Is there a hyphen in ‘gay marriage’?

Is there a hyphen in the term ‘gay marriage’? No. ‘Gay’ and ‘marriage’ are two separate words.

But the English language is a dynamic, evolving entity. The general pattern is this. New terms formed from two words become hyphenated as the term comes into common use. When the term becomes established, the hyphen is dropped, and the new term becomes a new word in its own right.

A familiar example is the word ’email’. This word started out as the two-word phrase ‘electronic mail’.

honeywellad

As soon as “electronic mail” came into common use with the advent of the Internet, the term ‘electronic mail’ became hyphenated (and simultaneously the word ‘electronic’ was abbreviated to ‘e’) and ‘electronic mail’ morphed into ‘e-mail’.

Today, a Google search for “e-mail” yields

About 4,450,000,000 results.

It’s an impressive result. But a Google search for “email” (no hyphen) yields more than twice that number! Clearly, the hyphenated term ‘e-mail’ is now somewhat archaic. Today, the correct term is ’email’. One word, no hyphen.

As more and more governmental jurisdictions around the world recognise “gay marriage”, we will see the same, familiar pattern instantiated again.

‘Gay marriage’ will very soon become ‘gay-marriage’ (hyphenated) or, more likely, ‘g-marriage’ (hyphenated and abbreviated).

By the time the children of these g-marriages are themselves old enough to g-marry, the hyphen itself will have fallen into disuse.

‘Gay marriage’ will morph into ‘g-marriage’ which will morph into ‘gmarriage’. It’s a linguistic inevitability.

This is Jezebel

Then Jehu went to Jezreel. When Jezebel heard about it, she put on eye makeup, arranged her hair and looked out of a window. As Jehu entered the gate, she asked, “Have you come in peace, you Zimri, you murderer of your master?”

He looked up at the window and called out, “Who is on my side? Who?” Two or three eunuchs looked down at him. “Throw her down!” Jehu said. So they threw her down, and some of her blood spattered the wall and the horses as they trampled her underfoot.

Jehu went in and ate and drank. “Take care of that cursed woman,” he said, “and bury her, for she was a king’s daughter.” But when they went out to bury her, they found nothing except her skull, her feet and her hands. They went back and told Jehu, who said, “This is the word of the Lord that he spoke through his servant Elijah the Tishbite: On the plot of ground at Jezreel dogs will devour Jezebel’s flesh. Jezebel’s body will be like dung on the ground in the plot at Jezreel, so that no one will be able to say, ‘This is Jezebel.’” (NIV)

Sick of David Bain?

Let’s talk about Amanda Knox instead.

Jailed suspect Knox attends murder trial session in Perugia

Amanda Knox is an American woman who was jointly convicted, with her boyfriend at the time Raffaele Sollecito, of the sexual assault and murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy, on 1 November 2007.

Meredith Kercher, a 21 year old British university exchange student from Coulsdon, South London, was found dead on the floor of her bedroom with stab wounds to the throat. Some of her belongings were missing, including cash, two credit cards, two mobile phones, and her house keys.

Rudy Guede, an Ivory Coast native raised in Perugia, was convicted in October 2008 of having sexually assaulted and murdered Kercher, and was sentenced to 30 years, reduced on appeal to 16 years in December 2009.

Also tried were Knox, an American exchange student and flatmate of Kercher, and Knox’s then-boyfriend, Sollecito, an Italian student. Knox and Sollecito were convicted on charges of sexual assault and murder in December 2009, and sentenced to 26 and 25 years respectively.

Their convictions were overturned on appeal on 3 October 2011 by a panel of six jurors and two judges. In an official statement of their grounds for overturning the convictions the judges wrote there was a “material non-existence” of evidence to support the guilty verdicts at the trial. The appeal judges further stated that the prosecution’s theory of an association between Sollecito, Knox and Guede was “not corroborated by any evidence” and “far from probable”.

I first heard of the case—and it stuck in my mind ever since—when I read this

Two intelligent young people with previously bright futures, named Amanda and Raffaele, are now seven days into spending the next quarter-century of their lives behind bars for a crime they almost certainly did not commit.

on LessWrong.com, a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality.
The Amanda Knox Test: How an Hour on the Internet Beats a Year in the Courtroom.

The author wielded something called “the Sword of Bayes” and, to the following propositions

1. Amanda Knox is guilty (of killing Meredith Kercher)
2. Raffaele Sollecito is guilty (of killing Meredith Kercher)
3. Rudy Guédé is guilty (of killing Meredith Kercher)

assigned the following probabilities.

