Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Dr Sally Ride- An Astronaut and Astrophysicist of Distinction


Our first American female astronaut, Sally Ride, died at the age of 61 from cancer, and the obituary cites her long time same sex partner. The news story then becomes she's "outed" in her obituary.

Here's a woman who had a PHD in Astrophysics from Stanford, who led a life that inspired millions of young women by her achievements, and yet, the fact that she was a Lesbian and she didn't tell anybody is the news. How thoroughly sophomoric of the press. 

Dr Ride felt that her achievements were based on her ability, and her gender was not an issue. She would've just as soon have had no more publicity than any other astronaut when she first went into space. Yet, our society demanded publicity, almost as a "see, women can do that too" kind of justification for her participation in the space program. 

Someday society will look upon women only for what they do, and not act surprised by their achievements or even feel the need to comment on their gender.  They  perform equally well in their work. Maybe someday they will even get equal pay for their work; even though we have a law that says they should now. Maybe someday they won't have to be "outed either". They'll just be who they are, doing what they do very well, as Dr Sally Ride would want.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Apple Says "Oops, We Made a Mistake"


Pulling out of EPEAT (the industry's Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool), and a national  measure of a product's "greenness",  may have been the brain child of a number cruncher squirreled away in some dark room trying to maximize profits, but the backlash from the consuming public was swift, and the  company's image as a corporation that cares about the environment turned brown faster than a rotten apple. 

The bean counters evidently hadn't placed enough value on "greenness" in their number crunching.  Surprise, surprise! Obviously, the number crunchers did a quick update based on the massive negative reaction from the consumer and Apple changed their position almost overnight. 

They know their market.  Many of their customers have a little more money in their pockets than the average consumer. ( Search engines even steer Apple users to more expensive products and services because they know this). They eat their kale, buy expensive "wild caught" seafood, shop at farmer's markets, drive a Prius, use CFAs, recycle their trash,  own energy efficient homes, and generally spend a little more for things in the interest of having a greener planet. Apple's environmental conscientiousness may be way more perception than reality, but it's perception that counts.

The new Retina  Macbook Pro is the culprit that started the row. The new laptop is not easily serviceable and key parts are not replaceable. The battery and display can't be salvaged and recycled, so rather than sell a product with a bad environmental rating, they decided to flex their corporate muscle and leave the program. In returning to EPEAT, Apple made noises like they will continue to stay in the program for "all eligible products". I interpret that to mean if it's a rotten Apple they won't tell us.

One thing is certain, staying in EPEAT must be more profitable than dropping out, or they wouldn't have come back. That may be the lesson learned by this action. Today, people care enough about the environment to pay a little more for their products if it means having a greener planet, or the perception of one. 



I've enclosed this article for reference:


