Pitepalt

I don’t know what happened to the divine Mrs Tilton. But this is in her spirit, for she used to post subtle recipes for incredibly calorific German food and, while looking for things to say about the Swedish elections, I found a recipe for Pitepalt, a cross between a dumpling and a depth charge:

  • Mix minced pork or beef with a little onion and salt and form into substantial meatballs, one for each dumpling.
  • Shred ten potatoes and drain them. Mix with flour and a little salt till you have a dough.
  • Take a lump of potato dough the size of a tennis ball; flatten it out, and then wrap it round a meatball to make a larger sphere, perhaps the size of the lump of uranium in an atom bomb.
  • Lower these into a pan of boiling water and leave for an hour.

Serve with melted butter and sharp fruit jelly, ideally lingon.

This dish has given its name to a medical condition, Paltkoma, which is the state of reduced consciousness consequent on consumption. I would imagine that a small digestif might be helpful then: no more than half a bottle of aquavit.

Posted in Travel notes | 1 Comment

A German Joke

It’s pretty obvious who said this, but one thinks better of him for it anyway:

The university was also very proud of its two theological faculties. It was clear that, by inquiring about the reasonableness of faith, they too carried out a work which is necessarily part of the “whole” of the universitas scientiarum, even if not everyone could share the faith which theologians seek to correlate with reason as a whole. This profound sense of coherence within the universe of reason was not troubled, even when it was once reported that a colleague had said there was something odd about our university: it had two faculties devoted to something that did not exist: God.

Even the Pope, you see, knows that he should preface his speeches with a joke. This is the one which is aerating Muslims all across the Middle East. It’s well worth reading, actually, both to get a flavour of the way that he actually thinks — and, boy, is he easier to read than the last one — and because it is a very clear statement of his beliefs about the relationship between science and faith. In particular, this …

This modern concept of reason is based, to put it briefly, on a synthesis between Platonism (Cartesianism) and empiricism, a synthesis confirmed by the success of technology. On the one hand it presupposes the mathematical structure of matter, its intrinsic rationality, which makes it possible to understand how matter works and use it efficiently: this basic premise is, so to speak, the Platonic element in the modern understanding of nature. On the other hand, there is nature’s capacity to be exploited for our purposes, and here only the possibility of verification or falsification through experimentation can yield ultimate certainty.

leading towards this

modern scientific reason with its intrinsically Platonic element bears within itself a question which points beyond itself and beyond the possibilities of its methodology. Modern scientific reason quite simply has to accept the rational structure of matter and the correspondence between our spirit and the prevailing rational structures of nature as a given, on which its methodology has to be based. Yet the question why this has to be so is a real question, and one which has to be remanded by the natural sciences to other modes and planes of thought – to philosophy and theology. For philosophy and, albeit in a different way, for theology, listening to the great experiences and insights of the religious traditions of humanity, and those of the Christian faith in particular, is a source of knowledge, and to ignore it would be an unacceptable restriction of our listening and responding. Here I am reminded of something Socrates said to Phaedo. In their earlier conversations, many false philosophical opinions had been raised, and so Socrates says: ‘It would be easily understandable if someone became so annoyed at all these false notions that for the rest of his life he despised and mocked all talk about being – but in this way he would be deprived of the truth of existence and would suffer a great loss’. The West has long been endangered by this aversion to the questions which underlie its rationality, and can only suffer great harm thereby.

Posted in God | 4 Comments

Slo-ooo-w progress

The rate of progress on OOo is glacial; every fortnight or so I get an update on issue 6193, about the utter uselessness of notes in Writer compared to MS Word, and that was opened in June 2002, since when nothing whatever has been done. But even glaciers move, when you’re not watching.

I downloaded, and played with the latest version of NeoOffice for the mac, and there is nothing bad to report. It just installed; just worked; just did everything. Even the python scripting worked, which was rather eerie. In fact, it should work better than on Windows, since it uses the system Python and not a separate copy.

As a final tribute to its integration with the operating system, the keyboard malfunctioned as it should under OS X (confusion among the modifier keys).

Neooffice is an unofficial project, which uses bits of Java to get round the horrors of X11. But looking quickly at the release notes for the latest official build, it looks as if they are about to add a tabbed document interface. I haven’t dared test this. On the other hand, there is a delicious new bug whereby, if you save a document twice in Word format, all the upper-case non-ascii European letters are replaced with squares. Yet it works when you only save it once.

Posted in OOo | Comments Off on Slo-ooo-w progress

Two shorts

Interesting and thoughtful piece from Scott Rosenberg about the difference between facts and stories. He talks about the way in which newspapers need to supply both and will always rely on humans for stories even though the access to facts can be greatly improved by computers.

On the other hand, stories, however credible, need facts. They need facts especially when they seem credible. See Martin Newland’s <mailscience> regurgitation (not on line) </mailscience> of a recent American book which purports to show that there are huge, inborn differences between male an female human brains. Now, almost every one of the factual claims in this book has been shredded in a recent series of Language Log posts; if no one else does so, I should in turn regurgitate them for the Guardian.

The thread that binds these two of course is that there is one thing that newspapers cannot hope uniquely to supply, and that’s opinion.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Two shorts

A thought after a party

The world needs a support group for people like me, who have trouble with faces. Let’s call it “Prosopagnostics Anonymous”. But how will we recognise one another?

