28 February 2013

A year ago, The Atlantic went about putting together one of the most extensive, high quality collections of WW2 photographs ever assembled online.

It wasn't just random black-and-white shots of Allied soldiers - they sought photographs from the home front (in colour), from the Japanese, African, Eastern and Western fronts, holocaust victims and the diplomacy behind it all.

A year later, month-by-month, they've compiled that collection - your Daily Quota.

These images are, quite simply, breathtaking.

Hours could be spent on viewing their entirety, exhibitions could be populated without breaking a sweat.

Words simply can't do them justice, so I'm just going to stop.

Enjoy them, take your time viewing them, because this is definitely one to save to your favourites.

VIEW THEM HERE

27 February 2013

She dried off her tears, stopped believing in the realities of this ugly old world, made up her own set of rules and played by them.
If 100 percent of men in movies told her she had no talent, she decided, 100 percent of them would be wrong.

Today's Daily Quota is a review of the latest in Munroe biographies; Marilyn: The Passion and the Paradox by Lois Banner.
Banner is a self-described reflection of Marilyn, thus her interest in the iconic figure, "an academic scholar, feminist biographer, and historian of gender".

The review does a great job of summarising the highs and lows point of poor Marilyn's life - doing so with the same post-feminist affection and empathy that seems to highlight her contemporary image.
A similar line of thought was adopted by former biographer Norman Mailer:

In her ambition, so Faustian, and in her ignorance of culture’s dimensions, in her liberation and her tyrannical desires, her noble democratic longings intimately contradicted by the widening pool of her narcissism (where every friend and slave must bathe), we can see the magnified mirror of ourselves, our exaggerated and now all but defeated generation, yes, she ran a reconnaissance through the Fifties, and left a message for us in her death, “Baby go Boom.”

Very elegantly put. For those of you interested in the life of Marilyn Munroe, this is an interesting article, and the biography itself is comprehensive to say the least.

READ IT HERE

26 February 2013

Health and nutrition is arguably one of the most volatile, convoluted and, yes, dogmatic areas of scholarship.
I say this because our supermarket aisles are lined with misleading and deceptive conduct, or at very least, an inconclusive choice of 'healthy options'.
But hey, that's what makes this so interesting!

Recently, I'd debated the concept of restricted caloric intake versus eating a desired amount of healthy, unprocessed food.
On the one side, my friend stressed that weight loss can be achieved as long as your calories are in deficit, regardless of where you obtain these calories. 
I however, told him that if a dietician told a client they could remain looking good, as long as they consume a set amount of calories, despite any nutritional, health or well-being factors, they will soon face a judge in a Civil court.
In my opinion, this approach is so incredibly stupid, it borders on negligence for anyone in a position of professional influence over another.

Today's Daily Quota is the article he linked to me. As you can imagine, I don't particularly agree with this article. However, I remain open minded and await a response from others that might want to have their input.
This study was conducted on a small sample space, and each person was fed three different meals - one fast food burger and fried, one completely organic burger and fried (cooked in certified organic canola oil etc), and the other was a turkey breast sandwich. Each consisted of the same caloric content.

Basically, a simple constant-variable analysis. Their hormone levels were tested and it was discovered that no immediate volatility was seen amongst test subjects. 
Could it be, then, that fast food and unprocessed food can have the same effect, as long as they hold the same caloric content?

Have a read yourself, make up your own mind. Is quantity more important that quality? Is a Daily Quota about J-Lo the same as a Daily Quota about Plato?
Whether you agree or not, it's still very much food for thought.

READ IT HERE

25 February 2013

We've heard it all before in all those media articles targeted at Gen X readers - Facebook has become a bohemoth of data and your privacy and nearly a billion users and this and that and Zuckerberg floating on the Stock Exchange.
Yes. 

Today's Daily Quota is a relatively brief, yet very interesting read from The Guardian.
It's called Why the Facebook and Apple Empires are Bound to Fall and it hypothesizes the steady decline of these two giants from their peak.

It must be noted that the author does not anticipate some kind of dramatic crash - he merely foresees a decline from former heights - Firstly due to less and less 'new customers', secondly due to marginally diminishing improvements, thirdly a heavy reliance on perpetual innovation, and finally, their heavy reliance on a fleeting demand for a specific service.

The final two paragraphs sum things up perfectly:

Although the eclipsing of Apple and Facebook is inevitable, the timing and causes of their eventual declines will differ. Apple's current strength is that it actually makes things that people are desperate to buy and on which the company makes huge margins. The inexorable logic of the hardware business is that those margins will decline as the competition increases, so Apple will become less profitable over the longer term. What will determine its future is whether it can come up with new, market-creating products such as the iPod, iPhone and iPad.

