Gacked from Smart Bitches:



I love a capella groups!

I said before I had some extra Christmas money I planned to donate somewhere. I decided to use it at www.kiva.org, a microlender. It's a fun site to use. You look through all the individual loan requests, each of which has a story to go along with it, and all you have to donate is $25. The requested loans are for larger amounts than that, but they're funded by multiple people. If you sit for too long, reading about the people who are requesting loans, you sometimes lose the opportunity to contribute! The loan will be fulfilled by other people, and then it grays out and you can't access it anymore.

I had $100 to spend, so I donated $25 each to a woman in Ecuador, a woman in Kenya, a woman in Ghana, and a group of entrepreneurs in Kyrgyzstan.

Technically, they are not donations, but loans. They are high-risk loans, so some of them may default on me, in which case I write it off as a donation. If they get paid back (with interest), so much the better, because I can turn around and loan the money to someone else!

I like this site because 100% of the money donated (loaned) goes to the person you're reading about. (Kiva requests a separate donation to cover their administrative costs, $3.75, which I paid.) And these are people launching or expanding businesses, so I feel like I'm helping people who are also helping themselves. The money's not just disappearing into a void somewhere and perhaps winding up in the coffers of corrupt government officials. (At least I hope it's not.)

If you want to check it out, go directly to the site (http://www.kiva.org) or I can email you an invitation, in which case I get credit for the referral (not that it gains me anything, it's just cool to see it acknowledged on the site).

Here are a couple more tips I picked up from that book that I forgot to mention in my earlier post:

1. You've seen those sweepstakes at the mall where you fill out a card to win a car or truck? Never, ever enter those. Many are outright fraudulent, as in they don't give away the prize. (After all, how would you know? If you don't win, you assume that somebody else did.) And their purpose is to build a sucker list. Your personal information will be sold to con artists, who will fill your mailbox with junk mail for sweepstakes scams and call you with telemarketing scams. I imagine it's even worse if you give them your email address.

2. Pyramid schemes are particularly important to avoid because not only are you almost certain to lose your money, it is a crime to participate in them. While usually only the people at the top of the pyramid are actually prosecuted, the moment you write your check to participate, you have committed a felony. Don't go there. Most pyramid schemes will claim to be legal. They're not.

Crimes of Persuasion, by Les Henderson

A couple years ago, I read a series of books about con artists and thieves because I was writing Finneas Trapp, and I needed insight into the criminal mind. This is one of the books I purchsed for that purpose; however, I ended up not reading it then because I got enough material from the other books. I read it this past month.

That time I spent reading about con artists, then and now, woke me up. You may not realize it, but you have probably been conned many times in your life. I average 6-10 direct encounters with a con artist per year, but I didn't realize they were cons until I read these books and began to recognize them. A happy side effect of reading these books is I no longer fall for cons (yes, I have fallen for a few of them in the past), and I no longer feel guilty turning away door-to-door salesmen or hanging up on telemarketers, because I know a large percentage of them are dishonest.

This book has a slightly odd format--it might be self-published. There are no chapters, and it is not particularly well organized. It is mostly just a list of known modern-day cons, covering a vast territory from investment scams to sweepstakes scams to timeshares to pyramid schemes to ponzi schemes to fraudulent charities and many, many more. As you read this book, you will probably wince a few times as you recognize cons that have been tried on you or on people you know. The lack of organization doesn't hurt the book much. It gets its point across. Read this, and you will be inoculated against getting scammed. I wouldn't say it's 100% protection--con artists are always coming up with devious new schemes--but you'll recognize many specific cons, and also the general features that characterize all cons.

Crimes of persuasion have something in common with sexual assaults--namely, that they are seldom reported. Only about 15% of people who are conned out of their money report the crime. The reason is that they feel humiliated and ashamed, and they know that if they tell people what happened, they are less likely to receive sympathy than blame ("You fell for THAT?"). This victim-blaming culture creates an environment where con artists thrive. Also, even if you prosecute, you are unlikely to get your money back. The con artist has already spent it or hidden it in an offshore trust.

