Archive for July, 2007

links for 2007-07-31

Leave a Comment

LS9 promises ‘renewable petroleum’ | Gristmill: The environmental news blog | Grist

LS9 promises ‘renewable petroleum’ | Gristmill: The environmental news blog | Grist

Picture a liquid fuel that is derived from the same feedstocks as cellulosic ethanol (switchgrass, sugar cane, corn stover) but contains 50% more energetic content and is made via a process that uses 65% less energy.

If these guys can do half of what they say they can, then I say invest. Now. Their proclamations put them way ahead of the curve as far as industrial microbial production is concerned. Their claim to tunable products based on manufactured organisms is, frankly, very hard to believe.

Leave a Comment

Judge Permits eBay’s ‘Buy It Now’ Feature – New York Times

Judge Permits eBay’s ‘Buy It Now’ Feature – New York Times

In his ruling, Judge Friedman said the company was not irreparably harmed because it continued to make money from its patents, either by licensing them outright or by threatening litigation against those it believed infringed upon them.”MercExchange has utilized its patents as a sword to extract money rather than as a shield to protect its right to exclude or its market share, reputation, good will, or name recognition, as MercExchange appears to possess none of these,” he wrote.

The truth.  It burns.

Leave a Comment

Saving Energy

Earlier I posted in a del.icio.us link that Blackle was now my new home page. Turns out that this would have made sense in 1995, but now that I am completely LCDelcicously displaying my stuff it is no longer relevant. nOnoscience has the details.

Back to igoogle then.

Comments (2)

links for 2007-07-27

Comments (1)

links for 2007-07-25

Comments (2)

Comment is free: Harry Potter: the economics

Comment is free: Harry Potter: the economics

The low opportunity cost attached to magic spills over into the thoroughly unbelievable wizard economy. Why are the Weasleys poor? Why would any wizard be? Anything they need, except scarce magical objects, can be obtained by ordering a house elf to do it, or casting a spell, or, in a pinch, making objects like dinner, or a house, assemble themselves. Yet the Weasleys are poor not just by wizard standards, but by ours: they lack things like new clothes and textbooks that should be easily obtainable with a few magic words. Why?

The answer, as with so much of JK Rowling’s work, seems to be “she didn’t think it through”. The details are the great charm of Rowling’s books, and the reason that I have pre-ordered my copy of the seventh novel: the owl grams, the talking portraits, the Weasley twins’ magic tricks. But she seems to pay no attention at all to the big picture, so all the details clash madly with each other. It’s the same reason she writes herself into plot holes that have to be resolved by making characters behave in inexplicable ways.

This matters. If the cost of magic isn’t well defined, how do we know what resources, other than plucky determination, Harry needs to defeat Voldemort? We certainly can’t rely on his mental acumen; he’s spent the last two books acting like a brain-damaged refugee from The Dirty Dozen.

I especially like that last clause – a concise summary of an earlier paragraph:

JK Rowling is not, to put it mildly, known for her seamless plotting or the gripping realism of her characters, most of whom spend the latter books pointlessly withholding information from each other that, if shared, would end the installment somewhere around page ten.

Now begins my impatient wait for the paperback release.

Leave a Comment

Older Posts »