Category Archives: Public Posts

Hey guys,

As I’ve been saying, I’ll update my blog more regularly once I get an easy internet connection. Currently, I’m just working out of labs, which are only open during the day… which is when I want to be exploring places.

But I know you guys are probably wondering what’s up, so I’ll give you a quick update. First- how this blog will work. I’m going to be writing up blog posts from when I was on my roundtheworld trip which I sort of wrote in my notebook, which are going to be pretty dated. (The most amusing ones are reflections on US politics, like my prediction that the Democrats were going to go after Palin’s squeaky clean image, and that those attacks weren’t going to have any effect… boy was I wrong about that). But I’ll also post blogs about what I’m currently doing… having a blog that’s constantly 2 months behind is a tad odd. And I might post the occasional stray thought, who knows.

Ok, an update on my situation: I arrived in SD on Sept 9, but my college wasn’t open, so I caught a plane up to the Silicon Valley where I lived for a few days before my uncle drove me down to SD. We went via Yosemite National Park, Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon. I arrived Sept 17th, and have been wasting large amounts of money furnishing my room. Like $60 in Ikea, then $80 at Target, $70 at Marshals plus food etc. Wow. And $100 for my phone plan. Insane. Also been catching up with the other I-House guys/gals. They’re all great- my theory is that exchange students are the types of people who create their own opportunities so they’re a really interesting bunch of people. I tend to avoid overviews of exactly what I did in this blog (its sorta dull), but I think in this case it brings a sense of perspective to what I’ve been doing.

So now to actual experiences… the most amazing thing is the incredible similarities and the incredible differences between Syd/SD. The climate here is exactly the same as Sydney. They have beaches, they have sand and wind. The campus is covered in gum trees, and they even have that slightly burnt feel to them that our forests have after bushfires. Its ridiculous really how similar they are.

The biggest difference hasnt been culture like I expected, but rather language. I expected culture to be very different, but you know aside from a few curiosities (like the tipping habits), its the same. And language I expected there to be a few curiosities (like removing the i from aluminium) but no actual, substantive differences which would inhibit communication. But there are. Some range from the minor, like me saying “ok, I’ll prank you, hang on” (prank just means prank calls, not what it also means in Australia), or saying peppers instead of capsicum at Subway. But then I discovered I don’t speak English very well.
I went shopping for a blanket (not supplied) and mysteriously I had no clue what to do. I spent ages looking for a “single” size blanket, and couldnt find one. There was nothing in a single size- only “twin”, “full” queen, king and cal king. So eventually, I converted the inches into cms and got a twin. But blankets… they have no such word. There were comforters, which look a bit like thicker bedspreads, like you get in hotels. There were bedsheets. No blankets per se.

The reason is Americans don’t use blankets. They have bedsheets, then a comforter on top which is icky cause you can’t wash the comforter and you’re obviously going to touch it whilst you sleep (ignore whatever innuendos your disgusting undergraduate minds come up with). Its barbaric what they do. As you guys know, in Australia, we wrap our blankets up in a sheet like a pillowcase. But what is that called. It was then I realised I had no idea. Its really seldom that I don’t know a word for an entire field of stuff. My vocabulary makes Zeus quiver on his golden throne. But I dont know any of these words, and the blankets are all wrapped up so I can’t open them and see what they are. There was this massive translation gap that I just could not bridge without slowly interrogating one of the staff members at a different store. Its because I never had any need for these words before so I never learnt them. Mum always bought them, and referred to them in Chinese, so I never had any problems. So there you have it, I can’t speak English. I cant speak any other languages either, so I guess I’m adrift withot a home

In the end, it took an hour for me to buy anything. I ended up paying $50 for comforter covers at Linen N Things (the expensive place) because Marshals or Ross didnn’t have them. Ridiculous. I’ll probably go to Macys to see if they have it there, and if they do I’ll just return it to Linen N Things.

Just testing if I can post from Facebook to my actual blog. That’d be awesome.

Edit: Well apparently I can. A tiny bit strange… considering I never logged into this account (or input any password) to add this blog to my facebook page! lol security issues?

Its not the most functional way of posting (I can’t, for eg. add this to any categories, nor can I add a password. I need to log into WordPress then edit all that stuff). But it works. An interesting function if nothing else.

