All your web sites are belong to us

Way back in the day, when I was a surly, unmannered LVS at One BM, our documentation had to be translated into multiple foreign languages. We sent it off to the translation centers (one of which may or may not have had herpes), and waited for them to send the foreign-language versions back. (Sidebar: how would you outsource that? Would you have India do all the translations, or would you have the work done by college students studying the corresponding language?)

My understanding is that the bulk of the translation was done by computer programs that would flag problem areas for a real person to examine. This was a big reason we needed to be careful about word choices ("Execute the command," for example, might transl(iter)ate in unusual ways.)

Anyway, it looks like machine translation has not progressed much in the intervening years, as evidenced here. The Duisburg-Nord Landschaftspark is built on an old industrial site in Duisburg Nord, Germany. The designer (Peter Latz) took a unique approach to recycling filthy industrial urban land, and this park is one of my precedent studies for my capstone project. (Fun side note: The translated version of the park's official web site indicates that its size is 200 acres. In actual fact, it's 230 hectares, or just under 570 acres.)

At long, long last

I got an email from the Lenovo indicating that my new lappy is in transit. It has left Shenzen, China. However, after viewing the shipment history for the jump drive that I received in reverse temporal order, I am hesitant to claim victory yet.

9/27 Billing info received
9/27 Departure scan; Shenzen, CN
9/27 Hub scan; Guangzhou, CN
9/27 "THE SHIPMENT IS BEING HELD BY BROKERAGE FOR REASONS BEYOND UPS' CONTROL"; Louisville, KY, US
9/28 Departure scan; Guangzhou, CN
9/28 Arrival/Departure scans; Incheon, KR
9/28 Arrival scan; Anchorage, AK, US
9/29 Departure scan; Anchorage, AK, US
10/2 "THE SHIPMENT IS BEING HELD BY BROKERAGE FOR REASONS BEYOND UPS' CONTROL / BROKERAGE RELEASED SHIPMENT. SHIPMENT IS SUBMITTED TO CLEARING AGENCY FOR FURTHER CLEARANCE," then: Import and Departure scans; Louisville, KY, US
10/2 Arrival/Departure scans; Minneapolis, MN, US
10/2 Arrival scan; Eagan, MN, US
10/3 Departure scan; Eagan, MN, US
10/3 Arrival, attempted delivery; Rochester, MN, US
10/4 2nd attempt; Rochester, MN, US
10/5 Successful delivery; Rochester, MN, US

I wonder if I should have specified something like, "Deliver after 4pm to avoid those annoying failed attempts." Ah well. I've waited this long, I can wait an extra couple days.

It dawned on me ...

Oh, that was my ponderable: This "Age of Aquarius" thing. If the Piscean Age correlates strongly with the rise of Christianity, which is symbolized by the fish, what characteristics might one expect in an age characterized by the water-bearer? What does water "mean"? Rising seas, environmental issues, lots of urination? While I don't believe in the legitimacy of astrology as a "way of knowing" - I am, after all, a product of my culture and environment, and we are still living in a society dominated by Enlightenment principles that value human reason and our ability to know the world through empirical means. But cultural phenomena based in superstition fascinate me. While the mythologies of the Greeks and Romans are mere stories to us now, they left a rich literary and artistic legacy that we can still appreciate. The mythology of Christianity still clings, unfortunately, and disgusts me in its application, but I love the architectural heritage, and just last night I listened to Mozart's Requiem again. Simply amazing, yes. So umm... I don't remember where I was going - oh yeah - So, I wonder about that whole Aquarian thing. Ya know. As I do.

odds 'ñ' ends

...Today on the campus shuttle I saw something that I'm still trying to process. A fairly heavy person of indeterminate sex (probably female, so I'll use the feminine pronouns, but I'm not certain) stepped onto the bus. Her hair was buzzed on the sides, and the top was short - between 1 & 2 inches - and bleached to a yellower shade of blond. She might have been pierced, but if so it was only moderate. Maybe a nose ring or something - nothing outrageous. To complete this picture, dress her in standard college student garb - jeans, t-shirts in layers, sneakers. Make the t-shirt Coke-red with the words "Chick magnet" in black, accompanied by a cartoon drawing of a bespectacled, scrawny nerd, shirtless and flexing. I still don't know what it means. It may well keep me awake for a night or two.

...[I can't remember this item... if I do, I'll write it down so I can share it later.]