1. Small. Something on the order of 0.01 or 0.1 at most.
2. Ditto.
3. About as high as the other two numbers are low. 0.99 as a (probably weak) lower bound.

The author continues

Needless to say, this differs markedly from the consensus of the jury in Perugia, Italy.

How could this be?

Am I really suggesting that the estimates of eight jurors — among whom two professional judges — who heard the case for a year, along with something like 60% of the Italian public and probably half the Internet (and a significantly larger fraction of the non-American Internet), could be off by such a large amount?

Of course, the author really was suggesting exactly that. (It’s tempting to say—but, for obvious reasons, I won’t—that the LessWrong.com author was vindicated by the verdict of the appeal court in October 2011, that overturned Knox’s and Sollecito’s convictions.)

I won’t go into the nitty gritty details of the case. If you’re interested in further reading, Injustice in Perugia is a website set up by a Knox and Sollecito supporter, documenting the case.

This post’s take-home messages are two: read LessWrong.com, and learn the Bayesian Way.

AllYourBayes

Drug users fill New Zealand jails

This was on the front page of the Dominion Post today.

POLICY CRITICISED: The New Zealand Drug Foundation says court-focused treatment of minor offenders is not working.

Petty drug users fill New Zealand jails

Hundreds of people are locked up for petty drug offences every year – many for crimes our top legal body says should not exist.

Justice Ministry figures show a significant amount of court time is taken up by minor drug cases, with nearly as many people imprisoned for possessing a small quantity of cannabis as for dealing.

Among these offenders are hundreds imprisoned for possessing a pipe or a needle, an offence the Law Commission recommended legalising last year.

The figures also show fewer than one in three minor drug offenders is offered diversion, allowing them to avoid a criminal record.

The New Zealand Drug Foundation said the figures were alarming and showed the court-focused treatment of minor offenders was not working.

But Justice Minister Judith Collins said all drug offending – no matter how minor – should be dealt with through the criminal justice system.

In the past six years, possession of small amounts of cannabis or smoking utensils, such as a pipe, made up about half of all drug charges laid by police.

While most offenders received a fine or community work, more than 2800 were imprisoned on minor drug offences.

These included possession of needles, pipes, and small amounts of cannabis or methamphetamine.

Imprisonment for petty offences almost equals the number locked up for more serious crimes.

Drug Foundation executive director Ross Bell said locking up minor drug offenders was simply stupid policy.

“You send someone away for a minor drug conviction and they can come out a meth cook,” he said.

Rather than dealing with people through the criminal justice system, the Government could introduce a mandatory cautioning scheme, he said.

“For a drug like cannabis you could get three cautions before being diverted to a treatment programme. We are not talking about decriminalising or legalising, it’s about a more pragmatic way to get help for people that need it.”

However, Ms Collins said the justice system was the right place for all drug offenders.

“The Government relies on enforcement agencies such as police to make appropriate decisions on how to charge someone for their offending, and the judiciary to make appropriate sentencing decisions based on the circumstances of individual cases.”

The Government had policies to ensure anyone requiring drug treatment received it, she said.

Last year a Law Commission’s review of New Zealand’s 35-year-old drug laws criticised the uneven and criminally focused approach to drug offending.

It also recommended a three-strike system for minor offending, and legalising pipes and needles.

Police opposed most recommendations – including legalising pipes and needles. The Government has followed up only on a handful, notably introducing drug courts. However, the figures show the police may have started to treat minor drug offenders less aggressively.

In the year to June 2012, there was a substantial drop in the number of people being charged, convicted and imprisoned for possession of utensils.

Police said that the drop could be attributed to the introduction of a pre-charge warning in September 2010.

The move gave police discretion to warn rather than charge people arrested on offences carrying a sentence of six months or less imprisonment.

The warnings are not available to people caught with methamphetamine.

Police say people charged with drug possession are likely to get diversion, particularly on a first offence, but ministry figures show minor drug charges usually result in a conviction.

