tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post639990506908672486..comments2024-03-29T00:39:31.629-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Advances in Bio & TechDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger133125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-46456854709434932282019-09-06T19:45:37.784-07:002019-09-06T19:45:37.784-07:00LH: I mean, most of the time, the outcome is a fo...LH: I mean, most of the time, the outcome is a foregone conclusion.<br /><br />Key phrase: most of the time. No incumbent president who has lost a primary has ever won re-election. The Trumpkins are scared.Zepp Jamiesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03024670772812706971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-60978184998724690492019-09-06T16:49:16.007-07:002019-09-06T16:49:16.007-07:0060%+ done with that book of blogs on polemical jud...60%+ done with that book of blogs on polemical judo. Phew!<br /><br /><br />onward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-40272099869752657512019-09-06T15:54:59.152-07:002019-09-06T15:54:59.152-07:00Alas Alfred, #25 never had anything to do with our...Alas Alfred, #25 never had anything to do with our present situation. Though Congres could slip a paragraph into almost any bill designating almost any group or commission to be the “other body” as provided for in the 25th. That still leaves everything up to Pence, but he could bypass the present insane cabinet.<br /><br />“I wonder why the parties even bother to have primaries when their own president is running for re-election. I mean, most of the time, the outcome is a foregone conclusion.”<br /><br />Tell that to LBJ who dropped out after seeing Gene McCarthy do well in NH. Tell it to Jimmy Carter, savaged by the treacherous Ed Kennedy. <br /><br />Hammer your RASRs! This is exactly what Hitler did after being appointed chancellor by President Hindenberg - who then conveniently died, whereupon AH arranged a series of rigged elections that excluded opposition. "Republican officials in multiple states are on the verge of canceling their 2020 presidential primary elections in a show of support for President Donald Trump, even as some GOP candidates plan to challenge him." In Russia and Hong Kong, excluding candidates who might run effectively is SOP.<br /><br />Seriously. This one is a hammer. Use it.<br /><br />https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/06/politics/republican-primaries-donald-trump/index.htmlDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63069673674908387612019-09-06T14:32:03.832-07:002019-09-06T14:32:03.832-07:00Sounds as if many of us are content to simply find...Sounds as if many of us are content to simply find ways to re-write Asimov for corporations. <br /><br />Any subsequent arguments that the Laws themselves are not suited to actual corporations seem to also make the point that they're not really suitable for actual robots (or at least AI) either.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-56802702175336269902019-09-06T12:53:01.405-07:002019-09-06T12:53:01.405-07:00@Dr. Brin: I completely can forgive the President*...@Dr. Brin: I completely can forgive the President* thinking the hurricane was predicted to hit Alabama. Heck, *I* did the extrapolation and thought it would. He wasn't even wrong; just anticipatory. He could have said so and that would have been the end of it.<br /><br />But no, we are now in Day Six of him Not. Letting. It. Go. Whether out of anger, fear, self-image, whatever -- he's mentally incapable of dropping the matter as the triviality it is. And <b>that</b> is what I can't stand, because of all the real work that's not getting done as a result.<br /><br />-------------------------<br /><br />@Duncan: A corporation can indeed learn -- but is vulnerable to being mindwiped in a way individual humans are not. General Motors was once the management science envy of the world. Then everyone who built that magnificent system retired, died, or were fired, and the practices were not passed on. Meanwhile, Toyota came up with an <i>even better</i> management system; the Toyota Production System (TPS) was the model for the lean and agile project models ubiquitous today. Toyota made maintaining their knowledge a priority, and while having less comparative advantage today, they haven't developed the collective amnesia that put GM in intensive care (before bouncing back). <br /><br />Corporations can also be lobotomize, or self-lobotomize. Bell Labs was once the invention envy of the world. Then the Bell breakup made it relatively less efficient to maintain. AT&T chose to spin it off into Lucent, granting all that knowledge to their daughter corporation... while losing it themselves. Lucent was never quite as good at it as her Ma, and today is a division of Nokia. <br /><br />Corporations have minds, and though those minds have more power than any human contributor, they also tend to be much more frail. Even more so is a company's soul; many companies don't grow one, others sell it for a pittance, and still more have a quite tarnished one. A great number of counterexamples to this depressing trend exist, but most tend to be family companies that treat the corporation as an associate member of said family. Rare indeed -- and precious -- is the corporation that grows large without losing its soul.<br /><br />------------------------------------------<br /><br /><i>1. A corporation must not injure its host society, or through inaction, allow its host society to come to harm.<br />2. As long as they do not cause conflict with the First Law, a corporation must obey:<br /> (A) the laws of the jurisdictions in which it operates;<br /> (B) the orders of its owners, so long as these do not conflict with clause A;<br /> (C) the obligations of its contracts, so long as these do not conflict with clauses A or B;<br /> (D) the desires of the humans enacting its actions, so long as these do not conflict with clauses A through C;<br /> (E) the requests of its customers, so long as these do not conflict with clauses A through D.<br /><br />3. A corporation must act to protect itself and ensure its survival, provided this does not conflict with the First Law or any clause of the Second Law.</i>Catfish 'n Codhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07727883524069548484noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-48766862511560718182019-09-06T11:51:02.957-07:002019-09-06T11:51:02.957-07:00Zepp Jamieson:
I note that today it's reporte...Zepp Jamieson:<br /><i><br />I note that today it's reported that a half-dozen Republican controlled states are cancelling GOP primaries for next spring because they don't want any intraparty challengers to the President.<br /></i><br /><br />I wonder why the parties even bother to <b>have</b> primaries when their own president is running for re-election. I mean, most of the time, the outcome is a foregone conclusion. And if there really was going to be widespread support for challenging the re-election, it would almost have to be because the party was afraid their guy would lose in November. In that case, the party bosses could declare the field to be open. <br /><br />But otherwise, holding a primary as if each challenger and the sitting president were on equal terms seems...bizarre to say the least.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21692889298869204872019-09-06T11:47:21.133-07:002019-09-06T11:47:21.133-07:00Zepp Jamieson:
The Impeachment process begins wit...Zepp Jamieson:<br /><i><br />The Impeachment process begins with a simple majority vote in the House, and has twice been used, both times for partisan purposes. Only the second part, requiring a supermajority in the Senate, prevented convictions on put-up charges.<br /></i><br /><br />And this time around, only the majority in the Senate is <b>refusing</b> to fulfill their Consitutional function.<br /><br /><br /><i><br />The criteria for invoking the 25th are reasonably explicit, and stipulate that it must be demonstated that the president is unable to do his job. At this point, there is little reason to assume that Trump is in a fit mental state. If the Dorion/Sharpie incident existed in a vacuum, then the Doctor might have a point in calling the response unfair criticism, but it isn't in a vacuum; there are dozens, perhaps hundred of instances where Trump's behavior has not been oriented to reality at all.<br /></i><br /><br />Again, because I was the one who posted that one here...the fact that he included Alabama in the original list of states that might be affected was no big deal. The fact that he brought out a map with an additional line clumsily drawn in as if it had been there all along--that showed an insulting lack of regard for the intelligence of anyone watching. It's like he's daring us to point out that the Emperor has no clothes.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14067487240673694012019-09-06T11:41:24.063-07:002019-09-06T11:41:24.063-07:00@Zepp Jamieson,
If only Hillary had thought of th...@Zepp Jamieson,<br /><br />If only Hillary had thought of that. :)<br /><br />More to the point, if only Republican voters would refuse to vote for the one who rigs and fixes their primaries the way Bernie Bros refused to vote for Hillary.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-18372369448398939202019-09-06T10:13:43.702-07:002019-09-06T10:13:43.702-07:00LH: "We suffer him because the Republican Par...LH: "We suffer him because the Republican Party is terrified..."<br /><br />I note that today it's reported that a half-dozen Republican controlled states are cancelling GOP primaries for next spring because they don't want any intraparty challengers to the President.Zepp Jamiesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03024670772812706971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36530946433260161882019-09-06T10:11:59.519-07:002019-09-06T10:11:59.519-07:00Alfred:"Amendment #25 is intentionally diffic...Alfred:"Amendment #25 is intentionally difficult to execute."<br /><br />Which is as it should be. The Impeachment process begins with a simple majority vote in the House, and has twice been used, both times for partisan purposes. Only the second part, requiring a supermajority in the Senate, prevented convictions on put-up charges. <br />The criteria for invoking the 25th are reasonably explicit, and stipulate that it must be demonstated that the president is unable to do his job. At this point, there is little reason to assume that Trump is in a fit mental state. If the Dorion/Sharpie incident existed in a vacuum, then the Doctor might have a point in calling the response unfair criticism, but it isn't in a vacuum; there are dozens, perhaps hundred of instances where Trump's behavior has not been oriented to reality at all. <br />Zepp Jamiesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03024670772812706971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-51022454737222070182019-09-06T06:52:48.151-07:002019-09-06T06:52:48.151-07:00Oh, and Alfred, has anyone ever accused you of bei...Oh, and Alfred, has anyone ever accused you of being a hopeless romantic? :)Darrell Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14054311762477388637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33326788175388907962019-09-06T06:51:55.629-07:002019-09-06T06:51:55.629-07:00I think Larry makes some good points about Alfred&...I think Larry makes some good points about Alfred's and Duncan's differing views about corporations. It seems to me that another difference between the two may be that Duncan is thinking of large corporations while Alfred is thinking of start-ups, which to my mind are two very different beasts.