...From Heloise, she of the Helpful Hint, two tidbits (from the Strib, 9/17/07):

Plastic Grocery Bags
Dear Heloise: Please let your readers know that plastic grocery bags can be used at inner-city churches that have food pantries and clothing for the needy. I also take my bags to area nursing-home residents. SUE, via e-mail
For what? So they can tie one over their head and end their suffering? Or maybe the eccentric ones like to store things like their toenail clippings and feces.

Sound off
Dear Heloise: I refuse to use the "self checkouts" in grocery stores! Why should I pay the same price for my groceries, doing all the work myself, as the next person, who gets service? Give me at least 10 percent off my total grocery bill, and I might think about doing it myself. I know I am not the only one who thinks this way. BOB in Texas
Well, Bob, I'm not sure what to do with your helpful hint, but here's a couple of other things that might get you riled up: The newspaper used to cost a penny, and you still had change to buy a phosphate at the local malt shop! Plus, young people use curse words! And the whippersnappers have the gall to congregate in public places! When I was your age, computers used punch cards! You don't even know what those are!

Screw the world - Jeebus is coming back soon!

"End Times" Theology Endangers Us All

I've believed this for a long time, but haven't taken the time to express it so clearly.

Culturally inappropriate!

Fran and I are talking about world issues, and we briefly mentioned Chinese population growth policies. The following phrase popped into my head: "This is Bob Barker reminding you to spay or neuter your Asian."

Break out your shades, cuz the future is blazin'

The other night I saw this show - well, part of it - on the Science Channel called "2057." Actually, it was three shows. There was one about "The Body" (which I didn't see) and one about "The World" (which I also didn't see) and one about "The City" (which I saw in part). I was intrigued by this concept of the future of the city. Given my studies in landscape architecture and my leaning toward urban design, I wonder what the future of the city holds. So I thought, This should be interesting.

Do I need to say at this point that I was disappointed? Apparently the city of the future is defined entirely by technology. I did learn a few things from the 20 minutes or so that I watched.

1) In 50 years, everyone will have a personal holographic pet that follows them around and apparently keeps children safe via its GPS module. Or something. It didn't make a lot of sense at the time, and makes even less now that I see it written down.

2) In 50 years, bipedal robotic assistants will be common. They will exhibit basic human form (a torso, head, two arms, and two legs). Everyone will have one, and old people will still cherish their 35-year-old models of these devices. Really? Given the rate at which technology becomes obsolete in the year 2007, I'm finding it hard to believe that a dusty old manbot from 2020 will still be around 37 years later. Also, which would we restrict them to the limited humanoid form? Why not give them 4 or 6 legs, so they'll be more stable? And throw on 6 or 8 arms, to increase their capacity to carry our groceries.

3) In 50 years, some fogey will build his grandson a souped up holographic cartoon shark buddy, and then run away from home (but leave his archaic robot friend behind). The kid will proceed to hook up grampa's 50-year-old laptop to the 2057 version of the internet (which, by the way, will be EVERYWHERE), and put his new pal into the city-wide internet, where it will swim from one gigantic holo-billboard to another. With it, unbeknownst to the annoying brat, it will carry an ancient computer virus that will cause the entire urban network to crash. (This reveals a couple of things: again, it appears that within the next 10 years or so, technology will stop being obsolete, and backwards-compatibility will extend so far into the past as to make obsolescence ... obsolete. With any luck, they'll be able to read those 5-1/4" floppies I've got in the bottom of my desk drawer.)

4) In the ensuing chaos, traffic jams will reappear for the first time in 40 years, because automated cars and networked roads and GPS satellites will make sure that the traffic is always flowing smoothly (up to that point, at least), and there will never be any technical glitches that cause that system to fail. Thankfully, this seamless flow of traffic has also eliminated traffic accidents and related fatalities, and, as previously noted, there are never any major malfunctions in the system. Looks like Microsoft will be losing the contract on that one. (Note to self: Invest accordingly.)

5) The police force will oversee all manner of things, including the city-wide network. In the ultimate irony, the kid who brings down the city (in a performance reminiscent of Jeff Goldblum's character in Independence Day) turns out to be the son of the Chief Inspector of Integrated City Network, or whatever title this apparent police state will bestow on the person in charge.

