingerers.

Second in line, though, are people who constantly complain, whether it's about their health, their marriage, or whatever, which is why I rarely blog about how I feel.  It's just that, when I feel badly or tired enough, I don't blog much.

And I got a good laugh from one of the comments:

This post gives me a whole new set of ideas for blog names: Shut-InPundit, The Valid Invalid, Suicide Watch, BarelyAbletoType, BypassPundit, ArthriticPundit, ClingingtoLife, ReasonToLive. DepressedPundit.

"The Valid Invalid."  Heh.  No, I'm hardly that badly off yet!

A tiny little milestone

Please forgive this post, as it's pretty much all about me.  Mostly.  Except to the extent that it's about, well, you.

At about 12:45 PM Eastern Time today, Forward Biased received its 10,000^th site visit.  Checking my refers, I can't tell where it came from, but it's still quite a milestone.  (Sitemeter ignores all visits from my own computer.)

I have no idea who you were, Mr./Mrs./Ms. 10,000, but I tip my hat to you.  I remember when I got my 100^th visit, and my 1000^th.  I knew I'd get 10,000 before the end of the year, but it's still a very cool thing to happen.

On the other hand, having been offline for a week has killed my daily averages, but that's to be expected.  No worries.

Thanks to all of you, not just the 10,000^th.  You are why I write!

UPDATE:  Turns out it was Phoenix!

I'm still alive

Sorry, folks.  I'm still here, and everything is still basically fine—especially after about 6:00 this morning.  For the week before that, though, we have been completely without power.

You may have noticed a few stories about a huge ice storm that just hit the Southeast (the worst in ten years, some say).  Well, about 7:00 last Tuesday morning our lights went out, and that was that.  Yes, a few times I planned to try to get some computer time at a local library just to let y'all know I was still kicking, but either the library was also without power or other, more important issues came up and I just never could do that.

So, anyway, I apologize for suddenly disappearing off the face of the net like that.  I'm going to make sure that, next time, someone else out there knows how to contact me when I don't have computer access.

After I get a few emergency issues, i.e. repairs, completed, I'll start posting again.  I was starting to go into serious blogging-withdrawal!

Strike three for me

(Sigh)  In my continual quest to lose as many readers as I possibly can, it now seems that I've reached the milestone of having been wrong at least twice, and possibly three times. 

What now, you ask?  Well...forgive me, readers, for I have sinned.  I not only liked Wikipedia—a lot—but have linked to it many times, disagreeing with wiser, more circumspect folk who denigrated its authority.

If it hadn't already jumped the shark before, it has now.  I've truly tried to stand by it, but I can't any more, lest I go down with it.  I've been dragged, against my will, to the camp of Wikipedia critics.

Via Bill Quick (who knew Wikipedia was a mistake 'way back at the beginning), we have this story (and another via Ralph Bristol):

It started as a joke and ended up as a shot heard round the Internet, with the joker losing his job and Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, suffering a blow to its credibility.

Yeah, I know:  what credibility?

A man in Nashville has admitted that, in trying to shock a colleague with a joke, he put false information into a Wikipedia entry about John Seigenthaler Sr., a former editor of The Tennessean in Nashville.

Brian Chase, 38, who until Friday was an operations manager at a small delivery company, told Mr. Seigenthaler on Friday that he had written the material suggesting that Mr. Seigenthaler had been involved in the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy. Wikipedia, a nonprofit venture that is the world's biggest encyclopedia, is written and edited by thousands of volunteers.

Mr. Seigenthaler discovered the false entry only recently and wrote about it in an op-ed article in USA Today, saying he was especially annoyed that he could not track down the perpetrator because of Internet privacy laws. His plight touched off a debate about the reliability of information on Wikipedia - and by extension the entire Internet - and the difficulty in holding Web sites and their users accountable, even when someone is defamed.

In a confessional letter to Mr. Seigenthaler, Mr. Chase said he thought Wikipedia was a "gag" Web site and that he had written the assassination tale to shock a co-worker, who knew of the Seigenthaler family and its illustrious history in Nashville.

Well, if Wikipedia wasn't already a "gag" site, it sure is now.

Just so you know, the reason I liked it so much was the consistent quality of the articles I read, which were almost totally limited to the sciences and mathematics.  What biographical entries I read were of scientists, almost never of political leaders.

Of those particular entries, I still hold that they are accurate, excellent, thorough, pithy, and generally very useful.

The trouble is that, unless you happen to be an expert in the field you're reading about, you have no way to know whether what you're reading is accurate.  This was always the case, now, but I had reason, I thought, to hope that Jimmy Wales and company had truly found a way to keep spurious entries to a bare minimum, and deal with them swiftly when they did happen (yeah, I know, sometimes I'm optimistic to the point of naivité).

But when a man's reputation can be attacked—by accident, no less—before a spurious entry can be removed, it's pretty clear that my optimism was misplaced.  Just imagine what can happen when someone intentionally sets out to smear someone with whom he disagrees.  (Actually, that has already happened a lot, but it was always pretty obvious when it did, and I know of no other cases where anyone was actually hurt this way.)

