Comcast to monitor bandwidth

Comcast has announced that they are amending their Acceptable Use Policy on the first of October, to limit their high-speed internet customers to 250GB per month. They say that less than 1% of users will violate this policy – even though it’s obvious that everyone’s usage grows all the time, as internet content grows more intense (like video).

In order to monitor your usage, of course, they have to have a way of measuring and storing the numbers … but they are NOT making the numbers available to the customers. Only if you violate the limit will you find out from Comcast via a phone call the following month. And if you violate the amount twice in a six-month period, your service is cut off for a year.

Why not make the numbers available directly to the customers, Comcast? Most of us will never approach the limit and won’t care to look, but for those customers who even occasionally need to large transfers of data – perhaps for publication, or transfer of work product, whatever – shouldn’t they be able to see the data so they can monitor themselves?

Virginia Tech Shootings — Did Gun Control Help or Hinder?

Virginia Tech, presumably like most American universities, prohibits guns on campus. Did this help the gunman achieve such a hideous body count? Did he count on this as he planned his mission, and later coolly implemented it?

From what I’ve been reading today, it would appear that the shooter only planned minimally. Certainly he was well armed — two guns, at least one of which was 9mm, and lots of extra ammunition — and he knew the dorm where his first target lived (although some reports say that she was not there, so he just shot her roommate and a residential advisor responding to the commotion). He later went to a classroom building where she was likely to be present, but he didn’t know where, so he just randomly checked classrooms and shot people within them. Although he was calm and cold-blooded, he really didn’t have that good of a plan to get somebody specific, if that was indeed his plan. The rules of gun possession on campus were probably not something that rose high in his consciousness during his planning.

So what would have happened without the rules? Once again, we can only speculate. If some students or staff did normally carry or stash weapons, perhaps with concealed weapon permits, it seems likely that at least one of them would have interrupted the shooter’s spree sooner than he did himself. Probably not in the dorm, but somewhere in the classroom building. Not all the weapons-carriers would be heroic types; not all would even be on “the good guys” team; but probably someone would have taken matters into their own hands. Many people likely would have been shot before anyone would have been able to respond. But without any weapons available (except perhaps to another law-breaker), the odds were close to — or exactly — zero that anyone would or could respond to the shooter’s rampage.

On the other hand (there always IS another side), what would happen if guns were allowed on this campus? Blacksburg is not exactly a large metropolis; it is in the middle of part of the country where hunting, privacy rights, and even rebellion have been part of the local culture for centuries. Perhaps the presence of weapons on a university campus, combined with growing but immature minds, and the volatility of new and different social situations would lead to occasional small gunfire incidents. Maybe, in the long run, the death toll would be similar to this rampage. Or maybe not. It’s close to impossible for us to know. Twenty small shooting incidents at campuses across the country don’t make the same lasting headlines as one big incident, do they?

Proper English: Use of the Apostrophe

The apostrophe ( ‘ ) is perhaps the most abused punctuation mark in the English language. There are two situations where an apostrophe can properly appear.

The first use of the apostrophe is within contractions. Some might say that contractions don’t belong in proper written English, but these days, there seems to be any number of proper places for slang or casual language to be used and understood without offense. Therefore, common contractions like don’t (do not), haven’t (have not), it’s (it is, it has), he’d (he had, he would), etc. appear often. The apostrophe replaces one or more letters, usually from the second word, such that the spelling approximates the common pronunciation of the phrase which has been condensed into a single word. Note that the space between the words of the original phrase is discarded within the contraction.

Some contractions are merely shortened versions of one original word, rather than a phrase, but these are generally considered a more extreme version of slang, and they are not as well accepted in proper written English. Examples include ‘n or ‘n’ (and), ‘cause or ‘cos (because) , wha’? or whu’? (what?). I personally avoid such contractions in all but the most private, casual writing.

The other standard use of the apostrophe is to indicate the possessive case of a noun, along with the letter s. The possessive form of a singular or plural noun appends ‘s to the noun, except when the nouns already ends with s, in which case the possessive form appends merely an apostrophe. Examples: head of a cat -> a cat’s head, wife of Bobby Kennedy -> Bobby Kennedy’s wife, color of the dishes -> the dishes’ color, house where the Smiths live -> the Smiths’ house. Note that personal pronouns are special cases and do not follow these rules; these will be covered in a later post.

