probabilityfields

I had to deliver a check to my new landlord and needed to kill some time before we met, so I stopped into the Half Price and I found this collection of four Bergman screenplays. I’ve been wanting to read some of his stuff for a long time, so I was super excited. But I quickly slipped into existential dread, as Sarah’s photo clearly illustrates.

Right now I’m sitting in the corner of a conference room inside Dave & Buster’s. I’m sipping an ice cold Dos Equis and using the free wi-fi while a roomful of business types does their networking thing. I’m here for work, a side job. In a little while I’ll get up and hit the record button on my camera. Then I’ll sit back down for about 45 minutes and continue sipping my beer. Phew, hard work. I wish I could get three of these gigs a week. I’d be set.

UPDATE: So it didn’t go quite as easy as I’d hoped. The forty minute presentation dragged out to about eighty minutes (tapes are sixty). The microphones weren’t working, so I’ve got audio that barely goes above the background noise of video games and music. And the second speaker didn’t believe in podiums so he just paced back and forth while he spoke and I had to chase him around the room by panning back and forth. The tape could be a disaster, I haven’t brought myself to look at it. Oh, and a tree limb fell on my car because I got the only space with shade. Sigh…still, I was in a good mood. Oh, and Sarah and I got a new apartment. Posts on that to come soon!

In this NY Times opinion piece, Krugman sets out to debunk the claim that America will be transformed by Barack Obama, arguing that America has already been transformed, and Obama’s nomination is the evidence for this. As the NYT resident liberal, Krugman supported Hillary Clinton, and now it’s good to know he’s being an adult about her loss by trying to take the wind out of Obama’s sails.

Krugman’s beef with Obama is that he’s too quick to forget the Boomers who fought and protested for the racial equality that made his nomination possible. Without citing any examples, he also points out that we have yet to make comparable moves toward gender equality, but we know what he really means. While none of these points are outright false, it all comes across as sour grapes.

There were only two Boomer presidents and both of them were sleaze bags. Still, the 60s generation has warranted more PBS specials, coffee table books, and four-disc retrospectives than anyone could have imagined. Do Paul and the Clintons really need Obama to bow down and ask permission for the torch to be passed?

Krugman reminds us again that Obama’s victory is no certainty, that Rev. Wright will be back, and “[m]oreover, despite Hillary Clinton’s gracious, eloquent concession speech, some of her supporters may yet refuse to support the Democratic nominee.”

Come on, Paul, it’s time for you to graciously and eloquently step aside for the new kids, and let’s see if we can’t continue where the Boomers left off. Sorry, Paul, but your generation’s time has passed.

Okay so you’re on the classic game show Let’s Make A Deal, and Monty Hall shows you three doors. Behind one of those doors is a NEW CAR! But behind each of the other two doors is a stinky goat. So you pick Door Number 1.

But wait, Monty says he will reveal one of goats behind one of the other two doors. He opens Door Number 3 and there it is, stinking of piss and feta. So now you’re left with two doors, and Monty gives you the option to switch doors (much like Howie Mandel does today).

So…do you switch? Does it matter? The odds are 1 in 3 no matter what, right? Might as well keep Door Number 1. Well, you’re wrong and now you’re the proud owner of a stinky goat. In fact the odds are 1 in 3 if you don’t switch, but they improve to 2 in 3 if you switch.

Think of it this way, if you picked the car first, then switching would get you a goat. But if you picked a goat, then switching would get you a car. There’s a 1 in 3 chance of picking the car first (losing), and a 2 in 3 chance of picking the goat first (winning).

The New York Times let’s you play the game and gives a wonderful graphic explanation here.

Imagine this, everyone gets to vote once, but some votes carry more weight. It’s all based on your education and your net worth. The more money you have, the less your vote counts; but the more educated you are, the more it counts. The scale goes from 1 to 2 and all the fractions in between. So you may only have one vote, or maybe 1.398 votes, but only up to two.

Okay, it’s ridiculous. A rich person could feasibly buy up twelve doctorates; and does philosophy degree from Harvard weigh as much as an online degree in metaphysics that comes with a crystal ball and a tarot deck?

Sigh…it seems like the start for a good bar discussion though.