Apple Retina Macbook Pro
Apple Retina Macbook Pro: has faced criticism as its RAM and storage are not user-serviceable or replaceable
Apple has been forced into an embarrassing volte-face, announcing that it would rejoin the American EPEAT environmental ratings system for electronic products just days after leaving it.
The reversal of the announcement, described by a senior Apple executive as a "mistake", was apparently forced on the company by government agencies, schools and scientists which use EPEAT – the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool – to certify the environmental credentials of computers they are considering purchasing.
Bob Mansfield, Apple's senior vice-president of hardware engineering,wrote in an open letter on Apple's site that "We've recently heard from many loyal Apple customers who were disappointed to learn that we had removed our products from the EPEAT rating system. I recognise that this was a mistake. Starting today, all eligible Apple products are back on EPEAT."
He insisted that "our commitment to protecting the environment has never changed, and today it is as strong as ever".
Apple's move last week looked as though it could lead to a domino effect in which companies and government contractors might stop buying its products due to the lack of EPEAT certification. The city of San Francisco announced that it would stop buying Apple computers, and then to reassessments by US government agencies. Although Apple's corporate sales are far smaller than rivals such as HP and Dell, such contracts are still important both for reputation and long-term stability.
EPEAT only applies to computers, but not tablets or phones. It was introduced in 2006, and is based on the IEEE 1680.1 standard. That covers elements such as the reduction or elimination of environmentally sensitive materials, material selection, design for end of life (wheh the product is replaced), product longevity/life extension, energy conservation (during manufacture and use), end-of-life management, corporate performance and packaging.
Apple has in the past year touted its own green credentials, most recently by announcing an internal initiative to use cleaner energy sources for its data farms in North Carolina. But it has come in for criticism from third parties for the design of its laptop products, notably the top-end Retina MacBook Pro, in which the RAM and storage are glued into the machine and are not user-serviceable or replaceable.
EPEAT bills itself as a global registry to which consumers can turn for information when shopping for greener electronics. According toEPEAT's website, its users include federal and state government agencies, colleges, and several private corporations such as Ford and KPMG.
Apple's decision this month to stop participating in the registry would have affected computer-related purchasing decisions by governments and universities because many them are required to use hardware that has been rated by EPEAT.
The city of San Francisco, for example, has a policy that its computers, laptops and monitors must be EPEAT "gold" rated.
Customers contacted Apple directly, which played a "critical part" in getting Apple back on the registry, said EPEAT chief executive Robert Frisbee.
"The scientific community in the US government are big users of Apple," Frisbee said, adding that they were "particularly influential" in convincing the tech giant to resume its participation.
Mansfield in his letter said that "Our relationship with EPEAT has become stronger as a result of this experience" and that Apple looked forward to working on the underlying IEEE 1680.1 standard used to build the tool.

Friday, July 13, 2012

The Other Castro gets the "Show Me Your Papers" Treatment


This story highlights the insanity of the "Show Me Your Papers" law and the emotional cruelty it imposes of innocent citizens. This is what happens when you cast a net only designed to catch Latinos. Maybe the Arizona police and Border Patrol should be required cast an indiscriminate net, and  stop everybody they see, all day, and do nothing else but harass innocent people. If other innocent people were caught in this web of bigotry, then maybe they would get their legislators to change the law.

Read it and weep:

Not first time Arizona governor stopped

EXCLUSIVE: Ex-Ariz. Gov. Castro tells Salon he wasn't shocked when stopped recently: It's happened twice before