There was no talk of the actual city of the future. Will suburbia continue to dominate the urban landscape of the industrialized world? Will multi-nodal cities spring up around present metropolises? Where will people work, relative to where they live? Will the concepts of New Urbanism finally be implemented in an effective way, or will we continue to see contemporary suburbia dressed up in ever-fancier tuxedos? Will "urban sprawl" - however you define it - be curtailed? What about poverty and race? Will segregation of the poor, blacks, and poor blacks continue to be de rigeur? What about environmental and ecological issues? How will cities of the future address the problems associated with massive impervious surfaces and the urban heat island effect? Will green space be recognized as a valuable sociocultural and physical component of the city, and will metropolitan areas be planned accordingly? Will urban planning itself become a more holistic and proactive discipline?

What about the fact that the vast majority of the world's population is (and will continue to be) located at the meeting point of water and land? What effect will rising sea levels have? What about climate change? Signs point to more frequent and severe tropical storms. Will New Orleans be remembered as the first of many coastal cities destroyed by storms?

And we havent' even looked at developing countries. What of the inconceivably massive slums that accompany so many major cities worldwide? How will continued population growth and urbanization in the developing world affect the quality of life in Bombay and its ilk?

Apparently, these are not questions that matter. Apparently, in 50 years, the city will continue to be defined as it matters to middle- and upper-class Caucasian Americans, and how technology will make their lives easier and safer.

I guess I shouldn't have expected much from a show on the Science Channel.

You know what they say about big feet....

Friend Mary and I had a brief exchange about Norman Borlaug, a U of M alumnus and nominal father of the Green Revolution of the mid-20th century that radically increased agricultural food production in the developing world. I mentioned that he'd been mentioned in a recent meeting I attended at the University's St. Paul campus.

There was much discussion of opportunities to make it the "Green Campus" - reduced turfgrass, more native plantings/greater biodiversity, stormwater management stuff, and so forth. A comment was made (tongue in cheek) about Borlaug's "Green Revolution," and how we could position it as "another Green Revolution" from said location. Then someone pointed out that Borlaug's version was very nearly antithetical to the current ideas, because it intensified agriculture (more chemicals, more monoculture in the landscape, and so forth). Then it was suggested that the new effort could be the "Real Green Revolution." This was all said amid laughs, and in fun, but it does give one pause, and perhaps more than anything highlights the changing values of the late 20th century.

But you know, I really like eating.

And she responded,

Oh yeah, he was *definitely* a product of the thinking of his time, but what he did with the knowledge available, and how hard he worked on behalf of people in parts of the world that were largely ignored on the basis of them not being here -- wow. I get tired just reading about what he's gotten up to.

And I got to thinking about the idea of one's ecological footprint. [The latter link points to a PDF file. In the unlikely event that you lack a PDF reader, (1) you've been living under a rock for 5 years, and (2) you need one. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader.] Some of you may be familiar with the Ecological Footprint Quiz. It calculates (roughly) how many acres of "biologically productive" land are required to sustain your lifestyle. I've had friends score as low as 8 and as high as the mid-50s. My score falls right around 30. The average American requires 24 acres. [Sidebar: Check out this interesting "Kid's Version" of the ecological footprint quiz. Careful, some of the questions might go off.]

According to the quiz, "Worldwide, there exist 4.5 biologically productive acres per person," and if everyone lived like me, "we would need 7.1 planets." (I'm assuming that those planets would all be identical to Earth.)

I tried answering in several different ways. For example, if I gave up my car and took public transit or my feet as my primary modes of locomotion, and if I ate less meat, and if I minimized my consumption of heavily processed foods shipped from parts unknown and harvested by various ethnic types, and if I radically altered my consumption of material goods and the disposal of the attendant wastes.... What is the lowest score I could achieve while still having a "decent" standard of living (by my admittedly American standards)? I knocked it down to about 10. If everyone lived like that version of me, we'd need 2.3 planets.

So I started thinking, if there are 4.5 acres per person, how many acres does that mean we have in total? Taking a total population of 6,607,578,032 (or 6.6 billion, for easier figuring), I come up with 29,700,000,000 acres. So how many people would the planet support, if we all lived like Americans, and averaged 24 acres per person? By my math, 1,237,500,000.

Let's say that hypothetically the bloated, over-consumptive American lifestyle were brought under control, and we could all live on 12 acres (aiming a little above my personal "idealized" score of 10). At that rate, the Earth would support 2,475,000,000 people.

The answers necessary to achieve a score of 4 indicate a level of privation that surely rivals that of the most poverty-stricken of this nation: no motorized travel, a strict vegetarian diet derived exclusively from local sources, and 4 people living in a residence of less than 1,000 square feet.

I have two words for the Chinese, the Indians, Africans, Catholics, much of South America, and all of Indonesia: STOP FUCKING!