It's Not Only Japanese TV

This reminds me of how the スベラーズ were sent to the northernmost region of Alaska for failing to crack the Top 10 of the Oricon charts. Except, well, the スベラーズ were on TV and were paid for the experience.

Apparently Americans can be just as strange.

Slow candy sales mean goodbye Hawaii, aloha Fargo!

FARGO, N.D. – There is an old saying in the sales business: Always be closing. Here is a new one: Always be freezing, if you do not sell enough.

The company that makes Hot Tamales candy offered its sales team an all-expenses-paid trip to Hawaii if it met its annual goals, and a trip to the nation's arctic tundra if it didn't.

The Just Born team did not meet its target and, on Tuesday, about two dozen salespeople gathered inside the 19-story Radisson hotel — the tallest building in frozen Fargo.

Outside, the temperature was 7 degrees. The ground had 2 feet of snow.

Not exactly Hawaii: Honolulu was sunny, and a comfortable 82 degrees.

"Fargo is not what you would think is one of the greatest locales in the United States and technically we didn't make our year," said Dave Bayha, a Just Born manager. "It was somewhat of a punishment."

Would Bayha rather be in Hawaii?

"Um, sure," the Phoenix resident said, laughing again.

The team had a good year, increasing sales from the previous year by 2 percent, said Josh Halpern, the company's director of U.S. sales. The goal was a 4-percent bump.

That earned them the trip to Fargo. Some had to go shopping for real winter clothes, such as furry bomber hats, long underwear and parkas.

They are trying to make the best of it, with a little humor.

They planned tours of two North Dakota wineries and a winter extravaganza with a sleigh ride, tobogganing and hot toddies around a fireplace inside a chalet.

On their first night in town, they went to the VFW in West Fargo for a spaghetti dinner. Five bucks a plate, all you can eat.

Afterward, they hauled an old-school popcorn machine into a conference room and watched a movie. "Fargo," of course. Yah sure, you betcha.

"Watching Fargo in Fargo is just one of those random bucket list things you get to check off," Halpern said. "It doesn't resemble the community at all," he said, laughing. "Maybe a few of the expressions."

The 24 employees from Bethlehem, Pa.-based Just Born have been popular among the locals, too, handing out care packages with treats like Peeps, Mike and Ike, Peanut Chews and Teenie Beanie.

Next winter, if the group fails to reach its goal, they will get an all-expenses paid trip to Rapid City, S.D.

"As a team, this is something we will never forget," Bayha said. "Twenty to 30 years down the road, when we see each other, we're going to say, 'Remember Fargo?'"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101214/ap_on_re_us/us_aloha_fargo

Freaking INSANE

I have various things on the pipeline but life and preparing for Thanksgiving have me completely swamped... but not so swamped that I can't say this:

North Korea, are you freaking INSANE?

The answer, of course, is yes, and has been yes for decades. But seriously. Kim Jong-un might just be crazier than Kim Jong-il, which apparently is possible after all.

And So It Ends

A brilliant bit of practical tracking and anticipation-building.

He may be a politician through and through, but this is beyond real.

Also, I'm sorry if this is incredibly inappropriate, especially considering I took advantage of BBC's generosity for many hours, but the people commenting on the rescue scene had more than a touch of toolishness.

All Cliches Aside

Tonight I have seen the face of courage.


Am I the only person who was concerned that the shaft had to be kicked into place as it began its descent?


BBC is getting its up-to-date information based on the Chilean Mining Minister's tweets. Unbelievable. I don't know whether to be impressed or hysterically amused.

Okay. There is no way BBC could not tell that Florencio Avalos' child is a boy. Of course this pales in comparison to everything, but really...

What Was That About Japan?

Oh ho, United States. Looks like you can't keep track of of your dead people either.

72,000 stimulus payments went to dead people
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER (AP)

WASHINGTON – More than 89,000 stimulus payments of $250 each went to people who were either dead or in prison, a government investigator says in a new report.

The payments, which were part of last year's massive economic recovery package, were meant to increase consumer spending to help stimulate the economy.

But about $18 million went to nearly 72,000 people who were dead, according to the report by the Social Security Administration's inspector general. The report estimates that a little more than half of those payments were returned.

An additional $4.3 million went to more than 17,000 prison inmates, the report said. Most of the inmates, it turns out, were eligible to get the payments because they were newly incarcerated and had been receiving Social Security before they were locked up.

