Tuesday, July 13. 2010
With The Daily Show on a summer break, I began to search for some other TV content to fill time. Naturally, I wandered over to PBS to see what they had. I came across this fascinating documentary entitled, " Secrets of the Samurai Sword." The documentary does a good job of explaining the cultural, spiritual, and scientific aspects of the Samurai sword. It's quite fascinating that even though 1,000 years ago, the Japanese swordmakers didn't understand the science behind their craft, but were able to create such effective weapons.
If you go to the 33 minute mark of the video, they do a live demonstration of a katana blade in the hands of a grandmaster swordsman. An archer fires an arrow directly at the grandmaster, and the grandmaster is able to defend himself by cutting arrows out of the air. Here's a clip of it:
Another interesting aspect of samurai swords is how they are rated. The more bodies a sword can cut through in one stroke, the higher quality the sword is. There's talk in the video about legendary five body blades which are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
If you jump to the 46 minute mark, they go over the meticulous work required in polishing finished swords. They use whet stones to polish the swords, and the stones can go for thousands of dollars. The sword polisher spends ten days polishing these swords.
I'll end with a passage from the Samurai honour code.
The Way of The Warrior: Think Not Yourself As Established
A man who thinks he is already established is unwise; a man content with fixed views won through considerable effort has already fallen into a trap. Without a moment of self-content with what little one has found out, one should keep thinking his accomplished results as being still unsatisfactory and not good enough, exploring the right way to the attainment through one's whole life. Truth lies in no place but in this course of pursuit itself.
[Update] For Canadians who want to watch this video, you can watch it here.
Tuesday, May 4. 2010
With an oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico right now, I came across this article entitled, " Nuke That Slick," which describes how the Russians dealt with oil leaks.
As BP prepares to lower a four-story, 70-ton dome over the oil gusher under the Gulf of Mexico, the Russians — the world’s biggest oil producers — have some advice for their American counterparts: nuke it.
Komsomoloskaya Pravda, the best-selling Russian daily, reports that in Soviet times such leaks were plugged with controlled nuclear blasts underground. The idea is simple, KP writes: “the underground explosion moves the rock, presses on it, and, in essence, squeezes the well’s channel.”
Yes! It’s so simple, in fact, that the Soviet Union, a major oil exporter, used this method five times to deal with petrocalamities.
It'd be interesting to see what would have worse consequences; having a nuke go off and dealing with the nuclear hazards, or having the oil continue to leak.
Thursday, June 4. 2009
I spent the weekend watching the Deadliest Warrior marathon on SpikeTV. I have to say, this show is probably one of my favourite shows at the moment. The premise of the show is that they take two warriors, evaluate the deadliness of their respective weaponry/tactics, and punch those values into a computer simulation. The computer program will then run 1,000 battles to determine which warrior would win if the two fought.
The warriors they choose span the ages, from the bronze age all the way up to modern warriors. The match-ups they've had so far are:
Episode 1: Apache vs Gladiator
Episode 2: Viking vs Samurai
Episode 3: Spartan vs Ninja
Episode 4: Pirate vs Knight
Episode 5: Yakuza vs Mafia
Episode 6: Green Beret vs Spetsnaz
Episode 7: Shaolin Monk vs Māori Warrior
Episode 8: William Wallace vs Shaka Zulu
Episode 9: IRA vs. Taliban
I think one of my favourite episodes was William Wallace vs Shaka Zulu because the trash talking from the Scots were hilarious. The weaponry of William Wallace was also quite amazing as they were often one shot one kill weapons. One weapon in particular was said to be like getting hit by a motorcycle at 20mph.
Full episodes are still available on Spike's website, so have a look. Myron has confirmed that the video is in fact viewable from Canada, yay. Wikipedia also has an article which summarizes each episodes, and the kill stats of each warrior (major spoiler alert).
I've been brainstorming what sorts of battles I'd like to see in season 2, and I find myself looking back at warriors from strategy games I've played in the past like Civilization, Medieval Total War, Empire Earth, etc.
