"amount of people employed as an architect"

I keep collecting and posting (for example) interesting (or odd) google search terms that get people to this blog and I have a list to post before long. But this query is really a grammatical point too long to talk about in one of my google search posts.

Amount versus Number

"amount of people employed as an architect"

I'm not sure how aware I was of this misuse of 'amount' before I went to Thailand, but in Thailand I learned what the problem is. In Thai, you don't do something like add an 's' at the end of the word to indicate more than one. Instead you use a classifier. So, you say

• "man, two people,"  
• "car, four vehicles," or 
• "chair, two things-with-legs." 

Every noun has a classifier appropriate to that noun.  Usually a variety of things use the same classifier.  Tables, chairs, animals, are all in the class of things-with-legs.  But NOT people who have their own class. (Chinese has a similar way of making plurals.)

I realize that sounds totally weird to people used to adding an 's.' But we actually do the same thing in English for mass nouns. Some examples:

• I want five gallons of gas. (Not five gasses)
• Two cups of coffee please. (Though people say "two coffees," this is really short for "two cups of coffees" and not two beans or two pounds of coffee.)
• Three pounds of beef.
• We talk about dollars and cents, not monies.
• We can talk about three days of bliss, but not three blisses.

Count Nouns and Mass Nouns

The key is a distinction between 'count nouns' and 'mass nouns.' Like the term suggests, count nouns are things you can count - birds, books, noses, toes, bikes, songs.

Mass nouns are things that aren't individually separable: water, humanity, time, distance, rice, music, mail.  You have to use another word - a classifier - to indicate amounts of these things.  Some, like humanity, I can't think of any classifiers for, just vague descriptions like 'a lot of' (which, we can use for mass AND count nouns.)
 
So, 'people' is a count noun.  We can count people.  There is one person, two people, three people, etc.  Amount is used for mass nouns:  amount of rice, amount of space, amount of depression, amount of money, amount of mail.  To indicate a specific amount we have to use a classifier:

• two sacks (or bowls or grains) of rice
• 1500 square feet of space
• several bouts of depression
• forty Euros
• in two hours 
• seven pieces of mail or five letters and two magazines.  

For count nouns, we don't usually say 'amount.'  We say

• The number of people employed as architects.
• The number of books in the library.  
• The number of bikes sold in May.  

All these things that can be counted and we can determine a number for them.  This isn't true of mass nouns.
For mass nouns, we ask, "How much?"  We want to know the amount.

• $5
• ten gallons 
• 21 lbs. in three months
• a pinch

We have some specific words for 'how much?' in certain situations:

• How far?  
• How long?  
• How high?

For count nouns, we ask "How many?"  We want to know the number.



So, if we say 'amount of people,' we're implying an amount of something that is not countable by itself, like rice or water or beef.  We use a classifier, some unit of measure for that noun.  It would be as if the person were asking about a mass of indistinguishable people:  How many busloads of people?  How many pounds of people?  How many acres of people?

I suspect the searcher was looking for a number.

This is not intended as a rant, but rather as a clarification.  I appreciate grammatical creativity. I'm less amused by grammatical laziness.   Grammar can sometimes seem unnecessarily complicated.  But the words and grammar have their own meanings embedded.  Sometimes they are redundant.  But when the speaker and the listener both understand the nuances of the grammar and use it correctly, the redundancy acts as a confirmation of the speaker's intent.  Meaning is more precise and there is less misunderstanding.

