A Citizen's Guide to Indiana

Masson's Blog

Almost everything we do is governed by the clock

by 22 Comments

In a comment to a prior post, Jim B. said, “Almost everything we do is governed by the clock.” That’s something we take for granted nowadays, but worth thinking about.

In pertinent part, Jim said:

Perhaps the most under appreciated innovation of 19th century America was the time zone system. Originally used by the railroads for their scheduling purposes it soon became accepted world-wide. Almost everthing we do today is governed by the clock. Modern society would be impossible without a uniformed time system. The Super Bowl kick-off at 6:25 EST is a case in point.

The concept is very simple. 24 hours in a day and 24 time zones around the globe. The zone system was a compromise between practicality and sun time by which each location set their clocks to noon or 12 o’clock when the sun was at its highest. In theory everywhere inside a zone is no more than 30 minutes from sun time.

This reminds me of a part of a class I took under the very excellent IU Communications Professor, Harmeet Sawhney. We were discussing Lewis Mumford and his discussion of how profound an impact the clock had on society. A handy passage from another work:

The clock “dissociated time from human events and helped create the belief in an independent world of mathematically measurable sequences ” As Mumford goes on to explain:

When one thinks of the day as an abstract space of time, one does not go to bed with the chickens on a winter’s night: one invents wicks, chimneys, lamps, gaslights, electric lamps, so as to use all the hours belonging to the day. When one thinks of time, not as a sequence of experiences, but as a collection of hours, minutes, and seconds, the habits of adding time and saving time come into existence. Time took on the character of an enclosed space: it could be divided, it could be filled up, it could even be expanded by the invention of labor-saving instruments. Abstract time became the new medium of existence.

There is a fair amount of irony to the history of the clock. Apparently it was invented, or at least improved quite a bit by Benedictine monks who wanted a device that would help them more accurately keep their prayers. But, in the end, it created a less organic and more mechanical world view. It was hugely important to the advance of science, since the ability to measure time is critical to many types of empirical observation. The scientific world view, in turn, has greatly damaged the primacy of religious devotion in our society.

Back on the subject of time zones and Daylight Saving Time, when we further disassociate our activities and notions of time from the course of the sun — e.g. ignoring the position of the sun when designating “noon,” we continue the process of divorcing ourselves from being organic parts of the world.

Super Bowl today

by 11 Comments

It’s finally Super Bowl Sunday, and thank goodness. I’m not terribly original saying this, but hoo-boy, I am tired of the inane “news” coverage for the past two weeks. I don’t find coverage of the celebrities going to the Super Bowl exciting or entertaining. I find it to be a little depressing. It reminds me how different the Super Bowl is than other football games. The other games are about football fans going to a game. The Super Bowl is something else with the fans and even the game being almost incidental.

Stampede Blue continues to have the best Colts coverage around. (And, no, they don’t pay me to sing their praises.) In particular, I got a kick out of this exchange between Big Blue Shoe & Windy City Gridiron.

And, finally, a little fun with Photoshop (not mine, I just thought it was cute):
Bear Hunt

Definition of Hoax

by 9 Comments

For some reason this Mooninite in Boston scare has really captured my imagination. It is a cautionary tale about how we are spending our security dollars. If, after all this time and all this money, we have a security apparatus in place that needs to shut down Boston to determine that a Lite Brite magnet of a cartoon character flipping the bird is not dangerous, we have real problems and our money probably hasn’t been well spent.

But, that’s sort of the lesser of my concerns. More disturbing, I think, is the media terror porn industry. I’m reminded of Kent Brockman asking a scientist, “Should we panic?” Response: “Yes, yes we should.” A commenter on Boing Boing had a comment on the insistence of media types and government officials using the term “hoax” to describe what happened here:

Next, let’s all get out our dictionary and look up “hoax”, shall we? Because while “War of the Worlds” was a hoax, this was not. There was no subterfuge involved, and no effort made to convince people that these devices were bombs. If I see a scary looking tree out my bedroom window, think it’s a monster, and then discover upon closer inspection that it isn’t, it doesn’t mean the tree has perpetrated a hoax against me. What it means is that for a moment I took leave of my senses. And just because I’m embarrassed about it doesn’t give me the right to go cut down the tree.

While there are legitimate security threats out there, we have to be concerned that there is a massive security industry out there that has to justify its existence, there are media companies that can sell more ads if they have you scared and watching, and we have a population that demands perfect safety. Sort of a toxic, expensive mix that probably doesn’t use our resources in the most efficient way.

Update Wonkette has an update on the prosecution of the two unfortunate punks who apparently hung the Mooninite lights:

The harmless cartoon Lite Brite thingies might just be harmless cartoon Lite Brite thingies, but the prosecutor still has to be very tough and extra-crazy in such a terroristic situation: “Assistant Attorney General John Grossman called the light boards ‘bomblike’ devices and said that if they had been explosive they could have damaged infrastructure and transportation in the city.”