Not first time Arizona governor stopped"It's not like I'm a gangbanger who was going to run away," Castro tells Salon.(Credit: AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)
What started as a “ridiculous” Border Patrol incident along Interstate 19 in southern Arizona may be spiraling into a full-scale public relations debacle for a border security gone awry.  Nearly three weeks after former Arizona Gov. Raúl Castro triggered a checkpoint’s radiation security system on June 12, the story of the 96-year-old’s brief but disturbing detainment in the brutal Sonoran Desert heat for more than a half-hour has spread from a local newspaper commentary to national news.
But there’s more: This was the third time such an incident has happened to Castro, who was elected in 1974 as the first (and only) Mexican American governor of Arizona.
“I’ve worked on immigration matters all of my life, as an ambassador, a governor and on the border,” Castro told me in a phone interview from his home in Nogales, Ariz. “But this was really bad judgment.”
An outspoken opponent to Arizona’s controversial SB 1070 “papers please” law,  Castro recalled the other two times he had to fend off stumbling Border Patrol efforts.
Nearly half century ago, working on the front fence of his Tucson horse farm in his work clothes, Castro was stopped by a passing Border Patrol car. The agents asked if he had his work card. Castro said no. When they asked whom he worked for, Castro referred to “the señorita inside.” The agents nearly arrested Castro until he showed them the sign by his farm entrance: “Judge Castro.” A former Pima County prosecutor, Castro had become the first Latino Superior Court justice in the state in the 1960s.
A decade later, the Border Patrol struck again.
“I once had a home in San Diego,” Castro said. “One day my daughter and I returned and were stopped by Border Patrol. ‘Hey, where were you born? I wasn’t about to lie. I was born in Mexico, I said. The guard starts questioning me. ‘What about that young lady?’ She was born in Japan, I said, during the Korean War. He thought we were being smart. He didn’t want to let us go.  In the meantime, someone came by and recognized me. Governor, how are you?”
Writing in the Nogales International, Castro’s friend and driver Anne Doan triggered the media interest in Castro’s recent Border Patrol fiasco with a commentary that described the “appalling” and “humiliating” treatment of the elder statesman last month.  En route to a planned birthday party for the 96-year-old icon in Tucson, Doan and the frail Castro were forced to exit their vehicle at the Tubac, Ariz., checkpoint in near 100-degree weather when Castro’s earlier medical treatment for his pacemaker set off the checkpoint’s radiation system. Despite Doan’s pleas for Castro’s health, the Border Patrol insisted he waited outside without air-conditioning.
The Border Patrol’s birthday gift infuriated Castro, who served as ambassador to El Salvador and Bolivia in the 1960s, and as ambassador to Argentina under President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1980.
“I’m 96 years old,” he said.  “It’s not like I’m a gangbanger who was going to run away.”
“They knew it was the medical procedure that was coming up on their radar,” Doan wrote, describing the Border Patrol’s apparent indifference to Castro’s earlier treatment at Tucson Heart Hospital.
“At that point I was begging them to leave him alone. They brought out a document for him to fill out and sign. They had a machine they ran up and down his body front and back. Finally they released us and as we were walking back to the car they stopped him and said they had to see his identification. We were standing out in the sun, by this time, and Gov. Castro reached for his identification and showed it to the agent, they registered the information they needed from his identification and they released us, again.
While Castro has refused to scold the Border Patrol for any apparent discrimination or profiling, he again rebuked its “poor judgment,” considering the possible health concerns for the elderly in the summer heat.
Doan was less charitable in her Op-Ed:
“This is the anger that exists with that checkpoint. We residents understand why it is there, but are reminded every day at how wasteful and ineffective it is. I am sorry, but in America, Americans should be able to drive from one city to the next without being detained and questioned by other Americans simply to file paperwork.”
This incident comes on the heels of the Supreme Court’s recent split decision on the state’s notorious immigration law, which still allowed the “papers, please” provision of the law to stand. Meanwhile, apprehensions of undocumented entries haveplummeted to the lowest level since Castro was governor of the state in 1974.
CONTINUE READING
Jeff Biggers's next book, "State Out of the Union: Arizona and the Final Showdown Over the American Dream" (Nation Books) is due out in September.

Jill Stein for President of the United States


Decisions, decisions, do I make my vote count by helping Obama to get reelected, or do I vote my principles and support Jill Stein and the Green Party USA?  The Green Party has no chance of gaining a foothold in American politics, lacking billionaire and corporate support,  but somehow, I feel the need to stand by my principles.  I plan to write-in Jill Stein when I vote. I may make a homemade Jill Stein for President (of the United States) yard sign, and I hope a few other people will do the same. Who knows, she may even get a mention in the ballot count, and anyhow, I'll sleep better. 

She did get a little article in the NYU Times the other day. See below. Mostly, they just talk about how futile it is for her to run against the two major parties. But she isn't phased by the two party control of American politics, so why should I be? 

Vote your conscientious. If you care about education, universal healthcare, peace, sustainability, civil rights, human rights, the environment and social justice, then the Green Party is where it's at.  Elect Jill Stein for President of the United States! Don't compromise your principles. You'll sleep better too...


