RIP::Optimnem Blog: The Blog of Daniel Tammet: A Tribute to Kim Peek (1951-2009)

The memory I most treasure of Kim is of our mutual feelings of joy and excitement at finding someone who understood, in some small way, what it was like to think and feel and perceive the world very differently. We spent a long time swapping facts and figures with the kind of affection normally reserved for the gossip and reminiscences of old friends. And it really did feel as if we had known each other for years. There was a warm and wonderful ease and intimacy between us. I was and remain profoundly moved and inspired by the experience.
Meeting Kim and Fran helped me to learn much about what it means to be a savant, and a man. Kim faced his condition, its blessings and its burdens, with great courage, humour, and dignity. I must also pay homage to the tremendous and untiring dedication of Fran, on whom Kim depended and of whom he famously said: “We share the same shadow.”
via Optimnem Blog: The Blog of Daniel Tammet: A Tribute to Kim Peek (1951-2009).

If you’ve seen rain man. Dustin Hoffman’s Raymond Babbitt Character is based on Kim Peek!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Probably Why GMA Left Copenhagen As Fast As She Could::How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian

With the deal gutted, the heads of state session concluded with a final battle as the Chinese delegate insisted on removing the 1.5C target so beloved of the small island states and low-lying nations who have most to lose from rising seas. President Nasheed of the Maldives, supported by Brown, fought valiantly to save this crucial number. “How can you ask my country to go extinct?” demanded Nasheed. The Chinese delegate feigned great offence – and the number stayed, but surrounded by language which makes it all but meaningless. The deed was done.
via How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian.

Taking a vacation and using the Mayon Volcanic activities as excuse initially infuriated be when I read the reports. I am less mad now. I believe the President didn’t know if she was going to be China or USA’s lackey, might as well not get in the oven and get burned in the process. Shrewd move.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Better Politicians Please::How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian

Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed. But the truth about what actually happened is in danger of being lost amid the spin and inevitable mutual recriminations. The truth is this: China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful “deal” so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame. How do I know this? Because I was in the room and saw it happen.
China’s strategy was simple: block the open negotiations for two weeks, and then ensure that the closed-door deal made it look as if the west had failed the world’s poor once again. And sure enough, the aid agencies, civil society movements and environmental groups all took the bait. The failure was “the inevitable result of rich countries refusing adequately and fairly to shoulder their overwhelming responsibility”, said Christian Aid. “Rich countries have bullied developing nations,” fumed Friends of the Earth International.
All very predictable, but the complete opposite of the truth. Even George Monbiot, writing in yesterday’s Guardian, made the mistake of singly blaming Obama. But I saw Obama fighting desperately to salvage a deal, and the Chinese delegate saying “no”, over and over again. Monbiot even approvingly quoted the Sudanese delegate Lumumba Di-Aping, who denounced the Copenhagen accord as “a suicide pact, an incineration pact, in order to maintain the economic dominance of a few countries”.
Sudan behaves at the talks as a puppet of China; one of a number of countries that relieves the Chinese delegation of having to fight its battles in open sessions. It was a perfect stitch-up. China gutted the deal behind the scenes, and then left its proxies to savage it in public.
Here’s what actually went on late last Friday night, as heads of state from two dozen countries met behind closed doors. Obama was at the table for several hours, sitting between Gordon Brown and the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi. The Danish prime minister chaired, and on his right sat Ban Ki-moon, secretary-general of the UN. Probably only about 50 or 60 people, including the heads of state, were in the room. I was attached to one of the delegations, whose head of state was also present for most of the time.
What I saw was profoundly shocking. The Chinese premier, Wen Jinbao, did not deign to attend the meetings personally, instead sending a second-tier official in the country’s foreign ministry to sit opposite Obama himself. The diplomatic snub was obvious and brutal, as was the practical implication: several times during the session, the world’s most powerful heads of state were forced to wait around as the Chinese delegate went off to make telephone calls to his “superiors”.
via How do I know China wrecked the Copenhagen deal? I was in the room | Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian.

This was sad.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

rePost::7 lies we tell ourselves about money | I Will Teach You To Be Rich

1. “I want to make passive income
I love when people say this because you can tell they have no idea what they’re talking about. It’s kind of like trying to identify people with bad taste: Just go to the local Hometown Buffett. They’re all there.
I hate to say it but most of us don’t need to focus on passive income, we need to focus on improving our active income — our jobs. How? By becoming more skilled, solving more problems for our bosses, and basically out-hustling co-workers.
A lot of people don’t like to hear this because it means that instead of reaching for some dream of $500/day in passive income, they actually have to do some work right now at their jobs. But your job is the most likely place you can significantly increase your income.
via 7 lies we tell ourselves about money | I Will Teach You To Be Rich.