PUNISHING DRUG USE

How New Zealand has treated minor drug offenders over the past six years:

CANNABIS POSSESSION

Charges: 17,931

Convicted: 13,131

Imprisoned: 890

Maximum penalty: 3 months in prison and/or a $500 fine

CANNABIS UTENSIL

(SUCH AS A PIPE)

Charges: 11,057

Convicted: 7,563

Imprisoned: 737

Maximum penalty: A year in prison and/or $500 fine

METHAMPHETAMINE POSSESSION

Charges: 2185

Convicted: 1523

Imprisoned: 341

Maximum penalty: 6 months in prison and/or $1000 fine

METHAMPHETAMINE UTENSIL

(SUCH AS A PIPE)

Charges: 3899

Convicted: 2765

Imprisoned: 548

Maximum penalty: A year in prison and/or a $500 fine

– © Fairfax NZ News

I didn’t know this happened in New Zealand. 🙁

Does it?! (Where did these figures come from? Can anyone vouch for them?)

District councils – Who are you?

I thought it might be important for dealing with the Rotorua District Council to find out precisely what the Council is… so I asked. It took a few weeks to get a considered response.

Dear Reed

My email below refers. Kathy confirmed that Council is a territorial authority. Below, please find an explanation.

Territorial authorities of New Zealand
Territorial authorities are the second tier of local government in New Zealand, below regional councils. There are 67 territorial authorities: 13 city councils, 53 district councils, and the Chatham Islands Council. Six territorial authorities (Auckland Council, Nelson City Council, Gisborne, Tasman, and Marlborough District Councils and the Chatham Islands Council) also perform the functions of a regional council and thus are known as unitary authorities. Territorial authority districts are not subdivisions of regions, and some of them fall within more than one region. Taupo District has the distinction of straddling the boundaries of four different regions (see below). Regional council areas are based on water catchment areas, whereas territorial authorities are based on community of interest and road access. Regional councils are responsible for the administration of many environmental and public transport matters, while the territorial authorities administer local roading and reserves, sewerage, building consents, the land use and subdivision aspects of resource management, and other local matters. Some activities are delegated to council-controlled organisations.

I trust the above information answers your question.

Thanks

**** ******
Policy Planner

Their considered response was the same as their unconsidered response – which I’d already explained couldn’t be correct. Try again…

Thanks for that but it doesn’t answer the question I asked.

The Local Government Act 2002 states: –
territorial authority means a city council or a district council named in Part 2 of Schedule 2

The Rotorua District Council must have existed prior to the existence of territorial authorities.
Territorial Authority is a title/role that has been given to the Council. This doesn’t tell me what type of organisation the Council is.

The type of organisation that the Council is should be defined by its establishment.
When was the Council established and which Act was it established under?

Cheers

Reed Robinson

And their response…

Hi Reed

I will investigate further and get back to you.

Regards

**** ******
Policy Planner

Sent today…

Hi ***

Can you please investigate these related questions at the same time.

1. Do the Rotorua District Council and Council employees have a fiduciary duty to Rotorua property owners?
2. If not, what duty do the Rotorua District Council and Council employees have to Rotorua property owners?

I asked these questions in June 2011 and the following is a summary of Council’s response at the time…

I re-asked these questions in July 2011 and Council has not responded.

Cheers

Reed Robinson

I’ll post Council’s responses if I get any.

** Related blogpost from 2011 – Something stinks in Rotorua.

Robin Bain is innocent

I’m sick to death of hearing about evil charlatan David Bain and his odious sock puppet Joe Karam. Unfortunately, my interest in the Bain case has been rekindled by my co-blogger Reed’s report on Fisher’s Report on Binnie’s Report on the David Bain case. I’m writing a response with the title Bayes, Bain and Binnie, which I’ll post soon. Meanwhile, here’s a piece I wrote a few years ago on the 13th anniversary of the Bain murders.

[Reprised from beNZylpiperazine, June 2007.]

10f

13 years ago today, on a cold Dunedin morning, David Bain slaughtered his youngest sister Laniet (2 shots to the head as she lay sleeping, and 1 further shot as she lay gurgling dying), his mother Margaret (1 shot to the head while she lay sleeping), his brother Stephen (a shot through Stephen’s hand, then 1 shot through the head after a prolonged struggle during which David partially strangled Stephen with his own teeshirt) and his younger sister Arawa (1 shot to the head as she prayed or pleaded for mercy, after David’s first shot missed) – all in quick succession.

Lastly, David slaughtered his father Robin (1 shot to the head). But first, David put the washing machine on and went off on his usual morning paper run. Returning, he hid in a curtained alcove in the lounge and calmly waited for his father to enter the house after waking in the caravan outside where he slept. How cold-blooded is that?

