Category Archives: Uncategorized

The United States of Shame

I saw this floating around on the Twitterverse yesterday and thought I’d share. No one has more Maine state pride than me (see tattoo), but even we have something to be ashamed of. Apparently, based on SAT scores alone, us Mainers are the dumbest of the pack. It’s alright though because at least we’re not my second favorite state, Washington. (Bestiality? Really?).

The United States of Shame —

The chart was created by Jeff Wysaski from a website called Pleated Jeans that I had not previously heard of. If you click the image, you can get more info on each of the claims. Some are not as bad as others. Ohio is the nerdiest state? Sounds fine to me.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

On the WikiLeaks manifesto and network theory

Warning: This post is not about journalism, Portland, my job or even me. Well, not really, anyway.

So, little known fact about me: My senior anthropology capstone at the University of Maine was a 27-page paper about network theory, the strength of weak ties and grassroots political organizing. For the paper, I did fieldwork and research on network theory, which is really fascinating. Promise.

Anyway, Eryk Salvaggio shared with me today a link to Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks Manifesto. He said he was reminded of my capstone and asked what I thought of the manifesto. Below is a slightly modified e-mail response. I think these things are interesting to think about. I promise I won’t blog about these things often, so if this isn’t your cup of tea, don’t worry.

(A note on terminology: What Assange calls “nails” are referred to in network theory as “nodes.” Similarly, “strings” are “links” and “weight” of a link is not really mentioned, so far as I’ve seen. Instead “fitness” is discussed, which relates to the efficacy and utility of individual nodes. If I’ve done my writing well, you shouldn’t have to know anything else about network theory a priori to read on. You do, however, need to read the WikiLeaks Manifesto, linked above.)

Assange’s manifest covers a lot of the same ground as my capstone. The big difference is where I was concerned with constructing the most efficient networks for action, he’s concerned with dismantling efficient networks. But the same principles should apply.

One of the things I’m surprised Assange didn’t get to is the relationship of hubs to conspiratorial networks, or action sets. (Action sets are networks with purpose). I would imagine that in a conspiratorial action set as he’s describing it, the model is one that theorists call “scale-free.”

A scale-free network is one that contains many nodes, and links that are not evenly distributed. Efficiency is created through a small number of hubs, which are really well-connected links through which most communications or actions must go if it wants to reach all parts of the network.

I’m not familiar with whatever network he’s talking about, but I would imagine state department communication networks are scale-free ones. I doubt most memos from Burundi about diplomatic relations there end up at the embassy in Rio. Most memos are probably between the individual embassy, the Secretary of State’s office and maybe a few other embassies with a pressing interest, thought I don’t really know. Similarly, the embassies in hotbed areas are probably also hubs, albeit smaller than the Clinton hub (Think Jerusalem, Baghdad, Beijing, Tokyo, London; but not Quito, Sofia, or probably even Prague).

If that’s the case, and I think it is, I don’t know why Assange is so focused on splitting networks into equal halves. In constructing an efficient action set, you should be looking to link with those well-connected hubs. In the same way, I’d imagine, if you want to destroy an action set, you target the hubs. In abstract terms, when you destroy the hub you should, theoretically, render many nodes completely isolated because they were only tapped into the network through the hub. (Imagine how many fewer people would find their way to our blog posts if you were able to target Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr).

At any rate, the point is his theory seems sound and in practice has worked well to his ends. But his manifesto doesn’t really outline what I would think was the best strategy for dismantling a conspiratorial action set.


Filed under Uncategorized

Also: Quotes of the Day from Jonathan Safran Foer, via Zach Dionne

I’m finally getting around to reading “Everything is Illuminated” and have been talking with Zach Dionne about how great JSF is and how many people apparently disagree on his greatness. The level of literary geekiness has devolved to sharing favorite quotes. Here’s the latest from JSF, via ZD.

I hope you one day have the experience of doing something you do not understand for someone you love.

Sometimes I can hear my bones straining under the weight of all the lives I’m not living.

Those are both from “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close,” a next-up on my reading list. That’s it for now.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

What Was the Hipster?

From New York Magazine’s “What Was the Hipster?” by Mark Greif:

“Through both phases of the contemporary hipster, and no matter where he identifies himself on the knowingness spectrum, there exists a common element essential to his identity, and that is his relationship to consumption. The hipster, in this framework, is continuous with a cultural type identified in the nineties by the social critic Thomas Frank, who traced it back to Madison Avenue’s absorption of a countercultural ethos in the late sixties. This type he called the “rebel consumer.”

The rebel consumer is the person who, adopting the rhetoric but not the politics of the counterculture, convinces himself that buying the right mass products individualizes him as transgressive. Purchasing the products of authority is thus reimagined as a defiance of authority. Usually this requires a fantasized censor who doesn’t want you to have cologne, or booze, or cars. But the censor doesn’t exist, of course, and hipster culture is not a counterculture. On the contrary, the neighborhood organization of hipsters—their tight-knit colonies of similar-looking, slouching people—represents not hostility to authority (as among punks or hippies) but a superior community of status where the game of knowing-in-advance can be played with maximum refinement. The hipster is a savant at picking up the tiny changes of rapidly cycling consumer distinction.”

Pretty interesting stuff, if a little long and academic. Read the whole article  here.


Filed under Uncategorized