Facebook, on the other hand, makes nothing. It just provides an online service that, for the moment, people seem to value. But in order to make money out of those users and satisfy the denizens of Wall Street, it has to become ever more intrusive and manipulative. It's condemned, in other words, to intrusive overstretch. Which is why, in the end, it will become a footnote in the history of the internet. Just like Microsoft, in fact. Sic transit gloria.

Enjoy!

READ IT HERE

24 February 2013

Today Aerosmith announced an upcoming Australian tour.

Therefore, for today's Superficial Sunday we pay tribute to one of the most 80's bands there are.

That's right, I used 80's as an adjective.

Love in an Elevator is one of their biggest records, and my own personal favourite. It's quite simply a fun song. One of the best attributes in a band, and a person, is a sense of humility.

One must not take themselves too seriously, and I've found that the more you learn to laugh at yourself, the more the world is laughing with you.

Lead man Steven Tyler screams into the microphone (complete with his trademark scarves) as the video gets stranger and stranger.

We see couple after couple enter and exit the elevator, each of them getting more and more dysfunctional. Tyler, ofcourse, spends a lot of the film clip humping the stage floor.

The looks on each of the band members' faces are priceless.

Here's a sample;

Jacki's in the elevator (woah)

Lingerie second floor (woah yeah)

She said 'can I see you later (woah)

and love you just a little more?' (woah yeah)

This song is fun as hell, and always puts me in a good mood. I've also once broken a chandelier playing this song on Guitar Hero.

True story. Rock 'n' roll!

WATCH IT HERE

23 February 2013

I hope yesterday's Filosophy Friday post got you all warmed up. Some of you may have seen the silver lining in the concept of doubt, others may instead see the cloud. The former group would have seen the potential for progress, the latter the potential for cynicism.
Others may not have given it any thought at all.

Whatever the case, we've got some nice black humour for your Sardonic Saturdays. Today's Daily Quota is, what Nestle would call, fun sized.

It's a single page from Watchmen by Alan Moore, arguably the greatest graphic novel ever written.
This page depicts a reflective fight scene, but the interesting part is the narration - a dark joke about depression, clowns and the irony of life.

This is one of my favourite parts of the book, and I know you'll enjoy it.
Until next week, remember; every silver lining has a cloud!

VIEW IT HERE

22 February 2013

Nothing like a Filosophy Friday on a Saturday morning.
Today's Daily Quota is based on one of my favourite maxims; de omnibus dubitandum est.
Translated, it simply means 'everything must be doubted'.

This statement was coined by Kierkegaard in his novelle on Johannes Climacus, and later employed by Karl Marx as an open-minded approach to life, and everything that we are told.
This maxim need not be cynical in nature, but rather a constant reminder that we must doubt all that we see, hear, feel or think, as it is almost always fleeting. 
We must never be arrogant about our own knowledge, as what we are certain about today will be the retrospective fiction of tomorrow.

How would things ever change for the better if there is no one that, at first, doubts?
How are we to ever move forward if we are completely satisfied in what we know and trust?
Is curiosity not what makes us human?

This approach to doubt was first employed amongst early Renaissance philosophers, most notably Rene Descartes (pictured left).
This was referred to as Cartesian Doubt, and laid the foundation for the maxim above.

Below I have linked everyone to a PDF file (pedophile?) that discusses, quite briefly, this concept of Cartesian Doubt. A very hot item for future conversations, and for our own approach to the 'truths' we encounter in life. 

READ IT HERE

21 February 2013

A picture speaks a thousand words - surely a painting does too?
Well, this one certainly does.

Today's Daily Quota is Bosch's famous The Garden of Earthly Delights.
This painting is incredibly chaotic - so much so, in fact, that you'll be quite thankful of the enormity of the image itself.

Historians and artsy-fartsy-folk are divided as to Bosch's intentions for the piece. On face value, it seems to contain the three possible stages of existence - the left panel being life on Earth, the middle being heaven, and the right being hell.
Alternatively, the left (and middle) has been seen as purgatory - a noteworthy hypothesis given Dante's Inferno having been published (narrowly) a century or two prior.

Another theory is that the panels depict a progressive 'paradise lost', in that each stage shows Man's degeneration of His own existence.
It starts off as bliss and simplicity in the Garden of Eden, it eventually degenerates into an orgy, each individual indulging in excess, some carrying others as they do so. This is perhaps Free Will at play - and the abuse of it.
Finally, Paradise is most definitely lost as we descend into a world that is suffering from its former excesses. Monstrosities have overrun the human race and have enslaved them in a perpetual Hell. Poor fellas.
Take life in moderation, lest ye too end up in the final panel.

I really like the third theory. It seems to present an omen against excess, lest we suffer today for our sins of yesterday.
A truly amazing piece. I could (and have) sat there for long periods of time just admiring the detail, the faces, the pleasure and the suffering.
Enjoy, folks.

