Screenshot

Weblogged by Amanda
maxsroom@gmail.com

Portal
Archives
Background
Sites of the Week
Polls & Discussion

Get notified when I post;
sign up for my Update List

  My other sites:
Chained Links
Book Reviews

comments by YACCS

 

10.25.2002

  We Won! Cornell graduate students voted down the proposed CASE/UAW union in a landslide of 1351 against to 580 for! Wooooo! If you're interested in the history of the anti-CASE/UAW effort, check out our website at AtWhatCost.org. I've been spending basically every waking hour on this for the past several weeks (and many hours that should not have been waking...) so I'm thrilled. I got to be at the vote itself and watch them count the ballots. It was the closest I've been to a democratic process in person, and it was thrilling.

I'll talk about this more in the next few days I'm sure, but for now I just want to give my thanks and love to Allen, Anne, David, John, and Mariajose. We did it, guys!

  We won!

9.29.2002

  To wrap up Banned Books Week, I just thought I'd point out some of the excellent works which ended up on the list of the 100 most frequently challenged books of 1999-2000, the most recent list I've seen published:
  • The Chocolate War, Robert Cormier (#4)
  • Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck (#6)
  • Harry Potter series, J.K. Rowling (#7)
  • The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger (#13)
  • The Great Gilly Hopkins, Katherine Paterson (#21)
  • A Wrinkle in Time, Madeleine L'Engle (#22)
  • In the Night Kitchen, Maurice Sendak (#25)
  • Anastasia Krupnik series, Lois Lowry (#29)
  • Blubber, Judy Blume (#32)
  • Julie of the Wolves, Jean Craighead George (#38)
  • The Pigman, Paul Zindel (#44)
  • A Light in the Attic, Shel Silverstein (#51)
  • Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret, Judy Blume (#62)
  • The House of Spirits, Isabel Allende (#67)
  • Summer of My German Soldier, Bette Greene (#89)

  reading:
The History of Lace; Mrs. Bury Palliser

9.24.2002

  I'm not sure anyone can disagree that there is over-hype of AI by pundits who claim it's the next technological magic bullet, particularly those who subtitle their books When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. However, any article which starts its argument with "First, AI is a technological backwater." needs to seriously look at what definition of "AI" they are using, and if they are limiting themselves to only the "building mechanical people" definition, they need to be slapped around. And then shown the ongoing research in and applications of learning, and machine vision, and planning. And then slapped around some more. Oh sure, the article later concedes that there is "narrow" and "generalized" AI, but the former is so quickly dismissed as to suggest it has narrowed itself beyond even deserving the label AI. Of course, anyone whose best slam against Kurzweil's Ramona is: "Ramona uses natural language processing, a technology that's been around for decades, although Mr. Kurzweil claims to have improved it." doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. [via RRE]

Schools certainly have to choose books with an awareness of not offending or traumatizing students, particularly when dealing with young children. Banning Shakespeare, or requiring permission slips from parents, particularly when talking about high school seniors is absurd. Almost as absurd as calling Twelfth Night "alternative lifestyle instruction".

MACBETH
We will proceed no further in this business:
He hath honour'd me of late; and I have bought
Golden opinions from all sorts of people,
Which would be worn now in their newest gloss,
Not cast aside so soon.

LADY MACBETH
Was the hope drunk
Wherein you dress'd yourself? hath it slept since?
And wakes it now, to look so green and pale
At what it did so freely? From this time
Such I account thy love. Art thou afeard
To be the same in thine own act and valour
As thou art in desire? Wouldst thou have that
Which thou esteem'st the ornament of life,
And live a coward in thine own esteem,
Letting 'I dare not' wait upon 'I would,'
Like the poor cat i' the adage?

MACBETH
Prithee, peace:
I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dares do more is none.

LADY MACBETH
What beast was't, then,
That made you break this enterprise to me?
When you durst do it, then you were a man;
And, to be more than what you were, you would
Be so much more the man. Nor time nor place
Did then adhere, and yet you would make both:
They have made themselves, and that their fitness now
Does unmake you. I have given suck, and know
How tender 'tis to love the babe that milks me:
I would, while it was smiling in my face,
Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums,
And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you
Have done to this.