NY Times:
Party Strains to Be Heard Now That Its Voice Isn’t Nader’s
Published: July 12, 2012

BOSTON — Jill Stein, presumptive nominee of the Green Party, is probably the only candidate on the campaign trail who spends an hour a day cooking her own organic meals — and who was, not too long ago, the lead singer of a folksy rock band.
But the differences do not end there. When Ms. Stein is introduced on the trail as “Jill Stein for president,” she is also very likely the only candidate to be asked, “For president of what?”
That’s what Keith Brockenberry, a cook, wanted to know at a meet-and-greet in Roxbury last week. After one of Ms. Stein’s supporters clarified, “for president of the United States,” Mr. Brockenberry seemed both taken aback and delighted.
“Get out of here!” he blurted out. “I had no idea.”
What Ms. Stein lacks in name recognition, however, she is trying to make up for these days in high-energy organization and low-cost social media outreach. When she officially accepts the nomination at the Green Party’s convention this weekend in Baltimore, she will be the party’s first candidate to have qualified for federal matching funds — a milestone for this 11-year-old alternative party and potentially a major boost for a campaign that does not accept corporate donations.
The Green Party of the United States expects to be on the ballot in at least 45 states and to spend about $1 million on its campaign. At the moment, it has secured ballot access, an organizational test in itself, in 21 states, including the battlegrounds of Colorado, Florida, Michigan and Ohio, where the major party candidates, President Obama and Mitt Romney, who are raising tens of millions of dollars every month, are locked in a tight race.
While Ms. Stein barely registers a blip in national polling, experts point to Ralph Nader, the Green Party nominee in 2000, who was seen by many Democrats as siphoning just enough votes from Al Gore in one state, Florida, to tip the election to the Republican, George W. Bush. Nationally, Mr. Nader had captured only 3 percent of the vote.
Could such a situation unfold again?
Unlike Ms. Stein, a physician on leave from her practice, Mr. Nader, a lifelong consumer advocate, enjoyed high name recognition. But now, more than a decade later, the Green Party has matured to the point at which Ms. Stein’s lower profile may be balanced by a more savvy political operation.
“The Green Party only needs to pull a very small number to provide an upset in a state like Ohio, if the balloting is close,” said Peter Ubertaccio, chairman of the department of political science and international studies at Stonehill College, in Easton, Mass. “Then suddenly their insignificant overall numbers become hugely significant in deciding who gets the electoral votes in that state.”
It’s a danger to their natural allies, the Democrats, he said.
Ms. Stein, 62, a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Medical School, takes her ultra-long-shot odds in stride and is eager to explain to anyone who will listen “how a nice doctor like me,” she says, “got to be in a Godforsaken place like this.”
A general internist who grew impatient with the social and environmental roots of disease, Ms. Stein said, “I’m now practicing political medicine because politics is the mother of all illnesses.”
The Green Party’s supporters tend to be young, but the party is also popular with liberals of all ages who are disenchanted with the Obama administration.
Emily Winter, 24, is one such voter. “I voted for Obama because he preached change, and he’s done impressive work in the area of women’s rights, heath care and foreign policy,” said Ms. Winter, a Boston University graduate student who approached Ms. Stein on a South End street to ask for a photo. “But I feel like too many other policies are stuck where they’ve been for years.”
Ms. Stein, ever polished in bright scarves and slim pantsuits, is quick to point out that she is the only candidate who has experience debating Mr. Romney, which she did in the 2002 Massachusetts governor’s race, her first of four unsuccessful attempts at elected office.