In all, the $250 payments were sent to about 52 million people who receive either Social Security or Supplemental Security Income, at a cost of about $13 billion. Other federal retirees also received the payments, but they were not part of the inspector general's review.

Social Security spokesman Mark Lassiter said, "Inaccurate payments are unacceptable. Social Security's Recovery Act payments were 99.8 percent accurate and we quickly collected the majority of the inaccurate payments. Each year we make payments to a small number of deceased recipients usually because we have not yet received reports of their deaths."

The inspector general for the Social Security Administration has been performing an audit to make sure no checks went to ineligible recipients. The latest report was dated Sept. 24 but was just recently posted to the agency's website.

People were eligible for payments if they were getting benefits during any one of the three months before the law was passed in February 2009.

Dead people were ineligible to get the payments. But, the report said, there is no provision in the law to recover payments incorrectly sent to dead people.

"Based on the failure of the SSA to properly check its records, and Congress' failure to fully think through the provisions needed to govern these payments, SSA lost $22.3 million in American tax dollars," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. "These findings are yet another example of congressional stupidity and a lack of accountability."

The Social Security Administration said that despite tight deadlines, workers accurately processed more than 99.8 percent of the 52 million stimulus payments.

"We worked with Treasury, developed new processes, and began issuing (payments) about 30 days earlier than the legislatively mandated deadline," the agency said in a written response included in the inspector general's report. "This was a major accomplishment for our agency."

The inspector general's report said that if similar payments are authorized in the future, prison inmates should be ineligible and the government should be able to recover payments made to dead people.

The Social Security Administration agreed with the recommendations.

Yay Palladium

Palladium now becomes the most famous metal and element in Japan, and takes over GFPs as the most commonly known advanced science in the country as well.

"The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2010 was awarded jointly to Richard F. Heck, Eiichi Negishi and Akira Suzuki 'for palladium-catalyzed cross couplings in organic synthesis'."

That's cool--I definitely studied this in school and I'm working with GFPs in lab now, so I'm really beginning to understand the basis for awarding the Nobel Prizes. But, as Gerald says: poor Sonogashira.

Equal Protection Under the Law

One of the biggest news stories of the past several days, other than the syphilis experiments unethically carried out in Guatemala, is the suicide of Rutgers freshman Tyler Clementi. While I feel for the anxiety and struggles Tyler must have gone through leading up to his fateful jump, the incident has led me to think more critically about hate crimes and hate-crime legislation, and come to the conclusion that I disagree with the entire premise.

This is not to say that I don't think that what Tyler's roommates allegedly did was awful, or that they were motivated to do what they did in no small part because he was gay. But I do think that ultimately, their reasons do not matter.

I have tried to understand the arguments for hate-crime legislation from the most liberal perspective that sociology could teach me, but I still cannot understand why they are necessary or even fair. The existence of such legislation seems to suggest that the murder or assault of a minority person is somehow more meaningful or punishable than that of someone in the majority. The argument that the government needs to take an active hand to compensate for the disparities that exist in society don't hold up with regards to a committed crime. Perhaps--and that is only perhaps--the government is responsible for instituting preferential measures in order to address persistent inequalities in areas such as education, but I believe that the moment someone commits a crime against another person, all social identity is essentially erased.

In a murder or an assault, there is a perpetrator and a victim. What difference does it make who or what these people are? A person is dead, a person has been attacked. In all such crimes there is a motivating hatred; whether or not that hatred can be placed under a socially tinged classification should not make a difference in how the guilty party is punished. If Tyler had not been gay, but rather simply been an unbearably annoying roommate, would Dharun Ravi and Molly Wei's actions been any less invasive or reprehensible? I think not.

One of the foundations of the United States justice system is "equal protection under the law." The pain for the victim's families is the same regardless of the social group to which they may belong, and the act of harming another human being is the same. And yet hate-crime legislation persistently contradicts the word "equal"...

Impossibly Unpopular

It was offhandedly brought to my attention late last night that Levi Johnston has been polling at laughably low numbers. According to Public Policy Polling (I finally understand the allure of alliteration now, whoa ;) ), 72% of Alaskans view Levi negatively while only 6% view him positively. 6%! Unbelievable, yet believable. For comparison's sake, the most unpopular person used to be John Edwards, whom 72% of North Carolinians (?) viewed negatively and 15% viewed positively. Well, good job, Levi, because you just cut down on that record to a third.

