Rotundus.com

Volvo tried this:

Of course that really doesn't say a whole lot about trucks. Aren't you supposed to try to feature the vehicles in question like BMW Films?

The Small Increments of Change

William Wilberforce voted for slavery... or was he the leader of the abolitionist movement? Some thoughts on the small steps he voted in favour of along the path towards Britain's banning of slavery and how that might apply in other areas.

Quebec’s election promises will cost us all

On Quebec election campaigns promising more spending on social causes while drawing from equalization payments. It notes promises like tuition freezes (despite having the lowest tuition in North America) and more doctors (despite have significantly more doctors per capita than the net-contributor-to-equalization provinces).

Surprisingly Good Evidence That Real Name Policies Fail To Improve Comments

"In 2007, South Korea temporarily mandated that all websites with over 100,000 viewers require real names, but scrapped it after it was found to be ineffective at cleaning up abusive and malicious comments (the policy reduced unwanted comments by an estimated .09%)."

*Science Left Behind*

Per Tyler Cowen: "the subtitle is Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left. I agree with many of the particular claims in this book, and also I find those undervalued in broader intellectual discourse." He objects to the tone seemingly to single out the political left in this case, but overall it would seem that the anti-science elements of the political right seem to attract more attention right now - perhaps an unbalanced book can help to create balance? That of course assumes that those on each side of the political debate read the thing... probably little chance of that happening though. I do like the quote he found though: "…despite what some progressives will contend, the purpose of this book is not to demonize all progressives. We just want to demonize the loony ones."

Some people say that the Canadian government places no restrictions on abortion - e.g. Wikipedia:

Canada is one of only a few nations with no legal restrictions on abortion.

Yet you do see some restrictions, only those restrictions are targetted at limiting public debate rather than limiting the number of such procedures - i.e. things like bubble zones around abortion clinics, limits on the ability to provide counselling, the number of protestors (where they're allowed), and the signs that they're allowed to carry.

Now it seems that the Ontario government is trying to further keep information regarding abortion out of the public eye. Here's a bit from The National Post:

Questioned as to why it had begun making it harder to obtain figures related to the number of abortions performed in the province, a practice that has been increasingly evident to researchers for some time, the provincial Ministry of Health responded in a statement to the National Post: 'Records relating to abortion services are highly sensitive and that is why a decision was made to exempt these records [from the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act]'

The National Post columnist's response included identification of a few other sensitive topics:

figures on gun crime, incest, spousal abuse, child abuse, rape, infanticide – crime of all sorts, as a matter of fact. You’d also have to concede that information related to racial, cultural or ethnic issues can be, and often is, highly sensitive. Is anything more delicate, given the cultural, religious and political ramifications, than the issue of honour killings? Should Ontarians be allowed access to figures related to immigration, given how touchy the matter can be? Perhaps data related to education and health care should be lumped in as well, given the heated arguments that often break out over policies and practices related to those topics. The government has seen fit to exclude none of those from its legislation, however. Only abortion.

As the article notes that safety considerations shouldn't be effected by mere numbers as people already know where abortion clinics are and no names of the women who've had abortions would have been released. The article's conclusion:

it is difficult not to conclude that the government simply wants to make an exception in the case of abortion in order to prevent researchers or opponents from continuing to assemble the kind of numbers that may make some Canadians uncomfortable. ... Singling out abortion as the only exception to the rule of public access suggests the government’s real motivation is a desire to stifle debate and avoid having to answer the difficult questions that arise from Canada’s easy and unquestioning approach to the provision of abortion.

How Advertisers Convinced Americans They Smelled Bad

"A schoolgirl and a former traveling Bible salesman helped turn deodorants and antiperspirants from niche toiletries into an $18 billion industry"

The Facebook Fallacy

From MIT's Technology Review. The byline: "For all its valuation, the social network is just another ad-supported site. Without an earth-changing idea, it will collapse and take down the Web."

Power-grid experiment could confuse electric clocks

"A yearlong experiment with America's electric grid could mess up traffic lights, security systems and some computers — and make plug-in clocks and appliances like programmable coffeemakers run up to 20 minutes fast." It's a result of clocks often using power-grid frequency to track time. Why would people want to make this less reliable? "Officials say they want to try this to make the power supply more reliable, save money and reduce what may be needless efforts." Note that the effects are likely to vary based on location: "East Coast clocks may run as much as 20 minutes fast over a year, but West Coast clocks are only likely to be off by 8 minutes. In Texas, it's only an expected speedup of 2 minutes." This article is timestamped last June. Wonder if they managed to get this started.

How Headphones Changed the World

"Up to half of younger workers listen to music on their headphones, and the vast majority thinks it makes us better at our jobs. In survey after survey, we report with confidence that music makes us happier, better at concentrating, and more productive. Science says we're full of it. Listening to music hurts our ability to recall other stimuli, and any pop song -- loud or soft -- reduces overall performance for both extraverts and introverts. ... With 70 percent of office workers in cubicles or open work spaces, it's more important to create one's own cocoon of sound. That brings us to a psychological answer: There is evidence that music relaxes our muscles, improves our mood, and can even moderately reduce blood pressure, heart rate, and anxiety. What music steals in acute concentration, it returns to us in the form of good vibes." And, of course, it adds that modicum of privacy to public spaces, not only allowing you a private experience but also as those around you "assume that people wearing them are busy or oblivious, so now people wear them to appear busy or oblivious -- even without music. "