Unhappy lists

The National Geographic website contains plenty of wonderful reports and pictures. This makes the website well worth visiting regularly. The website also now contains two new unhappy lists. One is the ten most polluted places in the world: La Oroya (Peru), Noril’sk (Russia), Linfen (China), Sukinda (India), Chernobyl (Ukraine), Kabwe (Zambia), Dzerzhinsk (Russia), Vapi (India) and Sumgayit (Azerbaijan)

The abandoned lead mines in Kabwe

It is all too easy to see that pollution has occurred somewhere else (preferably far away) and to forget that pollution has occurs as part of larger global system where even those of us in unpolluted countries are responsible and will be affected by the consequences.

The second list is the announcement of the most endangered species of 2007. These are the Western Lowland Gorilla, Chinese river dolphin, Egyptian vulture, Santa Catalina Island rattlesnake, Banggai cardinal fish, Gharial and Coral. This list is the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. There website is another which is well worth visiting both for their images and the sobering information.

Banggai cardinal fish

Turkey Images

The Sile campus is on a hilltop and the student room I am staying in has an excellent view of the Black Sea. Here is the sun rising over Sile.

Early Sile

Early

sile2.jpg

Bit later

sile3.jpg

Almost morning 😉

Impossible Solutions

Like many European countries Sweden has arrived at the sensible conclusion that female genital mutilation is wrong. Male mutilation (circumcision) is still permitted. Sweden has criminalized female circumcision but the problem is how to enforce such a prohibition.

The first easy step is to ensure that hospitals, medical facilities and doctors do not perform the procedure. The next step is also reasonably easy to achieve and that is to prevent “amateurs” from performing the procedure.

The problem arises when attempting to prevent parents from taking their children abroad and carrying out the mutilation. Every so often a bright eager politician or spokesperson states loudly that certain groups of parents should not be allowed to take their children out of Sweden or that if they do then the children should be examined upon their return.

Fortified and justified with horrific images of mutilated females such cries often receive a great deal of nodding and concerned humming from the largely uninformed public. Such suggestions however are, despite their good intentions, fraught with harsh consequences for society at large and the individuals involved.

First there is the inherent racism of singling out specific groups due to their ethnic background. No matter how finely tuned the mechanism – This is racism plain and simple. Second there is a level of child abuse in the actual examination. No matter if the brutal act has been carried out or not – examining a young child in this way (either to just check or to secure evidence) is a form of child abuse. This can often be compounded by the fact that the young child may not understand what the (well intentioned) medical team is attempting to do. Third the effect of checking unwilling and possibly terrified people in this manner does not have a good effect on any of those involved.

In a recent case in Sweden the Discrimination Ombudsman is now claiming damages for a family whose ten-year-old daughter was subjected to such an examination after the family returned from a trip to Africa. As it turns out the girl had not been circumcised but everyone involved has simply assumed that this was the case based upon the ethnic background of the family. They were all found guilty and had to prove their innocence.

Preventing female circumcision is an important task but it must be balanced against the social costs that mistakes such as these entail.

Publishers lobby against Open Access

The AAP/PSP has launched PRISM (Partnership for Research Integrity in Science & Medicine – read the press release) which seems to be nothing more than a lobby organization against Open Access. Among the more strange arguments (actually commonly used by opponents to OA) is that OA will ruin the peer-review system. The press release states:

Critics argue that peer reviewed articles resulting from government funded research should be available at no cost. However, the expenses of peer review, promotion, distribution and archiving of articles are paid for by private sector publishers, and not with tax dollars.

The idea of peer-review is that the articles should be reviewed by other researchers in the same field since they are the most competent and familiar. Like most other academics the task of peer-review is a challenge, an opportunity, a drain on precious time and a learning opportunity. Therefore, it is a task done, for the most part, with great seriousness (but maybe not enthusiasm) – and most importantly it is done for FREE. In other words the academic carries out this work while being paid from someone other than the publisher. Open Access will not harm the peer-review system since the system does not rely on the publishers.

For a much better and deeper rebuttal of the arguments in the press release read Peter Suber’s response to their arguments.

Update/Additional info:
According to Boing Boing at its launch the Prism website included copyrighted images used without the owners permission.

Regulating Violence

Is the regulation of violence in video/computer games censorship? Or is it a question of protecting the innocent? Naturally paternalism in all forms includes a “pappa knows best” attitude however there are cases of censorship/control/paternalism which we can accept and other forms which we tend to react against.

