NEW BLOG ADDRESS

If for some reason you have returned to this stimulating site and are finding no new entries there is a reason.

I have changed the address for my mind twisting blogs to a slightly shorter address. Now go to:

www.kensquestions.blogspot.com


Tell all of your friends and neighbours. They will thank you and so will I.




SCROLL DOWN TO READ ALL OF THE BLOGS ON MY OLD SITE IF YOU ARE DESPARATE FOR SOMETHING MINDLESS TO DO

ARE UBER AND SELF DRIVING CARS REALLY THE FUTURE?

ARE UBER AND SELF DRIVING CARS REALLY THE FUTURE?

I have never had a car fetish. I am one of a few men who never cared what kind of car I drove. I grew up at the same time as my Father’s 1936 Chev and his “newer” 1951 Chev found homes in our small garage. My own first car was a 1962 Corvair, one of the most unreliable and dangerous cars ever built. As I said, I wasn’t an auto aficionado! Keeping my record for innocuous car purchases in order, I then bought a brand new 1966 Nash Rambler. How’s that for an elevated taste in quality cars?

As I entered the work force and had a little more money to buy cars, I established a criteria for any new purchase. The car must be relatively inexpensive (cheap), be economical on fuel (cheap), an automatic transmission, and have enough leg room in the driver’s seat to be able to stretch my legs out completely. I wasn’t concerned with size of engine, power, number of doors, colour, tire size, or any of the latest techno gimmicks that were available. A car radio was a big deal to me. Ultimately, I discovered that the Honda Accord was the perfect car for my needs and it met my criteria. I drove Hondas for thirty years until I found my current vehicle, a Toyota Avalon, which I am also very happy with. 

Consequently, the news that the Ford Motor Company is now in the process of restructuring and reducing its white collar staff by about 7000 people globally did not interest me, until I read a little more about it. Once a giant of the auto industry, Ford has steadily been declining in terms of sales and profit. The first step was to dispense with 7000 bureaucrats who work in offices and not on the factory floor. I always find it amazing that after companies dispense with thousands of employees it doesn’t seem to noticeably effect the companies operations. General Motors did the same thing a few years ago and I think GM is still in business!

Ford has learned that to stay competitive they must become current with the times. Automobiles that are either electric or hybrid seem to have secured a toe hold in the market that just continues to grow in terms of demand. In addition, the rapid growth in the Uber phone a taxi service has had a huge impact on vehicle sales for everyone. Many people today are choosing the option of just paying for an Uber ride or using GoCars rather than the growing cost of purchasing a car, paying insurance, maintaining it, paying for parking, and buying gasoline. 

The latest threat to the auto industry as we know it is the emergence of numerous prototype self-driving cars. Many futurists are predicting driverless societies in many urban locations within twenty years. This notion, which smacks of science fiction, is rapidly being tested by many auto makers and will become a reality sooner than later. Ford is not quite ready for as big a restructuring as this, but they are taking the risky step of no longer making four door sedans in the future! If this momentous decision was made by one of the 7000 soon to be unemployed workers, I think Ford has made a correct downsizing decision. 

I’ve come a long way from driving my four door, rear engine Corvair to the world of automobiles today. I can hardly wait to see what is around the corner. (If I am in a self-driving car it will probably see around that corner before I do!)

DOES THIS PROBLEM HAVE A SOLUTION OR NOT?

DOES THIS PROBLEM HAVE A SOLUTION OR NOT?

First of all, I need to emphasize that this entry is not garbage, it is ABOUT garbage. Recent headlines about the Philippines returning our un-recycled garbage raised a lot of questions and my research led to some interesting information.

Canada agreed to the return of 2,450 tons of trash that were shipped to the Philippines in 2013 and 2014. The 103 containers holding the trash were shipped to the Philippines and most of it has remained in the ports of Manila and Subic ever since. Now Canada says it will haul the garbage back across the Pacific and pay the full cost of the operation. 

Questions: Why would the Philippines agree to importing garbage in the first place; they do reuse plastic, but most of the garbage was not plastic? Why would it sit on the dock for five or six years before a decision was made? What is Canada now going to do with the returned product? What does the operation cost? Does any government agency have any long term solution to the accumulation of garbage problem?