VIEW IT HERE

20 February 2013

Everyone loves a bit of psychology - but it's quite rare indeed to find an article on a prominent facet of psychology that has been disproved and re-proved numerous times over.
Today's Daily Quota is an article from the most recent section of The Chronicle Review titled 'Power of  Suggestion'. 

B.F. Skinner was the first to introduce the world to operant conditioning and other forms of behaviorism. Can constant, or variant, or specific, or any other kind of stimuli determine a person's immediate, subconscious behaviour?

The most famous example of classical conditioning is Pavlov's Dog experiment. Pavlov rung a bell each time before he fed his dogs.
Eventually, the sound of the ringing bell would cause his dog to salivate in anticipation of food.
Kind of like the sound of a new Facebook notification giving you a little sense of reward.

This article discusses John Bargh's long-term attempts at drawing attention to a more contemporary area of behaviourism - Priming.
Priming involves comparative behavioural manipulation, or in other words, using certain stimuli to trigger another reaction in your brain. For instance, when you see an inflated price next to a less expensive one, it appears cheap by relativity. Or when you are told to associate a colour and fruit, eventually if someone tips you in a slightly misleading manner, you'll end up with 'Green - Grape' instinctively.

Bargh held one (in)famous experiment, which was re-enacted numerous times - each one yielding differing results. He made students play with an assortment of 'random' words for about an hour, except each of them had something to do with growing old.
Then, he timed the students as they walked from the door, down a hallway, to the exist. The ones that played with the 'old-age' words walked significantly slower.
Interesting, but very, very inconsistent results.

Ah well, he tried, I guess. An interesting read, nonetheless - even if it's only to read up on these random psychological experiments!

READ IT HERE

19 February 2013

Of the countless pieces that I've read, quotes that have infatuated and infuriated me and publications that I've had the pleasure and displeasure of consuming, Alan Moore stands above all as my favourite author of all.

Alan Moore is one of the immortals of the comics industry, and stands the creator of such works as V for Vendetta, The Leagues of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Promethea, Lost Girls, several series' of Batman and Superman, Marvelman and my favourite work of all time, Watchmen.

He has so many smaller works to his name that I could run a Daily Moore with ease.
However, today's Daily Quota is a small excerpt from a recent interview with Paraphilia Magazine.

In this extract, he discusses (with long, liberal sentences) the importance of art in an increasingly chaotic world. He dismisses the notion that art has no influence in the noise and pragmatism of today
He does, however, place one condition upon its influence - "only if they are genuinely art and literature as opposed to corporate-approved fanfares that only add to the already-deafening level of cultural noise"

The excerpt can be found below, or the full January issue can be downloaded here (free sign-up required).

READ IT HERE

18 February 2013

Another week, another seven snippets of science, philosophy, economics and culture for your consumption.

Today's Daily Quota is on a topic that's undergone huge resistance and revisionism as of late, especially in the wake of it's almost absolute failure - the War on Drugs.

Milton Friedman is arguably one of the top two or three most influential economists of the 20th Century.
He gained prominence as most good economists do - in times of economic hardship. His appeal was that of a Commerce student with a sense of humour - he could apply economics to anything in life.
In this case, he chose to take a contrarian stance to the US-led War on Drugs (it was failing then, and it's still failing now).

Here are of the few points he makes:

• The War on Drugs, as an economic intervention, targets only the supply of drugs, which hopes to lower demand by surging prices upwards.
  What it does instead is surge prices upwards, but of a substance that addicts will pay any price for (price-inelastic). Lo and behold, they commit more crimes for more hits, or people come up with more creative ways to administer the more potent product.
• The incarceration rate has increased ten-fold as a result of Nixon's War on Drugs due to harsher and harsher penalties for offenders, thinking this would act as a deterrent.
  Most offences are minor possession - criminalizing an individual for the smallest of relative crimes.
  Pretty much, this meme.
• With greater demand for potency, output, affordability and transportability, drugs are being synthetically grown - in turn, creating dangerous super drugs like chronic (cannabis), crack cocaine (cocaine), heroin (opium) and ecstasy (amphetamines).
• The War on Drugs has proliferated the violence associated with it and has caused the most (collateral) damage to innocent people in the cross-fire, not rival cartels as is generally believed.
  Friedman estimated an additional 10,000 homicides a year in the US alone.

This interview is only a tiny snippet of the whole interview, and discusses only a handful of arguments for and against the War on Drugs as we know it. Great insight from a titan of knowledge and a man of incredible influence.
Until tomorrow, drugs are bad, mmmkay?

