I interned many years ago at the Helsinki Commission congressional office in DC, and the first task of every morning was to review the dailies for any news items pertaining to human rights offenses in my region of specialization. I'd review large stacks of newspapers, cut them out, and make copies for distribution (riveting work). Most government agencies begin the day this way, I imagine, and the Homeland Security Department is no exception. To simplify this task, they have commissioned researchers at Cornell, the University of Pittsburgh, and the University of Utah to develop software intended to sift out bad press about the US and its leadership in foreign publications. The software will generate a "sentiment analysis," that is, a roster of "potential threats to the nation" (read about it in the NYT). The executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press finds this "creepy and Orwellian." I'd add infeasible. I don't see how we can rely on a bit of software to gauge the appropriate weight given to subjective text and the context in which it is written. On the other hand, as research into this will cost taxpayers $2.4 million dollars, I figure that the publishing industry should get some of this data. Maybe we can generate some book ideas from it.
I interned many years ago at the Helsinki Commission congressional office in DC, and the first task of every morning was to review the dailies for any news items pertaining to human rights offenses in my region of specialization. I'd review large stacks of newspapers, cut them out, and make copies for distribution (riveting work). Most government agencies begin the day this way, I imagine, and the Homeland Security Department is no exception. To simplify this task, they have commissioned researchers at Cornell, the University of Pittsburgh, and the University of Utah to develop software intended to sift out bad press about the US and its leadership in foreign publications. The software will generate a "sentiment analysis," that is, a roster of "potential threats to the nation" (read about it in the NYT). The executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press finds this "creepy and Orwellian." I'd add infeasible. I don't see how we can rely on a bit of software to gauge the appropriate weight given to subjective text and the context in which it is written. On the other hand, as research into this will cost taxpayers $2.4 million dollars, I figure that the publishing industry should get some of this data. Maybe we can generate some book ideas from it.
From Matt: The scriptwriters made quite a few changes from the book, but they were all for the best - and booklover though I am I have to admit that its better to see magic than to read about it.
From Mina: I adore this film. Monsieur Hulot’s very modern sister and brother-in-law don’t know what to do with Tati’s charmingly untidy and bungling protagonist, who inhabits a world where meaning is still more important than appearances.
From Carey: A must see Hayao Miyazaki’s anime is Laputa: Castle in the Sky, originally released in 1986. A fantasy film that explores the altruistic and compassionate nature of humans, aspects lost through repeated exposure to power, technology, and the complexities brought by the combination of the two. 
Comments