Of particular interest was the well-known Nigerian prince scam. I wonder if the scam works as well today as it used to, because word has really gotten around and people publicly laugh at Nigerian prince scam emails. But at the time this book was written, it was a serious and very lucrative scam, pulling in five BILLION U.S. dollars worldwide. It actually originates in Nigeria, and it is a "big con" of the type described in the book The Big Con, which I HIGHLY recommend because it's fascinating. A "big con" is a con run by a group of savvy con-men with very convincing materials and props. They will fly you to Nigeria if you let them, to show you their millions of dollars and draw you further into the scheme. It's very serious because in a few cases, once they've drained their victims of as much money as they can, they've killed them. Those emails may be a laughingstock, but the results are not funny at all.

( Read more )

I was doing my budgeting for November and I found an unexpected transaction on my credit card. It was for $142 and was charged by a company I've never heard of. I looked them up on the internet and found very little information, except that the company was convicted of tax fraud in 2004. The business is described as an "exporter." They do not appear to be selling anything. I called the phone number associated with the charge--ten times. No answer. I left a message once--we'll see if they call back.

I am going to dispute the charge. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It's possible the charge is legitimate and I just don't remember what it was. It was over a month ago. But I suspect the charge is fraudulent and these guys are crooks.

Okay, the story is just "Dances with Wolves" in space, but what an amazingly immersive world. It draw me in so completely that after the movie I was disoriented and bumping into people. From the moment the guys started waking up from cryospace in an obviously weightless environment, I was entranced and thinking, "This is gonna be fun." There is real joy in seeing a science fiction-y environment rendered on the screen, and rendered so well that it's believable.

Also enjoyable: scientists as heroes! Strong female characters!

I was disappointed by some story elements that appeared to be supernatural (probably intended to be science, but they were really really implausible). But other than that, the movie was a ton of fun.

I am debating whether to take Sean (age 11) to see it. There were some scary, intense sequences, but there's also a lot of cool stuff he'd love to see. I definitely will NOT take Ethan (age 6).

ETA: I laughed out loud at "unobtainium." It's as if the filmmakers were telling the audience, "It's a MacGuffin, we know it's a MacGuffin, and we're not going to waste your time giving you some BS explanation for it."

If I knew then what I know now about elementary-school-level chess, I would have done things differently with Sean. I'd have started him earlier. Here are some common misconceptions about chess and elementary school kids, all of which I harbored for a while until I learned otherwise:

Misconception #1: Chess is a game for geniuses.

There is some truth to this, but not nearly as much as you think. It's true that chess is a brainsport, and high-IQ kids have an advantage. Only a small percentage of kids have what it takes to become a grandmaster. Similarly, only a small percentage of kids who play soccer will become the next David Beckham. But that doesn't stop plenty of less athletically talented kids from playing and enjoying the game. Elementary-school-level chess is similar to elementary-school-level soccer. The top players are quickly filtered off into their own tournament section (the Open), and the more casual players duke it out in the Under-800 section, where they have a real chance of winning. And chess tournaments are ridiculously generous with trophies, especially since number and size of trophies is a selling point for the tournament--more and better trophies means more kids attending and more entry fees paid. Over the years, I have watched the trophies get larger and larger!

Misconception #2: Chess is too complicated a game for a kindergartener.

Nope, it isn't, and there's a big advantage to starting the tournament circuit in kindergarten. Most tournaments offer a special section for just kindergarteners, and they usually give a trophy to every participant. If you wait until 1st grade, your 1st grader will have to begin the tournament circuit playing in the 1st-3rd grade division--which means he or she will be competing against 3rd graders. That's a tougher starting point than the kindergarten division. And they don't offer participation trophies in 1st-3rd.