It is not correct to use ‘s to indicate plural, although you will see this form used with numbers (in the 1900′s should be in the 1900s, and learn your ABC’s should be learn your ABCs.) so often that we sticklers of proper English might have to relent some day. Still, you have the choice of which way you’ll write it, and more people will find the non-apostrophized form agreeable than the apostrophized one.

Proper English: It’s vs. its

The words its and it’s are often confused and misused. But the rules are quite simple.

One word, its, is the possessive form of the word it. This word is an adjective (some might want to call it a possessive pronoun, but it acts like an adjective). Use this form when indicating ownership to a previously specified subject. Some examples: “The movie had its moments, but mostly I was bored.” “The mangy dog licked its mud-covered privates noisily.” “While outwardly expressing shock at the profanity in her student’s essay, Ms. Hannerty was secretly quite proud of its ingenuity.”

The other word, it’s, is usually a contraction of the phrase it is, and is thus a combination of a noun (subject) and verb. Some examples: “It’s a small world, after all.” “Damn it, Jim, it’s just a machine!” “I can’t tell if the timer is working properly, but it’s quite apparent that this bomb is unstable. Jump!”

It’s can also be a contraction of it has, where the word has is part of a verb in the present perfect tense. Example: “It has been a bloodbath” could also be phrased “It’s been a bloodbath.”

We’ll get into other pronouns, as well as the use of apostrophes, another time.

Proper English: Why Does it Matter?

Good spelling and grammar are just two of many factors that contribute to good writing. Of course, their presence often goes unnoticed and seemingly unrewarded, except perhaps by some English teachers and editors.

On the other hand, many readers definitely notice incorrect spelling and poor grammar. For them, such written errors may indicate an author’s laziness, fuzzy thinking, indifference to social norms, or even haste to publish without proper editing. These readers may choose to leave your website, blog, newspaper, or magazine due to irritation or confusion before you have made your point to them, and that means lower customer retention, advertising fees, or simply audience size.

Certainly, much written communications these days tends to be informal. Sentence fragments, cute word spellings, and slang all can be effective within the appropriate context. But why spell a word incorrectly when it gives you no advantage to do so? The only answer — other than laziness, fuzzy thinking, indifference, or haste — is simple ignorance of the proper forms of English.

The English language, in particular, is full of strange rules and inconsistencies, and it is notoriously difficult for native speakers of certain other languages to learn. So this author will occasionally write about various simple common mistakes of English grammar and spelling, just in case you want to help clean up your writing. Please suggest appropriate topics for future posts.

Slower traffic keep right

No, I’m not trying to make any kind of political statement here. I’m just trying to argue that this driving rule should apply in all cases, not just where signs indicate. (In the U.S. and other right-side driving countries; see strangemaps’ Driving Orientation).

The existing rules
Sometimes you see this sign. Often you’ll see one on hills or other spots along multilane highways or boulevards where traffic gets congested. It’s a good place for heavy trucks or underpowered cars to move over and get out of the way, right?

Some narrow highways have passing zones with an extra lane on long uphill grades, where you’ll see signs telling you to keep right except to pass. These exist for pretty much the same reason as the previous sign, just on a more temporary basis.

Some U.S. states (e.g. CO, OH) have passed laws in recent years which require you to keep right except when passing. I used to think was was stupid, but I’ve come to see its general efficacy, if only to get people into the habit. Of course, if people actually do it, the rightmost lane will wear out much faster than the other(s), but surely the state highway department is aware of this, and they are part of the plan, right? Maybe not, knowing how government bureaucracy works (and don’t call me Shirley).

For those of you who actually took a driver’s education class, you probably were taught (notice, I didn’t say “you probably learned”) to pass on the left, and to move right if someone wants to pass you. In fact, this is also the law in most states, at least on highways.

The reasoning
“But why should this rule be universal?” you might ask. Go ahead, ask. Nobody’s listening.

To grease the flow, as I say. (Pronounce “grease” with a “z”; it sounds cooler.) To lubricate the potential congestion spots. To regularize the traffic. To prevent highway constipation. You get the idea.

The more that driving behaviors can be normalized into a set of common expectations — habits, if you will — then the easier it is for everyone to do it with minimal complications. Face it, many of you don’t pay a lot of attention to your driving. At least, not always. So if you can a least be in the habit of doing the right thing (where “right thing” is defined as “what everyone expects you to do”), the smoother traffic can flow; the fewer accidents; fewer traffic jams; lower insurance rates.

The logical extension
How about we always do it? On every road — highway or boulevard. Busy road or empty one. Make it be the expectation. Always stay to the right when there’s somebody going faster than you in the vicinity.

