Test Post

oiuhewa

 

lkuhdsfkjh

 

kjdsfkhhfjdkd

Australian Election 2013

This election seems pretty much done. A big loss, as is looking fairly likely, will show that the problem isn’t Rudd or Gillard or the media or personality politics. The problem is Labour, as it has been since they got into office. As I see it this has three elements:

1) The Govt has been poor at actual politics – confused, uninspired messaging, lack of perceived legitimacy, no sense of achievement, a bunch of stupid promises.

2) Some poor policy choices – carbon tax instead of ETS, problems with mining tax, home insulation, asylum seeker policy has been a mess etc. The scope of its policy ambition was great in 2007, but so many of them were poorly thought out or implemented.

3) Complete underestimation/exaggeration of Tony Abbott and the current Liberal Party – for this time in Aus politics, Abbott is a good candidate. It’s incredibly easy to cherry pick quotes to make him look like complete fuckwit, and Labour seems to think doing so is good strategy, but it hasn’t worked up until now. The vast majority of voters form opinions on more complex (if not always rational) grounds. The Coalition has totally outboxed Labour, in almost every area, despite having a number of clearly substandard policies and inexperienced frontbenchers.

Progress

It is an exciting, but frustrating time to be interested in technology. It is clear what people desire: thin, light, fast, portable computers with detachable touchscreens. Gorgeous HD (and beyond) displays. Minimalist, intuitive operating systems; customisable and unencumbered with useless bloat. Elegant, comfortable and durable hardware. Brushed metals. Reasonable prices.

Sometimes I wonder if we don’t spend more time lusting, dreaming, than doing. But for another Gb of RAM. But for a slightly higher clock speed. But for another couple of pixels. I could do it. I could get to where I want to be. If I had a backlit keyboard.

And yet, Moore’s law doesn’t run on its own steam. These burning upgrade fantasies drive actual upgrades, after all. Intel doesn’t tick and tock just for the hell of it. 

So I wonder. Consumer culture has a kind of short term pointlessness and wastefulness to it, sure. Literally nobody needs to be desperate for the next Nexus phone if they have a Nexus 4. On the other hand, innovation comes from desire. If what we already have is enough, then we’ll never go any further. We’ll never spread portable technology to the developing world. Never become more energy and resource efficient. Just as nobody needs a Galaxy S 4, nobody needs a Tesla S, an amazing new electric sports car. But if people start buying them, then Tesla will make more of them. Other manufacturers will start copying, and then innovating themselves. 

The short term price might be a lot of wasted resources. But the long term benefit are both enormous and likely unclear. Pushing blindly into the future, hunger in our eyes, grabbing at the next new iteration, might seem barbaric and dangerous to some. But if there is not progress, then what is the point at all?

 

 

A short review of ‘The Great Gatsby’ (2013)

The 1974 film version of the Great Gatsby is a reasonably lifeless film. It is reasonably well acted and largely inoffensive, but, for the most part, fails to reflect Fitzgeralds stunning prose and explorations of  aspiration, decadence and American social politics. It misses the point, but it looks quite nice.

Baz Luhrmann’s  version, on the other hand, seems immensely self satisfied. It understands the novel – so well in fact that every metaphor or subtle piece of foretelling  is splayed across the screen in a such a palette of colour to be almost grotesque. There are no hints in this film, nothing to be reflected upon. Nothing is left out, every inch of the book is on the screen, all at once.

Despite the frankly weird, and pointless, narrative device of Nick narrating and, indeed, writing the story from rehab (a clear nod to Fitzgerald’s own history), the film is more like Gatsby’s mansion – a fake. In the novel, the ‘owl-eyed man’ calls Gatsby ‘a regular Belasco’. David Belasco was a theatre director, known for his elaborate sets and extensive use of props. The film appears to take this as a set of instructions – the heart of the film is visual trickery, ceaseless and turned up to 11. The reason that the most elegant passages of the novel stand out is that so much of the rest is pared back. Luhrmann is clearly incapable of such subtlety.

Other thoughts:

• The acting are mostly average, but it’s hard to blame anyone for that. Carey Mulligan and Joel Edgerton are decent. I thought Di Caprio was pretty awful.
• The modern soundtrack could have been good, but was pretty gimmicky.
• Luhrmann is a talentless hack with a very talented wife.
• Honestly, the seventeenth wide shot of the CGI’d New York was enough.
• This movie sucked in pretty much every conceivable way.

If the brightest of minds of generations were so foolish, then why are we certain?

If their moral codes had abbhorent flaws, are we so pure?