Misconception #3: Chess involves sitting still and thinking for long periods of time. My kid can't sit still that long.

Nobody's kid can. Those tournaments where players take an hour between moves are adult tournaments. Kids do not play that way. They move fast, and their games are quick. The typical kindergarten game lasts 10 minutes. Sean, now in 5th grade, becomes a little more thoughtful and deliberate each year. His games last 45-60 minutes now. But when he was in 1st grade, his games lasted 10 minutes or less.

There are also many chess variations that add liveliness and fast action to chess. These variations are hugely popular with kids, and virtually all chess instruction programs teach these variations and allow the kids to play them regularly.

The most popular variation is bughouse. This is a 4-person team game played with two chess boards. When you capture one of your opponent's pieces, you give it to your teammate, who can then put it into action on his board. When you visualize a chess game, you probably see two men sitting across from each other, silent and deep in thought. A bughouse game is the opposite of this. The kids are giggling and shouting ("gimme a queen! I need a queen!"), bouncing around and slamming down their pieces with vigor. The game is called "bughouse" (slang for a mental hospital) because it is so chaotic.

Other variations include atomic chess (each capture causes all the pieces around it to blow up) and "take me" chess, in which the objective is to force your opponent to capture all your pieces.

Get any group of chess-playing kids together, and they'll soon be playing bughouse, atomic, or some other high-energy variation. These games are casual and fun, and they also improve kids' skills for the real game.

I want to get a new music player--a nice one. I know the iPhone is great, but I can't stomach the contract and monthly fees.

What should I get--an iPod Touch or a Zune?

I know that two things I want to use it for are listening to music and reading e-books. (Possibly, on the e-books. I don't know yet if I'll like that experience.) I know they do more stuff than that. Since I've never owned an iPod-like device, I have no idea yet which of the other features I'll use.

Charge! History's Greatest Military Speeches, edited by Congressman Steve Israel

I read this for research. Lucien had to deliver a speech, and I didn't have a clue what he should say, so I read this book for ideas. It gave me lots of them.

The book turned out to be a good read on its own. It begins in the ancient world, with speeches from Moses and Pericles and Isocrates and Hannibal. (I was disappointed we didn't get many Roman speeches.) There are speeches from the Middle Ages, quite a few from Napolean, and of course lots from the American Revolution, WWI, WWII, and beyond. The book concludes with George W. Bush's post-9/11 speech, and though I detest Bush in general, I must admit that was a nice piece of oratory.

The editor, a congressman who describes himself as a "Truman Democrat" (meaning he believes in the use of both hard and soft power to protect American interests), frames each speech historically and draws parellels between them. It is striking how later speeches draw from the ones that came before, whether deliberately or by accident. Churchill's speeches draw heavily from Pericles. A speech by General Patton echoes one by the ancient Roman Catiline. Similar themes are seen over and over again, and by the time I got to the Bush speech, I could see the historical origins of almost every point he made.

The book is a fascinating walk through history. I learned things I hadn't known about WWI and WWII and other historical events.

I also learned that I'm a fan of Pericles! He spoke words nearly 3000 years ago that feel modern. Many areas of study were ridiculously primitive in 400 BCE--medicine, astronomy, math. But not oratory, and not military thinking. Those skills were as advanced among the ancient Greeks as they are today. Pericles was one of my favorite orators in this book because his speeches were clear and understandable appeals to reason. Some of the speeches that impressed me the least were the ones based purely on religion, like the one from St. Bernard that mobilized the Second Crusade. "Fly then to arms; let a holy rage animate you in the fight, and let the Christian world resound with these words of the prophet: 'Cursed be he who does not stain his sword with blood!'" Yet another embarrassing historical case of "God wants you to kill people! Really!" Blech.

The speech with the most character would have to be the one by Patton. "I don't want to get any messages saying, 'I am holding my position.' We are not holding a goddamned thing. Let the Germans do that. We are advancing constantly and we are not interested in holding onto anything, except the enemy's balls."

