Wanna see how smart you REALLY are?

Take Bang Goes the Theory's Brain Test Britain. I did mention that I like taking tests. I'm not sure why, but I do. I should have been tested enough in school to be petrified of anything like a test. But isn't life a test anyway?

Bang Goes the Theory is according to presenter Dallas Campbell, a show for "anyone who is remotely curious about life, the Universe and pretty much everything." It's a science show where they do more than just experiment. The only special episode I caught was where they powered a house inhabited by a "nuclear family" for a day by 80 bicyclists. Which may sound odd to you, but was absolutely fascinating in how much energy it takes to run our appliances. It also pointed out ways to cut back on energy use. Which although switching lightbulbs may seem like a small thing, as someone told me at the Centre for Alternative Technology combining just a lightbulbs worth of energy can add up. That is made more apparent when you watch a team of bicyclists power a house!

Unfortunately, Season one is over. So, you would have to wait until season 2 in 2010 to catch the show

Anyway, these are all sorts of weird little tricky tests to see if training your mind will improve it. They are sort of Kim's Game in spirit where you guess where things are. Also, they had one test where I had to put things from high to low, which sounds simple until you have to deal with negative numbers along with written (six) and numeric (6) numbers. One test gave me grief when I had to count items going into a box ancd compare them to items coming out. My internet connection screwed up that test. Also, there was one test/game where I had to do simple math calculations whilst balloon floated up, but I couldn't figure out which balloon I was supposed to be calculating.

If training your mind isn't enough, there are weird little science challenges that take me back to the quickie radio electronics class I was subjected to in the army (What was ohms law? (V=IxR)).

Fun! fun! fun! Now, I can't wait for the annual Financial Times Christmas Quiz!

Makes one want to become a Luddite.

Citygirl at Mudflap Bubba's had some criticism about her Blackberry. This follows on that line.

My Senior has been trying to get me to buy one of the things. There is indeed a temptation since my Palm pilot is totally wonky. The digitiser makes using it quite interesting. Fortunately, I am clever enough to have some work arounds for this problem.

I really only need the thing because I have to keep a diary of court appearances. And, it amuses me whilst sitting in Court. Despite the Courtroom dramas, being in Court is boring as fuck.

There are disadvantages to reading in court. One being that some tipstaffs will tell you that you can't read (unless it's a brief). Of course, you can only read a brief so many times. The other problem is if the book is engrossing in anyway, you will lose attention to what is going on in court.

That means play games on the old palm. I usually play Solitaire (Bristol is my fave version since it is pretty easy), but I have Nine Men's Moris, Go, Tetris, Chess, Monopoly, Scrabble, and Dope Wars. The last one was given to me by someone who was representing the prosecution, which seemed ironic. Scrabble using my rules can be too amusing for court.

I refuse to give up my toy!

Anyway, I had this computer security panic that my Senior's (the QC I trail after) e-mail account was compromised. That meant I decided to change his password, which buggered up the e-mail being sent to the Blackberry. Thus, I was sent to the mobile phone shop where QC is a "regular" (he has 20 phones and a seriously addictive personality).

The rep sorted us out. But it was far more complicated than I would like.

Not to mention I see the new phones on the market. It seems that the iPhone is becoming the trend. I just want a bloody phone and none of the other crap for chrissake. I'd probably get rid of the mobile altogether except it is useful when traveling.

Otherwise, mobiles are the bane of modern existance: especially the morons walking down the street or elsewhere texting. I could go on a long rant about mobile phone rudeness.

Here is a nice fantasy from Mobile to end this post.
WARNING: VIOLENT AS ALL GET OUT!

A thought

Part of this is something I am working on for my Michael Bellesiles vindication which is there is a technological and political argument for there not being many firearms manufacturers in Colonial North America.

One is that the Navigation Acts. These acts were a limitation on trade with the Colonies. The acts demanded that most raw materials be imported into England from the colonies in order to support British manufacturing. Particularly saliently to this matter, Iron was found in all the colonies, and forges and furnaces were established in many places (e.g., Batso, NJ). In 1750, Parliament enacted a law declaring that "no mill or other engine for rolling or slitting iron," "nor any furnace for making steel shall be erected in the colonies". After this only pig and bar iron could be made.

That would rule out one possibility for local North American firearm production since they lacked the technology to do so. Additionally, Britain wanted to make sure any manufacturing of ANYTHING took place in England: that wasn't just firearms.

The War for American Independence provided some impetus for North American Firearm production, but a fair amout of muskets used were either the British Brown Bess or the French Charleville Musket. Major North American firearms production didn't begin in strength until after 1794.

In 1794, the new Federal government decided to manufacture its own muskets so that the United States would not be dependent on foreign arms (got that "dependent on foreign arms"). President Washington selected Springfield as the site for one of the two Federal Armories, the other being the Harpers Ferry Armory at Harpers Ferry), Virginia (now part of West Virginia). Production of weaponry at the Armory began in 1795 when 220 flintlock muskets were produced.

Wow, in case you missed it, the first target of Shays' rebels was the Springfield Armoury! Now, shouldn't a bunch of Revolutionary War vets just pull their muskets from the mantle? Somehow, this crew felt the need for firearms.

I happen to believe that private ownership of firearms up until the early 1800 was pretty rare. That would point to a lack of concern with private firearm ownership at the time of the ratification of the Constitution and the drafting of the Second Amendment. This is even more important when we think of the civic aspect of the "right to bear arms".

Personally, I think this is something for a historian who is much more prepared for the fallout such a revelation will have on the US mindset than I am or Michael Bellesiles was.