University of Alaska President Gamble to Review Religion at the Air Force Academy

Background:  Journalistic Guidelines

As the world is coming to grips with blogging and how it differs from traditional journalism, so too do I have to figure out what I'm doing and what my rules are.  I'd learned from journalists in the past, that if a source knows he's talking to a journalist, it's assumed that everything is 'on the record' unless the source says it is not BEFORE anything is said.  Here's what Norman Pearlstine says:

We should start virtually all interviews with the presumption that they are on the record. Inexperienced sources—usually ordinary people who unexpectedly find themselves the news—should clearly understand that you are a reporter and should not be surprised to find themselves quoted in your publication.
Journalists should not give the source more protection than is necessary. It is preferable to spell out the nature of the attribution in clear terms, instead of using vague and other terms that might be misunderstood. A primer:
· On the Record—The source can be named and identified by title, rank, job description, or other relevant information. Information can be used in direct quotation or indirect quotation. [It goes on to spell out 'Background,' 'Deep Background,' 'Not for Attribution,' and 'Off the Record.']

So, you are asking, what's this got to do with President Gamble and the Air Force Academy?  I'm just giving you context of why I haven't posted on this sooner. I still feel a strong obligation to be fair to the people I write about and that seems to be much stronger when I actually talk to them.  It's a bias I noticed when I started blogging seriously.  I'm probably guilty of what Pearlstine describes as giving  "the source more protection than is necessary."  And unlike traditional journalists, I don't have an editor demanding a story.  Just you readers and you are, for the most part, very undemanding.

Learning about the story

When I spoke to University of Alaska  President Gamble after the Faculty Senate meeting last February 4, I identified myself as a blogger.  He said something like, "You're not the blogger who wrote about the sexual harassment at the Air Force Academy, are you?"  I said I was.  He said he'd had nothing to do with that.  I pointed out that the first GAO report had come out in 1991 saying all three academies were having serious problems.  That he'd been the Commandant of the Air Force Academy from June 1993-November 1994, and the next GAO report - 1995 - said things were worse.  Since I hadn't had that information when I went to the public forum in Juneau last February, I posted about it so someone (like the Board of Regents) could ask then-candidate Gamble about his role.  I hadn't said he was directly involved, but raised questions about his management effectiveness if things had gotten worse during his watch.  He told (back to Feb 4 now) me he'd been there such a short time he really couldn't have had an effect, but that he learned after the fact and much later that he'd been cleared in an investigation and, in fact, the policies he'd implemented had been cited as model policies.  (I'd note that most Commandants are at the Air Force Academy for about two years so that would mean none of them have enough time to have an effect.  If people aren't in their positions long enough to have an impact, how does this square with the importance of accountability in the Air Force?)  I asked him to send me some documentation so I could add it to my original post.

He also mentioned that he had been asked to do a review of how religion was being handled at the Air Force Academy in March. 



Now, about blogging ethics again.  I try to use publicly available information and point out where there are contradictions or missing information.  But I'm soft when it comes to my need to publish something fast rather than be (overly?) respectful of my sources.  So even though he knew he was talking to a blogger, I still asked if the Air Force Review was something I could post about.  He said that no one had said it wasn't, but asked if I'd hold off until he checked. I agreed.



He didn't get back to me on either issue.  I emailed him a couple weeks later and still didn't hear from him.  But I guess I should say something now since today I noticed a Huffington Post piece on the review of the Air Force Academy.  

Gamble said Friday he was assembling a team of five or six other members with expertise in law, religion, academics and other areas to conduct the review. He said it was too early to release the other members' names.

Gamble said his goal is to see whether various programs and provisions put in place since 2004, when religious intolerance became an issue, are working. . .

Gamble said he wasn't sure whether he would report his findings orally, in a written report or both. No date has been set for the team to visit the school, he said.

It's a bit vague. Just an oral report?  Is that serious?  And the scope of the study seems vague as well.

Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and a vocal critic of the academy, criticized the scope of the review as it was outlined in the Air Force statement.

The problem at the school is not with any restriction on the free exercise of religion, but with unwanted proselytizing by fundamentalist Christians, a violation of the constitutional concept of the separation of church and state, he said.

Gamble said he had not ruled out looking at the separation issue. He said his review team is still getting organized and its scope hasn't been determined.
"We're going to take a blinders-off look, and nothing's off the table, but nothing's on the table, either," he said.  [Emphasis added.]