Battles I'd like to see:
The Mongols vs The Huns
17th Century British Redcoats vs Scottish Clansmen
Pirate vs Ninja
Medieval Turkish Archers vs English Longbowmen
Alexander The Great vs Ivan The Terrible
The Mossad vs Hezbollah
George Washington vs Napolean
Thursday, May 7. 2009
So just a short post as I get settled back in San Jose; yes, I made it back alive. I'll have a longer post later. In either case, while I was home, I came across the most awesome show on Spike TV, Deadliest Warrior. Basically they take warriors from history, and try to figure out who would win in a fight. Here's a sample clip from Ninja vs Spartan, guess who will win before you watch the clip.
I also hope one day they'll do a Ninja vs Pirates and settle this long lasting debate once and for all. In either case, I'm totally hooked on the show.
Tuesday, November 11. 2008
With Remembrance Day upon us, I was reading this article in the National Post entitled, " Canada never one to back away from war."
The Canadian Encyclopedia online says peacekeeping is "Canada's special métier" - which it surely is - but that is only one of our military's specialities. In all, in our 141 years of nationhood, more than 116,000 Canadians have laid down their lives to protect our sovereignty and freedom. [...]
After the Germans and Japanese surrendered in 1945, we had the fourth-largest army in the world. Between 1939 to 1945, when our population was just over 12 million, nearly one million Canadians served in uniform. (To put that number in per-capita context, it was the equivalent of today's Canada fielding a military of almost three million - equivalent to the population of Montreal.)
We are not a country that seeks out war. Indeed, we have always let our military deteriorate between conflicts, focusing our public spending instead on domestic priorities. There was almost as much expert and media hand-wringing over the sad state of our Armed Forces between the First and Second World Wars as there was immediately before the recent round of spending by the Conservative government. Yet when called upon, we are always equal to the challenge with our combination of full-time soldiers, reservists and volunteers. Whether ensuring the first election in a nascent democracy goes off fairly, rushing aid and medical personnel into a disaster zone or engaging in old-fashioned combat, Canadian soldiers, sailors and airmen have long established that they are even-handed in policing trouble spots and tenacious fighters where someone else has started the battle.
For too long, our politicians, academics and educators have tried to bury or even deny our true military history, insisting we have never been a warrior nation. And while it is true that we have never as a culture glorified war, neither have we backed away.
Yes, Canada has been instrumental in developing the modern concept of peacekeeping, something of which we should be extremely proud. In Kashmir, Suez, Congo, Cyprus, Somalia, Haiti, Rwanda, Bosnia, Lebanon, Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique and dozens of other conflicts around the globe, we have over and over again proven ourselves equal to the complex and dangerous task of standing between two warring factions (or more) and keeping them from killing one another. And we have lost over 100 brave young men and women in 50 years of this service to mankind.
Still, we risk dishonouring those Canadians who have gone to war to defend our nation and its values when we seek to revise our history and downplay our contributions to wars fought in the name of freedom. This is especially true at a time when more than 2,500 of our soldiers are battling the Taliban and al-Qaeda on the plains and in the mountains of Afghanistan. Nearly 100 have lost their lives there in the past six years trying to bring stability to the people of that nation and deny terrorists a staging base from which to plot their attacks on the West.
I think it's interesting that the author points out that Canada does not glorify war, but we don't back away from it either. In my time in the US, I have noticed that people here are a bit too rah rah about their military. To illustrate the difference, when was the last time you watched a war movie featuring Canadians in a war conflict? Off the top of my head, I can only think of Hotel Rwanda where it highlights Canadian General Dallaire, and the Canadian involvement isn't really the main part of the story. American war movies, I can list off quite a few: Pearl Harbor, Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, Band of Brothers, Patton, etc. In either case, I do prefer the Canadian approach to war making; we don't actively seek out war, but we will bring it if needed.
Remembrance Day used to be kind of abstract to me because I couldn't really internalize what it meant when someone talked about the sacrifices that soldiers make for their country. It only hit home a couple years ago when the headlines said that the US military was stretched really thin, and some politicians were pitching the idea of a draft. A draft usually involves recruiting able bodied citizens, which largely consists of my demographic.
