i talk a lot shit, don't i? do i know what i'm talking about?

i'm putting this aside for my own records.

...but i have an honours degree in mathematics, with a surplus of credits at the fourth/fifth year that would be enough for a masters degree, if i were to pay for it. this is why i focused on a second degree in computer science rather than a master's degree in math - i already had one, i just never bought it. it didn't get me anywhere, and wasn't going to get me anywhere i wanted.

i stopped the computer science degree a credit short for the simple reason that i didn't want to do it anymore. i did not formally switch into law, but i completed about two years worth of law credits before i abandoned this as well. i could get a minor in either subject if i wanted it.

i spent a year in physics, as well, and you can see that i had an interest in it.

i have no meaningful formal education in history, anthropology, music or political science. this is dabbling and outside reading.

so, when i start talking about thermodynamics or statistics or whatever else, i'm not just repeating things i learned at wiki. i went to school for an absurd amount of time, and took a very technical workload. it's actually the "softer" subjects that i'm not trained in.

i promote skepticism. but, you can usually take me seriously when i get technical, and i will always caveat when i'm being unconventional.

all courses taken at carleton university in ottawa, canada.

mathematics/statistics

*MATH 1002 - Calculus and Introductory Analysis I (full credit)
*MATH 1102 - Algebra I (full credit)
  MATH 1805 - Discrete Structures
*MATH 2000 - Calculus and Introductory Analysis II (full credit)
*MATH 2100 - Algebra II (full credit)
*MATH 2454 - Ordinary Differential Equations
*STAT   2655 - Introduction to Probability with Applications
*STAT   2559 - Basics of Statistical Modeling
*MATH 3001 - Real Analysis
*MATH 3002 - Calculus of Differential Forms and Geometry
*MATH 3008 - Ordinary Differential Equations
*MATH 3057 - Functions of a Complex Variable
*MATH 3106 - Introduction to Group Theory
*MATH 3158 - Rings and Fields
*MATH 3256 - Plane Projective Geometry
*STAT   3505 - Linear Regression and Design of Experiments 
  MATH 3705 - Mathematical Methods I
  MATH 3801 - Linear Programming
  MATH 3804 - Design and Analysis of Algorithms I  
  MATH 3806 - Numerical Analysis
*MATH 3855 - Discrete Structures and Applications
*MATH 4002 - Fourier Analysis
*MATH 4207 - Foundations of Geometry
*MATH 4700 - Partial Differential Equations
*MATH 4802 - Introduction to Mathematical Logic
*MATH 4803 - Computable Functions
*MATH 4805 - Theory of Automata
*MATH 4806 - Numerical Linear Algebra
*MATH 4807 - Game Theory
*MATH 4808 - Graph Theory and Algorithms
*MATH 4809 - Mathematical Cryptography
*MATH 4822 - Wavelets and Digital Signal Processing
*MATH 4905 - Honours Project
*MATH 4907 - Galois Theory

* - enrollment limited to honours students.

total math credits: 19 credits, or 38 courses.
result: official b. math. unofficial m. math.

computer science

*COMP 1402 - Introduction to Systems Programming
*COMP 1405 - Introduction to Object-Oriented Programming
*COMP 1406 - Design and Implementation of Computer Applications
  COMP 1805 - Discrete Structures
  COMP 2003 - Computer Organization
*COMP 2402 - Abstract Data Types and Algorithms
*COMP 2404 - Programming in C++
  COMP 2805 - Introduction to Theory of Computation
  COMP 3000 - Operating Systems
  COMP 3005 - Database Management Systems
  COMP 3007 - Programming Paradigms
  COMP 3804 - Design and Analysis of Algorithms I
*COMP 3805 - Discrete Structures and Applications 
  COMP 3806 - Numerical Analysis
 *COMP 4803 - Computable Functions
 *COMP 4805 - Theory of Automata
 *COMP 4806 - Numerical Linear Algebra

* - enrollment limited to honours students.

total computer science credits:  8.5 credits, or 17 courses.
result: incomplete degree (completed 8 of 9 required credits, and 19 of 20 overall).