The proselytizing by evangelical Christians at the Air Force Academy became enough of a problem that the Air Force set up a task force to look into it in 2005.

Colorado Springs, where the Air Force Academy is located, has become an evangelical stronghold.  According to an NPR story,  Colorado Springs

has become a special place for evangelical Christians, like Ted Haggard, pastor of the 11,000-member New Life Church and president of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Another giant evangelical organization, Focus on the Family, is nearby.  Someone told me these organizations are across the highway from the Academy and google maps suggests it sits on the other side of the Ronald Reagan Highway, less than 2 miles from the Academy gate.  

A recent law suit against the Air Force concerning an evangelical luncheon speaker was  dismissed by the judge on the grounds the plaintiffs didn't have standing, but others are percolating, and 1977 Academy Honor Grad, Mikey Weinstein, through his position at the Military Religious Freedom Foundation  seems to be connected to a number of the lawsuits.

A USA Today piece posted at Militarytimes.com on March 10, 2006 described allegations in an earlier lawsuit and gives some background to the current 'review':

The 12-page court filing says guest speakers at conventions of Air Force recruiters in 2003 and 2005 told Burleigh and other recruiters that "they needed to accept Jesus Christ in order to perform their job duties" and "to use faith in Jesus Christ while recruiting."

"It's absolutely horrifying that the Air Force has been trying to force its recruiters to use the gospel of Jesus Christ as a recruiting tool," said Weinstein, who is Jewish. "There's no wall left between church and state in the Air Force."
Weinstein took on the military last year after a Pentagon task force cleared the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs of "overt religious discrimination" but noted insensitivity toward cadets of non-Christian faiths. Weinstein has a second son who is a cadet there.

Complaints of religious intolerance, conversion attempts and favoritism for "born again" Christian cadets had first surfaced in a 2004 campus survey and in criticism in a Yale Divinity School study of chaplain practices at the academy.
The controversy led the Air Force to issue four-page guidelines last August for "free exercise of religion" throughout the service. It also instituted religious sensitivity training for the academy's cadets and staff.

Members of Congress and some Christian groups objected that the guidelines were too restrictive. They said the rules violated constitutional guarantees of free exercise of religion and discriminated against evangelicals, who consider spreading their faith a requirement of Christianity.

It would interesting to know how much the Air Force will spend on this possibly oral review.

Good Lord, Friday in Anchorage Beats Thursday in Juneau

The mountains look small and distant in Anchorage, compared to Juneau's in-your-face vertical walls.  But the weather on Friday in Anchorage, as I escaped to Campbell Airstrip for some great March cross-country skiing, was perfect.  Low 30s, bright blue sky, warm sun, and, unlike Juneau, no wind at all. (This is not completely fair  since I'm comparing downtown Juneau to Anchorage in the woods.)






It hasn't snowed for a while and the ground was hard, packed snow, almost icy, until I got over the bridge.  Then the main trails were beautifully groomed for both skate skiers and people like me who use the Nordic tracks.

I realized that I'm usually here when there's lots of snow on the trees and they looked almost naked without gobs of whipped cream snow.  (You can see some winter shots here.   And you can see summer views here.)

Off the main trails, it was trickier for Nordic skiing - no tracks and smooth to icy.  Great for fat tire bikes.  (I tried to get the picture as he came toward me, but it took time to get my gloves off and camera out of my pocket.)

But while in Juneau you're likely to see posters for Peace on Earth, Anchorage folks take it a little further.

The New Testament is not one of my areas of expertise, but something told me to google the phrase "Blessed is the nation whose god is the Lord Jesus."  There are only seven entries.