WATCH IT HERE

17 February 2013

Superficial Sundays on The Daily Quota - our one day of rest where we pursue the trivial and scope the superfluous.

The Daily Quota for today is one of my favourite news clips from The Onion News Network - America's finest news source. What makes it the finest is that is is satirical.
Yep, it's a well-funded, not-so-subtle acerbic critique of the more popular US news networks.

Kinda like The Liberty Tree from the GTA series, which was meant to take the piss out of The New York Times.

Check out their website and you'll see just how much effort they put into taking the shit out of CNN and FOX News.
For instance, they've recently reported on the global, unanimous surrender to North Korea in light of a 10-megaton atomic test, an opinion piece about a man's surprising discovery that sex with a prostitute was, in fact, emotionally fulfilling, and one of my personal favourites, the news that '2012 was once considered the hottest year on record, man in 2024 remembers wistfully'.

The clip I've chosen for you today is one titled CLOSE YOUR FACEBOOK ACCOUNT. It consults a panel of CIA representatives and social media experts as they discuss the enormous success the CIA has had in their Facebook Project.
As we all know, the CIA has owned Facebook Inc. for a number of years, and it's been paying greater and greater dividends for the intelligence agency as more users become more transparent with their lives.
It has apparently been more successful than the Twitter Project, which resulted in '500 billion tweets, and not a single useful piece of data'.

Oh the lols to be had in satirizing something that is quite evidently occurring.
I mean, what else can we do but laugh?
Well, take action I guess, but that requires effort.

WATCH IT HERE

16 February 2013

Welcome back to Sardonic Saturdays - where every silver lining has a cloud.

Today's Daily Quota explores contemporary innovation; in particular, how innovation has stagnated as of late. The article is from the January edition of The Economist and poses the question 'Has the ideas machine broken down?'

The 20th Century inarguably saw the greatest spike in innovation, from the proliferation of electricity (okay, that was late 19th Century, but I said proliferation), automobiles, firearms, nuclear energy, radio and digital broadcast, the internet...the list goes on.
However, has innovation hit a plateau? Surely not, I mean what about the iPad and Facebook and all those cool apps that listen to music and can identify it?
Don't forget the plethora of fart sounds that you can store in your own pocket, ready to be enjoyed by all in mere seconds.

The author outlines three arguments for his 'Innovation Pessimism':

1. Growth Statistics - This can be separated between extensive growth (how much is innovation expanding the GDP overall) and intensive growth (is each unit of labour, capital etc being used to its maximum efficiency). Over the past decade or so, the world overall has plateaued, except for the US in the latter. 
2. Innovative Output -  How much invention are we outputting? By invention, the author refers to new patents that not only hit market, but contribute to overall GDP growth. Software has obviously been a big one, but given that most of it is open source (Android is free!), are these figures reliable?
   A 2002 paper identified the biggest contributors to innovative growth as a rise in education attainment and a greater proportion of the labour force being allocated to research. As these plateau, so too will innovative output.
3. 'Evidence of our Senses' - This the most interesting and subjective argument of the three. Have the 'inventions' in our day-to-day lives really improved that much?
   The 1950's-70's saw a huge proliferation in lifestyle innovation - from Japanese manufactured colour televisions and radios to dishwashers, microwaves, refrigerators, medicine, jet engines, again the list goes on.
   However, have cars or planes changed that much since their inception? They still take us from A to B, except quicker and in greater luxury.
   Radio, television, the modern kitchen? Life expectancy has only crept up a few more years in almost half a century, whilst electricity remains sued largely the same way, with the same methods. The internet is the most obvious exception - it has revolutionised the way we interact, pay, store and send information. It is also full of superfluous crap that is largely entertainment, not pragmatism. Mr Thiel of the Founders Fun put it quite eloquently - 'We wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters'.

A very interesting, yet somewhat Americanized argument, backed by a nice combination of quantitative and qualitative factors. Perhaps the pessimism is justified?
If the modern world has taught us anything, however, is that the next big thing is only around the corner...

READ IT HERE

15 February 2013

Another Filosophy Friday on The Daily Quota - best consumed on a Saturday mornings, very much under the weather.

The link for today is fantastic. As you all know, I'm a huge Batman fan. As such, I'm drawn to all things as such - even if it crosses over into other fields.
One of the most seemingly unlikely cross-overs is Batman and philosophy; but lo and behold, M.D. White and R. Arp made it happen with Batman and Philosophy: The Dark Knight of the Soul.

Have a flick through the contents page here - it's fantastic.
Such a treat for any fan of Batman or philosophy, let alone both.

