Japan’s earthquake and nuclear power plants

This is scary:

The explosion [at Japan’s Fukushima plant], he said, was due to hydrogen buildup in the steam piping that mixed with oxygen, and that there was no damage to the container with the nuclear fuel. TEPCO has been filling the container with seawater combined with boric acid to cool the reactor, which Mr Edano called an “unprecedented” remedy. Boric acid, as well as being a strong neutron absorber to prevent the nuclear fuel from overheating, will also make the reactor much harder to get running again.

I wasn’t worried until they began taking steps that could undermine the future operation of the reactor. If they are running those risks now, they must really be worried about what could happen if they do not set things right.

Also, it is virtually guaranteed that the company running the plant and the Japanese government will play down the seriousness of the accident to the greatest possible degree. That suggests it may be worse than reported so far.

Choosing nuclear power involves special risks.

VERSeFest 2011

I went to a slam poetry event at Ottawa’s VERSeFest tonight, and it was extremely good. The speakers were very talented, and the crowd was duly appreciative.

For the most part, the poets were very critical of government policy and society in general. I suppose that is normal at these events, which have a certain idealistic revolutionary flavour. At the end, I wished I had a chance to respond to some of the speakers and say that, for the most part, problems persist because they are difficult to solve, not because people are malevolent. More often, they are just focused on other priorities, or blocked by structural constraints and the inherent difficulty of solving enduring problems. All that said, a lack of compassion is definitely one reason why problems like homelessness endure, and poetry is a medium that seems capable of encouraging greater compassion.

This is the first time this particular festival is being held, and it seems to involve a tonne of different events. Tomorrow (Saturday, March 13th) is the last day, with a bilingual poetry event at 1:30pm, Japanese form poetry at 3:00pm, a Dusty Owl Reading Series event at 5:00pm, and a closing ceremony at 7:00pm.

Passes for the day are $10, and available at Arts Court (2 Daly Avenue), The Manx (370 Elgin Street), and Collected Works (1242 Wellington Street).

I have about eight gigabytes of RAW image files from the event to process, but I will definitely put up a link to the Flickr set once I have dealt with them.

‘Track changes’ in calendars

One neat thing about software like MediaWiki (which powers Wikipedia, among other sites), is that it keeps a record of every change that is made to a document. That way, it is easy to see what the history of changes has been and respond when information changes.

It seems to me like it would be very useful to have the same technology in my calendar. So often these days, things get moved around and re-scheduled. It would be useful if I could annotate my calendar to know what is certain and what is uncertain, which appointments have already been rescheduled, and so on.

It would also be useful for situations where something accidentally gets deleted. If I delete my only record of an event, the chances of me remembering and showing up are virtually nil. That is one reason why I maintain a paper copy of my calendar in a page-a-day Moleskine, in addition to the Google Calendar I update from computers and my phone.

On the stability of personality

One of the most interesting questions arising within biology, psychology, and philosophy is: “What are we?”.

We aren’t a particular collection of atoms and molecules, because that is constantly in flux. With every breath we take and meal we eat, we incorporate matter from the world into our bodies. At the same time, we lose matter whenever we exhale or excrete. A carbon or nitrogen atom that is in your brain or bone today could be in your blood tomorrow and in the air or your local river tomorrow. There are probably hardly any of the atoms you were born with still inside your body, and few of the atoms inside your body now will be there when you die.

We also aren’t disembodied souls or spirits. Our minds and the experience of mental life are fundamentally tied to our physical brains in predictable ways. There are structures within the brain that operate the various features of mental life, and our experiences are related to them. These things change in response to physical stimuli, such as exposure to psychoactive drugs or a brick to the head. There isn’t some abstract ‘I’ that enjoys cycling and coffee, but which dislikes intense heat and polka music. Rather, those preferences reflect changeable facts about my mind and brain. If I fell in love with a polka musician, my feelings about the genre could change. Similarly, with a few more spectacular crashes, my ardour for cycling could diminish.

There is one partial answer to the identity question that has arisen from psychology. Psychologists have identified a ‘Big Five’ set of personality traits that vary between individuals but which tend to remain stable for a particular individual over time. If you test a group of young children, you will find that they score differently from one another on the five traits. But if you come back decades later and test the results, they will likely score similarly to how they did as children.

As described by Wikipedia, the traits are:

  1. Openness – (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious). Appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity, and variety of experience.
  2. Conscientiousness – (efficient/organized vs. easy-going/careless). A tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behaviour.
  3. Extraversion – (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved). Energy, positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of others.
  4. Agreeableness – (friendly/compassionate vs. cold/unkind). A tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others.
  5. Neuroticism – (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). A tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability.