A broader search found a website called biblos which offers 15 parallel translations:

New International Version (©1984) Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people he chose for his inheritance.New Living Translation (©2007) What joy for the nation whose God is the LORD, whose people he has chosen as his inheritance. English Standard Version (©2001) Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage! New American Standard Bible (©1995) Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, The people whom He has chosen for His own inheritance. GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995) Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD. Blessed are the people he has chosen as his own. King James Bible Blessed [is] the nation whose God [is] the LORD; [and] the people [whom] he hath chosen for his own inheritance. American King James Version Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he has chosen for his own inheritance. American Standard Version Blessed is the nation whose God is Jehovah, The people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. Bible in Basic English Happy is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom he has taken for his heritage. Douay-Rheims Bible Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord: the people whom he hath chosen for his inheritance. Darby Bible Translation Blessed is the nation whose God is Jehovah, the people that he hath chosen for his inheritance! English Revised Version Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. Webster's Bible Translation Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. World English Bible Blessed is the nation whose God is Yahweh, the people whom he has chosen for his own inheritance. Young's Literal Translation O the happiness of the nation whose God is Jehovah, Of the people He did choose, For an inheritance to Him.

I know I'm walking on shaky ground (for me) when I write about the New Testament, so I'll leave this for readers to clarify.

[OK, before you all shoot me down, I began to think, wait, the Psalms are in the Old Testament.  But since the Old Testament doesn't mention Jesus, I assumed this was from the New Testament at first, before I saw the Psalms part.  Here's a poetry website that rewrites the Psalms for the New Testament on the grounds that:

As beautiful as the Psalms of the Old Testament are, the refrain of nearly every song is the idea that the God of the Israelites will not only protect them from their enemies, but they actually pray that their god will destroy the persons they hate. Personally, I could not repeat such words in my daily devotions. So, with prayers and supplications to the best within myself, I have transposed these marvelous poems, back into their old genre of parallelism with the thinking as revealed by Christ.

Her version of this line (I think this is the one) comes out this way:

Happy is the nation who believes in the Beloved
Happy are the people who have chosen this way]

Now There's Epic Google for When You're Feeling Expansive

Last April I noticed and posted about someone getting here from something called Weenie Google - for when you're feeling inadequate.



This week someone got here from Weenie's big brother Epic Google.

Why do I bother with such posts?  That always lurking underlying theme here is 'how do you know what you know?"  So I'm particularly fond of things that make us see things we take for granted in a new light.  It reminds us that what is, doesn't have to be that way.  We have lots of alternatives.  We shouldn't be surprised when what is, isn't any more.


UPDATE:  Also check out posts on Weenie Google,  Mr. Doob's Google Gravity, and the Revolving Internet. ]

Why Were We Surprised? Tunisia, Egypt, Libya

Let's see:

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 (Hungarian: 1956-os forradalom) was a spontaneous nationwide revolt against the government of the People's Republic of Hungary and its Soviet-imposed policies, lasting from 23 October until 10 November 1956. . .
The revolt spread quickly across Hungary, and the government fell. Thousands organized into militias, battling the State Security Police (ÁVH) and Soviet troops. Pro-Soviet communists and ÁVH members were often executed or imprisoned, as former prisoners were released and armed. Impromptu councils wrested municipal control from the ruling Hungarian Working People's Party and demanded political changes. The new government formally disbanded the ÁVH, declared its intention to withdraw from the Warsaw Pact and pledged to re-establish free elections. By the end of October, fighting had almost stopped and a sense of normality began to return.
After announcing a willingness to negotiate a withdrawal of Soviet forces, the Politburo changed its mind and moved to crush the revolution. On 4 November, a large Soviet force invaded Budapest and other regions of the country. Hungarian resistance continued until 10 November. Over 2,500 Hungarians and 700 Soviet troops were killed in the conflict, and 200,000 Hungarians fled as refugees.[Wikipedia]

The Prague Spring (Czech: Pražské jaro, Slovak: Pražská jar) was a period of political liberalization in Czechoslovakia during the era of its domination by the Soviet Union after World War II. It began on 5 January 1968, when reformist Slovak Alexander Dubček came to power, and continued until 21 August when the Soviet Union and members of its Warsaw Pact allies invaded the country to halt the reforms. [Wikipedia]