Let me give you an example of one of the topics;
Suppose you were at the reins of a train, and you could pull the lever that would either kill one person, or several people. This is a classic psychological conundrum - the Utilitarian would choose to kill one person instead of several, whilst another might choose to do nothing, thus absolving themselves of any moral liability.
Basically, Is there a difference in killing someone and letting someone die? Does evil prevail when good men do not act?
Do we remember the decision that Nolan's Dark Knight had to make in letting Ra's Al Ghul die, as opposed to breaking his one rule and killing him?


Here's another classic example;
We all know of the Prisoner's Dilemma, right?
Basically, two prisoners are caught, and they have the option to either testify against the other or remain silent.
However, it's a bit risky - what if you stay silent and the other testifies? You end up with a huge sentence and they end up with nothing.
If you testify to save your skin, but they do the same...you both go down for a long time.

Have a look at the possibility matrix to the left, and recall a certain decision that Nolan's Joker made Gothamites make - either blow up the other ship full of people, or risk them doing it first.
Luckily, both boats chose to stay silent.

Hell, this book even addresses Carl Jung's Introvert and Extrovert concepts (Does Bruce Wayne make the sacrifices of Batman for intrinsic benefit, or is he as vulnerable to extrinsic factors such as public opinion, important people etc) and Schopenhauer's Will and Representation concept (Bruce Wayne often sees Batman as an extension of himself, sometimes even converting over completely to Batman - so is the Bat suit an extension of his own will, or still merely a tool towards an end?)







Very, very interesting stuff.
Who says philosophy can't be fun?

BUY OR DOWNLOAD IT HERE

14 February 2013

Roses are red,
You think her divine,
Be wary to cast,
your peals before swine.

Yes, it is indeed Valentine's Day - the day where lovers measure their worth with feats of consumerism. Love, joyous love.

Today's Daily Quota is very much about love - particularly the courting phase. A few months ago the Fashion & Style section of New York Times posted an article titled 'The End of Courtship?'.
It hoped to delve into the perspective of a 20-something Western female, battling against the laws of supply and demand.

This piece consolidates the opinions of several disgruntled females as they discuss how men are no longer able to 'put in the hard yards' of traditional courtship. They wail about being treated as 'friends' on their first dates and they yearn for a time when chivalry was not dead.
The merit in the piece, of course, lies in the extensively reliable sample space of around 6 people; each acting as springboards for the fairer sex.

This article disgusts me, and I post it only to (optimistically) seek solace in a shared opinion. 
Currently, 20-something females hold more relative romantic 'bargaining power' than any other demographic - they have more freedom than in the past, more rights than in the past, less social barriers than in the past, and they find themselves conveniently wedged between the cushion that is equal pay but unequal courtship.
Lo and behold, they don't know what to do with it.
The closed-mindedness, cheap stabs and sweeping generalisations make this piece one of the worst examples of post-feminist dogma I've had the displeasure of reading - which is exactly why I have posted it.
Perhaps I should have saved this article for Sardonic Saturdays?

Am I wrong to place faith in the art of courtship, or am I delusional to believe that romanticism is not an archaic concept? Has Aphrodite, the goddess of love and desire, been replaced by Athena, the goddess of strategic warfare?
Should one digest a copy of Machiavelli's The Prince before a first date, and let the Romantics gather dust?
I certainly hope not.

The article concludes with the beautifully succinct, post-feminism trash that is, what we pass off as, romantic wisdom:
"If he really wants you,", Ms. Yeoh, 29, said, "he has to put in some effort."
Indeed, pearls presented before swine.

READ IT HERE

13 February 2013

This one is incredible.
We all imagine what it would be like to be secluded from the rest of the world, thousands of miles away from civilization. Sometimes, we long for it - but none of us would ever dare to make it a reality.

Today's Daily Quota is a recent piece from The Smithsonian on a family who have done just that in the harshness of the Siberian wilderness - for 40 years.
In fact, they weren't even aware that WW2 had occurred.

Karp Lykov, his wife and their four children had lived in a one-bedroom, hand-made shack in the Siberian wilderness for 40 years before being discovered by a group of Russian geologists looking for oil.
Lykov and his wife had fled the oppressive Stalinist regime in 1936 after his brother was shot whilst labouring under harsh conditions. They took with them their two young children and fled to the secluded, and almost uninhabitable Siberia.

Here they had had two more children, all of which had learnt to read and write with a single Russian Orthodox bible. The latter two children had not seen a single human being, outside of their direct family, for all their lives. In fact, they had never tasted bread until the geologists had found them many years later (the Serbian climate and terrain does not allow for wheat or grain to grow).

Read about their fascinating lifestyle via the article below. Their story is amazing - self-subsistence, chronic famine, a traditional lifestyle and extreme seclusion. Awe-inspiring, I very much recommend the read.
A documentary was also made about the Lykovs; Part 1 of the 3-part series can be found on YouTube here or via the article below.