What did she learn? “It’s easy to debate a robot,” she said of his speaking style.
While Ms. Stein ultimately lost big, with only 3 percent of the vote, a poll taken by a local television station immediately after one debate showed that 32 percent of voting viewers said she had won the debate, compared with 33 percent who gave it to Mr. Romney (he ultimately won the race).
“Stein wouldn’t have struck you, if you were watching the debates, as a caricature of a third-party candidate,” Professor Ubertaccio said. “She was thoughtful and spoke about policy quite knowledgeably.”
Still, some detractors dismiss Ms. Stein as a perennial protest candidate who has never gained much traction with voters.
Now a major challenge for Ms. Stein, a native of the Chicago area who lives northwest of Boston with her husband, a surgeon (they have two adult sons), is to show that she can win support around the country. She longs to be included in the nationally televised debates, a high hurdle for any third-party candidate. According to the Commission on Presidential Debates, a candidate must have “a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate” as determined by five national polling organizations.
Ms. Stein’s problem, then, is of the chicken-and-egg variety: to get national name recognition, she needs television exposure in debates. But she does not qualify for debates because of a lack of national name recognition.
She thinks that is by design, to benefit major parties.
“If they actually have to debate a living, thinking, informed person, it’s very hard for them,” Ms. Stein added, referring to Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney. “They have kind of a mutual agreement, which you can see evident in the nature of their debate right now. If it’s important, they won’t go there. Many issues are not on the table.”
Ms. Stein says she emphasizes issues like ecological sustainability, racial and gender equality, and economic justice. The centerpiece of her platform is a Green New Deal, a twist on the Roosevelt-era programs intended to stimulate job growth and the depressed economy. It could be paid for by ending the presence of American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the campaign says, and by eliminating waste in the health care system. Beyond that, Ms. Stein favors a progressive income tax that would raise rates on the wealthy.
“There are overwhelming benefits to moving to a green economy that provides jobs and good wages,” she said.
Ms. Stein is quick to align Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney, saying their policies are nearly indistinguishable. She cites the former governor’s policy on health care and the president’s health overhaul as an example. (She supports a single-payer system.)
“We need to have people in Washington who refuse to be bought by lobbyist money and for whom change is not just a slogan,” Ms. Stein said. “It seems like there’s a rebellion going on, and people are really ready for something different.”

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

A Rotten Apple Dumps Mother Earth for Pollution and Profit



Well, now I have to consider the prospect of boycotting Apple. It seems that they have decided to withdraw from the Electronic Product Environmental  Assessment Tool (EPEAT) program that rates a product from the perspective of its Earth friendliness. Of all the electronics companies in the world, I am surprised that Apple would do such a stupid thing. By designing their fancy Retina display with the battery glued to the assembly in such a manner that it can't be taken apart and salvaged for its component parts, Apple has taken a giant step backward in environmental conscienness. 

Their disregard for a higher social ethic than profit  serves to highlight to me that the largest countries and the largest companies can make their own rules.  People will undoubtedly continue to gobble up Apple products, even if they're an environmental disaster.  But I will not be smacked around like this for their profit motivation. As much as I like Apple products, unless they reinstate their participation in EPEAT, they're a bad apple, and I won't bite it.


Check out the article from PC Mag below:

Apple Removes Green EPEAT Certification From All Products
Word is starting to hit the airwaves that Apple has officially withdrawn its 39 products from EPEAT certification – that's the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool, a program that awards products with "gold," "silver," or "bronze" classification based on how well they meet a variety of environmental-themed criteria including recyclability, energy consumption, and environmental impact.
That sounds like a lot of green gobbledygook, but it's a classification program that Apple appeared to take seriously up until the company's request for removal (announced early last month). In fact, Apple still touts its iMacs' EPEAT Gold status on their official product page although, as The Verge's Bryan Bishop notes, the gold status logo is now conspicuously absent from the site.
"Apple has notified EPEAT that it is withdrawing its products from the EPEAT registry and will no longer be submitting its products to EPEAT for environmental rating," wrote EPEAT representatives in a June 29 blog post. "For participating electronics manufacturers, EPEAT is a chance to showcase and validate their greener design initiatives, cleaner production and customer support services."
"We regret that Apple will no longer be registering its products in EPEAT. We hope that they will decide to do so again at some point in future," EPEAT representatives added.
So, why'd Apple leave? According to Robert Frisbee, EPEAT CEO, in an interview with CIO Journal, it appears as if Apple's future plans for hardware design are to blame.
"They said their design direction was no longer consistent with the EPEAT requirements," said Frisbee, who added that Apple didn't elaborate on what exactly the company meant by that.
Frisbee went on to confirm that Apple's controversial decision to make its new line of Retina-Display Macbook Pro laptops difficult, if not impossible to disassemble, would make the product line ineligible for EPEAT certification.
In other words, gluing the battery and the display to the laptop is an environmental no-no as far as EPEAT's concerned: "If the battery is glued to the case it means you can't recycle the case and you can't recycle the battery," Frisbee clarified.