This is an excellent list and should be read !

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Things To Ponder::Common Sense Atheism » On Seeking Truth

How should I be trying to find truth?
Truth is a difficult thing. Just a few centuries ago, the smartest humans alive were dead wrong about damn near everything.
They were wrong about gods. Wrong about astronomy. Wrong about disease. Wrong about heredity. Wrong about physics. Wrong about racism, sexism, nationalism, governance, and many other moral issues. Wrong about geology. Wrong about cosmology. Wrong about chemistry. Wrong about evolution. Wrong about nearly every subject imaginable.
Or so we believe. We think we are better informed than they were. Are we? Is our truth more reliable than their truth?
If we want to know the truth, we’d better have a good method for finding it. What’s the best method for finding truth? How should we be trying to find truth?1
via Common Sense Atheism » On Seeking Truth.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

rePost::Prince William spends night on London streets – World – GMANews.TV – Official Website of GMA News and Public Affairs – Latest Philippine News

Prince William spends night on London streets
12/23/2009 | 09:01 AM
LONDON – A cold alley in central London is a far cry from a palace — but it was the spot Prince William chose to sleep to highlight the plight of homeless British teenagers.
He spent a chilly night near Blackfriars Bridge last week with Seyi Obakin, the chief executive of British homeless charity Centrepoint. William has been the charity’s patron since 2005.
“I cannot, after one night, even begin to imagine what it must be like to sleep rough on London’s streets night after night,” William said Tuesday. “Poverty, mental illness, drug and alcohol dependancy and family breakdown cause people to become and then stay homeless.
via Prince William spends night on London streets – World – GMANews.TV – Official Website of GMA News and Public Affairs – Latest Philippine News.

Admirable!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Interesting::Overcoming Bias : Naked Promiscuity

Men in the mating condition … said they would spend more money on the conspicuous luxuries. … Women in the mating condition … said they would spend more time on conspicuous pro-social volunteering. … Mating-primed women … said they would spend more on generosity-signalling conspicuous spending; mating-primed men did the same. Also, mating-primed men … said they would do more heroic helping, but not more non-heroic helping. … Moreover, men who were most interested in promiscuous, short-term sexual liaisons showed the largest increase after the mating priming in both generosity-signalling conspicuous spending and in heroic benevolence. …
via Overcoming Bias : Naked Promiscuity.

Interesting. This paragraph caught my attention but the whole article is worth reading.

rePost::Overcoming Bias : Married Sex

So the wife is less committed to her sex part of the deal than the husband is to most of his parts. The wife can implicitly threaten to withhold sex for last minute demands, but even if he meets those demands she may still decline. And if she is not in the mood there is little he can threaten to withhold at the last minute that is of comparable value. Without kids he might threaten to leave the marriage, but that is a dangerous game to play.
Presumably overall this problem makes men less, and women more, willing to marry, though it may also make men more eager to marry to signal their confidence that this problem won’t befall them. I see two general ways to avoid this time-inconsistency problem:
1. Obligatory Sex – more explicit norms about the frequency and nature of sex, norms wives are expected to meet even when less in the mood. Perhaps wives would have to do something unpleasant, like exercise lots, when there was no sex.
2. Nonobligatory Other – remove something wives want lots from the usual set of stable husband contributions, so husbands can threaten to withhold that without being a pariah. Perhaps the expectation that he sleep at home [added: or maybe a big budget he could spend on extras for him or her]?
Both these approaches have been common in the past. Either would make women less willing to marry. Men won’t propose these because that would signal a lack of confidence, but women could propose them to signal they don’t expect a sex problem. Intuitively this seems unlikely, thought I’m not sure exactly why.
Added 3p: I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: people express strikingly little sympathy for sex-starved men.
via Overcoming Bias : Married Sex.

This was really funny. Poor sex starved married guy.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

rePost::The story of the pencil « Paulo Coelho’s Blog

‘Fourth quality: what really matters in a pencil is not its wooden exterior, but the graphite inside. So always pay attention to what is happening inside you.’
‘Finally, the pencil’s fifth quality: it always leaves a mark. in just the same way, you should know that everything you do in life will leave a mark, so try to be conscious of that in your every action’
via The story of the pencil « Paulo Coelho’s Blog.

loved reading this!!!