Archive for November, 2007

Ninjas

A certain muggle has asked that I divulge to the world my middle name. But little does the muggle know how big a challenge this is.

Why, you ask? Because to know the name of a Ninja, is to know him for who he is. And if you knew who he is, then he is no longer a Ninja because, well, you know who he is.

Stealth is a Ninja’s only true friend. And if a Ninja loses his stealth, he becomes very vulnerable. To little kittens who may nibble on him. To the vagaries of the stock exchange (speaking of which, is it me or does anyone else think that Fox Business News is run by Ninjas?). To private equity monsters.

To this man. Or this woman.

In front of a Ninja, even Chuck Norris looks like a woman.

My middle name, my friends, is Michraphangelatellardo. Lardo for short.

L is for the L that’s not in Ninja. Or my name.

A is for Yet Another Ninja. Or me.

R is for, well, Rhinoceros (variety and all that). Or Raptors, who are outside your house right now.

D is for Deadly Ninja. Or me.

and O is for “O! It’s a Ninja!” Turn around!

And now, you all have made me vulnerable to the most dangerous things known to man.

Velociraptors! The threat to man!

For a Ninja, one is many and many is one (which would explain Rajnikanth, who is secretly a Ninja). And one nut is the same as many nuts. So, Mr. Almonds, I nominate you.

Comments (1)

What the UN Torture Ruling Means for TASR

Recently, the United Nations ruled that tasers are a form of torture. According to the UN’s Committee Against Torture, “The use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of torture.” And given the increasing number of taser disasters and deaths in the US and Canada, it was long due that someone took attention of this.

Now let’s think about this for a second. The moment you give a non-lethal weapon in the hands of someone, they are more likely to use it than a lethal weapon simply because it is non-lethal. And with everything else, you run the risk of abuse — when something is non-lethal, the abuse is likely to be more frequent.

For instance, a cop is less likely to shoot someone who is abusing him or her but a lot more likely to tase someone because he or she knows that the weapon is non-lethal and therefore, can be used a lot more frequently without (deadly) consequence. As a result, we have a lot of people who would otherwise not have used a gun use a taser.

So what does this mean for TASER International? I remember seeing a recent Wallstrip where they talked about how TASER International is trying to get into the regular consumer products industry.

One of the two points that they brought up was the potential for lawsuits when tasers start replacing the pepper-spray. It’s one thing for cops to use them — but it’s quite another when everybody and their brother starts using them. Imagine that frat party, with tasers thrown in for fun. Or imagine kids getting hold of them from their Mom’s handbag.

The other point was of course the NRA — they are perhaps one of the most powerful lobbies in this country, and having tasers replace guns in the home-protection market is probably not in the NRA’s best interests.

A quick look at TASR’s stocks tells us that they are a long way off from their 2004 high of $31.65, trading currently at $13.04. So, this UN ruling is probably not going to help them, either. After all, imagine a consumer product that’s deemed a torture device by the UN.

Of course, for all we know, it may have no bearing whatsoever on how the stock ends — everyone knows that cigarettes cause cancer, but that certainly hasn’t put a serious dent in tobacco sales around the world. Right?

Comments

3d Quaternion with Mandelbrot Pattern

Here is a 3d Julia fractal with a Mandelbrot pattern that I whipped up in POV Ray. I’ve done some 3d quaternions before, but I figured I’d try creating patterned ones and this is a starter piece.

3d Quaternion with Mandelbrot Pattern

And here is the starter piece on which I patterned this Mandelbrot from POV Ray’s documentation.

3d Quaternion with Mandelbrot Pattern

I do think that it needs a little smoothening and that there are some points that are disjoint from the central piece.

Comments (2)

How Much Would *YOU* Pay for Your Jeans?

That’s the question that Vogue asks, because apparently paying $20 for a good pair of blue-jeans should result in a loss for at least someone.

Not that fashion designers are known to be the brightest kids in the block, but you’d think that they’d just stick to what they know and not make fools of themselves by spewing forth rubbish in economics.

Quite obviously, these guys aren’t really keeping up with all the progress humanity’s been making in automation and process improvement.

Comments (6)

« Previous entries