law

LAWS 1000 - Introduction to Legal Studies (full credit)
LAWS 2201 - Persons and Property  (Private Law I)
LAWS 2202 - Obligations (Tort law)  (Private Law II)
LAWS 2301 - Criminal Justice System  (Criminal Law I)
LAWS 2302 - Criminal Law (Criminal Law II)
LAWS 2501 - Law, State & Constitution (Public Law I)
LAWS 2502 - Law, State & Citizen (Public Law II)
LAWS 3500 - Constitutional Law
LAWS 3504 - Law and Aboriginal Peoples

total credits: 5 credits, or 10 courses.
result: undeclared minor.

physics

PHYS 1001 - Foundations of Physics I
PHYS 1002 - Foundations of Physics II
PHYS 2604 - Modern Physics
PHYS 3807 - Mathematical Physics I    
PHYS 3808 - Mathematical Physics II
PHYS 4203 - Physical Applications of Fourier Analysis

total credits: 3 credits, or 6 courses.
result: this is a credit short of a minor.

breadth

BIOL 1003 - Introductory Biology I
BIOL 1004 - Introductory Biology II

PSYC 1001 - Introduction to Psychology I 
PSYC 1002 - Introduction to Psychology II  

ENGL 2107 - Science Fiction
ENGL 2906 - Culture and Society

MUSI 3603 - Computer Music Techniques
MUSI 3604 - Computer Music Projects

CLCV 1002 - Survey of Greek Civilization                  
HIST 3902 - The Late Roman Empire (Byzantine History, 395-1453)

ECON 1000 - Introduction to Economics (full credit)
ECON 4004 - Operations Research I

total credits: 6.5 credits, or 13 courses.
result: this is breadth outside of the four areas i focused on, remember: 1 credit bio, 1 credit psych, 1 credit english, 1 credit music, 1 credit history and 1.5 credits in economics (ECON 4004 was also listed as MATH 3801).

OAC courses

SPHOA - Physics
MCAOA - Calculus
ENGOA - English
DCCOA - Computer Science
MFNOA - Finite Mathematics
MAGOA - Algebra & Geometry
SBIOA - Biology
SCHOA - Chemistry

total credits: 8 credits, or 8 courses.
result: these are pre-university courses that were previously offered at the ontario high school level. i believe i was in the last year for OAC.

what i want to say about this is that it's as clear as day that canadians want an ndp government.

it's really depressing what happened last time around with mulcair. but, the electorate remains in the same place that it was in 2015. all the ndp needs to give trudeau a run is somebody willing to stand up and commit.

and, we won't make our votes contingent on immigration, either. it's clear what we want. but we won't vote against our broader interests to get it.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/canadians-oppose-policies-that-would-align-canada-with-those-of-donald-trump-poll

once again: it is in no way clear what trump is trying to accomplish in north korea.

he surely doesn't think he can bully them into giving up their nuclear weapons. why does he think they have nuclear weapons in the first place?

is he trying to look tough in front of the chinese?

there isn't a clear objective, here.

...and so i'm once again left to conclude that this is a made-for-tv movie.

get some popcorn, i guess.

and, we'll have to hope that the north koreans behave rationally in the face of american absurdity.

who is the rogue state, here?

if there's one thing potheads are, though, and as i've pointed out repeatedly, it's innovative.

“they want to make weed uncool to any sort of new user. i don’t think that’s right … they’re going to prevent innovation.”

hey.

that's a winning argument.

i mean, maybe i should remind you that i was an anti-globalization protestor in the late 90s. remember the battle of seattle? this is where i was politicized.

i've been fighting free trade and globalization for twenty years. it's at the very core of my politics.

and, you think the neo-liberals are any less racist? different types of racism, maybe. not less racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElUA25rgyeg

the whole premise of "this is old, therefore it's good" is just mind-numbing.

generally, people prefer to look for the most up-to-date source, not the oldest one.

out of all of the religions, the indian ones are both the oldest and the most painfully, distressingly idiotic.

it's dipshits all the way down, folks.