Haha this is so awesome. The Perseids meteor showers are normally only visible in the Northern hemisphere so I never get to see them. BUT this year around Aug 12 I will be in the Northern Hemisphere! More specifically in Athens. It won’t be perfect since Athens is a fairly large city, and the light pollution will dampen the effect of the Perseids, but isn’t that great?

On the other hand, I fly out to Geneva on the 13th… and Geneva is relatively speaking, a smaller city and I’m living further from the city center so I can see them on that night :)

Haha I love the irony of this post. Its the final archived post from my facebook notes- and its a perfect introduction to this blog.

Originally posted: Thursday, July 3, 2008 at 7:01pm

I’ve got a new blog. Instead of writing new facebook notes every time I’m bored, I’ll post there instead. http://thejackalscodex.wordpress.com/

(A lot of posts will be password protected. That’s not to stop you guys from reading it, I encourage you all to read it. I just don’t want randoms reading it. The passwords are contained here: http://thejackalscodex.wordpress.com/password) If you can’t figure it out, just shoot me a line.

That way I can migrate all my current facebook notes over there, and then remove a lot of clutter from my facebook page (including a lot of those “what are your political beliefs applications)

I’ll probably replace my current notes with a description of my core beliefs (political, philosophical and personal). I’ve been worried that recently I’ve been joking around too much and confusing people as to what my actual beliefs are. Right-wingers are now of the impression that I’m a communist, whereas left-wingers seem to think I’m an anti-feminist, gay-bashing Catholic.

Another archived note. Again, this information is out-of-date.

Originally posted: Saturday, June 28, 2008 at 10:25pm

1) Stand-up comedy is on! I went to Centennial Park, and it looks good so long as it doesn’t rain. There’s plenty of parking and there’s limited rain shelter. It’s also reasonably easy to get to by public transport, though it involves spatial skills like reading a map and being able to turn right.

I will be canvassing for availabilities tomorrow, so if you see this, please tell me what days you’re free in the next two weeks. Saves me bother of chasing you down

2) I always find it interesting to compare my expectations with my actual marks. These should are my expectations net of arrogance.

Generally speaking, I dropped the ball this semester due to many factors, but mainly a lack of willpower and general homosexuality.

Finc3015 (Financial Valuations):
Expected mark: Upper credit (70-74, centered about 73)
Variance = fairly even, with upward skewing, due to possibility that the markers will actually read my group assignment and see the shining brilliance that is my macroeconomic analysis.

Finc3017 (Investments)
Expected Mark: Upper distinction (80-86, centered about 84)
Variance = mild downwards skewing to account for the fact I’m an idiot

Finc3193 (Pre-Honours)
This one was difficult to predict, owing to the fact I’ve only gotten marks for 1 (out of 3) assignments. Expected mark: distinction (75-85)
Variance = significant downward skewing, due to mathematical incompetence

Laws1018? (International Law)
Expected Mark: Credit (65-68)
Variance: Its hard to say, my opinion of my essay may be distorted by my happiness with the fact I got to say “empirical evidence” multiple times, and refer to logic and science, and call Charlesworth an illogical communist who misses the point.

Hmmm, given the marxist predispositions of many academics, I may actually have failed this course.

Nonetheless I am content. The only thing really missing was a reference to Boguslawski v Gdynia Ameryka Linie Zeglugowe Spolka Akcyjna (a case stating that recognition of states is only retrospective to the point when the forum government would realistically recognise that the recognised government took de facto control of the state) or to Judge Billings Learned Hand, whose wikipedia article begins with several paragraphs on how Learned Hand struggled with his name as a child, and the rest of which evinces to maximum extent possible, the deep insecurity which plagued Learned Hand to the rest of his days.

Math1001 (Differential Calculus):
Expected mark = 95
Variance = significantly downward skewed, due to possibly significant scaling effects

3) A few observations:
- Richard Dawkins will be on tonights episode of Doctor Who. I am so incredibly turned on right now.
- I’m confused as to how a 6 foot tall, bald angry former rockstar can fail to scare tiny Japanese diplomats.
- Obama says Washington is broken. I’m not so sure… I’ve always thought the NRA and civil libertarians worked well together. First the NRA gives them guns so they can commit crimes. Then the civil libertarians set them free so they can commit more crimes. (And vote in between crimes). Like a well-oiled machine.