Now, Wikipedia is still a good place to try looking for "pop culture" stuff that you can't find in other encyclopedias (e.g. the "seven forms of Jedi light saber fighting styles"), although you still have to be careful.  And I'll continue to use it personally for the sort of articles that I've always found useful (until I find that even they are inaccurate).  I just don't know if I'll link to it ever again.  After all, it's hardly been the sole source for information on the net, regardless of subject.

Finally, Bill Quick put it well:

Within three years it will either be operating under an entirely different, and more trustworthy model, or it will be remembered only as another well-meaning failure.

I still have hope for the former, although considerably less than I had before.

If the rocks can speak...

There is a fascinating comment thread going on over at Steel's place, located here, concerning principles of geology and how they might help us in hunting down terrorists.

The power of the press, part II

You might remember a post I made last 26 October regarding a family from Wakeman, OH that had eleven adopted, disabled children who were alleged to have been kept in "cages."

I wrote a strongly-worded post defending the parents from the press who seemed interested mainly in selling papers with sensationalist stories of the "caged children."

I just received a new comment that severely upbraided me for that story.  Then, as now, I'm open to whatever is just the plain truth about this situation, including whether I was just plain wrong.  And, again, I'm asking for anyone who has any more detailed information about this situation, especially if you live nearby, to please step forward.  The last thing I want to do is to defend the abusers of children, even if it's to join a pile-up on parents who are simply doing the best they can.

Amongst all the allegations floating about, there are two about which I have no doubt.  First is that there is a little more information available now than I ever saw then, fortunately (and perhaps by my own fault—to whatever extent I made errors because of my own lack of due diligence in research, I should be held to account).

Repeat:  to whatever extent I screwed up, I deserve to be reprimanded and held accountable in whatever ways you see fit.

Second is this statement, from the comment:

Three months ago when the Gravelle case first came to light, it was clear that they were treating their adopted children like animals.

That wasn't at all clear unless you simply believed some people's stories and disbelieved others.

For example, the children were in the "cages" only to sleep, and even then they could get out any time they wished, according to some (including the reporter from the Cleveland Plain Dealer who toured the home).  The issue of the alarms is a non-issue, since if the children are in the kind of shape that require their being confined for their own safety in the first place, then it would be irresponsible not to have alarms warning the parents that they were roaming the house alone at night.  But, like most of the issues involved here, it depends on who you believed at the time.

Now, it seems, they were found locked in those cages last September, which were smaller besides.

Nine children were found locked in cages in their home in Wakeman in Huron County, NewsChannel5 reported.

The sheriff said the kids, ages 1 to 14, were found in the cages with no blankets or pillows on Friday. The wooden cages, estimated to be about 3 feet by 3 feet, were built into the walls. Officials are not releasing the photos of the cages, but the sheriff described them as makeshift cellblocks.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer link is no longer active, but described the enclosures as considerably larger, being built around existing beds.  Now, the exact dimensions are seldom given (usually the height, which is variously described as "less than 3 feet" and "about 3-and-a-half feet," which hardly matters if they are sleeping quarters only).

I suppose there must be a good reason for not releasing the photos.  The photos posted with the story reveal nothing of the house's interior.

So, were they locked in or not?  This story says that the parents themselves told authorities that the children were, in fact, locked in these cages, which seems unlikely—but with this story, anything's possible.  In fact, the issue that was the deal-breaker for me was the allegation that the Gravelles would take in eleven children with severe disabilities and raise them just for the money, which amounted to about $100,000 per year, again, depending on who you believe.  This just wasn't credible to me.  But I've been wrong before, and Steel certainly seemed to think I was here.

In addition, Michael Gravelle is accused of sexually molesting his biological daughter, and their adopted children may not be as "handicapped" as the Gravelles claim they are (and just what documentation is required before the state will pay for child support isn't clear).

The commenter also mentions the children's race, but until someone can make the case that race somehow made a difference in how the childrean were treated, it's a non-issue to me, in spite of "the long denial of the humanity of black people in America."  Black people, generally, are treated far better in this country than in many other countries, say, in Africa, but that doesn't get racists off the hook, nor should it.

Needless to say, I've got lots more reading to do, but I'd appreciate any pointers you can give, even if they only point out my own errors.

UPDATE:  Steel has posted on Judge Cardwell's Thursday ruling.

Whew...!

I'm back.

Seriously, we've GOT to get a more reliable computer around here.  First I lost my internet connection for no reason I could discern, then, when I decided it was time (again) to reinstall Windows clean, I almost couldn't get it to reinstall.  (This time I've made a Ghost^® disk image of Windows, plus updates, plus my usual setup choices, fonts, etc., plus basic software, so that next time I have to do this it won't take as long.  I hope.)

Anyway, sorry for going incommunicado for so long, folks.

This next post was actually written and saved as a draft awaiting a final proofing or two when my computer died, so that's the next order of business.