What accounts for this? Clearly one thing is exposure--he and the Palins both love exposure--because without exposure a public opinion couldn't even form. Another thing, I suppose, is the role he has played, or rather has not played, in Bristol Palin's life. I almost always disagree with the reasoning that "'he' got 'her' pregnant," as if more fault and responsibility lies with the male, but Levi has really failed here. Maybe it is what is in everybody's best interest, given the state of his relationships with the Palins, but it is easy to see how he would be viewed as an irresponsible, absentee father who is unable to make two engagements actually come to something.

Personally, what annoys me most is that Levi is running for Mayor of Wasilla. Actually, does it annoy me or amuse me? I mean, how much failure can one city handle?

終戦の日

http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20100815-00000360-yom-soci.view-000

Thanks, Forbes.com!

Coupled with the bright news from Mercer in July 2009, it's obvious that I have chosen all of the right places to live.

In the Land of PC

As it pours outside and I wait for my cells to transform (which really isn't as cool as it might sound):

This has been bothering me for the past several days, ever since it made the mainstream news. Apparently the Australian Aborigines are offended by Oksana Domnina & Maxim Shabalin's OD, which is based on an aboriginal theme. Of course the news would use the photograph of the moment with the most outrageous expressions from Oksana, meant to elicit politically correct outrage:

Copyright AP, I believe.

However there are several problematic points with the Australian Aborigines' anger, and theirs as well as the general public's reveals their ignorance about ice dancing. Without addressing any specific complaint that the Australian Aborigines', ice dancing and ice skating as a whole is as much theatre as it is sport. And I mean that in the most respectful way possible. Although the ones giving the marks are ultimately the judges, who are sitting immediately rinkside, the audience and its reaction is a huge component of ice dance.

To this end, the makeup and costumes of ice skaters in general is often exaggerated (see: Miki Ando) because it helps drive the theme home while they skate at top speed (well, not all of them), especially to those sitting way at the top of the stands. Ice dancing, while highly technical and athletic, is usually the most theatrical of the diciplines and often borderline ridiculous (if not outright so). This Russian team in particular, compared to teams such as Tessa Virtue & Scott Moir and Meryl Davis & Charlie White, tends towards the more ridiculous on the ice dance spectrum and go for the costumes rather than dresses/shirt & pants. Oksana & Maxim's OD this year treats their theme no differently than they have past themes.

1. "We see it as stealing Aboriginal culture and it is yet another example of the Aboriginal people of Australia being exploited. It's been absolutely stolen without our permission and without consultation of the relevant dance groups within Aboriginal Australia. ... It's not just intellectual property. It's straight-out cultural theft." -Sol Bellear, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council
   
   The moment someone exaggerates to this extent, they immediately start losing credibility.
   
   • There is no exploitation of Australian Aborigines occurring. There just isn't. Every year the music of various cultures and persons is used, and the process for using the aboriginal music was no different than for others. If anything, the music of a highly successful program can in fact benefit, with fans (re)discovering music or the movies from which they were taken. After Mao Asada's win at the World Championships in 2008, the piece for her long program was one of the most purchased songs in Japan.
     
   • Choosing a piece of music for a program does not involve consulting the composer; instead, the skaters credit appropriately and indicate whether it is a compilation of two different songs, original cuts, etc.
     
   • Oksana & Maxim did not steal an aboriginal dance. They used an aboriginal dance as inspiration for their OD, much like Tanith Belbin & Ben Agosoto with their Moldavian dance. As above, they did not claim that this was a dance conceived entirely of their own creativity, and nor did they claim that this dance was taken from a different source than "aborigine."
     
   
   
2. "Interest must be expressed in a way that is respectful. The ripping off of our art and songs is not, and nor is this depiction of my culture." -Bev Manton
   
   This, on the other hand, is much more reasonable and thoughtful, and I am sure she has a point. However, I still think that she does not fully understand the style of ice dance, and does not realize that many cultural pieces are "adapted" in exaggerated for the sport. If this is the first time she has fully looked at ice dance, then yes, the OD is probably offensive. The Internet was probably not the best sole source for research on this dance.
   