Now, of course, David Bain is a free man, and two thirds of New Zealanders believe David Bain is innocent. Stuff.co.nz has delighted us with images of the remorseless killer enjoying life on the outside in the David Bain gallery.

There are far fewer pictures on the web of his dead family members. Google Image Search turned up nothing at all for Arawa or Laniet, and no images of Stephen. A search for images of Margaret produced a single image of David, and a search for images of Robin produced two images, again of David. So I guess when I said there are few fewer pictures… I really meant none at all.

But the exercise wasn’t altogether fruitless. I was introduced to Robin Bain’s namesake, an actress by the name of, er, Robin Bain. And I don’t think she’s innocent…

Don’t ask about the bronze rat

1280px-Bayes'_Theorem_MMB_01

Here’s a story problem about a situation that doctors often encounter:

1% of women at age forty who participate in routine screening have breast cancer. 80% of women with breast cancer will get positive mammographies. 9.6% of women without breast cancer will also get positive mammographies. A woman in this age group had a positive mammography in a routine screening. What is the probability that she actually has breast cancer?

What do you think the answer is? If you haven’t encountered this kind of problem before, please take a moment to come up with your own answer before continuing.

If you think it would help, make like a constipated mathematician.

If you get the answer wrong, you’re irrational.

If you click here to find the correct answer, you’re both irrational and lazy.

(Judge not, that ye be not judged? Yeah, I already worked out the correct answer myself, thanks. :-))

Vegetable Man

In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. And the Lord delivered Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, along with some of the articles from the temple of God. These he carried off to the temple of his god in Babylonia and put in the treasure house of his god.

Then the king ordered Ashpenaz, chief of his court officials, to bring into the king’s service some of the Israelites from the royal family and the nobility—young men without any physical defect, handsome, showing aptitude for every kind of learning, well informed, quick to understand, and qualified to serve in the king’s palace. He was to teach them the language and literature of the Babylonians. The king assigned them a daily amount of food and wine from the king’s table. They were to be trained for three years, and after that they were to enter the king’s service.

Among those who were chosen were some from Judah: Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah. The chief official gave them new names: to Daniel, the name Belteshazzar; to Hananiah, Shadrach; to Mishael, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abednego.

But Daniel resolved not to defile himself with the royal food and wine, and he asked the chief official for permission not to defile himself this way. Now God had caused the official to show favor and compassion to Daniel, but the official told Daniel, “I am afraid of my lord the king, who has assigned your food and drink. Why should he see you looking worse than the other young men your age? The king would then have my head because of you.”

Daniel then said to the guard whom the chief official had appointed over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, “Please test your servants for ten days: Give us nothing but vegetables to eat and water to drink. Then compare our appearance with that of the young men who eat the royal food, and treat your servants in accordance with what you see.” So he agreed to this and tested them for ten days.

At the end of the ten days they looked healthier and better nourished than any of the young men who ate the royal food. So the guard took away their choice food and the wine they were to drink and gave them vegetables instead. (NIV)

Mandatory Suicide

Military suicides outnumber combat deaths – economy and leadership to blame

By ROBERT LAURIE – There’s a good chance that this is the most depressing statistic you’ll see all year.

According to a new Army report, as of November, 303 active-duty, Reserve and National Guard soldiers had committed suicide in 2012.  During the same period, 212 men and women in uniform were lost due to combat fatalities in Afghanistan.

It’s depressing, and disgusting.

Our military has sacrificed precious blood and treasure in Afghanistan for an ill-defined, and as such probably unwinnable, war.  They’ve been given an arbitrary withdrawal date which has nothing to do with the accomplishment of any military goal and everything to do with politics.  While they wait to leave, they’re still forced to fight, but their Commander in Chief has offered them little in the way of an objective.

When they finally do earn a ticket home, they return to a broken, barely functional, America.  The economy is in the dumper, jobs are nigh-on impossible to come by, and – as a result of their low pay – former soldiers find themselves in an extraordinarily difficult financial position. All too often, this is leading to depression, substance abuse, and suicide.

Given the lack of leadership, coupled with the reality of the U.S. fiscal situation, are we really supposed to be surprised about the ugly numbers?

The President, the government, and every American citizen should be ashamed that we’re doing so little to support the men and women who protect our nation. This is the darkest scandal of the Obama administration.

This next song is dedicated to all our friends who made it back alive from the Persian Gulf …