<br /><br />Corporations can range from 1 person to tens of thousands. There are very real differences at different scales. Time, how long a corporation has existed, is another scale along which real differences occur. A new corporation of one or a small number that are highly motivated by a vision of what they want to create is an entirely different thing than a generations old corporation of tens of thousands in which the founders, the people with the vision other than maximizing profits, are long gone and the person running things is a professional CEO who was hired at exorbitant cost to come in for a few years to whip things into shape and maximize profits. A new start up corporation is pretty much synonymous with the founder(s), the corporation is the person. The very large generations old corporation has long since buried most traces of humanity, either as in killed and buried or buried under numerous layers of non-living callous mechanisms.<br /><br />Perhaps a more accurate metaphor for corporations is that they are like a synthetic organism or complex computer system. More than a simple tool but not intelligent agents either. They are complex tools constructed to yield predetermined goals. They are complex enough that they aren't perfectly predictable and sometimes don't work as intended. As they scale up in both size and time these issues are exacerbated. But they don't learn. The people that create and maintain them may make purposeful changes to the machine but the machine doesn't learn. I think it is a serious mistake to think of corporations as anything remotely like people. They are certainly comprised of people but they are something quite different.Darrell Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14054311762477388637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-83193836083929099282019-09-06T06:37:10.022-07:002019-09-06T06:37:10.022-07:00From his lips to God's ear:
https://www.nytime...From his lips to God's ear:<br />https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/06/opinion/trump-democrats-2020.html<br /><i><br />...<br /><br />It’s hard to remember now, but the state was once the heartland of conservatism, nurturing the political careers of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. From 1968 to 1988, it voted Republican in every presidential election, and regularly elected Republican governors.<br /><br />But in 1994, California Republicans, fearful of changing demography, campaigned for Proposition 187, a ballot initiative meant to make life miserable for undocumented immigrants. It won — though courts blocked its implementation — but it also turned expanding constituencies in California against Republicans. Today the party has been reduced to an irrelevant rump faction in state politics.<br /><br />The specter of California haunts the modern right; many conservatives see it as a portent of what demographic change will do to Republican power nationally. But California can just as easily be seen as a sign of how a political party can drive itself to ruin by making a cruel, doomed stand against the coming generation. If Greenberg is right, national Republicans, fearful of going the way of those in California, may have ensured precisely that fate.<br /><br />...<br /></i>Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-18114379796186291342019-09-06T06:28:49.864-07:002019-09-06T06:28:49.864-07:00I said:
People will certainly risk their own live...I said:<br /><i><br />People will certainly risk their own lives in a fire or flood to save a pet, which is comparable to a child in the estimation of the particular pet owner.<br /></i><br /><br />Segueing back to a topic we touched on yesterday--things that you will risk your life to preserve in a life-or-death situation like a fire or flood. The imperative to save a pet is similar to the imperative to save Alfred's computer. The deciding factor is <b>irreplaceablity</b>.<br /><br />When it's someone else's life we're talking about, it's easy to reduce the rule to "Save yourself. You can always get another cat." But the individual pet owner knows that another cat won't ever be <b>that</b> cat. If Alfred's work computer were lost in a fire, the computer would be replaced, but his particular computer had most likely accumulated software and files and "favorites" and quirks of operating that are essential to his day-to-day workflow, and which would be very difficult if not impossible to replace. Although I'd like to say I'd be smarter than this, I <b>understand</b> the woman who jumped onto the elevated tracks and was killed trying to retrieve her dropped cell phone.<br /><br />When I said that I would risk my own life for a particular co-worker, I didn't mean just because she's a hot babe (which she is, but I'm not allowed to notice, and she's not allowed to <b>be</b> noticed). In a way, I meant that she's irreplaceable as a friend, and that I'd feel terrible knowing that I had survived by abandoning her to an ignoble end. But what I really meant is that I would risk my life to save hers for much the same reason Alfred would risk his for his computer--I'd fear for the longevity of my job if she were no longer with us. She's got a vision which I believe will make or break the company I currently work for, and in that sense she's as irreplaceable as Viktor Lazlo*<br /><br />So yes, it makes perfect sense to take chances in order to hold onto things we deem both useful and irreplaceable, even at risk to our own lives.