Yes, and if prosecutors were actually barrels of shit wrapped in dynamite, courthouses around the country could be severely damaged and extremely unhygienic.

Washington Post on extended DST

by 9 Comments

The Washington Post has an article on extended Daylight Saving Time beginning this year entitled Clocks’ Early Spring Forward May Bring About a Few Falls. It mainly focuses on the technology related headaches caused by the change. For example, airline schedules will have to be revamped, particularly with international flights. And, in certain situations, failure to get the time right could have severe consequences — the focus again being on airlines. There is a brief mention at the end about the increased morning darkness the expansion will entail.

Daylight Saving Time will begin on March 11 this year. Last year it began on April 2.

Number One in the Hood, G.

by 3 Comments

Holy overreaction, Batman! Cartoon promo causes panic. Electronic displays (magnets with lights) of one of the Mooninites from Aqua Teen Hunger Force giving the finger caused Boston officials to panic and shutdown highways, bridges, and a section of the Charles River. Nine other cities managed to notice similar displays without freaking out.

Reading a news report trying to describe Aqua Teen Hunger Force is kind of amusing:

Turner Broadcasting, a division of Time Warner Inc. and parent of Cartoon Network, later said the devices were part of a promotion for the TV show “Aqua Teen Hunger Force,” a surreal series about a talking milkshake, a box of fries and a meatball.

I also like how the words chosen by the story give a fig-leaf of credibility to the Boston reaction. Instead of magnets, they’re “devices.” And, they were “planted” throughout the city. Planting devices sounds so sinister.

stAllio! has a good analysis.

SJR-7 – The meaning of paragraph (b)

by 10 Comments

This Constitution or any other Indiana law may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

(Keep that passage in mind as you read the following).
Senate Joint Resolution 7 – The proposed Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage and prohibiting same sex couples from being granted any of the legal incidents of marriage was passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. A copy of the vote is here. It passed out of committee on a party line vote.

Advance Indiana and bilerico both have posts on the subject, particularly the dissembling in which proponents are engaging with respect to subsection (b) of the proposed amendment.

Micah Clark of the American Family Association has said:

SJR 7 does not prevent the legislature from creating civil unions, what it does do, is prevent an unelected, runaway judge from telling the legislature that it must reject 200 years of state law and centuries of common wisdom and embrace homosexual marriage. SJR 7 does not take away any rights that do not currently exist under state law. All SJR 7 does is allow the people of Indiana to decide this issue, instead of a court or an ACLU lawsuit.

Senator Lubbers, a proponent of the resolution, has said:

[I]t is my opinion that this resolution does not prohibit legislators from passing laws to provide new protections [based on sexual preference.] Subsection B of this resolution speaks to the powers of the judiciary and not the actions of the legislature. Likewise, I do not believe, based on the testimony I heard and my personal study, that SJR-7 prohibits the establishment of domestic partner benefits by employers.

Both of these statements ignore the pretty fundamental requirement that judges interpreting the Constitution are required to look at the plain meaning of the text. The text of SJR 7, SECTION 2(b) reads as follows (yes, I’m posting it again for emphasis):

This Constitution or any other Indiana law may not be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.

At it’s root, this means no law may be construed to require the legal incidents of marriage be conferred on unmarried couples. It’s remarkable that Mr. Clark and Senator Lubbers can, with a straight face, tell people that this passage does not tie the hands of future General Assemblies or that it does not prevent civil union laws. I suppose in a very technical sense, Mr. Clark is correct. It does not prevent the General Assembly from passing civil union laws. They can pass any damn thing they want. Courts will simply be powerless to enforce such laws.

I gave my interpretation of the proposed amendment several days ago:

But, the proposed Constitutional amendment goes much, much further than the current Indiana statute by prohibiting any Indiana law from requiring a legal incident of marriage to be conferred upon an unmarried couple. In other words, as I read the proposed amendment, if there is a right that is an incident of marriage, Indiana law is not permitted to extend that right to same sex couples. Think of marriage as creating a bundle of rights. This amendment not only says that the bundle can’t be extended to same sex couples. It’s saying that if there is a stick in that marriage bundle, same sex couples cannot be given the same type of stick. In my mind, that is simply abusive.

[tags]SJR7-2007, culture wars[/tags]

IU beats #2 Wisconsin

by 3 Comments

Kelvin Sampson’s Indiana Hoosiers beat #2 Wisconsin. Indiana is a solid Big 10 team playing at home, but still, that’s pretty huge. Indiana scored 45 second half points to overcome a 2 point half-time deficit and win 71 to 66. A.J. Ratliff led the way with 20 points, including 4 from 6 behind the 3 point line.