The Iranian Revolution (also known as the Islamic Revolution or 1979 Revolution Persian: انقلاب اسلامی, Enghelābe Eslāmi or انقلاب بیست و دو بهمن) refers to events involving the overthrow of Iran's monarchy (Pahlavi dynasty) under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and its replacement with an Islamic republic under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the revolution.
Demonstrations against the Shah are sometimes said to have begun in January 1978.   However, they actually commenced earlier, in October 1977, developing into a campaign of civil resistance that was partly secular and partly religious. Between August and December 1978 strikes and demonstrations paralyzed the country. The Shah left Iran for exile in mid-January 1979, and in the resulting power vacuum two weeks later Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran to a greeting by several million Iranians. [Wikipedia]

Solidarity was the first non-communist party-controlled trade union in a Warsaw Pact country.  In the 1980s it constituted a broad anti-bureaucratic social movement. The government attempted to destroy the union during the period of martial law in the early 1980s and several years of political repression, but in the end it was forced to start negotiating with the union.
The Round Table Talks between the government and the Solidarity-led opposition led to semi-free elections in 1989. By the end of August a Solidarity-led coalition government was formed and in December 1990 Wałęsa was elected President of Poland. Since then it has become a more traditional, liberal trade union. [Wikipedia]

The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, also known as the Tiananmen Square massacre and the June Fourth Incident (in part to avoid confusion with two prior Tiananmen Square protests), were a series of demonstrations in and near Tiananmen Square in Beijing in the People's Republic of China (PRC) beginning on 15 April 1989. The movement used mainly non-violent methods and can be considered a case of civil resistance. Led mainly by students and intellectuals, the protests occurred in the year that was to see the collapse of a number of communist governments in eastern Europe.The movement lasted seven weeks after Hu's death on 15 April. In early June, the People's Liberation Army moved into the streets of Beijing with troops and tanks and cleared the square with live fire. [Wikipedia]

I'm sure you are getting my drift.   And then the Berlin Wall fell, the Soviet Union dissolved, Romanians got rid of Ceauşescu.   The Ukraine had its Orange Revolution.  Just to name a few. 


Why are we surprised?

Popular demonstrations against dictatorships, whether ultimately successful or not, are not all that uncommon.  We've had a series of  'unimaginable' changes.

So, why are the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions seen as a surprise?

And then, why are we surprised when Libyan rebels get brutally attacked?

A few hypotheses come to mind: 

1.   Our models of power don't handle sudden massive power shifts easily.
2.   Our fear mongers want us to be afraid of Islam, want us to see all Muslims as radical anit-Western fanatics.  And many Americans (and Europeans) are only too glad to oblige them. Fear of outside evil, or foreigners amongst us, unifies a population behind its leaders and stifles opposition.  
3.   Our ignorance of the world outside our borders means we have no clue about what is happening in other countries unless it's an international sporting event.   So we generalize to "the Iranians" or "the Egyptians" rather than recognize all countries have a wide range of political points of view, just as we have. 

These events are unimaginable only to those with less than robust imaginations.

Such change - popular demonstrations against seemingly entrenched powers, some of which succeed* and some of which fail - isn't all that unique.  The right set of conditions have to come together.  Some typical conditions might include:

1. General unrest and unhappiness due to severe long-term restrictions, oppression, and usually widespread corruption in the ruling government.
2. Some event that inflames that unrest and gets people into the streets
3. Effective forms of communication with each other and with the Outside world
4. Some charismatic leaders

Then there's the regime's reaction.  Will they just start shooting or will they show restraint?   I'm not sure what factors play a consistent role.  Perhaps:

1. Support or opposition from outsiders. (Lots of possible combinations and outcomes here.  It could give the rebels courage, restrain the leader, or not.)
2. General cultural norms of the current leaders.  (Does the culture promote dialogue and democratic principles?)
3. Existence of face saving exit strategies for corrupt leaders.  