This matters most when traffic gets really heavy. If the rule isn’t followed, then eventually you get everyone going the same speed, in every lane. And that speed is whatever the slowest car wants to do, because nobody can pass when both lanes are going the same speed. So, if you find yourself going the same speed as the guy to your right, and that’s the speed you want to go, then you need to figure out how to get into his lane. Slow down or speed up just a tad, long enough to find a place to move over. Then you will provide others behind you the opportunity to pass.

Sure, when you’re all alone on the road, it really doesn’t matter. But if you’re in the habit of keeping right except to pass, then you’ll already be in the right place when somebody wants to pass you. And they’ll be expecting to pass you on the left. Just like you, when wanting to pass somebody, will pass them on their left.

The Germans figured this out long ago, at least for their highways. And when everybody follows the rule (which they almost always do), traffic flows amazingly well. If you’ve ever had the pleasure to cruise the Autobahn, you’ve been impressed with how fast some cars are able to travel. Safely. Smoothly. Because their drivers can trust that only the cars that can actually go at the highest speeds will ever enter the leftmost lane, and that those who do, will indeed go very fast, and will give up their position to any car approaching them from the rear at an even higher speed. Okay, occasionally it requires a quick flashing of headlights, but from a long ways off, not right at the last second.

That’s the key — don’t let the traffic go the same speed in two different lanes. Keep the traffic greased.

Fallacy of “immigrants have lower incarceration rates” study

Last week, I read a few articles based on a 2/27 release from the Immigration Policy Center, telling us how new immigrants, whether legal or illegal, had lower incarceration rates than those with established U.S. residence, and that long-term residents and citizens have the highest incarceration rates. The authors’ conclusion was that people become more crime-prone as they live in U.S. society, rather than the popular perception that immigrants bring crime and criminal behavior with them.

There are many logical fallacies to this reasoning, but I’ll just start with one. Think of it this way: name a class of people who cannot immigrate into the U.S. Answer: “incarcerated people.” So the incarceration rate is exactly zero for brand-spanking new immigrants, and can only go up. So the whole report is useless.

A better study would have been to compare incarceration histories of people in the various groups, although this stillwould proabably be fairly useless since other countries likely have different success rates of locking up criminals, different sentencing, and even different survival rates of prisoners.

I’m not taking sides on whether the popular perception is true or not; that’s not my point.

Open fire.

Radioactive music

Recently I found this page about radiation-related music at The Radiation Dose Assessment Resource website. It includes many songs you’ve likely never heard of; here are sample quotes, lifted directly from their website (some of my old favorites):

LISTEN to Neutron Dance, by The Pointer Sisters —
I still like this song a lot. Definitely fast neutrons, resonance escape probability is zero. Whoo-hoo. Now what any of it has to do with neutrons I never understood. But you don't have to understand the deep meaning of a song to sing it badly in your car when no one's listening, right?

LISTEN to The Wild West Is Where I Want To Be, by Tom Lehrer —
"Where the scenery's attractive, and the air is radioactive". You gotta love that rhyme. Tom had several songs dealing with bomb issues, and we did not treat all of them here. One good one, however, is We Will All Go Together When We Go, that has the memorable phrase "When the air becomes uranious, And we will all go simultaneous."

LISTEN to Your Love is Like Nuclear Waste, by Tuff Darts —
Jim Herrold transcribed the lyrics for us (what a guy!) Here's some: "Your love is like nuclear waste. Your body is a danger to the human race. They should stamp 'contaminated' right across your face." "I'd rather crawl through poison ivy or grab high tension lines, cut my legs off at my knees or set myself on fire than be between the sheets with you, for any time or feel your scaley flesh moving onto mine." Hopeless romantics, obviously, but can they sing?

Of course, looking for the name of the Tuff Darts is what got me here in the first place.

Most states are purple

About a year and a half ago (August 2005), having had discussions with many people about the supposedly new polarization of America’s population into red and blue states, and looking for a better visualization of the actual results, I was pleased to find the following website. The authors at Univ. of Mich. carefully describe some more accurate ways of portraying the proportions of votes in the last presidential election, where — like in most elections — the majorities were as often slim as they were wide. For the explanation behind the attached purple proportional cartogram, please see http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/.

This sequence shows a progression from winner-takes-all state votes in 2004, to county votes, to shading by proportion of votes, to scaling the counties by the number of votes in them.