   
3. There was also a protest on the fact that the costumes involved bodysuits made to make Oksana & Maxim's skin look darker. I have not been able to find this complaint since, so perhaps whoever said it realized that this was a foolish one and withdrew. Kim Navarro & Brent Bommentre also wear dark-colored bodysuits for their Afro-Brazilian dance, and Brent goes as far as to wear a leather headpiece meant to emulate long hair: "As far as the headpiece is concerned, they were trying to find a way for me to have longer hair. I was really hesitant about hair extensions, and I can't grow my hair out fast enough to have dreds." Where's the protest on this one?
   
   
4. In addition, the "body paint" on the costumes has been criticized as looking as if "a 3-year-old child had drawn it on." -Stephen Page
   
   Perhaps to an Australian Aborigine, this is true. However, look at Maia & Alex Shibutani's OD costumes for this season, set to Japanese drum music:
   
   
   Copyright Michelle Harvath
   
   

   The Shibutanis are ethnically Japanese, so they would probably know a thing or two (or at least their parents would) about the culture. Yet their tops are stereotypically designed, and not at all like the solid, dark-colored, open front tops that one usually sees on traditional Japanese drummers. Yet in a world where most people have never seen a taiko performance, the point is made: this dance is Asian. Could the Russians have been more tasteful? Probably. But a point of the similar effect is made through their costumes, and that was reasonably their goal when they were designed.
   
   
5. "First of all, in the ISU rule book there is a list of dances which are allowed for use in the Original Dance competition. In black and white it states Aborigines Dances. When creating an 'Aborigines' dance, we were not suggesting a specific geographic region, but rather a tribute to a place and time before the 'modern civilization.' We had no intent to make the dance specifically 'Australian,' because we realize our limitations to fully understand all the intricacies." -Natalia Linichuk
   
   Well, no one can really know for sure what their intentions were, but she does have a persuasive point. This woman is a force to be reckoned with, evidently.
   

I also found IceNetwork's coverage of this controversy to be slightly distasteful and lacking in journalistic standards. This article, titled "In ice dance, it's a fine line between tribute an insult" and written by Lynn Rutherford, directly addresses the issue and uses the relevant quotes. It gives a clear context for the quotes from Tanith & Ben and Meryl & Charlie--they were asked "What do you think about the controversy over Oksana Domnina & Maxim Shabalin's Aboriginal dance?"--and both teams answered accordingly.

In particular, Meryl answered, "We can't speak for anyone else, but for us, knowing that we didn't know anything about Indian culture going in, it was very important for us to do the research and do the dance justice. We didn't want to offend anyone or do something that was completely off base." It might not be a journalistic masterpiece, but it's fine. Meryl & Charlie come off very well, good for them.

On the other hand, THIS article (Bollywood scores blockbuster in Spokane), published the same day and also written by Lynn Rutherford, reuses the quotes from the other article and without context. (It also uses a terrible pun, but whatever.)

"[Specialists they consulted] broke it down, we worked off the ice, and they helped us explore all the areas of Indian dance. We really didn't know anything about Indian culture going in. It was very important for us to do research to do the theme justice, and know that we were not going to do anything to offend anyone or do something that was completely off base."

This comes in the middle of a discussion of how the dance was conceived, and given the controversy that everyone knew about, it just sounds like a not-so-subtle swipe at the Russians. Well, turns out, Meryl wasn't directly talking about creating the OD after all. Or... maybe this is the original quote, the other article reused it, and she's a little catty. :) But given the nature of the comment and Meryl & Charlie's sportsmanship in general, the first interpretation makes more sense.

But all in all, whatever. Ice dancing is ridiculous, and everyone (should) know(s) that. By continuing this outrage, the Australian Aborigines are giving the OD the serious consideration they insist it doesn't deserve.

2010 Australian Open: Days 0 and 1

Yes, it's already that time of year--the Australian Open has begun! The time difference makes matches difficult to follow live, and more often that not I end up waking up to the result of the key matches, but it's all exciting nonetheless.

I just have to mention Day 0 because that was when Hit for Haiti, Roger Federer's brainchild, took place. It's such a simple idea but so well executed, and it seems to have had an amazing turnout in terms of audience, players, and donations. There was something quite unsettling about Jon Wertheim's analysis that 'This is not the "foundation benefit," whereby you pay your buddies an appearance, hold a lavish party and give the "proceeds" to charity.' (sigh), but he's right--this was a purely charitable event. It makes me wonder why the US Nationals, which started this past weekend (see: previous posts), hasn't capitalized on its opportunity to make a mention of Haiti. Perhaps part of the ticket sales to the gala could be contributed... But anyway, I'm not here to judge, or rather I shouldn't when I'm on the East Coast instead of Spokane.