Remember those predictions,

Of ’14, ’28, ’38, ’06

Are we so sure?

As certainty rises, loosen the shackles on your doubts

There is always something hidden.

In the models, and the scriptures,

Something missing.

Work

Why do we work?

Surely nobody works for money? Money is not anything, after all. Money is food and things and comfortable healthy people.

Food and things and experiences are why you keep working. Satisfaction and pride and confidence too. Relationships, safety. Something to do, to get you out of the house.

So why do we start work? Or, why do we start where we do?

Why choose, consulting or marketing, say?

It could be passion for selling people things. For improving business performance. But I don’t think people get much of kick out of that.

Kicks are kind words from a wise boss. A glass of champagne for a job well done. Expensive city drinks because you can afford them. A promotion next year.

Kicks are a little bit of control, but not too much responsibility.

Knowing your parents are satisfied with the person they brought up.

Kicks are not taking too many risks.

Kicks are no kicks.

This is the currency of the CBD. To argue passionately in a meeting about shit so banal I can’t bring myself to write it down, it takes something. To use serious brain horsepower on just absolute fucking fluff. There isn’t enough caffeine in Melbourne and coke ain’t cheap enough.

Why work?

Does anyone know? Guess?

And I don’t mean when there aren’t any other options. I mean educated, probably formerly creative people. You know, even lefties, former freakin’ marxists. Damn Karl. Even you too?

And I don’t even mean creating. I don’t even mean hacking, packing away, moving and carving. I mean…hoaxing, I guess.

The CBD is a hoax. Yes, that’s it. They aren’t, they’re laughing. Got us all tricked! Run around and answer phone calls, send emails. Build this web, entangle people and companies. Get a website up – it’ll have to be true!

Had me tricked for a minute there. Had me whacking out kindergarten level Powerpoints – ‘pitch it at CEO level, you know – think worldwide amphetamine shortage, espresso 50 bucks a shot, barely conscious, suited zombies just dribbling on their collars’. Had me sold on their message – the smart people are all in here. The change is all in here. Learn the real skills baby.

Why do we work?

You don’t have to. Some of us create. Teach. Farm. Some of us fucking make coffee and do a damn fine service to society.

Fuck. I could be a farmer. I could open a website. Sell useful stuff on ebay. Be a carpenter, do some real fine shit. Be an architect. Go back to uni, do a science degree. An engineering degree, build some bridges. Mould cities. Traffic flows. Alleyway cultures. I could break some laws, steal and vandalise. I could coach tennis. Make agonising films. I could run, just run and never stop.

I don’t work. I can’t work. There aren’t enough days.

ANZAC

It will never be enough, but in a way it is all we can do. Remember them.

Remember them, freezing cold, infected, seventeen years old on the edge of the Somme. Remember them, rabid and weak, like dogs in prison camps. Remember them, nurses all in white (a joke?), never flinching or complaining. Just working, always working. Remember them, glorious and youthful, charging over fences. Dead there, still.

Remember parents. Every moment, waiting for door knocks and fingering treasured letters.

To forget would be a travesty, a stain,

A growth to future folly.

Anzac is too much and not enough. It is too much to have a national myth laid where we can never be. In French fields and Papuan jungles. In Viet tunnels. There is too much.

We grasp a little Australian shard, hold it for our own. Hold the little English newspaper recommendations of courage. Hold them like a bible in our grief. It is not enough, not for a nation.

Are our only values those of wasted young men? Of white working class courage?

It is not enough, not now. An anaemic nation, grasping – what is an Australian?

Life? Liberty? Pursuit of happiness?

No. Young men perishing.

I will remember them. But that is all.

US Election Day – Liveblog

I’ll be updating this page throughout the day for anyone who is interested in coverage that isn’t ABC journos mindlessly speculating for hours and hours.

12:44 pm:
Exit polls (done by asking people who they vote for outside polling booths) can be fairly unreliable at times. It looked like John Kerry was home against George W. Bush at this time of the night (day here obvs) in 2004, and we all know how that turned out. Having said that, the exits have been encouraging for Obama in the key states of Ohio, Virginia and Florida.

The counting that has been done so far (which isn’t all that much) is pretty much tracking at how the pre-elections were indicating. The biggest worry for those of us who are desperate to know the result is that Florida is genuinely on a knife edge – its possible that this could end up in 2000 territory, when the Supreme Court ended up stopping a recount in that state, effectively giving the election to George W. Bush. The good news is, if the polls are dead on in Ohio, Obama likely wins.

