What Everyone Needs to Know about Derivative Financial Instrument in Deep Space

Absolutely nothing.

Five foods to never eat - time wasting infomercial

The five foods are

• orange juice
• margarine
• artificial sweeteners
• wheat bread
• soy products

Or low-fat muffins or healthy cereals or something like that, but there is no clear list in the infomercial video that is flooding the internet right now.

I post this blog just because the title "5 foods to never eat" eat annoys me. It is clearly written as a sensationalist catch phrase to attract viewers who are prepared to waste 30 minutes of their lives and then buy products from the company behind the video.

It is a good idea to google around for health benefits for different foods.

It is not a good idea to list foods to never eat, as all humans are different and we have different dietary needs depending on our age and health.

Bananas contain potassium, and that can be good for you.

Disclaimer: I have not watched the video myself. All I write above are things I have collected from google searches on the video. If you read this blogpost until here and are upset that I made you lose three minutes of your life, it is at least less than the 30 minutes the infomercial takes.

Ten Questions Atheists cannot Answer

1. How did life arise on earth?
2. How many galaxies are there in the universe, exactly?
3. If there was nothing before the Big Bang, how did it know when to start?
4. What’s the evolutionary advantage of dental caries?
5. Did Cambrium end on a Thursday?
6. What was Jack the Ripper’s real identity?
7. Can’t the frogs in my garden shut up, so I can get some sleep?
8. Can God create a wall so high that he cannot jump over it?
9. Where did I leave my slippers yesterday evening?
10. What on earth is going on in creationists’ minds?
11. Wasn’t this supposed to be just ten questions?

Superfluous University Degree

You do not need a degree to succeed in life. You can replace one with

• hard work 
• unique talents
• a large amount of luck.

If you cannot guarantee these three, you are probably better off with a degree.

An Efficient Circle

In my sister's company there was a division that was incredibly productive last year. They produced tons of memos and presentations and product plans. Unfortunately, no result of all this ever reached any customer. 

There were three departments involved in the release cycle, and they depended heavily on each other. Doug, the head of Delivery, was stuck waiting for Eric, head of Effects to produce output, which Eric could not possibly come up with without input from Filip, head of Fagocytosis. Filip was all eager to provide all that was needed, and each week he sent a reminder to Doug to deliver the necessary information for Filip to provide his tasks.

At the end of the year, an external consultant delivered a report in which he was very pleased with the information flow between Doug, Eric and Filip. There were no less than 156 mails sent between them during the year, each containing reminders that they were waiting for each other's deliveries.

Venus transit 2012 in France

If you observe the 6 June 2012 Venus transit in France, these are the times you should remember:

5:50. Sunrise. The transit has already started.
6:37. Venus starts exiting the sun.
6:55. Venus has fully exited the sun.

Even though astronomy is supposed to be an exact science, I'm as agnostic as ever here, that is all the figures here are approximate, as far as I'm concerned. 

Some further tidbits:

• Don't look at the sun. When the sun rises, it is very unpredictable how bright it will be with the current weather conditions. It is possible that you could look at it immediately after sunrise, but that is likely to change very quickly. So, don't look at the sun.
• You probably will not see very much. Venus is just a tiny dot on the sun.
• If you want to be confused by much more facts, check for example the web site of the Observatoire de Nice and this local transit time calculator. 
• Some web sites call this the 5th June Venus transit instead of the 6th. That is because the transit starts when the time has not yet struck midnight in the Americas.
• It is probably going to rain.

Update: It did not rain, but it was cloudy.

♀

Stealing IP only from those want to be stolen from

What are the rules of the game for the people who promote free downloads of movies and music?

I can see that there would be room for musicians and film makers who release all their material for free so other people can copy it and enjoy it. I can see how the artists would benefit from the attention and appreciation they get, and from the fact that people can listen before they buy. I can see millions of people paying to go to the concerts with those artists and freely paying for the material on online stores out of sheer gratitude. I can also see that the results might be better if left to true enthusiasts who believe in their art than the industrially produced movies of Hollywood and big music companies.

However, I cannot see that it could be my decision if a particular artist should handle his/her music in that way.

