San Francisco’s Most Important Scientist

Lie-01I have been using Dr. Paul Ekman’s learn­ing mate­ri­als for 5 years now and have acheived a 90% recog­ni­tion rate. That is face read­ing for the novice.

Learn to read face. The micro-expressions. From the man who has been study­ing them for 40 years. An indus­try has arisen from his work.

Be aware of how the peo­ple you know really feel about you. It’s writ­ten on their faces.

He cre­ated an ‘atlas of emo­tions’ with more than 10,000 facial expres­sions. His research on iden­ti­fy­ing decep­tion and hid­den demeanor is used to train law enforce­ment and secu­rity per­son­nel around the world. He was even the inspi­ra­tion for a tele­vi­sion drama series. APS William James Fel­low Paul Ekman reflects on his sto­ried career in an inter­view for the Inside the Psychologist’s Stu­dio video series.

The inter­view, filmed before a live audi­ence last May at the 2014 APS Annual Con­ven­tion in San Fran­cisco, was con­ducted by APS Past Pres­i­dent Robert Levenson.”

via Inside the Psychologist’s Stu­dio: Paul Ekman — Asso­ci­a­tion for Psy­cho­log­i­cal Sci­ence.

The Most Important Article of the 21st Century (So far…)

B9316600246Z.1_20150313203231_000_G5LA7DMPK.1-0Bless this woman. She speaks sim­ple, pure wis­dom: Noth­ing will change until you bring the “vio­lent” crim­i­nals into the onorous carceral state equaation.

The entire Amer­i­can soci­ety will not become a human soci­ety until then. Until this is dealt with, as Ms. Gottschalk says, Amer­ica descends into total­i­tar­i­an­ism and atrocity.

Read it. And weep. Or not.

The intense focus in crim­i­nal jus­tice reform today on the non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual offend­ers — the so-called non, non, nons — is trou­bling. Many con­tend that we should lighten up on the sanc­tions for the non, non, nons so that we can throw the book at the really bad guys. But the fact is that we’ve been throw­ing the book at the really bad guys for a really long time.

Leg­is­la­tors are mak­ing trou­bling com­pro­mises in which they are decreas­ing penal­ties in one area — such as drug crimes — in order to increase them in another area — such as expand­ing the use of life sen­tences. In doing so, they’re also fos­ter­ing the mis­taken idea that it is easy to dis­tin­guish the non, non, nons from the really bad guys.”

via It’s Not Just the Drug War | Jacobin.

A Setback for American Justice

Grassley-090507-18363- 0032
Grassley-090507–18363– 0032

Why is Amer­ica chock full to the gills with revenge Puri­tans? I guess it’s what the “peo­ple” voted for. The old peo­ple. The young peo­ple. The Amer­i­can people.

Sen­a­tor Grass­ley is in charge of sen­tenc­ing reform, a long, long over­due reform that is stran­gling America.

Yet.

He is one of those revenge freaks. And was elected as such.

This piece comes from the legal blog in the United States. It is detailed and bor­ing to read for a non-lawyer.

I rec­om­mend you read it sev­eral times.

We can­not change a thing by releas­ing a few “low-level” offend­ers. But, even doing that may be beyond Chuck Grassley’s feel­ble grasp.

Ugh.

I share the view that it is silly to speak of a ‘leniency indus­trial com­plex,’ and there are lots of other lin­guis­tic flour­ishes in Sen­a­tor Grassley’s floor speech that could be exten­sively picked apart for rhetor­i­cal excess and inac­cu­racy.  But, but the same mea­sure, I under­stand Sen­a­tor Grassley’s expressed con­cern with terms like ‘low-level’ and ‘non-violent’ (echo­ing points pre­vi­ously made here by Bill Otis) because use of these terms in sen­tenc­ing reform debates are ‘question-begging’ and do involve ‘sheer cloudy vague­ness.’  Though I may myself be some­times guilty of using or repeat­ing these terms, I think a term like ‘less seri­ous’ is a bet­ter term that ‘low-level’ (though still vague).  And what can and should qual­ify as vio­lent or non-violent crime has been such a prob­lem in fed­eral law that the US Sen­tenc­ing Com­mis­sion has given up try­ing to fix this mat­ter and the US Supreme Court might soon blow up a statute for its vague­ness in this arena.”

via Sen­tenc­ing Law and Pol­icy: Spar­ring over sen­tenc­ing reform lingo involv­ing the media and Sen­a­tor Grass­ley.