One interesting pair of speeches are by Josef Stalin and (British) General Sir Bernard Montgomery. Both speeches say the same thing--stop retreating and make a stand here. But they do so in remarkably different ways. Stalin says, "We can no longer tolerate commanders, commissars, and political officers, whose units leave their defences at will. We can no longer tolerate the fact that the commanders, commissars and political officers allow several cowards to run the show at the battlefield, that the panic-mongers carry away other soldiers in their retreat and open the way to the enemy. Panic-mongers and cowards are to be exterminated at the site." The speech basically tells the soldiers they will be punished if they retreat.

Montgomery, on the other hand, makes no mention of punishment, but bolsters the morale of his troops. He says, "I have ordered that all plans and instructions dealing with further withdrawal are to be burned, and at once. We will stand and fight here. If we can't stay alive here, then let us stay here dead." Then he goes on to talk about the reinforcements on the way and an offensive they're going to launch. He does not threaten his soldiers; he gives them praise and encouragement and hope.

I'd like to think that Montgomery got better results than Stalin.

Yesterday I posted about how Blizzard had changed WOW in a way that had greatly enlarged the community, and this had both positive and negative effects.

I kept thinking about that all day yesterday, and it occurred to me that we see this happening all over the place in the real world, with similar effects. It's been going on for a long time. Small towns are shrinking while more people move to big cities and the suburbs that encircle them.

Big cities have obvious benefits. More restaurants, better shopping, access to theaters and symphonies and opera houses and sports arenas and art museums, festivals and special events. More employment options. A larger pool of people from which to find friends.

But there's a downside to large communities. Most of the people you interact with as you go about your business are strangers, people you may never see again, so it doesn't matter too much what they think of you. You can be rude with impunity, and we see this all the time while driving, where anonymity is all the greater because we're encased in our fortresses of steel. We often don't even see the faces of the people we're cutting off. In a small community, what you do is seen and remembered by the people you'll be around tomorrow and the next day. Rude behavior has consequences. In a large community, most likely your behavior will not be remembered by anyone you'll see again, and there will be no consequences.

And yet most of us, though we hate the sense of aloneness you can feel in a big city even while surrounded by multitudes of people, and we hate the traffic and the crowds and the rudeness, still choose large communities over small ones. The positives outweigh the negatives. And if you're a little bit "different" in some way, a large community is almost a necessity, because you need a larger pool of people to find people like you.

One of the staple songs in country music is the song extolling the virtues of small-town life. An example is "Where I'm From" by Jason Michael Carroll. There's a line that goes, "So come take me home to my family and friends, where the quarterback dates the homecoming queen, the truck's a Ford and the tractor's green..." Every time I hear that song, I think, what if you're not the homecoming queen? Is there a place for you then? Some people love the sense of community in a small town, but for others, a small community is a prison that denies them the acceptance they could find in a larger, more varied group of people.

I don't know what the answer is. Large communities have huge benefits, but we humans aren't really designed for them. We're meant to live in small family groups where we know everyone and everyone knows us. Could the loneliness and breakdown of social bonds associated with large communities be behind a lot of the depression and general unhappiness in America?

Sean's 5th grade classroom has a goldfish. To name it, the kids submitted names and voted on them, but there was a typo on the ballots. "Flippers" was listed as "Fkippers." The class voted for "Fkippers," and that is now the fish's name.

Sean was amused by the name, so he named his stuffed dolphin Fkippers as well. Sean says the name with virtually no vowel sound between the 'f' and the 'k'. F'kippers. But Ethan is younger and struggles with difficult pronunciations, so he pronounces it "fukippers."

Lately Ethan has been baiting Sean. He steals the dolphin from Sean's room and goes to his own room, bounces on the bed, and yells, "I've got fukippers! I've got fukippers!"

It's completely innocent, yet it makes me want to spew my coffee every time.