For decades, Canada and other developed countries had been selling their waste plastic to China, where it was sorted, cleaned, processed and re-used in the country’s massive manufacturing industry. That all changed on Jan. 1, 2018, when China began refusing shipments of a wide variety of plastic waste products. That was the first major blow to the “ship your garbage elsewhere” practise.

A recent study states that Canadians produce more garbage per capita than any other country on earth. Canadians generate approximately 31 million tonnes of garbage a year (and only recycle about 30 per cent of that material). Thus, each Canadian generates approximately 2.7 kg or about 5.5 lb. of garbage each day.

The landfills around all major cities in Canada continue to be overused and the consequences are still not completely felt. All landfills leak and consequently all of the materials that leech into the soil ultimately find their way into the ground water that will feed our water supplies. In time, landfills will contaminate most cities water supplies. 

Current steps to minimize garbage are token attempts at best. Recycling is a small endeavour that attempts to separate useable refuse (plastics, paper and rubber) from decomposable waste. It is not successful as noted by our shipping our recyclable wastes to foreign countries who are now shouting “Whoa!” 

On the local scene, the city of Calgary further illustrates the problem. Last year, it cost Calgary tax payers nearly $300,000 to rent semi-trailers to house the hard-to-reprocess plastic material, about 1,600 tons filling 100 storage units. The space required to store them is growing at the pace of two to three trailer units a month. And since we can’t ship it overseas anymore, now what?

Despite the seriousness and long term effects of just the “plastic problem” politicians and government agencies constantly dance around the issues. Sure, banning plastic straws is a small step, but the inability to pass strict and unpopular legislation is a hallmark of government sleep walking, again. Perhaps they should consider the decisions made in Rwanda and Kenya where the penalty for the import or use of plastic bags is jail time. Who would have expected two African nations to take the matter that seriously?

If you have any good ideas relative to the problem get in touch with your MP! In the meantime, I will begin stockpiling Ziplock bags by the carton, just in case our government eventually decides to make a firm stand on a critical problem!

GUESS HOW MANY CROOKS WERE RECENTLY ELECTED?

GUESS HOW MANY CROOKS WERE RECENTLY ELECTED?

If you think Trudeau was a bad choice or Sheerer will be or Kenney is or Notley was, you ain’t seen nothing yet! Just this month India completed its national election. Over 900 million people voted for 539 government seats over a period of almost six weeks. The results are now in and some of the accompanying data will shock you. In the world’s largest democracy, 43% or 233 out of 539 winning candidates in the general elections have declared criminal charges pending, according to a report by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR). Is there something wrong with this picture?

Indian law bars a person convicted of any offence and sentenced to an imprisonment of two years or more from running in an election. But persons only facing charges are free to contest the elections. Meanwhile, the Indian judicial system moves slowly and can take decades to resolve a case, so the potential convicted felons are not overly concerned. Out of the 7,928 candidates analyzed by ADR in this election, 1,500 (19%) had declared open criminal cases against them

Moreover, 159 (29%) of the winners face serious criminal charges including rape, murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping and crimes against women. The party which won the elections with a majority, can also boast the highest number of parliamentarians facing criminal charges. As many as 116 out of the ruling parties 303 elected MPs (39%) have criminal cases pending against them.

One winning candidate topped the list with 204 criminal cases against him, including cases related to committing culpable homicide, house trespass, robbery and criminal intimidation. Another elected parliamentarian is currently being tried for alleged terrorism. 30 other winners face charges of attempted murder, 19 are implicated in crimes against women and 29 for hate speeches.

I don’t know about you but that information just blew my mind! Over forty percent of the elected government officials could become convicted felons! What kind of a government is that? The inmates are running the asylum! Or more correctly, the crooks are running the country! It totally boggles my mind. I am assuming that these pending criminal charges were known during the campaigning and before the election.