READ IT HERE

12 February 2013

Today's Daily Quota is a powerful one for those readers that idolize the modelling industry, or models in general. Young ladies, I'm looking at you.

Cameron Russell is an American fashion model with 10 years experience in the industry - a staggering statistic, given her supple age of 25. In a recent TEDx MidAtlantic talk, she discusses the origins of her modelling, and gets quite personal in the process.
Cameron gives brief examples of the real process of a fashion shoot, she gives recent statistics on racial profiling in the industry and she discloses a rarity for her audiences - less-than-flattering photos without the professional touch-ups.

In fact, both the image below was taken on the same day, when she was only a few years into puberty.

Normally, I wouldn't be too swept away but such a talk.
However, it's hard not to respect her for her honesty, her lack of shock value, her epiphanies and the acknowledgement that she would not be able to say such things in a few years time. She describes a modelling career as 'winning the genetic lotto', and she feels almost ashamed for having done so;
"But it was most difficult to unpack a legacy of gender and racial oppression, when I am one of the biggest beneficiaries"

If you want more, she had responded to this blunt, but unsurprising TEDx talk in the most recent issue of Vogue Australia.
The link to the talk itself is below. If it's not one of the most honest, informative 10 minutes of your day, you're doing something right.

READ IT HERE

Note: I did have some problems viewing the embedded video (download worked), so here is an alternative link for those of you that have the same trouble.

11 February 2013

Unless you've had your head in the sand, you would have heard about the use of drones in Afghanistan and Iraq, and even in Pakistan, Yemen, and who knows how many other countries.
In fact, Iran had recently hijacked (US: "it malfunctioned and crashed") a US drone that was discovered in its air space.

Drones are basically unmanned aircraft, sophisticated as hell, that are used for either reconnaissance or precision air strikes. They've been particularly popular with the US due to their unManning-ness (please, someone pick up on that joke) and the fact they seem to provide legislative loopholes to selectively spy on and kill perceived threats to national security.

Today's Daily Quota is a link to a memo, recently linked by NBC News, that details President Obama's rationale for using these drones to target al-Qa'ida affiliates and potential conspirators.
Here's the twist - this would include targets within the USA, including, if need be, US citizens.
This would ofcourse imply that these US citizens are given no trial, no jury, no judicial process as conferred upon them by the constitution.

In this leaked memo, Obama attempts to justify this as constitutionally sound, while others like Julian Assange are urging greater transparency on the post-9/11 world of drone warfare.
Gizmodo has put together a good summary of the document, and relevant 'buzz words' in the proposed reforms:

The document, obtained by NBC News, explains that targets believed to be “senior operational leader[s] of al-Qa’ida” or an “associated force” who “pose an imminent threat” can be targeted by US drones without the need for excessive quantities of paperwork. 

The memo goes on to explain that an “informed, high-level” official of the US government must determine that the target has “recently” been involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities”. The words “recently” and “activities” aren’t defined. Right. 

There are, of course, some further guidelines. Capturing the person in question must be “infeasible” and terminating the target must be performed according to the “law of war principles.” Well, at least that’s something.

Whatever the case, it seems that this news has rattled some cages - as it should.
It would be interesting to see how US citizens and liberal activists react to this news.
It's not too harsh a read, and very informative for anyone that wants to know the legal 'rationale' of such military action on home soil. 

READ IT HERE

10 February 2013

A lazy end of the week, perfect for Superficial Sundays - where we pursue the trivial.

Today's Daily Quota is a personal favourite of mine. What happens when you mix comics and coffee?
Well, you get the brilliantly simple revival of Too Much Coffee Man by satirist Shannon Wheeler.
Ofcourse it's one of my favourites.

TMCM is a caffeine-addicted, anxiety-ridden problem magnet. His misadventures do not involve his caffeine addiction, but they are definitely worsened and solved by it. Simultaneously.
The first issue ever sees our hero TMCM doing (legal) battle with another TMCM, Trademark Copyright Man.
Heartbreaking work of staggering genius.

The following link is to the TMCM Omnibus page on Amazon, where the first few pages can be previewed and the softcover can be purchased.

BUY IT HERE

9 February 2013

Another weekend, another Sardonic Saturday on The Daily Quota - where every silver lining has a cloud.
As fate would have it, I had only discovered of National Curmudgeon Day a week after it had happened. Curse the Gods, I would have made an event out of it!
If you don't already employ this word liberally to describe either yourself or others, you're about to start.

cur·mudg·eon  

/kərˈməjən/

Noun A bad-tempered or surly person.

Synonyms niggard - miser - skinflint - tightwad

Well, better late than never. Today's Daily Quota is perfect for the occasion, and for our Sardonic Saturday - It's an article from The Week about the origins of the word curmudgeon.
What I love about this article is that it's littered with fantastic synonyms that can be used in every day conversation to describe people of ill-repute - scoundrel, malcontent, ninny, fool...the list goes on!