It's not be easy to predict exactly where and when the next world class revolution  will occur.  Even if we scan the countries with high levels of discontent, knowing when some event will be the catalyst to get people out into the streets is hard.  BUT, we should realize that it is going to happen somewhere and we shouldn't be surprised.

But I guess this calls for some knowledge of history, of other cultures, of world conditions, and a myriad of other things that we don't have time to learn while we keep track of celebrity breakups, what our friends are eating for dinner (as reported every few minutes on Facebook and Twitter),  buy ever bigger televisions and smaller computers.

*'Success' is a relative term. And it maybe be short-lived. Or it may just refer to the overthrow, but may not be a good term to describe the next permanent government.

Delta to Pathways - Juneau to Anchorage

The last two days I've been at the DELTA meeting. I could never remember what DELTA stood for because the acronym didn't really match the words. Apparently everyone else had the same trouble and now it is called Pathways. That's good. This group has developed a statewide plan for Intimate Partner Violence Prevention. I've blogged about it before.


I'll just put a couple pictures up now since I'm in the airport getting ready to return from Juneau to Anchorage. I'm really, really ready to be home and see my wife again. It's been a little over three weeks. Anyway, here are some shots and I'll talk more about what we did later.

 These photos are from yesterday.

We went around the room and people talked about things they had accomplished that related to the goals of Pathways.  They were then stuck up on the wall in random order.

Then we tried to figure out where they fit with the goals (On the white papers).  A number fit several goals.

And here things are all sorted out, or at least a lot better than at first.

My brief comment at this moment is to say that I was pleased to see that a lot of progress has been made.  Though there is still a lot to do.


I better post this quick before I have to board.  As you can tell, there is still free wifi in the Juneau airport.

Want to Make Your Own iPhone App?

A couple of months ago the question, "How do people make apps?," popped into my head.  I asked my computer savvy son and his answer was vague about writing programs for them.  So when Craig Hockenberry's iPhone App Development:  The Missing Manual showed up at the Alaska Apple User Group review desk, I grabbed it.  I wasn't planning on making any apps, but I was just wanted to get a sense about how they are made.  So the rest is basically the review I did for the Apple User Group.  The style is a little different from how I usually write.  I'd just say, writing an App sounds possible (for someone like me) but would take a fair amount of work to learn.  I'd need to have a killer app to do it.  One thing I learned is that you can write your own app for your iPhone or iPod Touch. You don't need to buy them if you can figure out how to make one.  [UPDATE 3/29: a reader corrected me here.  You can test the APP on your computer, but the iPhone is not open source so you apparently can't (without more complicated workarounds that void your warranty) make it just for your own iPhone.  But you can make your own Apps for Androids.  Thanks J.]

I was surprised, to find in the first chapter, there was something called Xcode already on my Mac startup disk, but it's one of the extras that aren't included in the basic package of software most people load.  And then once you get Xcode installed you have to get another free software - iPhone SDK - and you have to join the iPhone Developer Program to get that.  But then you have software set up especially to make Apps.

But by chapter 2 it already wasn't going to be that easy.  Hockenberry starts talking about Objective-C language.  Since the last computer language I could do anything with was Fortran - and some basic HTML for my blog - this was getting beyond what I might be able to  do without some serious effort.  For those who already program I suspect this chapter will mean a lot more.  It is just an overview and in the end he refers readers to Apple's free online book The Objective-C 2.0 Programming Language.

Chapter 3 is about Cocoa Touch frameworks - "the building blocks" - the parts of Cocoa Touch frameworks that get pieced together with your new adhesive [Objective-C].  The handy acronym to remember these by is MVC - Models, Viewers, and Controllers.