Thinking about myself, I can pretty easily estimate where I lie with respect to others on each of these:

  1. I think I am unusually open. If someone offered me an interesting job in Paris or Tokyo tomorrow, I would take it. At the same time, I am not the sort of person willing to devote their entire life to the search for novelty. I do enjoy learning and using difficult words, spending time on reflection, and considering abstract problems. I would find myself hopelessly frustrated and bored in a life with no novelty, even if it was very comfortable.
  2. I also think I am unusually conscientious. I have been following a personal strategy for years that has involved a fair bit of investment and delayed gratification. I like keeping to-do lists, and I rarely miss appointments or allow things to ‘fall through the cracks’. I rarely lose things.
  3. I am on the borderline between introversion and extroversion. At the wrong sort of party (with dancing), I am likely to be at the edge, but I am likely to be right in the middle of a party that is to my liking (with talking). I am generally comfortable around people and open to talking to strangers. At the same time, I definitely need solitude and time to myself. I would never be happy in a life that afforded no opportunities to be alone.
  4. Compared to most people, I don’t think I am especially agreeable. I tend to be critical and judgmental and I do not care very much about feelings for their own sake. At the same time, I think having people of that sort is defensible and necessary. For injustice and wrongdoing to be stopped, there need to be people who will speak out against it. Similarly, if we give excessive attention to how people feel, we risk ignoring the facts in any particular situation.
  5. I am more neurotic than most. I wouldn’t be the person who I am if I didn’t worry about climate change every day. To reverse the tautology, If I didn’t worry about climate change every day, I would not be the person who I am. I don’t usually feel much anger, but I do get anxious and sometimes depressed. I worry a lot, and my moods vary a great deal.

All this seems like an important part of the answer to the identity question. These personality traits tend to remain stable across the course of a normal human life (if you get a railroad spike through your head all bets are off about the stability of your personality). They are not substantially altered by common but important occurrences like adolescence, emergence into adulthood, marriage, reproduction, or aging. Even though the traits probably arise from a combination of genes and experience (studies suggest that about half of the explanation for how we score is genetic), this nonetheless seems like a valid and useful way to understand the meaning of an individual.

Precedents and interpretation on privilege

Those following the news may find it interesting from a legal and historical perspective to read up on the precedents involving privileges and immunities within the Parliament of Canada.

The most authoritative text on the subject is probably House of Commons Procedure and Practice. It includes an entire chapter on privileges and immunities. It makes being a Member of Parliament sound pretty good, though the rights of the House as a collectivity far eclipse those of individual members.

If you really want to read up on the rules of Parliament – specifically the Confidence Convention – O’Brien and Bosc recommend:

For further information, see Forsey, E.A. and Eglington, G.C., “The Question of Confidence in Responsible Government”, study prepared for the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons, Ottawa, 1985. Also of interest are the First and Third Reports of the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons (the McGrath Committee) respectively presented to the House on December 20, 1984 (Journals, p. 211) and June 18, 1985 (Journals, p. 839), as well as Desserud, D., “The Confidence Convention under the Canadian Parliamentary System”, Canadian Study of Parliament Group: Parliamentary Perspectives, No. 7, October 2006.

Or you could have a life and not be a total procedural nerd – your choice.

Radio frequency ID security

Contact-free cards and authentication tokens have become common. These are the sort of things that you put close to a reader on the wall in order to open a door or perform a similar function. People use them to get into parking garages and offices, and even credit cards now allow you to pay without swiping or inserting your card. Of course, all this creates new security risks. All of these cards can be read at a moderately long distance with inexpensive hardware, which is one reason why it is a bit crazy that these chips are being put into passports. Furthermore, cloning these radio frequency identification (RFID) tags is often quite easy.

Your standard RFID tag is just a little chip with an antenna. When it receives a signal on a particular frequency, it chirps out its name. The card reader says: “Any RFID tags out there?” and it says: “12345678abc” or whatever string it contains. The string is transmitted in clear text, and it is always the same. Anyone with a device that can program RFID tags can easily copy it. These sorts of tags exist all over the place. An office tower might have a database listing the code inside the RFID tags used by each employee. It would then check the database each time someone used a card, to make sure the number was on the list.

This system can easily be attacked. Just stand outside a building with an appropriate antenna and recording equipment and you can capture the code from each person’s tag as they go in. You can then copy whichever you like to make your own access card.

More sophisticated tags use a challenge-response authentication protocol. That means they take an input value, perform a mathematical operation on it, and generate a response which they transmit. For instance, an absurdly simple rule would be something like ‘multiply input by two’. Then, the reader would say: “3” and any card that replied “6” would be accepted as valid. These tags tend to require a battery to run their computing hardware, so they are relatively rare.

