Exploration: Writing for a living?

So, I'm exploring the idea of writing for a living... Technical writing would be first of all, a way to pay the bills. Beyond that, it would give me a chance to use some of my creative talents to move forward with my life.

Technical writing is going to be hard to move into - I only have a few samples of my work for my portfolio, since most of what I've written has been company-proprietary documents.

Creative writing would be even more interesting to me, but it would also be almost impossible to get anyone to take notice. I have an interest in science fiction, but have never really tried to write anything more than a short story.

I also have some interest in journalism, but, that's an area where it would be hard to be taken seriously without a degree.

There's also some sites out there on the web to publish and possibly make some money, not sure how far I could go there, but it sounds intriguing.

Thoughts?

Economic Woes

I was recently layed off from my job - one of the latest victims of the Bush economy. On the up side, now I have a bit more of a reason to write. On the down side, I'm out an income until unemployment kicks in or I manage to find work.

I'm seriously considering a change of careers when I do eventually go back to work, maybe even start my own buisiness for an even bigger change. I actually wouldn't mind writing professionally, but breaking into that field is easier said than done.

Thoughts?

Eep!

Killer dust bunnies!

A colleague's case was full of dust bunnies like these. Amazing that the fan still worked.

Chapel Hill Transit honored in enviromental award.

Chapel Hill Transit awarded for green effects :: WRAL.com

The Town of Chapel Hill has recently been honored for it's public transportation system, which is free to riders.

Politics: Election Reform

The integrity and fairness of elections is one of the cornerstones of democracy, yet this essential institution is ripe with opportunities for fraud, uncounted votes, and other problems.

Amend the Constitution
I believe the constitution should be amended so that election fraud or tampering are considered a form of treason. This would extend the highest punishments possible by law those that commit election fraud - and it should - this is the most insidious way in which someone can undermine a democracy.

Require Voter-Verified Paper Ballot
Because the integrity of an electronic record cannot ever be safeguarded to the extent required to assure that every ballot is recorded properly, without alteration, voter verifiable paper ballots should be the ballot of record in all elections. This, combined with physical security is the only practical way we currently have of securing our elections, as well as the best way to uphold legal requirements for a recount in contested elections.

Eliminate the Electoral College
The Electoral College dates back to a time before the telegraph and telephone, when communication across the country took days. Back then, it was necessary, and desirable to have someone appointed to represent the collective will of a state's voters in a Presidential election. Now, its a relic of an earlier time, and instead of giving states proportional representation, it creates a system where voters in some states are essentially denied a voice.

Require Majority instead of Plurality
A plurality, having the greatest number of votes, is not always the same thing as a majority - having more votes than all the other candidates combined. We should require elections to be won by majority, not plurality. Plurality allows some votes to effectively not be counted - any vote that's not for 1st or 2nd place has the effect of being a vote for the winner. This means that many votes effectively don't count at all, and that people vote their support for candidates they see as "the lesser evil" rather than risk their votes not counting. There are a few methods for insuring majority - one is a true runoff - another is instant runoff voting - and there are still others such as various Condorcet methods with different strengths and weaknesses. None of them are perfect, but they all do a better job of letting the majority decide than the plurality method we use now.

Blogged with Flock

Politics: Curtailing the US Military

An interesting distinction in the US Constitution is that while the president has the power to command and direct our military forces, only Congress has the authority to declare war. In reality, this means the President can, and often does act without the consent of Congress, having a blank check to pursue their own agenda.

I propose that we strengthen this distinction, and restore to Congress the ability to keep the country out of military conflicts that do not affect the interests and security of our country, by dramatically limiting the size and funding of our military to that absolutely required for the "common defense" as spelled out in the constitution.

• The number of active-duty troops in the "regular" military would be sharply capped.
• Funding for training would be earmarked as such, and isolated from funds which could be used to support an ongoing operation.
• A reserve fund would be set aside to handle the initial days of a major conflict - providing only enough resources to operate until Congress could meet. By law, this would provide no more than 30 days of operating capability. This fund would not be automatically replenished.
  
• The reserve forces would be bound by law to only operate within the borders of the United States. This restriction could be temporarily lifted by Congress.
• Congress would enable Wartime funding when appropriate through special appropriations bills. These bills would expire after a period of time, and upon their expiration, the peacetime budget would be restored.
• Ongoing peacekeeping operations would have a dedicated, earmarked budget appropriated by Congress.

The obvious purpose of this is to keep us out of open-ended conflicts, and limit our involvement in world affairs to that which receives congressional oversight and blessing.

Blogged with Flock

How the government could eliminate SSN fraud...

There's a simple step the government could take to help combat identity theft and other forms of fraud involving social security numbers. Eliminate them.

With a new infrastructure, the social security number we know now could be replaced with numbers that are single-use - predestined at their creation to allow a single entity to link us to our social security records - the way it would work would go something like this:

An employer, bank, or other entity with a legal requirement to link you to your social security record would provide you with their EIN or an equivalent.  You would provide the social security administration an authenticated request to provide the employer (or other entity) with your information. They would provide an identifier to that entity that is only unique to their organization, and only valid for a given time period. You would then provide that entity the new identifier, and they'd be able to "redeem" this identifier to obtain a link for tax reporting.

Only slightly more complicated, and it also puts into force a mandatory validation with social security for employment purposes - which would serve to discourage employment of illegal immigrants too.

Blogged with Flock