Solzhenitsyn on violence and falsehood

“We shall be told: what can literature possibly do against the ruthless onslaught of open violence? But let us not forget that violence does not live alone and is not capable of living alone: it is necessarily interwoven with falsehood. Between them lies the most intimate, the deepest of natural bonds. Violence finds its only refuge in falsehood, falsehood its only support in violence. Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose falsehood as his PRINCIPLE.”

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1970/solzhenitsyn-lecture.html

Important critique of Noakes’s irresponsibility

Nathan Geffen has written a very important critique of Tim Noakes’s increasingly wild and conspiratorial claims. Noakes has not only promoted his unproven dietary advice as evidence-based, but portrayed the majority view and criticism of his claims as a “medical hoax”. His vocal supporters on social media tend to be non-scientists who do not cite evidence, but Noakes’s credentials, showing just how irresponsible an abuse of his scientific reputation his unsupported – and now actively dangerous anti-science – claims are. He should be held to account by the scientific and academic community for this betrayal of the trust placed in him and for the damage he is doing to public health and the public understanding of science.

http://groundup.org.za/article/tim-noakes-and-responsibility-experts_2175

NYT on Mailer’s description of Kennedy

I find the parallels with Obama’s detachment striking:

In 1960, Esquire magazine commissioned Norman Mailer’s first major piece of political journalism, asking him to report on the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles that nominated Kennedy. Mailer’s long virtuoso article, “Superman Comes to the Supermarket,” came as close as any book or essay ever has to capturing Kennedy’s essence, though that essence, Mailer candidly acknowledged, was enigmatic. Here was a 43-year-old man whose irony and grace were keyed to the national temper in 1960. Kennedy’s presence, youthful and light, was at once soothing and disruptive, with a touch of brusqueness. He carried himself “with a cool grace which seemed indifferent to applause, his manner somehow similar to the poise of a fine boxer, quick with his hands, neat in his timing, and two feet away from his corner when the bell ended the round.” Finally, however, “there was an elusive detachment to everything he did. One did not have the feeling of a man present in the room with all his weight and all his mind.”

Mailer himself doesn’t know “whether to value this elusiveness, or to beware of it. One could be witnessing the fortitude of a superior sensitivity or the detachment of a man who was not quite real to himself.”

Source: New York Times

The New MacBook Pro: Unfixable, Unhackable, Untenable

When Apple dropped the MacBook Air to $999 in 2010 to match the price point of the MacBook, they gave users a clear choice: the thin, light, and un-upgradeable MacBook Air or the heavier, longer lasting, more rugged, and more powerful MacBook. Same price, two very different products. At the time, I wasn’t very happy with the non-upgradeable RAM on the MacBook Air, but I respected that Apple had given their users a choice. It was up to us: Did we want a machine that would be stuck with 2GB of RAM forever? Would we support laptops that required replacement every year or two as applications required more memory and batteries atrophied?

ource: Gadget Lab | Wired.com.