I pondered the hypothetical situation of the things that one would have to give up should a draft actually be implemented. In my case, that would mean not being able to finish my schooling. It would mean being posted to anywhere in the world without my say. It would mean putting aspirations to go after that dream job on hold. It would mean not being able to spend time with that special someone as I could be thousands of miles away. It would mean wondering every day if this was my last day on earth.
With that in mind, I am grateful to those who volunteer to fight our wars, so that the rest of us can enjoy our freedoms as civilians. I end by applauding all those who have served their country to preserve our freedoms, our national interests, and our sovereignty.
Saturday, October 4. 2008
With the banks imploding all around us, and talks of an $850 billion bailout of the banks, many people have suddenly become interested in the banking system, and why are these awful things happening around us.
There's a short film that's circulating on the internet entitled "Money As Debt" which helps explain some of these things. This film answers questions such as:
- What is the role of the central bank?
- Where does money come from?
- What is a "run on the bank"
- etc.
The documentary is pretty accessible to even people with basic understandings of economics and such. It's also completely animated and not too complicated.
To the Ron Paul fans, you've probably heard the congressmen lament how bad our monetary system is currently. One of his solutions is the return to using the gold standard for our money, but this documentary highlights the problems with the gold system.
The first half of the documentary I enjoyed as it gave the history of how banking was created. However, I can't vouch for the second half of the documentary. It suddenly becomes very conspiracy theorist like. An example of this is when they quote from two American presidents who opposed the money system, and they imply that they were assassinated because of their opposition. In addition, I find the documentary's proposed solution of solving the money system's problem to be a bit naive or impractical. Some of the solutions, they wave their hands and say, oh alternative energy could save us money problems without explaining why.
Some of the solutions are very naive. For example, they suggest that if government had complete control over the money system, that would solve all our problems of evil bankers manipulating the system. However, giving absolute power to government is just replacing one problem with another in my opinion. Do we not remember that government has corruption and scandals as well?
I was debating whether to post this or not due to the duality of my opinion of this film. However, there are some nuggets to be sifted out of this. I'll let you decide which parts of this film is true, and which parts are conspiracy theories.
One interesting tidbit of information, apparently this film was created in Cowichan, British Columbia.
Wednesday, September 3. 2008
With each passing day, it looks like Russia and the West is starting a new cold war. Putin seems intent on bringing back old soviet power. What better way of doing that than stirring up nationalism, and revising history? I saw this article in the Times entitled, " Stalin's mass murders were 'entirely rational' says new Russian textbook praising tyrant."
Stalin acted ‘entirely rationally’ in executing and imprisoning millions of people in the Gulags, a controversial new Russian teaching manual claims.
Fifty-five years after the Soviet dictator died, the latest guide for teachers to promote patriotism among the Russian young said he did what he did to ensure the country’s modernisation.
The manual, titled A History of Russia, 1900-1945, will form the basis of a new state-approved text book for use in schools next year.
It seems to follow an attempt backed by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to re-evaluate Stalin’s record in a more positive light.
Critics have taken exception, however, to numerous excerpts, which they say are essentially attempts to whitewash Stalin’s crimes.
In the West, it has been widely accepted that in the 1920s millions were shot, exiled to Siberia, or died of starvation after their land, homes and meagre possessions, were taken to fulfil Stalin’s vision of massive ‘factory farms.’
In the 1930s millions more whom he considered or suspected a threat to the USSR were executed or exiled to Gulag labour camps in remote areas of Siberia or Central Asia, where many also died of disease, malnutrition and exposure.
Historians believe up to 20 million people perished as a result of his actions - more than the six million killed during Hitler’s genocide of the Jews. [...]
The manual informs teachers that the Great Terror of the 1930s came about because Stalin ‘did not know who would deal the next blow, and for that reason he attacked every known group and movement, as well as those who were not his allies or of his mindset.’
It stresses to teachers that ‘it is important to show that Stalin acted in a concrete historical situation’ and that he acted ‘entirely rationally - as the guardian of a system, as a consistent supporter of reshaping the country into an industrialised state.’
|