If you think being a “professional” makes your job safe, think again

Robert Reich, Goldman School of Public Policy, UC BerkeleyRobert Reich sees into the future. There is none. Unless we embrace redis­tri­b­u­tion. I know. Amer­i­cans are averse to that God Damn welfare.

But, guess what? Amer­ica? Change it. Or Lose it. Here’s why:

That vir­tu­ous cycle is now falling apart. A future of almost unlim­ited pro­duc­tion by a hand­ful, for con­sump­tion by who­ever can afford it, is a recipe for eco­nomic and social collapse.

Imag­ine a small box – let’s call it an “iEv­ery­thing” – capa­ble of pro­duc­ing every­thing you could pos­si­bly desire, a mod­ern day Aladdin’s lamp.

You sim­ply tell it what you want, and – presto – the object of your desire arrives at your feet.

The iEv­ery­thing also does what­ever you want. It gives you a mas­sage, fetches you your slip­pers, does your laun­dry and folds and irons it.

The iEv­ery­thing will be the best machine ever invented.

The only prob­lem is no one will be able to buy it. That’s because no one will have any means of earn­ing money, since the iEv­ery­thing will do it all.”

via Robert Reich (The “iEv­ery­thing” and the Redis­tri­b­u­tional…).

A Musician’s Musician

620-01b-bob-dylan-man-strong-opinions.imgcache.rev1422563250097.webThis long-form inter­view (in the old folks’ mouth­piece AARP) is a primer on record­ing, singing and play­ing music. But it is so much more. Just one seg­ment of the inter­view fol­lows. Any­one who is doing art, who is per­form­ing music, will be inspired. A man with a purpose.

Once you think you know the song, then you have go and see how other peo­ple have done it. One ver­sion led to another until we were start­ing to assim­i­late even Harry James’ arrange­ments. Or even Pérez Prado’s. My pedal steel player is a genius at that. He can play any­thing from hill­billy to bebop. There are only two gui­tars in there, and one is just play­ing the pulse. Stand-up bass is play­ing orches­trated mov­ing lines. It’s almost like folk music in a way. I mean, there are no drums in a Bill Mon­roe band. Hank Williams didn’t use them either. Some­times the beat takes the mys­tery out of the rhythm.”

via Bob Dylan Exclu­sive AARP The Mag­a­zine Inter­view (Long Form) — AARP.

A Tiny Bit of Justice

tascajpg-39db9c68998fd406This is a primer on what hap­pens when a human being who is also a police offi­cer attempts to be a human being. Other police offi­cers attempt to ostra­cize her (or worse). Now.….what does that make those other police offi­cers? Human beings? In what way are they human?

Put one on the score­board for the humans in this one par­tic­u­lar case.

A New Jer­sey police offi­cer who was fired after she pro­tected a sus­pect from being beaten by offi­cers has won her job back. Regina Tasca is the only female, and gay offi­cer on her force to this day and said she was con­tin­u­ously harassed by officers.”

via Offi­cer Fired for Stop­ping Beat­ing Gets Her Job Back | XRe­pub­lic.

The History of Eating

greasy-breakfastWant to be healthy? Want to lose weight? This essay cov­ers the his­tory of eat­ing over the last 5 cen­turies. A relaxed fit is the best course for the human mammal.

Instead of obsess­ing about meal size and fre­quency, Ochner rec­om­mends some­thing sim­pler: Don’t eat when it’s time for a meal; eat when you feel hun­gry. That, he says, is a lost art: In indus­tri­al­ized soci­eties, where food is abun­dant, we eat because of social cues ‘or just because some­thing smells good.’ If we can teach our­selves to pay atten­tion to our own bod­ies instead of our envi­ron­ment, he says, ‘that might be the best diet of all.’”

via Why You Should Stop Eat­ing Break­fast, Lunch, and Din­ner | Mother Jones.