Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

‘Internet Hunting’ Ban Gains Ground

Posted on February 20, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

As Miami's own Dave Barry says, I am not making this up.

More States Move To Ban Internet Hunting: A Texas businessman who wanted to allow computer users to hunt from the comfort of their homes has instead spawned dozens of state laws banning the practice. Texas lawmakers shut down San Antonio businessman John Lockwood's operation

in 2005 and two dozen other states have since banned Internet hunting. Connecticut lawmakers are now considering whether to follow suit and ban state residents from using a computer mouse to point, click, and kill penned animals herded before a Web-based camera.

On the one hand, this seems like a barbaric practice, and I'm perfectly happy to see it banned. On the other hand…is this our most pressing social problem?

Posted in Internet | 7 Comments

NOVA Behaving Badly

Posted on February 20, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

The University of Miami may not have behaved as well as one might wish in dealing with the demands of its striking janitors last year, and worse with students who supported the union, but at the end of the day the University stepped up to the plate and offered a decent contract.

The same cannot be said about Nova Southeastern University, which is engaged in a very unfortunate — I almost wrote something much worse — campaign to prevent a similar unionization of its workers. Their jobs are being handed off to new sub-contractors. Workers active in the union movement are not being rehired by these new contractors.

Coverage of NOVA behaving badly can be found in the article linked right above, and in Better wages, healthcare not enough, a column by Ana Menendez.

Posted in Miami | Comments Off on NOVA Behaving Badly

Cold Fusion Reaction Replicated

Posted on February 19, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

New Scientist, Table-top fusion, back with a pop:

Reports that the bubble had burst for a form of cheap, table-top nuclear fusion may have been premature. Rusi Taleyarkhan, the physicist at the centre of a furore surrounding so-called bubble fusion, was last week cleared of scientific misconduct.

In 2002, Taleyarkhan, then at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee and now at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, published a paper in Science claiming that bombarding a solvent with neutrons and sound waves produced tiny bubbles that triggered nuclear fusion reactions. Then in March 2006, Purdue began investigating allegations of misconduct against Taleyarkhan, amid accusations that the evidence of fusion he reported was actually caused by a radioactive isotope of californium.

However, on 7 February, Purdue absolved Taleyarkhan's group of any misconduct. The verdict follows independent verification of Taleyarkhan's results by Edward Forringer of LeTourneau University in Texas and his colleagues last November (Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, vol 95, p 736).

I want my “Mr. Fusion”!

Posted in Science/Medicine | 6 Comments

McCain’s Forked-Tongue Express Rolls On

Posted on February 19, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

Jesus' General has the graphic that tells all:

Substantiation: compare McCain's statement that Roe v. Wade should be repealed yesterday with McCain's pro-Roe v. Wade remarks in 1999 when he was trying to run left of the field:

“But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”

A man with no principles, or merely very changeable ones?

Updates: (1) Changed his view on Ethanol subsidies too (a big issue in Iowa…), but at least here he has a plausible excuse — higher gas prices. (2) And maybe the pander / lie was in 1999, given his consistent voting record against reproductive freedom?

Posted in Politics: US: 2008 Elections | 1 Comment

Iraqi Oil Law?

Posted on February 19, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

A bunch of evening clicking around led to me to what purports to be an unofficial English translation of the latest draft text of a proposed Iraqi Oil Law. Apparently, this draft text has been a closely held secret.

According to this blog, if passed this draft would have some serious distributional consequences:

Please feel free to widely distribute this document. It's important to start a stronger debate and to try to educate Iraqis and Americans about this catastrophic law that will facilitate the further looting of Iraqi oil, and will achieve nothing other than increasing the levels of violence and anger in Iraq.

This law legalizes PSAs (production sharing agreements) in Iraq. Iraq will be the only country in the middle east with such contracts privatising Iraqi oil and giving foreign companies crazy rates of profit that may reach to more than three fourth of the general revenue. Iraq and Iraqis need every Dinar that comes from oil sales. In addition to the financial aspects of this law, it can be considered the funding tool for splitting Iraq into three states. It undermines the central government and distributes oil revenues directly to the three regions, which sets the foundations for what Iraq's enemies are trying to achieve in terms of establishing three independent states.

Unfortunately, I can't vouch for the authenticity of the translation or the commentator as they are all complete strangers to me.

Nor am I so sure that dividing Iraq yet sharing oil revenue is necessarily such a terrible outcome, at least compared to the other imaginable outcomes. As for PSAs, I'd think the devil is in the details — Iraq is presumably short of capital for exploration and development (the capital having been destroyed, denuded. and of course stolen) so unlike its neighbors it may need these deals — if somehow they were concluded in an equitable fashion…which I admit is not all that likely in the current circumstances where the government has such a weak hand to play.

By raising these questions I don't want to sound like I'm claiming the blog quoted above is wrong. I simply don't have enough information to form a judgment either way. And, for what it's worth, the same bout of clicking did bring to me to Digby's quotation of this line by conservative she-guru Ann Coulter, “Liberals are always talking about why we shouldn't go to war for oil. But why not go to war for oil? We need oil.”

Posted in Iraq | 2 Comments

Rumpole on the Rampage

Posted on February 18, 2007 by Michael Froomkin

The Justice Building Blog, a gossipy yet serious attempt to talk about what happens in the local courts, is on a bit of a roll recently: I recommend both Diary of a Mad Jurist and Traffic.Parking (about how to improve conditions in traffic court). Having been through it recently, I especially like the idea of moving traffic ticket soundings (in which the magistrate offers most offenders a plea — usually, so many dollars, no points) online. But I wonder if the proposed rule about never allowing continuances isn't a bit harsh. Even the feds allow them for illness, for example.

On the other hand, I do think that last week's post about the TV exposé of local cops is a bit late (unless maybe the local station is doing reruns?). I wrote about it a year ago.

Posted in Blogs, Law: Practice, Miami | Comments Off on Rumpole on the Rampage