MACBETH
If we should fail?

LADY MACBETH
We fail!
But screw your courage to the sticking-place,
And we'll not fail.


  reading:
Persuasion; Jane Austen

knitting:
red & black "ski sweater", Knitting Without Tears, Elizabeth Zimmermann

premier watching:
Survivor (wooo!)
Firefly (undecided)
Push, Nevada (ummm, huh?)
CSI: Miami (stick with the original)

9.23.2002

  To celebrate National Banned Books week, I'll be featuring a different banned book each dady I remember to update. My favorite banned books site is the Online Books Page Banned Books Online site, though ALA has a nice one too. I'll start off with Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, banned at one time by South Africa's apartheid regime and required reading this year for incoming Cornell freshmen. Of course, everyone here remembers that Frankenstein is the scientist, not the monster...
By one of those caprices of the mind which we are perhaps most subject to in early youth, I at once gave up my former occupations, set down natural history and all its progeny as a deformed and abortive creation, and entertained the greatest disdain for a would be science which could never even step within the threshold of real knowledge. In this mood of mind I betook myself to the mathematics and the branches of study appertaining to that science as being built upon secure foundations, and so worthy of my consideration.

Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by such slight ligaments are we bound to prosperity or ruin. When I look back, it seems to me as if this almost miraculous change of inclination and will was the immediate suggestion of the guardian angel of my life -- the last effort made by the spirit of preservation to avert the storm that was even then banging in the stars and ready to envelop me. Her victory was announced by an unusual tranquillity and gladness of soul which followed the relinquishing of my ancient and latterly tormenting studies. It was thus that I was to be taught to associate evil with their prosecution, happiness with their disregard.

It was a strong effort of the spirit of good, but it was ineffectual. Destiny was too potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible destruction.


 

attending:
Dave Barry lecture

reading:
Persuasion; Jane Austen

9.19.2002

  It's been a working-vacation here, with traveling and writing and keeping up on the fight against graduate student unionization and many other stresses. For those who know why I was out of town - things have gone great. As an upshot, I actually spent two entire weeks without doing a spot of websurfing and I didn't even miss it. This is doing great things for my productivity. And over a week of 7AM mornings has totally reset my sleep schedule. I've come back a whole new me. Unfortunately for you, it's a me that wants to get work done, but I'm sure that won't last long. And of course, through cleaning out my inbox I've come across a couple of items worth mentioning...

They're letting just anyone into our orbit now, it seems. Astronomers last week found a new Earth moon, though they haven't determined if it's rock or space-junk coming home to roost. Either way, it's got a 50-day orbit around us. I didn't even know, as the article mentions at the end, that we've already got a natural satellite besides the moon - Cruithne. There's a very nice information page on Cruithne out of the Queen's University Astronomy Research Group. [via Skunkfuckers]

As I mentioned above the group I helped kick off is working its collective asses off on getting the word out on why Cornell graduate students shouldn't unionize under CASE/UAW. In the latest fun news, the graduate student government, who have passed a resolution of neutrality on the issue, are planning on hosting a website at which a "static debate" on the issue can be displayed. Each side will get a chance to write in answers to student-submitted questions, and also briefly rebut the other side's answers. Sounds great - a one-stop information clearinghouse for people who don't have the time to search through multiple sites. Problem? The proposal designates the administration as the official anti-unionization group. Yet another attempt to make this "students vs. administration" and push under the rug the growing number of students who oppose unionization. I'd be less cynical about their motives, but the currrent president of the graduate student assembly was elected president while concurrently being paid as a UAW organizer, though of course that was not disclosed to the voters, and many other members are also active in the unionization effort. Excuse me if I am slightly skeptical of the grand neutrality of the group's leadership.