If a movie company invests in a new movie based on the assumption that people should pay for it every time they watch it - in the cinema or on their own devices, then, surely, it is not up to me to change that business assumption by downloading the film for free from some channel the movie company does not control?

If a musician hates making tours and wants to live on selling their music only on recorded media, then, how can I take the decision that this musician should give away their music for free to me?

Isn't the inevitable conclusion that it is not only illegal, but also immoral, to acquire intellectual property for free against the express wish of the producer?

If all media was free, then we would limit the production of movies that require people to pay. We would limit the music that depends on payment.

But on the other hand, this does not mean that the protection of the artist's rights has to be a top priority of the state. It does not mean that harsh punishments and infringements on freedom of speech are excused.

It just means that we should follow the rules of the game.

Why does Charybdis send the Stocks up?

It is pretty clear that the Greek cannot go on spending like they do. They have to cut down, because there is no money to spend.

On the other hand, it is very unlikely that the recent austerity measures will actually help their economy. They will slow it down. The measures will lead to increased poverty and probably to increased unemployment. Having a lot of unemployed Greek will not help any economy - the Greek or any other one.

Now, as the Greek parliament accepts the austerity measures that will sink their economy, the stocks of the world go up. Is that really the right direction?

Scylla and Charybdis. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I have a feeling that the stocks go up not because the investors think what is happening is good. Perhaps not even because it is the lesser of two evils. But because now, at least, there is less uncertainty.

Optics in Renaissance Art

I just watched a program about the so called "Hockney–Falco thesis", which claims that the explosive development of renaissance art largely was due to advances in optics and new techniques for mirrors and lenses for camera obscura. The controversial bit of the theory is basically the word largely.

It is well known that artists did use optics to project pictures on to canvases, like in the 16th century picture below from a "Sketchbook on military art, including geometry, fortifications, artillery, mechanics, and pyrotechnics". (Source: Wikipedia commons.)

The controversial bit is just how much it was used, and if it was crucial to the explosion of life like pieces of art from the renaissance and onwards. And I do not care. I'm agnostic.

Regardless, it is interesting to consider the possibility that already at the time, there was a technical competition between artists. Those who could afford the best optical equipment could achieve the best paintings, just like you today can achieve much better photos with a DSLR camera than with a phone camera. There may have been discussions already at the time, which tools were best, like we today discuss the advantage of high resolution over noise reduction in dark pictures.

Besides, a large number of objects must have been real. When we see a magnificent lute in an old still life, it is very likely that the artist really had access to a lute in order to project it onto the canvas. It was probably rare that he painted something he had seen in the past from memory.

The artists could project different objects on top of each other, and paint one person one day, and call in another person to be projected onto the same canvas another day - each part being photorealistic in isolation. But just like when we today cut and paste layers in Photoshop, one had to pay attention to make sure that the different parts fit together realistically.

It is said that when Matteo Ricci in 1601 introduced Western paintings to the Chinese emperor Wànlì (万历, 萬曆), there were people at the court who said that the paintings were admirably life like, but it was not art. If the paintings indeed were made with optical aids, the Chinese may have perceived them like we perceive holiday snaps next to a Renoir or Picasso.

The Italian painter Giovanni Niccolo taught painting in Japan at the end of the 16th century. His pupil Jacopo Niva (倪一誠) executed religious art at several locations in China, like a copy of a Virgin of St Luke for a church in Beijing and decorations for a church in Nanchang. Matteo Ricci noted that to the Chinese, Niva's pictures seemed more like sculptures than paintings. I know of no evidence that Niva actually used optical projections for his paintings, but even if he did not, his paintings built on a tradition that partially included optical projections. The perceived hyper-realism could explain the Chinese reactions.

Proof that God does not exist

There is no room for God. There are things we do not know in the world, but there are no mysteries only a god could explain. As science potentially could explain everything, there is no purpose with a god, and a god without purpose does not exist.

That's a pretty good proof, isn't it?

Luckily my faith is strong, and I believe in God, even though I have proof he does not exist.

Resistance is Futile

Certain victories stand out. Today I have seen two dozen things on the internet that were blatantly wrong, and I resisted the temptation to answer any single one of them.

Will power!