What the hell was the Indian electorate thinking? How could so many unsavoury candidates run for office, let alone be elected? I can only surmise that mega-money was flowing out into the countryside, as it does in rural Turkey, in order to buy votes. Any admiration that I might have had for Indian democracy has just been placed in the same cesspool that stores all of the tweets and pronouncements of the self proclaimed “stable genius” of American politics!

Can you believe it?

DO SCHOOLS NEED A PARENT DRESS CODE?

DO SCHOOLS NEED A PARENT DRESS CODE?

Dress codes have constantly evolved over time. In the business world, the suit-and-tie mentality has slowly been eroded to something called “business-casual” to butt crack exposed slob. What people wear to work seems to operate in most businesses on the “anything goes” mentality. I find it unacceptable that people who work with the public are more concerned with feeling comfortable in their work attire than dressing appropriately to meet the public. But if it is not an issue for the employer, who am I to criticize the employee? On the other hand, in the world of education I do have some very specific expectations.

I never went to work, in a school or with the school district, without a sport coat, slacks, and shirt and tie. I was not a suit-man but preferred the mix and match options that various combinations of sport coats and slacks offered. In today’s schools, it is often difficult to distinguish staff from students. Most male teachers do not wear suits or sport coats, but substitute clean shirts or sweaters with casual pants and I can accept that as being a reasonable choice. I have no tolerance for a teacher who wears sweat pants, a T-shirt, torn jeans or shorts during school hours if they are a classroom teacher. Women who choose tight clothing, short skirts or revealing tops are also not acceptable. Teachers have a responsibility to model appropriate dress. In my books it is a requirement of being a teacher. Sadly, there are few teachers who agree. 

Schools seem to all expect a certain dress code among students. They do not accept revealing clothing or clothes bearing inappropriate slogans. Often student hair styling or accessories are also monitored. Too bad that teachers are not held to an even higher standard. In general, our society has adopted a laissez faire policy when it comes to dressing up. Going to church, or out to dinner, or to a musical concert or play usually meant wearing something besides your gardening clothes. Not any more! The crowd at the opera or a hockey game dress the same - whether you call it casual or slovenly - there are no differentiating standards. 

An interesting twist to this issue occurred recently when a high school in Houston implemented a dress code targeted toward parents! The principal wrote to parents in a letter earlier this month that they cannot enter school grounds while wearing pyjamas or revealing clothing. The school is also prohibiting parents from wearing leggings, sagging pants, low-rider shorts, short dresses and low-cut tops. Women can't wear a satin cap, hair curlers, shower cap or bonnet on their heads. The new policy was implemented "to prepare our children and let them know daily, the appropriate attire they are supposed to wear when entering a building, going somewhere, applying for a job, or visiting someone outside of the home setting," the principal said.

While I do commend the principal for taking this courageous stand, I have a feeling that in the fight that is bound to ensue, that she will not really be supported by her school board. With all of the more significant issues that educators face, I do not think that implementing a parent dress code is the hill you want to die on!

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED CGTN?

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED CGTN?

Finally, followers of this outstanding blog, who have persevered in reading it faithfully over the past six months, are going to be rewarded. I am going to let you in on a small secret that I accidentally discovered about a month ago that will change your TV viewing habits. If you are suffering serious withdrawal from the ending of the Game of Thrones or The Big Bang Theory, I have great news for you. You must first find it on your TV channels and then selectively watch CGTN - the China Global Television Network!

CGTN (China Global Television Network), formerly known as CCTV News, is a Chinese international English-language news channel of the State-owned China Global Television Network group, based in Beijing. In other words, a Chinese television network designed for Western viewers such as me and possibly you. Calgarians who subscribe to Telus can find CCTV on channel 834.

I first stumbled upon a program that turned out to be the best travel program on China that I have ever seen. It was largely filmed from drones in dozens of backwater location in China that I had never heard of before. The photography was stunning and showed me locations in China that were amazing. The show avoided any of the usual tourist sites like Beijing, Shanghai, Xian, and Hong Kong. It explored the “unknown to me” more inland and Eastern areas of the country and the sites and sights were truly remarkable. 

