I don't know enough science, much less about the study to really argue with it, but behavioral science usually strikes me as, well BS. I particularly hate the ones that tell me what I'm naturally supposed to be like as a girl.

Also Peter Wimsey COULD drive. And was actually, you know, intelligent.

See, but Toad even brings the rotund and argumentative along with the reckless and causing (and emerging unscathed from) dreadful occurances.

Incidentally, Tina Brown's new Diana book is supposed to actually be a really interesting look at the fortunes of the British aristocracy over the past thirty or forty years.

Yes, he is very much Mr. Toad.

You know what would be a really great non-profit? The International Internet Association to Keep Shrift From Killing People. Really.

Although I'd miss her rants and inventive threats about assorted idiots.

Incidentally, Tina Brown's new Diana book is supposed to actually be a really interesting look at the fortunes of the British aristocracy over the past thirty or forty years.

That, and a brief look at the appalling state of education for girls of Diana's class that was available in the 1970s, even at boarding schools. Apparently, her school taught her next to nothing, which is why she was a kindergarten aide and not doing anything that required more education.

Oh my god, I can't believe it isn't even noon yet. I guess I could pack up my office. That'll take about five minutes.

Wow. I started poking around my desk and found a task sheet for my current position. It's scheduled up the wazoo, in 15 minute blocks with a Time Completed box and space for initials.

I'm glad they didn't give this to me when I took this job, because I wouldn't have lasted a day being micromanaged like that.

A somewhat more detailed look at that study: [link]

The study results are actually quite modest -- the researchers claim to be the first to find a relationship between political differences and "a basic neuro-cognitive mechanism for self-regulation." However, these results are supported by a wide range of behavioral data which does support the idea that conservatives are less willing to accept complex arguments or shades of meaning compared to liberals.

Does this mean that liberals are "hard wired" to be different from conservatives? This data alone certainly doesn't support that claim. After all, the go/no go task is a learned activity. The reason that it's hard to inhibit tapping when the "M" appears is that you've learned to tap when you see a letter. You could also learn to tap only when you see an M, and you might be able to learn to be better at this task. Could you learn to be liberal (or conservative)? This study doesn't answer that question, but my suspicion is you could. After all, what's considered liberal in the U.S. is considered conservative in many places. In other places, a U.S. conservative would be considered a flaming liberal.

And was actually, you know, intelligent.

Pratt wrote a well-received book on..oh, something I don't remember so I guess the Percocet is finally kicking in. He was a big old coaster, but had some talent.

Any news about the open floor plan threat?

I feel like there should be an office scale of terror. shrift's currently at threat level: open floor plan. You could have threat levels for cubicles, office, office with a door, and open floor plan with forced socializing.

According to that obit, he had written a highly regarded book on castles and estates in Central Europe that's still in print.