This is harder to attack. You need to figure out what the rule is, and they are often cryptographic. That being said, the cryptography used is often either proprietary (which usually means ‘bad’) or out of date. With access to a few tags and some knowledge, it may well still be possible to reverse-engineer the algorithm being used and clone tags.

In addition, this kind of system can be attacked in real time, using a man-in-the-middle attack. Suppose I am in line at the grocery store, about to pay. I take out a dummy wireless credit card, while I have an antenna concealed in my jacket sleeve. The clerk’s RFID reader sends a challenge request, which my antenna picks up. I then re-broadcast that request with more power, so that all the tags nearby chirp up. Suddenly, everyone in line who has a wireless card is offering to pay for your groceries. Re-broadcast one of those responses back to the clerk’s card reader and you suddenly have free groceries. I suspect something similar would work with the more high-security access cards used by some offices.

Not all cloning is necessarily malicious. Phones are increasingly sophisticated radio transmitters and receivers. They can transmit voice calls on various frequencies, as well as access WiFi networks and interface with Bluetooth devices. Somebody should make a phone that can transmit and receive on the common frequencies used by RFID cards. Software could then be used to record the contents of a person’s existing cards. Instead of carrying one fob for your car, one card for work, one embedded in your transit pass, and a credit card, you could just program the functionality of all those RFID tags into one device.

Of course, doing such a thing would reveal how easy it is to copy RFID cards in the first place. That’s all it would be doing, however – making it obvious. Anybody who is malicious and capable can already copy these cards, though consumers often assume that they are secure (like they assume their cell phone calls cannot easily be intercepted by moderately resourceful crackers). By revealing how insecure most wireless authentication technologies are, this cell phone software could play an important role in raising awareness, and maybe even lead people to pressure politicians to get rid of those stupid wireless passports.

I mean really, does that have any non-evil uses at all? A passport clerk can easily scan a barcode or swipe a magnetic strip. Making them readable at a distance only helps spies and criminals. How easy would it be to build a bomb and connect it to a machine that constantly scans the vicinity for wireless-equipped passports? You could program it to explode when more than a set number of nationals of any country you dislike are within a particular distance. Alternatively, criminals could take advantage of chatty radio passports to identify promising targets for mugging.

Selling F15s

Does it strike anyone else as strange and somewhat objectionable that the United States is selling the F-15 attack aircraft to Saudi Arabia? Before being supplanted with the F22 and F35, the F15 had unmatched capabilities. As such, you need to wonder whether the United States would be better off keeping sales of the old plane restricted and being less bothered about developing new generations of attack aircraft during an era where they already possess complete air superiority.

A cynical perspective is that this all comes down to the arms industry. They can’t sell F-15s to the United States anymore, so they want new customers. Even better, they know that the United States will feel threatened by F15s in the hands of potentially unstable regimes like Saudi Arabia, and that the US will respond by purchasing more F22, F35s, and other hardware.

It’s like a gun shop that sells its newest weapons only to its best customers, but progressively makes each new weapon available to anyone with the cash. That keeps the best customers locked on an upgrade pathway and keeps weapon designers in business. Unfortunately, it also makes the world a riskier place, and wastes substantial resources that could be better applied to reducing poverty or building a more sustainable society.

Scanner recommendations?

I am happy to say that I continue to endure without a printer at home, though that does sometimes make it difficult to print my Greyhound tickets. What I do think I need, however, is a scanner. Such a machine would let me keep track of my correspondence more easily and also let me archive documents that could be important in the future. It could also be useful if I do find myself enrolled in a doctoral program.

I don’t want to spend a fortune, if possible, and these are the key features I need:

  • Works with Mac OS (ideally with no need for the vendor’s software)
  • Scans text nicely to TIFF or PDF
  • Can scan photos acceptably
  • A multi-sheet feeder would be nice, but is not absolutely essential
  • Relatively small and portable

I don’t need to be able to handle documents larger than legal size, and I don’t need to be able to scan photos at commercial quality. There is definitely some chance I will be moving cities at some point in the next year, so it would be good to get something that wouldn’t be too difficult to bring along with me.

So, do readers have any suggestions?

Taxation isn’t slavery

There is an argument that libertarians sometimes make that equates taxation to slavery. They say that your money is a representation of your time, since you need to put in time to earn it. As such, someone who takes your money is effectively taking your time, and thus making you their slave.

The problem I see with this argument is the claim that taking up any part of your time is akin to slavery. For someone to utterly dominate your life is a much worse situation than for someone to periodically demand a quantity of your time. More than a few societies have been structured in exactly that way: people paid their taxes in the form of labour or military service. Calling upon people to sacrifice some of their time, in exchange for getting to live in a good society, is a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

Thus, taxation is not immoral, because it is not akin to slavery.