Posted in Blather | 3 Comments

Queen Victoria would be ashamed of me

I can often type faster than I think, but that is because I am often a very slow thinker. If a good idea comes to me all in a lump, as they tend to, I write it down on the nearest piece of paper. That’s one reason my desk is covered in the stuff. Anyway, I was just writing something down, and wanted to emphasise a word. So I very careful drew little underscores from each end of it, as I would if I were typing, and then looked at the result, thinking that it ought really to be italic. Only after did I remember that the idiom, in handwriting, is underlining the whole word.

Posted in Blather | 1 Comment

Last pus blow to chanty

I was writing a quickie for Ariel, the BBC in house magazine, about the new Google archive news service and thought I would, you know, check how well it worked. So I typed in “Ampthill Claimant” as an example of the kind of story that is now almost entirely forgotten, but in its day filled a lot of newsprint, even in America. I only got five results — clearly they are not indexing English papers — and none from older than 1976, though the scandal dates from the 1920s. So they have not got back very far with their digitising, either. When I clicked on a link whose text was … claim to the estate of the Baron Ampthill hinged on his contention that he … this year in Ireland at the age of 80 THE NEW CLAIMANT is John Russell, … I got this —

unfortunate OCR.jpg

Followed by a demand for more money if I wanted to know what it really meant. Thanks, Google, but no thanks. This isn’t even Beta.

Posted in Net stories | Comments Off on Last pus blow to chanty

Time on their hands

There are currently on Cafepress 2,030 different slogans, verbal and visual, commemorating the expulsion of Pluto from the register of planets. These are available on 35,100 products. The page I am looking at (thanks, Jeremy) claims to rank them by sales, though I can’t believe that the ones below about 100 have ever sold anything. What matters, though, is that the attempt was made. I don’t know why this one piece of frivolity strikes me as the the perfect summation of a society of abundant capitalism, where people no sooner think of a joke than they try to sell it. File under “Things for which Tim Berners Lee did not receive his knighthood”

Also: a completely mysterious ad on Craiglist. Someone in Venice, California, who wants to have a child by “A wealthy platonic friend” in London. What, in Venice, does “platonic” mean? What is supposed to be the attraction of this offer for the wealthy father?

Posted in Net stories | Comments Off on Time on their hands

on not having opinions

I note that I haven’t blogged, or wanted to, about big stories for a while. In particular, the war in Iraq and the Anglican schism (which does, absurd though it seems, actually matter) have both seemed subjects actively repulsive. I think the reason for this is that we know, in both cases what is going to happen. It’s important. We are going to care, and to regret what will happen. But the big decisions have all been made, and the interesting questions answered. I suppose this is the same impulse as led me not to go on the last big, anti-war march. It was obvious then that whatever other effect it might have, it could not stop the war. If it was going to have any effect at all, it would be to make the war slightly more likely by showing Blair the costs if his gamble was lost.
If you understand Iraq as a colonial war, then it was very soon obvious that the Americans were going to lose, because they would not bear the cost of fighting it. I see that the first reference to “declaring democracy and getting the hell out” as a strategy cropped up here in February 2004. Everything that has happened since then is the ineluctable outcome of choices made earlier. All those people who said the next six months would be decisive were right the first time, however many times they went on saying it, wrongly, at six monthly intervals thereafter.

Similarly, I cared passionately about the whole gay priests nonsense in the run-up to Rowan Williams’ election, and all through the fight over Jeffrey John. But once he had caved in, then, the rest hardly mattered. I can’t claim quite such perspicacity as over the war, because I did not foresee that he would so completely abandon his friends as well as his beliefs.

In any case, there seems absolutely nothing to add about either of these stories. Equally, there are huge stories, like global warming, which aren’t interesting yet because we don’t know what the choices are, or if there are any. In Afghanistan, there has been a rush of stories saying that we can’t go on like this. Either we must retreat, or we must fund the occupation properly and send really large numbers of troops there, not just from the USA and Britain, but from other NATO countries too. Well, if those are the alternatives, it’s bad news for Afghan women, because, obviously neither Britain nor any other European country will spend the blood and treasure that is needed any more than the Americans will. So that’s not interesting. It’s just awful.

What, then, is an interesting story right now? In what fields are the decisions being taken which will shape the world in important ways? There are two additional criteria. The choices have to be clear, at least to the well-informed, and the outcome has to be uncertain, in the sense that we still have a chance to influence which choice is made.

Posted in Journalism | 2 Comments

Google and privacy: it’s worse than that

A friend of mine, a very well-connected professor of computer sciences — he knows who he is, and so, if he’s right, do the CIA, the FBI, and so on — writes about the Google piece last week:

Had only to add that, if one thinks that it’s only commercial stumbles that are now letting this kind of info out — one would be badly off the mark… Like the NSA phone listening, since 2002 or so, the US has been accumulating and using just this kind of detail — all of it, as far as I understand things. Every email. Every link, recorded. Every jot and tittle. We know because we see the grants coming in to [where I work] from the DHS, and other places – it might be that as much as 40% of all computer science research funding is in this area, now that DARPA has slowed down. You can imagine the AOL scenario, magnified a million times.
It’s all happening, right now, even with this email.

The way this is done, he says, is essentially the same way that the US government fdoes its phone mining. The law there said that telephone companies, obviously, where allowed to share data with each other, so the NSA built an entire telephone network of its own, which could then peer with the public one. This gives the government complete access to everything on anyone’s telephone line.

Similarly, he says, the US government has built, like Google, a shadow internet, containing copies of everything it can find – though with the added twist that it also has access to all the traffic passing through the network if it wants. Think Slitscan in the hands of Dick Cheney.

Posted in nördig | 3 Comments