12:58 pm:

I won’t talk all that much about the Senate and House races, a) because nobody really cares that much and b) the results are pretty clear:

The Democrats will most likely still have control of the Senate, although not the filibuster proof super majority of 60 that they had from 2008-2010.

Democrats did have designs taking back the House of Representatives, but it actually looks like the Republicans will pick up a couple of seats, maybe more.

In summation, Government will still be as divided as it was from 2010-2012. Unless Obama and House Republicans can figure out a way to work together more effectively, Americans will still be very frustrated with the progress of legislation.

1:06 pm
With more than half the vote counted in Florida, it is dead even. I mean literally dead even. Late reporting precincts tend to lean Republican there, but way too early to make any prediction. If Obama wins Florida this all over.

1:12 pm

Michigan to Obama. Romney’s dad was Governor there, but the state never really warmed to Mittens. No big surprise.

1:18 pm

US news networks are calling Pennsylvania for Obama. This shouldn’t have been a surprise,  but Romney put in a big last ditch effort there in the last week of the campaign. Remember, just because the networks call it, it doesn’t mean that this is an absolute lock, they have been wrong occasionally in the past (see Florida, 2000).

1:22 pm

Virginia, a key state, is leaning Romney at the moment – still lots of urban areas to be counted yet, however. Ohio early counting looks good for Obama, but only 10% or so counted, a lot of these from cities which (of course) lean Obama. North Carolina is probably closer at the moment than expected, but still leans Romney.

1:37 pm

Florida is still really, really ridiculously close. NY Times is saying its within 2000 votes out of more than 6 million counted so far. If the margin is less than 0.5% then Florida laws requires an automatic recount, so this one might not be known for a while.

Probably more importantly, NBC and Fox News are projecting Wisconsin for Obama. If this the case, Romney must win Ohio, Florida and Virginia. Early counting still very good for Obama. If this holds, Obama wins, even without Florida.

2:10 pm

Richard ‘pregnancy by rape is an act of god’ Mourdock is projected to lose the senate race in Indiana, pretty much because of that comment. Good riddance.

2:13 pm

Add to that Todd ‘women have this crazy thing which means their bodies can terminate pregnancy in case of rape’ Akin – looks like Americans are rejecting this kind of bullshit. Won’t hear this kind of stuff again.

2:17 pm

Obama basically home in New Hampshire. Not a big state, but fewer and fewer options for Romney.

2:25 pm

This won’t be totally clear for another couple of hours yet – but things are looking baaaaad for Romney. Literally everything would have to go his way for him to win. Could happen, of course, but I can’t see it as this point. I’m a have a break from watching twitter and red and blue coloured graphs for a bit. Brain feels fuzzy.

3:20 pm

Well, that escalated quickly. This thing is done. Obama remains the President of the United States of America. The political science geeks called it exactly right. Yay!

This time next week…

In 7 days, the polls will have closed in California – results will be known in many of the East Coast states. Will we know the winner of the US Presidential election? I doubt it. In fact, a situation that seems more and more likely every day is that there will be many similarities to 2000, when Al Gore won the most votes nationwide, but George W. Bush won Florida and therefore the White House.

The result may not be so controversial this year, but there is at least a decent chance that Romney will win the popular vote and Obama the election. What kind of chance exactly? Its very hard to say – it depends on whether you think the state or national polls are more accurate. At the moment, the national polls say Romney is up, but by less than a point. This analysis includes the most recent Gallup poll, which has Romney up by 5. This may be an outlier, all of the other polls have it within two points. Unfortunately, Gallup (the oldest and most famous US polling firm) hasn’t started polling again since Hurricane Sandy wiped out power on the East Coast, so we may not have an updated figure for another couple of days.

Regardless of Gallup, the race is dead even, with a possible lean to Romney. If both state and national polls are accurate, you should be able to add up the state polls and get the national figure. This is difficult, however, because many of the states are sparsely polled, if at all. For example, it may be that much of Romney’s advantage comes from a huge swing in heavy Republican states who were not excited in 2008, nor earlier in Romney’s campaign. The same may have happened in Democratic states where Obama won by huge margins in 2008. This phenomenon is known as ‘vote wastage’.

From the evidence we do have, there isn’t any clear indication that this is occurring. If you add up the average of the state polls and give reasonable estimates for the little polled highly partisan states, you get Obama up nationally by about 1 – 1.5 points.

So what is happening? Thousands of red-eyed, exhausted campaign hacks are chattering about it on Twitter, blogs, TV, newspapers, radios. Get yourself a microphone or a keyboard and some bastard will vomit all over it. Everybody wants an answer, but literally nobody knows for sure. I’ve been telling myself to wait a week for months, but the race hasn’t changed.