Historically, populist movements have thrived in regions of economic distress or among demographic groups that are enduring hardship. This appears to be the case among France’s youth, especially in the deindustrialized northeast. According to a recent Ifop poll, 39 per cent of 18-to-24-year-olds support the FN. Mr. Macron’s centrists attract only 21 per cent of the youth vote, and Mr. Fillon’s conservatives pull in just 9 per cent. Ensuring that young people come out in force is crucial for Ms. Le Pen’s electoral success.

the differences are just exaggerated, here.

- clinton may have worked for bankers, but there was some reason to think she'd push back a little. macron is a banker. full stop. pick your cliche; let's go with foxes and hen houses, although hands in the cookie jar works, too. that makes macron far worse.

- you couldn't take a word trump said seriously. le pen is clearly not the fool that trump is, and she comes from a lineage with a history of standing up for people. her threats are believable.

again: it's lesser evil. they're both terrible. but..

i said during the last election in the states that i agreed with clinton more than i agreed with trump about 53% of the time. that means i agreed with trump over clinton about 47% of the time. so, it was hardly a ringing endorsement, right?

what i'm saying here is that the situation is flipped - because macron is that much worse than clinton, and le pen is that much better than trump, the situation flips over: i end up agreeing with le pen over macron 53% of the time.

not a ringing endorsement. lesser evilism. and with the caveat of understood russian ventriloquists snaking around in the background.

it's more of a brutal rejection of macron. and, what i'm getting at is that my logic might end up replicated fairly widely.

again: i would have rather seen a real leftist candidate win.

but, le pen has the credibility factor that trump never did. i said over and over again that if i could actually believe trump, i'd endorse him. i never did. but, i believe le pen.

....and, at the end of the day, if i have to choose between a quasi-racist working class candidate and a crypto-racist investor class candidate....well, that isn't actually a choice.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/marine-le-pen-macron-fillion-french-elections-who-will-win-a7600206.html

if le pen wants to win this, or at least make the vote rigging obvious enough that it cannot be reasonably denied, she needs to make the election a referendum on neo-liberalism and german austerity. that means that she needs to aggressively frame the issue on those terms.

if she frames macron as an out of touch, elitist banker working solely in the interests of the parasitic investor class, she has a chance - because it is true, and because she can credibly claim to protect the welfare state and general interests of the french working class.

if she makes the election about "security" or "terrorism", she will lose. she should avoid this.

and, no jews.

no jews.

she should embrace the very narrative that the establishment wants to use against her, and turn it around on them.

i want to be clear that there isn't a good choice here. but, le pen will probably do less long term damage to the french economy than macron will. this is a lesser evil calculation. if you look into it a little more closely, perhaps you may be surprised to realize you agree with me.

when le pen talks about saving french civilization, she may have a point - because macron is going to sell off the country to the highest bidder, while pushing down crushing austerity from the banks. all of her rhetoric makes far more sense when directed at her immediate opponent, because all of a sudden it's actually true.

how much would disney pay for the eiffel tower, anyways? it's ok - it'll trickle down.

macron is a far greater threat to french civilization than islamic terrorism ever will be.

so, this is more dangerous than you think. i probably wouldn't vote at all, because...i mean, you can vote for the banks or the kremlin. fuck that. the banks are in some way better than the kremlin, right? good luck writing that essay.

the reality is that if the average french voter is to be expected to vote on self-interest, it's not at all clear that macron is the preferable option.

but, jfk was a misogynistic, racist, mentally unstable, right-wing war criminal. he reflects american "liberalism" fairly well - in the sense that american "liberalism" is what they call conservatism everywhere else in the world. but, i expect far better from the french than to look up to an american psychopath from midway into the last century.

the worst part about the jfk assassination is that it prevented him from being tried at the hague.

the left split the vote. melenchon's numbers came up a little at the end, but not enough. it's hard to understand why you'd vote for hamon when you know he's trailing melenchon by over 10%, and you have a legitimate chance at winning an election. but, it's hardly the first time this has happened, either. it's just irrational behaviour.

if the french elite want to make this about the establishment versus the people, which probably isn't even accurate because on aggregate le pen probably doesn't represent the people any more than macron does, they should not be surprised when people react poorly to the messaging. but, that's exactly what you're going to see - every kind of banker is going to line up behind this guy and expect that voters follow their lead.

le pen is a puppet of the kremlin. she can't win. but, the french have clearly lost.