Bills passing the House

by Leave a Comment

A number of bills passed the House by healthy margins today:

HB 1018 – increasing the maximum speed limit of a school bus from 55 mph to 60 mph. Passed 90 to 8.

HB 1027 – The minimum wage bill, increasing the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.50 by 9/1/08. The bill also doubles the inheritance tax exemption from $100,000 to $200,000. Passed 71 to 29.

HB 1075 – Individual development accounts. Adds repair of a primary residence as a permissible use of an “individual development accounts” and tweaks some of the dollar amounts involved with IDAs. Passed 98-0.

HB 1119 – Prohibits the Department of Revenue from charging a fee to a custodial parent who seeks to seize the federal or state income tax refund of a parent who is delinquent with child support. Passed 97-0.

HB 1165 – Provides an income tax credit to a taxpayer that installs an auxiliary power unit in the taxpayer’s semi-tractor. Passed 96-0.

HB 1183 – Authorizes the transfer of service credit and contributions from the 1977 police officers’ and firefighters’ pension and disability fund to the public employees’ retirement fund (PERF) for appointed police and fire chiefs. Passed 97-0.

HB 1208 – Education programs for veterans. Provides free tuition for 124 semester credit hours to a state school to veterans of the armed services who suffer a service related disability while serving between 9/11/01 and such time as the President declares an end to the War on Terror. Passed 99-0.

HB 1364 – Reestablishes the sentencing policy study committee. Passed 98-0.

HB 1546 – Provides that a military discharge record is not available for public inspection and copying. Allows the veteran who is the subject of the record, a veterans’ service officer, an employee of the Indiana department of veterans’ affairs, a funeral director, and other persons under a court order to have access to the record. Passed 95-1. (Rep. Murphy was the 1 nay vote.)

HB 1722 – Coal gasification tax credits and cost recovery. Provides that a facility that produces synthesis gas as a substitute for natural gas is eligible for a coal gasification technology investment tax credit. Requires the utility regulatory commission to allow a utility that purchases substitute natural gas to recover any costs arising under the purchase contract through rate adjustments. Amends the definition of clean coal and energy projects to include a project using coal to produce substitute natural gas. Passed 84-11.

On Liberty and Discrimination

by 30 Comments

I thought this was a very interesting exchange between Mike Kole who was posing a question to Branden Robinson. (I would also direct readers to Mike’s thoughts on the limitations of democratic governments.) So, as the guy with his name on the blog, I’m exercising my liberty to move Branden’s response to the front page. (Though, more seriously, I recognize that much of the value of this space comes from the thoughtful posts of the commenters. So, here or any other time, let me know if you’re unhappy with the way I use a comment.)

(Mike Kole): How do you reconcile one’s right to choose who they associate against prohibitions against discrimination?

Remember that a right cannot negate a right and have both survive.

(Branden’s response follows)
The subject no doubt demands an essay or more to elucidate fully, but in the interest of brevity (a mistress I serve mercurually at best), let me offer you the guiding principles I’d apply:

* There is such a thing as a public space. Unlike radical propertarians, I do not reject the notion of a commons (in the physical or abstract senses), and do not insist that every square inch of land on this planet be the property of some individual, with right of exclusion to everyone else.

* On the other hand, I do believe each individual does have a right to some area of exclusive use, to which they can retreat when stressed, invite friends and confidantes, and otherwise assert control over an intimate space.

* I find exclusive use to be fundamentally incompatible with operating a retail enterprise wherein one seeks the custom of strangers.

* Economic theory illustrates that markets operate most efficiently when market actors are rational and well-informed.

* Actual market actors, whether as individuals or as organizations, are frequently anything <em>but</em> rational and well-informed.

* Efficient markets are desirable because they ultimately empower individuals to do more with the resources they have.

* It is therefore a societal good to increase the amount of rationality and information in the marketplace.

* You can’t force people to learn or be rational.

* You can, however, through legal prescriptions and proscriptions, encourage (or compel) them to behave as if they were rational and/or informed.

* Such compulsion should only be undertaken where the benefit is worth the infringement on individual liberty.

* There is no easy formula for making such evaluations. The popular will, as well as fundamental individual rights, must be seriously weighed.

* Discrimination against gays and racial minorities is irrational (and frequently ill-informed, grounded on stereotypes or myths, including religious myths).

* Discrimination against gays and racial minorities makes the market less efficient.

* An individual has a fundamental right to exclude whomever he/she chooses from his or her private exlcusionary zone.

* A private exlcusionary zone does not include, e.g., a retail business, as covered above.

* Individuals have a right to transact commerce in public spaces.

* It is acceptable for the society (acting through persuasion, protests, picketing, or petition of their elected representatives) to discourage this form of irrational market behavior, on behalf of the individuals being irrationally discriminated against.

That’s longer than I had hoped, but I hope it is useful to you to illuminate my values and my approach.