I love notes I write when procrastinating. btw, Boguslawski is a case which states that retrospective recognition of states extends back in time, only insofar as the effective control of the recognised government could be said to exist.

Originally posted: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 at 5:34pm

Ok. I’m far far too busy to be posting notes but this has to be said:

Two things I’ve noticed whilst studying law.

1) The name of the Hon. presiding judge in Moore v Mitchell is “Judge Learned Hand.”

2) There is a case (for some reason omitted from our syllabus) called Boguslawski

(full name: Boguslawski v. Gdynia-Ameryka Linje Zeglugowe Spolka Akcynja)

Praise be to Heaven.

Archived facebook note. Information on what days I am busy and stand-up is obviously out-of-date. Interestingly enough, you can see the first germs of my travel blog beginning to appear.

Originally posted: Saturday, June 21, 2008 at 5:09pm

Yay another note because studying for law requires me to be on a computer with internet access. Oh the bane of my study!

1) Busy
After my exams I will be very busy organising things (and in particular cleaning my room. That may take a week in itself… I don’t want dust accumulating in strange places over the course of half a year whilst I’m in America. I believe in evolution… so who knows what terrors might arise so I’m going to post my schedule (so far) down the bottom of this post.

2) Blog
I’m going to stop posting notes on facebook, and put it all onto a blog. Does anyone know a good blogsite that will allow me to set different tiers of access? So public viewers (who don’t know a password) can only view posts in a certain category. Viewers who know password A can view public posts to minimum security stuff (ie stuff with timetables, phone numbers etc you don’t want to post on the web unprotected), viewers with password B can view private blog posts for close friends only etc. The reason I use facebook atm is because it lets me restrict access to these notes to friends only, so eg. my flight itinerary isn’t public domain.

You might as well tell me now if you know, I’m going to ask everyone who would have any clue. I’m going to track you down bitches.

3) Stand up in Centennial Park
I’m still planning to do it. I’ll go visit Centennial Park on say Thursday or Friday and see if its a good place to go, then set a day to do it (or probably two, just in case it rains).

4) Schedule:
Thursday 26th: Busy (whole day)
Fri 27th: sleeping, scout Centennial Park
Sat 28th: Busy (whole day)
Sun: unallocated
Mon: unallocated
Tues: unallocated
Wed: busy (night)
Thurs: busy (morning to afternoon)
Fri: busy (night)
[Week beginning July 7th is completely unallocated except Thurs morn]

I may leave on July 17th, or on July 22nd. I haven’t decided yet, but its probably not a good idea to plan things just as I’m about to jet off as I’m sure there’s plenty of loose ends for me to tie up in Australia.

Unallocated means that I will be doing miscellaneous tasks like buying books and preparing plane tickets for my trip. I suspect I will only have 5 or 6 free days to catch up with all of my different groups of friends, so this will take organisation skills.

Yet another archived note. PS: This event never actually happened due to rain :( I may attempt to reorganise it later, but probably can’t be stuffed.

Archived post below:

Originally posted on facebook Saturday May 31st, 8:08am

You guys can tell I’ve got another assignment due, cause I’m writing up more notes.

Now many people, when insulted or laughed at, get a bit hot under the collar. That’s I silly approach- I see a money-making opportunity. It’s called the law of defamation.

So in the interests of spreading my rational, scientific mindset to the rest of you chumps, I’m thinking of holding a Stand-up Comedy thing in Centennial Park these holidays. [no precise details yet, but it'll be have to be after June 29, and before July 15 or so]

It’ll be mostly impromptus, but I’m sure you can pre-prepare skits or a stand-up spiel if you’d like. I’ll probably think of funny topics you can base your impromptus around. I’ll design them so its impossible to be unfunny. Eg. Abo jokes, its so unPC that its impossible to make it unfunny. We’ll probably also have those speeches people were going to make at my birthday party, but couldn’t due to incompetent organising.

For you law students, it’ll be great to practice your joke-telling skills. Denny Crane approves. (For the rest of us, a little Schadenfreude next goes amiss). For those who aren’t confident in public speaking because you’re afraid people will laugh at you, well that’s perfect. Either someone will laugh at you (the aim of this exercise), or someone won’t laugh at you (the thing you were afraid of). Logic compels you to join in.