The forms of Internet censorship (more here) displayed by states such as China and Saudi Arabia are usually criticized as forms of censorship unacceptable in democratic societies while they themselves argue the need to protect their cultures and citizens against the corrupting influences online. It is, it may seem, a question of perspectives.

Then what of the regulation of violent computer games? Are computer games supposed to be seen as forms of speech to be protected? Or are we on a dangerous slippery slope when we start excluding forms of speech? The New York Times has an article showing that the US courts tend to find laws against computer game unconstitutional.

Considering the US approach to Free Expression this is not surprising. The European approach – in particular the French, German and Scandinavian models could not be as clear cut in this question. This only means that the US is against censorship and feels the cost of this decision is worth it, while many other jurisdictions feel that the damage caused by this extreme acceptance of free expression may cause discomfort and hardship to individuals and groups beyond the eventual benefits of the speech.

The ever eloquent Judge Posner is quoted in the article:

“Violence has always been and remains a central interest of humankind and a recurrent, even obsessive theme of culture both high and low,” he wrote. “It engages the interest of children from an early age, as anyone familiar with the classic fairy tales collected by Grimm, Andersen, and Perrault are aware. To shield children right up to the age of 18 from exposure to violent descriptions and images would not only be quixotic, but deforming; it would leave them unequipped to cope with the world as we know it.”

The problem is that there is often great value (moral rather than economic) in quixotic pursuits and the practice of subjecting people to hardships in order to prepare them for eventual future hardships is really only useful in military training and never a satisfactory way of raising children.

Spanner in the Works

Tomorrow is my first day at work in Lund so I am taking the early train down. Unfortunately a very aggravating incident occurred tonight. The person who was going to rent me a room had apparently decided not to rent out the room. Unfortunately she didn’t think it was important enough to contact me and tell me about her decision.

This means that I have a ticket to Lund and two full days of appointments but nowhere to live. I feel the urge to swear loudly but since it will not make any difference I have not bothered to do that.

I am really pissed off…

Social Norms

Sweden likes to think of itself as an enlightened place. In particular when talking about gender roles. And to give Sweden its due – we have come a long way. That is why I was particularly amused when I saw this piece of graffiti. The artwork is an adaption of a typical sign on the road marking a pedestrian lane. It portrays a father walking with his daughter.

The artists adaptation of the sign shows the child dreaming of walking together with a man and a woman. I presume this to mean that the child longs for a complete family. I have never reflected upon this sign before but the artist made me think of several things at once.

First: Despite our progress in gender roles it is more often the woman who takes care of the children and therefore the sign on the road portraying a man and child shows gender roles as they are not. This can be interpreted in a friendly manner to mean that this is a vision of a better future where the father pays a more active role in child rearing but most probably it is an attempt to portray men in a better light.

Second: The child dreaming of walking with a male and female. If the image of the father and daughter can be seen as a portrayal of life as it is not then the dream of the family consisting of father, mother and child is a re-enforcement of a socially acceptable norm vis-a-vis the heterosexual family. Is the artist aware that by critiquing one social norm she/he is re-enforcing another?

Third: The child is the one dreaming of family. The male has no such thoughts. Significant?

Forth: Is the child’s longing for a mother figure a cry for security or normality?

All these questions from a drawing on the pedestrian lane. In addition to this the artist has received a response. From the thought bubble showing the child’s dream or longing rises another bubble with the words “hate him” written in Swedish. Is this the child’s thoughts? Is it the woman’s thoughts? Or should this be seen as a comment from the society around this little group?

It’s amazing what a morning walk can bring…

When I shut my eyes…

I can still feel the warm summer breeze while walking in the shade of the trees. Then I open them again and remember that I have marking to do before term begins in a couple of days…

Wish I was still here…

How DRM Becomes Law

Cory Doctorow has written a short must read article on how DRM becomes law in Information Week. I know that there is a lot of stuff out there which is must-read but DRM is really important. It has already reached a point where the regulation of our access and use of technology is controlled not by a transparent process of law and regulation but by the interests and technology of those who manufacture technology.

Imagine if road traffic where regulated by the groups who made asphalt, air-traffic by airplane manufacturers and what you could say on the phone was controlled by the mobile phone companies! Nobody would agree to that. And yet we accept DRM.

By the way, Cory also has the most decorated laptop I have ever seen. I just had to take a picture of it in Dubrovnik.