One a very important side note, is it me or is Oscar the Grouch based almost entirely on Diogenes?
They're both curmudgeons, they both live in a cylindrical contraption, they both exists for the sole discomfort of others, and they are both somehow loved and even respected by those around them.


READ IT HERE

8 February 2013

Welcome back to Filosophy Fridays for your Saturday mornings.
Today's Daily Quota is one of the lesser known essays from heavyweight philosopher Bertrand Russell.
It is titled The Einstein-Russell Manifesto.

Russell lived a long, interesting and contrarian life. As a young, middle-class intellectual, he naturally had his opinion on the outbreak of the First World War. He became an active pacifist - supporting Chamberlain in his appeasement of Hitler until hindsight reared its ugly head from the rear.

Whatever the case, he became known as the futurist philosopher of two things - agnosticism and pacifism. In July of 1955, at the onset of atomic weapon mass production, he crossed paths with Albert Einstein. As a major contributor to the Manhattan Project, Einstein had largely regretted his input in the creation of atomic weaponry, and so they had drafted an open letter to world leaders with the intention of persuading them to disarm before it was too late.

The contents of this joint publication are contained below. This combination of authors had resulted in a piece which was surprisingly short, unsurprisingly pragmatic and ultimately fell on deaf ears.
It's surprising that this piece is so unknown, given the authors and their cultural presence. Whatever the case, it's a great snippet of Western culture.
Definitely one to keep in the back of your mind when the water-cooler conversation inevitably turns to nuclear proliferation. I'm prepared, are you?

READ IT HERE

7 February 2013

There are some great scenes in Hollywood history, and many of them are held by one icon - Al Pacino.
One of his most stellar performances is in Scent of a Woman, where he plays a former US Army colonel who was blinded by a careless shrapnel incident. He tags an adolescent boy along for one last mortal hoorah - in the process, bestowing some of his own knowledge about life, love and tango.

Today's Daily Quota is, in this author's opinion, one of the most under-rated scenes of his career - the quaint monologue on women. 
Having written a piece on this topic, and read many many more, I've become very fond of the back-handed romanticism that some writers can bestow upon the fairer sex. 

Thivs scene is a perfect example - his words appear vulgar, his language, in some parts, distasteful. However, he speaks of the female form with such passion; so much so that he becomes almost incapacitated at the thought, unable to go on lest he become overwhelmed with emotion.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. It's not offensive, nor is it risqué - it's that fine line that only few have achieved (in my own literary experience, at least).
Ancient Greek literature, and even their Olympian myths, achieved this perfectly. They would place women on a pedestal as goddesses, but warn of their nature nonetheless. They loved them, and they also feared them.

Pacino engages in one of the most intimate tango scenes of cinema history, and flexes his acting muscles in an iconic scene of stoicism and honour. 
Enjoy this short video, my dear readers. Perhaps you will grasp that fine line of which I speak, or perhaps you won't. Either way, your daily quota has been fulfilled.
Enjoy!


WATCH IT HERE

6 February 2013

The US economy is quite evidently fucked. There is little denying it.
Over 14 trillion in debt for a GDP of 11 trillion and rapidly decreasing. A divided system of politics and populace, an obsolete, dogmatic Reaganomic system, and a social system that is designed to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Then we have the fact that the top 1%  use their wealth and power to pay little to no tax, or divert their incomes to foreign tax havens.
Uh-oh, what is the debt ceiling isn't increased?
What will happen if the US goes over the fiscal cliff?

But wait, US Senate Representative Jerry Nader has a plan to save the day - why don't we just print off a $1 trillion dollar platinum coin?
That's twelve zeros after the one.
Yep, it's precisely that episode from The Simpsons.

Because of a hilarious (read: genius) loophole in the US Federal Reserve laws, they can technically print off a coin 'of any amount'.
Those of you with a background in economics, or minimal fiscal capacity whatsoever, might ask; 'but what about inflation?'.
Yes, Mr. Nader, what about inflation? Well, apparently it won't be that bad since most of the trillion is going overseas.

Now, I'm not saying that this plan can't work. What I am saying, however, is that it's stupid.
Today's Daily Quota is an interview in The Atlantic, discussing this concept. It's quite light-hearted, but also very informative. The interviewer goes into the piece with heightened skepticism, and comes out with more informed skepticism, as will you.
Strange days have indeed found us.

READ IT HERE

5 February 2013

Even the most apathetic of us would know that Australia is in the midst of an online freedom revolution. Well, more of a devolution. Actually, we're on the cusp of one.
With recent news that Telstra will trial P2P traffic throttling, and the under-the-radar upgrade of AFP surveillance powers, the aforementioned observation is difficult to disprove.
This includes Conroy's dumped internet filter plans and the ALRC's frantic revision of copyright laws in the context of cloud technology.
Yep, turbulent times.