And look on the bright side. Dave Hughes is the most unfunny man in Australia- he can’t even make himself laugh- but he’s still classified as one of Australia’s most well-known comedians.

PS: If I haven’t tagged you in this note, its not that you’re not invited. I can’t go through my friends list tagging everyone, so I just tag a representative selection of friends, which ensures that this note appears on your news page.

Note: This was a fun note. In particular, because it sparked a counter-note from one of my friends (I’ve attached it down the bottom). For the record (and I think its pretty clear), this note is entirely sarcastic. I don’t mean a single word of it. I think I may have been procrastinating instead of doing my law assignment…

Originally posted: Friday, May 16, 2008 at 9:52am

Ok. It’s time to admit it. Natural law arguments are absolute bollocks without the backing of God. There is no such thing as a just secular law, these are enforceable only by the force of state, an utterly illegitimate legal system based upon superior power.

So where do we turn, once we admit this? The solution is to immediately implement a system of laws as commanded by God. But there are so many different systems of law he’s commanded us to obey. I mean its really a testament to the breadth of God’s omniscience that some laws vary from telling us to wear magical underwear (the Mormons), to abstain from flicking light switches on Sundays (the Jews) to sacrificing sheep (most religions pre-2000).

I mean its quite difficult since even within these legal systems there are directly contradictory laws. Say the 1st Commandment (Thou Shalt Not Kill) and the various bits of the Bible where a) God kills b) God advocates genocide, say of the Midianites, adulterers, and people who work on weekends. Also, its a bit difficult to implement some of these laws, like the requirement to love your neighbour. A literal application of such laws may again conflict with laws against adultery and buggery. The alternative is the Lord Atkin approach (in Donoghue v Stephens)… which lead to the law of negligence and the nanny state (which I’ve been told is a big no-no).

But we do have one shining example of a legal system which has not changed, even in the face of a shifting moral zeitgeist or empirical evidence contrary to its claims of efficacy. And that is Sharia law. Because it is based not in fact, but in God. So what if stoning adulterers won’t stop adulterers? God tells us to, so we do. And so it shall Be.

And we cannot forget that it has been actualised into a proper legal system by many countries. Some shining examples of sophisticated jurisprudential countries like Saudi Arabia (birthplace of our dear Osama), Afghanistan (domicile of our dear Osama) and Sudan. It is a triumph of religious prophecy that a text some centuries old may still be relevant to every aspect of life, including politics, economics, science, health (inc surgeries etc) and banking. Truly, praise be to God. Allah Akbar.

———–

Katrina’s Counter Note

Title: Let’s not impose a law… let’s depend on GRACE

This is a response to John’s recent note, “Let’s Impose Sharia Law”.

I hope John understands this isn’t an attack, but rather, a series of thoughts on some of the issues raised in his note – which was very entertaining and well written, by the way. It’s also because I ran out of space in the comments. :P

  • “I mean its quite difficult since even within these legal systems there are directly contradictory laws. Say the 1st Commandment (Thou Shalt Not Kill) and the various bits of the Bible where a) God kills b) God advocates genocide”

The commandment not to kill was given by God to his people, for them to obey. God himself reigns over all, because he’s the Creator of the universe. ALL life comes through and is sustained by him. Thus, all life is his to take.

Indeed, if you believe the Bible, it says that we’ve all turned our backs on our Creator, and deserve the punishment of death. The only reason God hasn’t struck us all dead already is because of his love for us, his incredible mercy, his grace through Jesus Christ.

  • “Also, its a bit difficult to implement some of these laws, like the requirement to love your neighbour. A literal application of such laws may again conflict with laws against adultery and buggery.”

Haha, I’m sure John isn’t serious with this. But say he is … well, love taken literally doesn’t have to mean sex, “adultery and buggery”. If that were so, then what about the fact that people generally love their parents? Their siblings? Hmm, I’ll let you follow that thought to its logical conclusion … :S

Let’s look at the “love your neighbour” phrase within its original context, as stated in the Book of Leviticus 19:18:

“‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbour as yourself.”

Clearly here God is instructing the people of Israel to love one another not in the eros sense, but in the philia sense – love between friends and brothers.