Some favour the national polls, because they have been around longer – more data to discern accuracy and adjust for biases. Some, the state polls, because there are so many more and they simply ask more people in the pivotal states. Sophisticated state polling does not have a long enough history – the quality of the polling may be quite poor. Then again, it may not be.

And me? It isn’t always fashionable, but I’m going to go out on a limb here and trust a man who has PhD in all of this. Dr. Simon Jackman is an Australian Professor of Pol Sci at Stanford. His probabilistic model relies largely on state polls – and it says the most likely outcome is that Obama will pinch the most crucial swing states and win the election. But he might not.

If only we had some way of asking everyone in the country, on the same day, whether they supported Obama or Romney….

A week out – The polls say that Romney is going to need gains in 2 or 3 crucial swing states, have the ones sitting on a knife edge go his way and win Ohio. He leads in the national polls, just. Make of this what you will, but anyone talking about anything else in this election may as well be writing episodes of the West Wing. I mean, policy? Come on…

Bi-modal

 

As I argued the other day, the result of this years US Presidential election rests, to a large extent, on which of the two candidates wins Ohio. I suggested that in that post that Obama was leading, although it was still pretty close. As a few poll watchers have pointed out in recent days, there may be a problem with that contention.

The view that Obama is up in Ohio by say 2-3 points comes from averaging the results of recent polls. However, Weekly Standard columnist Jay Cost has been basically shouting from the rooftops on Twitter that the Ohio polls have a ‘bi-modal distribution’. Cost is a conservative columnist for a magazine that prints a hell of a lot trash on occasion – but it would be foolish to discount his opinion. He began a PhD in political science, before coming to realisations about that discipline. He knows his US political history and he knows his stats.

If the differences in the polls were the result of random variance (which is what you would expect if they were using the same methodologies), they should more or less form a ‘normal distribution’. This is not the case with the polls in Ohio (and, to an extent, in some other states). Instead they are clustered around two different points – with very few polls hitting around the mean of all the polls. When graphed, instead of looking like a hill, they look kinda like a camels back, two humps. Cost’s current read of Ohio is that Obama is up either 4-5 points, or 0-1.

Which is true? Who knows – an average is still the best way of hedging bets, but we need to be careful not to assume that the average gives an accurate read of the race. The problem comes from the way in which pollsters calculate their results from the interviews they do. They do not literally ring up 1000 randomly selected people and then print the results. They have to mould the results so that it gives an accurate as possible representation of the whole nation. This is difficult for a number of reasons, but most importantly because not all Americans vote. Pollsters employ what is known as a likely voter screen, to try and determine which of their interviewees will actually vote. Different polling firms use different methods in trying to make their results as representative as possible – different methods can favour different candidates/parties. The conservative argument is that many polling firms have methods which lean Obama. Liberals fire back that Rasmussen – whom conservatives tend to adore – does the opposite.

The result is that instead of seeing different and randomly distributed versions of the same universe, in Ohio it looks that pollsters are looking at two different universes. If one set of pollsters are making faulty assumptions, then we are probably being somewhat misled.

There is some merit to this, for the following reasons:

1. Obama leads in pretty much every poll

2. Ohio generally goes to the Republican candidate by a few more points than the national average (about 2 in 2008)

3. Obama is even at best in the national polls – likely down a point, maybe more.

It seems that either the national polls or the state polls are wrong. But maybe neither are.

Polling is damned had – this becomes clearer in a race that is this close. The best way to think about the race is probabilistically. Some try to look deeply into the internal methods of each polling to find better answers, but I think you just end up validating what you previously thought if you do this. A better method is to look at the trends and be cautious. Obama is likely up in Ohio, probably by a point or two, but maybe by more. There is also still a small chance that Romney is actually up. If Obama wins Ohio, then he likely stays in the White House – but not necessarily. There are still some paths to victory for Romney, but they are tough.

The most likely scenario is that Romney needs to pick a little more ground nationally. With 10 days left, this seems a difficult ask, but he only needs a little.

But this could well be completely wrong. The problem with elections are that the media loves a bit of certainty, a clear change, an event they can write about. So do consumers – probability is boring and confusing at times. But for those of us wanting to be accurate, probability is all we have.

Bottom line – if you think the polls have a shred of accuracy, take $10 and put it on Romney winning the popular vote, but Obama winning the electoral college. 10 days out, that is what the polling universe suggests and you might get 20-1 for it. Pretty easy 200 bucks in my book.