In other news, the Federal Attorney-General Nicola Roxon has up and resigned from her role in a very spontaneous manner. In a teary speech, she stated that her actions were to spend more time with her daughter - an excuse that smells fishier than a lesbian bordello.
Although we won't go into that right now.

What she did leave behind was the notorious Federal Data Retention Scheme. This proposal aimed at  capturing the browsing history of every single Australian internet user and retaining this data for up to two years. For national security, ofcourse.
Well, it wasn't that bad. I mean, it only captured the IP addresses, so there was no other way of knowing who the user was. Well, besides those that have their own computer for their own exclusive use. Time to bring out the ol' company names when signing up for internets!
Unsurprisingly, this proposal copped a lot of flak. Even in the light of her resignation, it does not signal an end to this saga.

Alas, I want you, the informed voter, to know as much as you can about this program - especially with the impending federal election creeping ever-closer. Today's Daily Quota is an article from techy kinda-leftist website Delimiter.
It reviews the current (and former) Attorney-General's data retention proposals, and what the future may hold for future AGs and their take on domestic security. This will definitely help you get your head around this whole fiasco.

Winston Churchill once said "The greatest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter". Please don't let that be the case. Be informed, and cast your mandatory vote with some degree of purpose.

READ IT HERE

4 February 2013

We've all heard about the Placebo Effect - all those studies you hear about in journals, in the corner of Men's Health magazine, in interviews or via your GP.
You know, the one where half the test subjects are given painkillers and the other half are given corn syrup tablets (but told they are given painkillers), and then lo and behold, both groups note the same pain relief.

It really is amazing what the mind is capable of, especially when you trick it into thinking things are getting better. I call it delusion, others call it positive thinking, but the underlying concept may very well be the same - the Placebo Effect is very powerful, but seems to defy all medical logic.

Dr. Ted Kaptchuk is an expert at the Placebo Effect.
He has the equivalent of a Ph.D in Chinese Medicine, but has devoted the past 15 years of his life to testing and retesting this effect on unsuspecting patients; in fact, some of them were even told they were taking a placebo and noted positive results. He is the only faculty member of Harvard Medical School without a Doctorate in Western Medicine, and his studies are causing a storm - mainly because they seem to discredit traditional medicine at every turn.

Today's Daily Quota is an article from the current issue of Harvard Magazine.
It discusses Dr. Kaptchuk's eccentric work, his numerous studies, and some external counter-studies that seem to discredit his own results.
Overall, it's a great article - especially reading about all those unconventional placebo-skewed medical results.

READ IT HERE

3 February 2013

Superficial Sundays on The Daily Quota, where we pursue the trivial.

Today's link is a great one. We all love a good conspiracy theory - but the only thing better than a conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theorist. Henry Makow is one of the most vocal out there.
I mean, he's no David Icke, but he's still a lot of fun.

His website, henrymakow.com (formerly savethemales.ca) posts an article every few days about topics ranging from Illuminati, Freemasons, Zionism, New World Order, Jews, homosexuals and many more. All your favourites are there.
However, his speciality topic is feminism; in particular, how feminism is a movement aimed at emasculating males, causing us to become 'pussified', rendering us unable to stand up to our overlords due to our own crapulence.

His feminism theory goes hand in hand with his take on homosexuality - a method of killing off the population by proliferating relationships that do not bear offspring. Also, again, homosexuality is there to emasculate the male and so on.
For instance, yesterday's post was titled 'When Did Gays Become Jews?'.

Admittedly, some of his posts are very well researched, and somewhat convincing. Who knows, he could be right about a few things. Although as it stands, probably not.
But until he's proven right, to the skeptics go the lols.

READ IT HERE

2 February 2013

Welcome again to Sardonic Saturdays on The Daily Quota - where every silver lining has a cloud.

Today's link discusses the recent release of a US Intelligent report on global trends by the year 2030.
Basically, it's the US government's attempt to hypothesize future trends - most of which do sound quite accurate.
This is the report itself, and it's one hell of a PDF file (pedophile?).

It anticipates a shift in power from state actors to individuals and NGOs, a shift from Western to Eastern power blocs, an increasing population placing further strain on resources (particularly in developing countries), and a worsening of climate change.

Hey guys, what's new?

As we can see, the exponential curve is very much taking its toll on humanity. Technology and population are growing exponentially, but resources are staying constant, food output is linear and improvements in technology seem to be addressing the deficiency in fart apps and not the battle against cancer.
Yes, sardonic indeed.

READ IT HERE