Today, I discovered my second incredible show on CGTN. It was the opening night of the Asian Cultural Carnival - an event that I am sure that I can accurately predict that none of my avid fans have ever heard of. The show held in the Beijing Olympic Bird’s Nest Stadium put any Olympic Opening Ceremony to shame. The Asian Carnival or Festival cannot adequately be described in words. Performers from almost all of the countries of Asia from Turkey to the Emirates to India to Tibet to Japan all contributed to the two hour show with some cultural song and/or dance event that was superb. I have never seen a show either live or on TV that was as colourful, with hundreds of performers wearing multicoloured national costumes, originally choreographed, with music ranging from wooden flutes to symphony orchestras and all performed without a hitch. As one example of its complexity, have you ever seen a group of a dozen live horses on a stage, trotting on a treadmill-like floor while dozens of dancers, whirled around them? Pretty hard to imagine and to describe.

Although two examples rarely provide enough evidence of excellence, I am using my two viewings to do just that. See if you can find the channel and then selectively search for similar shows. Much of the programming is devoted to world news, Asian and African news, and local Chinese talk and political shows - almost all in English. Look for the variety or travel features.

The reason for a Chinese TV channel in Canada (North America) is probably two fold. Firstly, it depicts and highlights a China that would be foreign to most North Americans. Secondly, it might contain obvious propaganda programming, but I know that I can skip that and search for any opportunity to learn more about China, its culture, geography and the way of life that exists in China today. Anyone whose mindset of China is based upon peasants dressed in Mao grey tunics or farmers wandering the cities filled with rickshaws, wearing their straw pointed hats, is going to experience a huge awakening. 

Just as Al Jazeera TV has helped introduce the Middle East perspective to our Western world, CGTN is bringing today’s China to us in Canada. Have a peak when you are bored of hockey games or police dramas. You might like it!

SHOULD FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY BE BANNED?

SHOULD FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY BE BANNED?

Most people would agree that we should provide every means possible to assist  police forces to fight crime. We are always faced with the challenge of “building a better mouse trap” as the mice become more skilled or devious. Petty and serious criminals have access to significant weapons and technology in trying to outsmart police forces and security agencies. It seemed to me like a step backward when the San Francisco city council recently banned the use of facial recognition technology by local agencies, such as the city’s transport authority and the San Francisco Police Department. 

From my extensive knowledge of crime fighting, learned from watching current police and detective dramas on TV and reading the crime procedural novels of Michael Connelly, I have observed facial recognition technology assisting with the resolution of many crimes. This technology uses the same kind of strategy as fingerprint recognition. Since all finger prints and all faces are unique, technicians identify a number of critical points on a finger print or face that make up a one-of-a-kind template. If an unidentified print or face is compared to a known template it “recognizes” the duplicate. A wonderful tool to assist in the identification of a specific individual. Why would the city of San Francisco ban its use by the SFPD?

Those in favour of the move said the technology as it exists today is unreliable, and represented an unnecessary infringement on people’s privacy and liberty. In particular, opponents argued the systems are error prone, particularly when dealing with women or people with darker skin. The American Civil Liberties Union claims that face surveillance technology is incompatible with a healthy democracy and violates our privacy. There doesn’t appear to be an equivalent group presenting data on the number of successful uses of face recognition in identifying criminals in the enforcement of law and order. The new rules will not apply to security measures at San Francisco’s airport or sea port, as they are run by federal, not local, agencies.

Over the years, our police departments have been provided with a number of new tools and technologies to help in their fight against crime. Police cruisers are equipped with computers that allow officers instant access to data bases to provide information at the scene of an altercation. Improved body armour and both dash cameras and body cameras allow for police interactions to be recorded live. DNA and fingerprint analysis provides scientific support in solving crimes. Police training is continually improving and the access to new and helpful technologies can only provide for safer communities everywhere. 

I can understand that facial recognition is not perfected yet, but it is a far better tool than relying simply on witness memory in identifying a possible suspect. No tool is perfect, but it is a helpful means of honing in on finding the actual perpetrator of a crime. I think it should be kept as one more tool, among many others, in the policeman’s toolbox and used where applicable. What do you think?