The Views are "all those buttons, scrolling lists, web browsers, and everything else that appears on your iPhone screen. . .Views know how to present your application's data.  Some views also know how to react to user input.‚" (p. 67)

Models  "are your application's heart and soul because they are responsible for managing the data.  . . A model's only function is to manipulate and process the user's data within the application.  Models often implement internal logic that provides these basic behaviors.‚"(p. 67)

Finally, Controllers "act as an intermediary between the view objects and the model objects."p. 68)  

Chapter 4 goes in a totally new direction, one that I was able to follow completely:  it's about the designing of tools.  It is aimed at the techie who needs to work with a non-techie designer and discusses designing goals, unique designing issues for iPhones (such as the small size and low weight, left and right handed users, display rotation.)  Then it goes through the design process - starting with paper and pencil - and how to get along with your designer, as well as getting feedback from beta testing and other methods.  I had no trouble understanding this chapter and it is well done.

Part II of the book gets into much more programming depth and I only skimmed it.

Part III gets back into language and culture I understand - The Business End.  It takes an App developer step-by-step from Beta testing through advertising. It covers pricing and user feedback and updating your product.

Based on the parts I could understand, I'd recommend this book to someone who was serious about getting into the App business.  It's an intro to the technical part with links to get more information and it's a well written guide to the non-technical parts.  I think that if I wanted to build an App, this book would be my basic guide and I'd be able to figure it out (going to the links it provides, of course.)  And it also avoids the cutesiness of a lot of computer books.

As you can tell, I'm not going to be designing any apps soon, but I achieved my objective of getting a basic understanding of the App building process.

What Do Peace Corps Volunteers Do? Juneau Returned Volunteers

Some Juneau Returned Peace Corps Volunteers gathered Monday night to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of JFK signing the law that created the Peace Corps.  In these two short videos they tell you what country they served in and what they did.








The first video includes people who went to Ukraine, Thailand, Nepal, Rwanda, and Morocco.












The second video has people who were in Nigeria, Afghanistan, El Salvador, India, Cambodia, Guinnea-Bissau, and Paraguay.

Here's an older post with a few Anchorage and Fairbanks Returned Peace Corps Volunteer pictures and what they've been doing after Peace Corps.

Kitty Litter Technology - Who Knew?

This last week in Juneau my hosts have been out of town and I'm house and cat sitting. I like cats including this one. My son's allergic to cats, so I really have been out of touch with the cat world.




So among my chores here - besides picking up the mail and the Full Circle Farm box today - is to feed Nori in the morning and empty the litter box at night.






The feeding part is pretty easy - though it means I don't sleep too late because someone is hungry.

But what were these huge flat burger like things in the litter box? And so many? I've taken care of my son's dog and know she doesn't poop that much or nearly that big. What gives?

Consider what a good cat litter should do: It should suppress odors, absorb, be biodegradable, nontoxic, and inexpensive. If you have more than one cat, both should be willing to use it. It shouldn't stick to paws, or between claws; yet it should clump enough to localize waste. And it's nice if it's flushable. But none of these features matters if your cat doesn't want to use it.

Now writer Curt Wohleber traces the design evolution of the stuff. Litter boxes existed before 1947. Owners had simply lined them with sand, sawdust, or torn-up newspapers. Then one of those moments -- like Newton's Apple or Goodyear's spilled chemicals:

Edward Lowe, back from the army was working in his father's supply store when a next door neighbor asked him if he had any sawdust for her litter box. [You can read the rest of this history at  John H. Lienhard's Engines of Our Ingenuity Episode 2103 or you can get the audio here.]

It took me a while to figure out that modern science now gives us kitty litter that soaks up the urine into these patties.

While I've been watching electronic technology, kitty litter technology took off.

The Lights Are Back On

I was sitting here at the computer when the room went dark.  I'm not even sure how long ago it was or how long it lasted.  The Capitol building was still lit, but looking south and east it was dark.  It was probably around 9:30pm and maybe lasted an hour.  My computer at least went to battery and I found the candles and matches.