Having recently returned to my home state — long known for its extreme conservatism — after an absence of almost eight years, I was surprised at the broad mix of colors there, and particularly by the fact that my county was NOT the reddest county on the map…. though it was still quite non-blue. On the other hand, some places are just plain predictable — e.g. Provo and S.F./Berkeley.

At the time, I asked the authors about extending the study to several previous elections, and then devising a visually informative method of displayingtrends and changes over time (or we could make an animated GIF, I suppose). But I received no response. I guess it takes a lot of grad students to enter all that data… ;o}

Interstate highway system map, revised

I found an excellent diagram of the U.S. Interstate highway system on strangemaps’ blog. Although the post doesn’t say who originated the diagram, the discussion is excellent. [Update: strangemaps' previous post has a comment noting the map's source (http://www.chrisyates.net/store/fullinterstatemap-web.jpg), and indeed the image itself is signed Chris Yates 2007.]

However, there are numerous technical errors and omissions on the diagram. It appears the original artist intended to include all of the one- and two-digit interstate highways (as evidence, I see that he included the single-state I-4 and I-16 in Florida and Georgia, respectively), and that he intended to label cities at intersections of interstates. Along those lines, the deficiencies are listed below.

Route errors:
• The intersections of I-90, I-94, and I-25 (originally labeled Butte, Billings, and Buffalo) are all scrambled.
• The intersections of I-8, I-10, I-17, and I-19 (originally labeled Phoenix) are all scrambled.
• I-20 intersects I-10 almost 200 miles east of El Paso.
• Columbia is indeed at the intersection of I-20 and I-77, but nowhere near I-95 as shown.
• I-93 does not intersect I-91 at White River Jct, but rather much farther north.
• I-87 and I-89 do not exit the country together.
• Erie is indeed at the northern end of I-79, but that is at the intersection with I-90, not I-80.
• Almost all the routes in Pennsylvania are messed up (currently labeled Pittsburgh and Harrisburg).
• All of Wisconsin is missing.
• Many interstates in Illinois are missing, as well as others scattered around the nation.
• I-65 does not continue north past Chicago/Gary to Grand Rapids, and in fact the west end of I-96 is Muskegon, not Grand Rapids.
• I-75 does not end at Ft. Myers, but rather extends to intersect with I-95 at Ft. Lauderdale.

Other erroneous cities:
• Wilkes-Barre is not at the I-80/I-81 intersection.
• Raleigh is not at the I-95/I-40 intersection.
• Winston-Salem is not at the I-77/I-40 intersection.
• The intersection of I-20 and I-95 is at Florence.
• The intersection of I-70/I-15 is not at a city, town, or village named Monroe.
• Las Vegas isn’t at an intersection, so it shouldn’t be shown.

Missing routes:
• Part of I-94 is missing. It continues east of Minneapolis/St. Paul, to join with I-90 for awhile, then splits again at Madison WI, where I-94 heads east to Milwaukee WI and then south to the Chicago IL metropolitan area.
• Part of I-84 from Newburgh NY to its terminus in Massachusetts at I-90 is missing.
• I-64 east of I-95 to the Norfolk area is missing.
• I-40 east of I-95 to Wilmington is missing.
• I-76 from Pittsburgh to Cleveland is missing.
• Entirely missing are everything in Wisconsin, much of Illinois, and various regional and single-state highways: I-H1,H2,H3^*, I-12^*, I-24, I-26, I-27, I-37, I-39, I-43, I-49, I-59, I-72^*, I-74, I-82, I-97, and I-99.

So I have modified the map greatly, as shown below. I have extended each highway to its actual end, or where it extends into Mexico or Canada, including the last major city, if any. Still missing are I-12 (a bypass around Lake Pontchartrain, north of New Orleans — in fact this was the original route of I-10, and the piece connecting down to N.O. was called 55 and 59), and I-72 in Illinois, for which there just isn’t room, and the Hawaiian highways I-H1,H2,H3.

[updated 19 March 2007] Moved I-64 south, between Staunton and Charleston; replaced El Paso with Las Cruces; replaced Portland (ME) with Houlton; labeled the blank dots at Green Bay and Blacktown (PA); merged Ft. Lauderdale into Miami; extended I-69 and I-94 to Port Huron; added more intersection names along I-10, I-39, I-57, I-69, I-70, I-77, I-80, I-81, I-82, I-90, I-93, I-95, I-99; completely revamped the WI-IL-IN-MI area to separate Chicago and Gary and clean up (slightly) the IL bramblebush, and adding I-72 and I-88; added I-12.