But speaking of love, there’s a third kind – agape, as used within the New Testament, to denote a specific type of love that is unselfish, all-consuming, and indestructible. It’s the love that God has for his people, so much that he sent his own son to die in their place, as atonement for their sins. John 3:16-17:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

So John, you’re right, laws in themselves don’t work. We can’t rely on laws to be made right with God, because we’re hopeless at obeying them. The Bible recognises that humanity is utterly lost – there’s nothing we can do to make God forgive us.

That’s why I have such joy in Jesus, who died on my behalf and made it possible for me to be forgiven by the Creator of this universe. :)

Thanks for reading! Everyone is welcome to respond. Also, check out the following sites:

Two Ways to Live

Christianity

A searchable online Bible

Note: I never actually made proper notes for third-year pre-honours… ironically because I spent my time writing notes for second-year pre-honours in preparation for third year pre-honours. Lol. Anyway, here are the notes I uploaded as a facebook note.

Originally posted: Saturday April 12, 10:16am

This note is mainly for my own purposes, as I find it highly likely I will lose my notes I made on finance (I think I’ve already lost them, so I might as well jot them down now). Also, I don’t feel like starting my law assignment or my mooting just yet. In a kingdom of blind men, procrastination rules supreme.

Now, I’ve just finished reading up on the Finance second year Pre-Honours course (which I didn’t do, but have to know since I’m doing third year pre-honours this semester). I have come to the conclusion that it is actually remarkably simple.

Before the emergence of sophisticated capital markets, investors were restricted to simple choices which limited their freedom to choose. Fortunately, Adam Smith came away, blew away all the communists and established efficient capital markets which increased freedom of choice considerably. However, the question remains, what financial asset will a sophisticated investor choose?

Fortunately, financial economic provides an answer by limiting the choice set considerably, and providing a few simple choices in this complicated, and most sophisticated financial system- regardless of an individual investor’s preferences.

We call this the Fisher Separation Theorem. You have an absolute freedom to like whichever assets you like, and the absolute freedom to choose whatever assets you wish to buy within the range of your initial monetary endowment. This is strictly separated from how you will actually exercise your choice, which, if you are smart, you will exercise in exactly the way we say.

But look, we’re not elitist. We think everyone is smart, or as we like to say “rational”. But there are problems, for example people who both gamble (a sign of risk-loving) and buy insurance (a sign of risk-aversion). How could this be?

Fortunately, Milton Friedman in his infinite majesty proposed a solution: maybe some investors are both risk-averse and risk-loving? Some other guy (Friedman’s blinding light blocked all light from reaching his name) disagreed, at his own peril. One does not simply disagree with Milton fucking Friedman. I admire his guts – one for standing up to Milton Friedman, and two for abandoning everything for a guaranteed place in the unemployment queue. But back to his actual disagreement. He thought that risk-loving was always irrational, and that’s fair enough. We have an absolute say over what people believe in America, I mean look at our mega-churches. Instead he proposed an alternate solution entirely consistent with being rational- maybe people are stupid, and can’t calculate simple probabilities. What if they thought they had a 1/5 chance of winning instead of a 1/10 chance? If we do a few calculations, we see buying into this 1/5 lottery is the same as buying into insurance (if he similarly stupidly believes he can get a payout without going to court for a few years against the monopolistic industry gods). It’s mathemagic!

But hey, let’s get back to being rational. You can believe whatever you want, but here’s a few rules for what you need to do to be smart.

(1) cowardice: you must be risk-averse. You can’t argue with me on this point, because I’ve just defined you to be a coward, and cowards don’t fight back remember?
(2) You are absolutely self-serving and would sell out your own grandmother if you got an extra cent. This is a logical conclusion from the fact that you are a coward and unable to stand up for any principles except the ones propounded in this article.
and there’s a few others, which I won’t list because I’m rational. It would take effort, and that’s a definite no-no without adequate payment. It’s about 5c/60 mins for hard manual labour, and $60m/5mins for sitting at a desk and pretending to be a CEO.

So in conclusion, we have financial theory to thank for making us so very sophisticated (and above all, incredibly rich). It removed the barriers choice, freeing us of those few simple choices and maximising our utilities. But to deal with the complexities of the financial markets, financial economics developed many restrictive assumptions to simplify everything down to a few simple choices. Isn’t it wonderful?