 

reading:
The Portable Dorothy Parker
Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason; Helen Fielding
The History of Lace; Mrs. Bury Palliser
The Winding Stair; Daphne duMaurier
Northanger Abbey; Jane Austen

8.27.2002

  As a whole separate can of worms for the unionization debate, it seems that even students that want a union are trying to get as far away from UAW representation as possible, though they aren't necessarily succeeding. I knew that UMass Amherst had had their union made into an administratorship, but I only learned last night that at UCSB graduate students aren't being represented in negotiations for their own contracts, though they are being asked to strike. A whole separate, independent union, United Student Labor, has been set up, but the UAW is saying that legally they are the only group permitted to bargain with the university. Things sound very bad:
The UAW is calling for a strike authorization vote because UAW contract negotiations with the UC have failed to produce a contract. However, the people that the contract negotiations and the related strike authorization vote will affect most--that is, UCSB graduate students like you and me--have not had any input into this strategy. As many of you already know, we no longer have any elected representatives on the UAW bargaining team and, since November, the UAW has not even allowed us to observe the local negotiations here at UCSB. Furthermore, the UAW staff have refused to provide any substantive information on the proceedings of the negotiations (e.g. to GSA President Grace Credo). And despite our repeated objections, the UAW has so far ignored our insistence that important contract items such as our right to strike, our protection from discrimination, and a variety of other important topics not be negotiated away without our informed consent.
While the original union representatives did resign, due to conflict with the UAW, it is outrageous that new representatives were not recognized. This belies any claims that the UAW will leave graduate student issues up to the graduate students, and are only involved as a provider of money and legal resources. The UAW will have the legal right to step in, and it has shown itself willing to.

I once heard a union activist say "I'd rather have other graduate students determining my contract than the administration." Well, I'd rather have my contract in the hands of Cornell than the UAW.

 

reading:
The History of Lace; Mrs. Bury Palliser

8.26.2002

  The Cornell Daily Sun had a sadly one-sided, and occassionally incorrect article on unionization in its first edition of the semester, including the false title Graduate Students To Elect Union Reps; we only elect representatives if we first vote to form a union. Of course, the article ignores that there might be any graduate student opposition, simplifying the situation to one of a fight between graduate students and the administration. I suppose, with that view of the world, it is a reasonable jump from Cornell's agreement not to appeal the election, but hopefully the vote isn't as sure as all that. Certainly, anecdotal evidence suggests that students signed cards either not understanding that they implied support for the union or in order to get union activists out of their hair.

Also interesting in the article:

Facing similar student unionization movements, Columbia and Brown universities appealed the NYU case and are currently awaiting a decision from the full NLRB.

"If the Brown and Columbia appeal is victorious and we haven't signed a contract, then we could be back to square one," said Robb Willer, grad, another organizer of the CASE/UAW.

So, part of the motivation for a quick union vote is to push a union through before the NLRB decides we aren't actually eligible for unionization. This makes Cornell's concessions even more surprising and conciliatory.

And, because I'm hoping to push some Google points its way, I'll mention again that 'At What Cost?' is reaching out to graduate students concerned about unionization at Cornell.

 

reading:
The History of Lace; Mrs. Bury Palliser

8.25.2002

  My weblogging time over the past couple of days has been taken up with a real-life project, but at least it's one with a web presence. At What Cost? is a group of graduate students who are concerned about the current unionization process taking place at Cornell. You can go there to read about some of the concerns the group has; we've tried to put together a comprehensive and consise list. I'm very interested to see what kind of response it draws, if any. Right now, there's no way to tell how much support the union has. At the least, I hope the site forces the union people to answer some concrete questions they've been avoiding.

Next time I find a piece of free time, though, I'll probably use it to play with The Google Quiz. Play with Google, win Google swag. What could be better? [via Anita's LOL]

With minimal artistic license, a snippet of this evening's conversation:

Guy on TV, to skinny girl: You're a stick figure!
Them, to me: You're not a stick figure.
Me: No, I'm three dimensional.
Them: I'm so big, I'm four dimensional!
Me: Yes, you take up time and space....

 

reading:
Treasure Island; Robert Louis Stevenson
Human Croquet; Kate Atkinson
The History of Lace; Mrs. Bury Palliser

Previous Entries  

 

 

 

Subsequent
Entries

 

These pages are Copyright 1999 -2002. Do not copy or redistribute any of the content on these pages without express permission. Direct any questions to maxsroom@gmail.com.