Onto the actual tournament. Maria Sharapova was upset in the first round by Maria Kirilenko, and I'm not sure if I'm surprised by this result or not. It's hard to tell where Sharapova's game stands right now, but I think I expected a little more from her. And as most others have been saying, her dress was a part disaster, if not a full one:

Sorry for the terrible quality.

Evidently she designed it herself. I guess this is another one of those super-hyped outfits that will be used once (or twice) and then never seen again...

Rafael Nadal also won, as did the other top seeds (Dinara Safina, Juan Martin del Potro, Andy Murray, Andy Roddick)--it's also good to see that Ana Ivanovic, now seeded 20(!), won as well. Day 2 is already underway, and it looks like both Serena Williams and Nikolay Davydenko will win, but sadly (although no surprise) Fabrice Santoro is a game away from losing.

My personal favorites have a tendency to lose, but here's to them and to more drama and excitement over the next two weeks~

The Most Selfish Profit

It's all over the news--in response to bans on toys and jewelry containing lead, Chinese manufacturers have turned to the more toxic heavy metal, cadmium. This is problematic for many obvious reasons, but it still blows my mind that anyone could be so greedy and selfish as to jeopardize the safety of millions of children around the world.

True, many companies often mislead their consumers about the quality and contents of their products, and claiming that something is "organically grown" when it is generally not (see: baby formula, et al.), extolling the "miraculous" healing properties of plants that have yet to be scientifically tested or have already been disputed (see: Noni juice), and disguising certain ingredients under less commonly known names (see: sugar) all deserve punishment or at least some form of regulation. Still, the key difference is that some research on the part of consumers can make them more aware of what they are purchasing, and often these misleading activities cover up for less healthy alternatives, not blatantly toxic ones. What's more, these actions, particularly those of the first two types, rely more on hype and trendiness rather than on simply hoping no one (such as the Associated Press) notices the dangerous truth.

My cousin is two and a half years old, and although I haven't seen her in over a year and she doesn't know who I am, I can't imagine ever doing or creating anything that carried even the smallest chance of hurting her. And, seeing how small, cute, and innocent she is, I can't imagine ever doing or creating anything that carried even the smallest chance of hurting any two-year-old--or a young child of any age for that matter. The owners and managers of these manufacturing plants have children (or a child, I suppose), and if not a child, then a niece or nephew, neighbors, or family friends. They continue to produce small toys and jewelry knowing that these children close to them could be one of their consumers.

Handling cadmium is dangerous enough for the adults who work in these factories. The majority of laborers probably don't know enough about the danger of cadmium to realize that their health problems--particularly cancer, kidney damage, and osteoporosis--could be due to their exposure to the metal in addition to the regular hazards of polluted air, long hours, and crowded working conditions. If there is anybody who knows enough about the metal to protest, then more likely than not he or she is simply replaced by another.

Yet in children, the effect of cadmium is even more critical. Cadmium can result in developmental and mental retardation, and thereby saddle children with irreversible and incurable conditions starting in a period of their lives when they barely know what a hospital is. By knowingly using cadmium in jewelry, the manufacturers are robbing these children of their future, China of its future, and the world of its future. How any factory owner or supervisor can look at a child and still continue to permit the processing of cadmium into jewelry is something I cannot understand. For the transient benefit of an extra margin of profit, these Chinese manufacturers have made safety--and their own integrity--their last priority.

Does life mean nothing to them? Do love, compassion, and honesty remain abstract concepts to which they attach no importance? Does civic responsibility carry no meaning? Evidently the answer to these questions is yes--and I question a society that fails to instill any basic values in its citizens. The transition to cadmium demonstrates that the Chinese factories chose not to understand the basic concern underlying the ban on lead, apparently believing that complying with regulations--instead of ensuring consumer safety--was sufficient.

Yes, every government has a responsibility to check the quality of its goods, domestic- and foreign-made. The U.S. government (and probably several others) displayed a nonsensical lapse in judgment when it passed legislation banning cadmium only in painted toys, and moreover failed to detect that dangerous goods were entering the country. Yet regardless of regulation, every person has a responsibility to society and humanity. A country whose citizens regard themselves as above this responsibility is one that does not deserve to participate in the global community.