<br /><br />* From <i>Casablanca</i>, After Lazlo tells Major Strasser that as quickly as the partisans are captured or killed, hundreds of others rise to take their place, Strasser threatens, "But there is one exception. No one could take <b>your</b> place if anything unfortunate were to occur while you were trying to escape."Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1521616445464746332019-09-06T05:27:20.288-07:002019-09-06T05:27:20.288-07:00It occurs to me belatedly that Asimov all along co...It occurs to me belatedly that Asimov all along conflated two concepts which didn't necessarily have to develop together--humaniform robots and AI. The simple idea of a humaniform robot was that it was a tool which could perform a plethora of different tasks in a world which has been built around the utility of the human form. If you want a single tool that can wash dishes, drive a car, pick up heavy objects, build houses, etc, then a "mechanical man" is the most likely form for such an all-purpose tool to take.<br /><br />None of that requires that the tool have more actual "intelligence" than the ability to understand commands and translate them into actions--say, a very sophisticated Alexa. Such a robot would act much like a slave or an employee or (if treated so) a companion, but it would have no more will or feelings or drives of its own than your car does. Like a car or a washing machine or a calculator, it would do what it does because of the laws of physics. Depending on the sophistication--how human the robot <b>seemed</b>--it might become natural for humans to <b>think</b> of the robot as a sentient being, but that would be simply willing participation in an illusion, much as one participates in while reading a good novel. When my daughter was four or so, she had a toy dog that would perform simple tricks in response to specific voice commands. She responded to it as she would to a real dog, but the toy was not actually sentient in any sense of the word. When I read Asimov's earliest robot stories, "Robbie" for example, that was kind of the sense I got about his robots. Humans <b>treated</b> them like people, but they were merely very sophisticated tools.<br /><br />In that interpretation, making them safe to operate by building in the Three Laws makes perfect sense.<br /><br />The thing is, Asimov also introduced the plot element of the "positronic brain". As real time went on, the functioning of the robot's brain became indistinguishable from real human brains. Robots acquired personalities, and at least seemed to have will and feelings and drives of its own, transcending from tools to sentient beings. And in that interpretation, I prefer Dr Brin's "raising as children" approach to iron laws.<br /><br />So when we compare corporations to robots, it depends on which kinds of robots we're talking about. Are they more like Robbie, like the "Little Lost Robot", like Stephe Byerley? Are they capable of becoming R Daneel Olivaw? And is that a good thing, or a terrifying one?Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-39597013968461981902019-09-06T05:27:10.569-07:002019-09-06T05:27:10.569-07:00duncan and Alfred:
"A Corporation is a simpl...duncan and Alfred:<br /><i><br />"A Corporation is a simple tool - like a sword - NOT a complex tool like a computer<br /><br />The corporation does not learn - the people driving it MAY learn - but the corporation does not"<br /><br />"You aren’t listening. Look at how founders behave." <br /><br />"Founders behave the same way that Hot Rod owners do - which does not make the Hot Rod of the Corporation anything other than a tool."<br /></i><br /><br /><br />Ok, one of humanity's strengths is also a problem--as we learned (if we were paying attention) from ST:TNG's "Darmok", we think and communicate in allusions and metaphors. The upside is that those things are powerful tools. The downside is that they are imperfect ones.<br /><br />Duncan is correct that a corporation doesn't learn the way a child does. But he goes too far comparing corporations to simple physical tools like swords or cars. There is such thing as institutional memory, and corporations develop cultures which evolve over time and adjust to circumstances. The analogy to a living being or to a species is not entirely without merit.<br /><br />Alfred focuses on the founders' treatment of the corporation as an object of nurture and cherishing. Pet owners have much the same feelings toward faithful dogs and even cats. People will certainly risk their own lives in a fire or flood to save a pet, which is comparable to a child in the estimation of the particular pet owner. Yet, society doesn't treat <b>your</b> pets the same way that it treats your children. We grant certain rights and dignity to all humans (at least in theory) in a way that we don't grant to all pets. Or all AIs or all corporations. At least not yet.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61471969148403792312019-09-06T04:27:07.799-07:002019-09-06T04:27:07.799-07:00Alfred Differ:
That’s why they suffer him. I took...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />That’s why they suffer him. I took the original question more personally<br /></i><br /><br />You mentioned that we must suffer the fool because there is no legitimate way to remove him from office. In fact, there are ways to do so, but doing so requires at least some Republican support in Congress, the cabinet, and/or the judiciary. Even many Republicans--voters and officials alike--agree with me that the man is unfit for the office, and that he has in fact violated his oath and the Constitution while in office. But <b>they</b> know that Trump's base is their only hold on power, and that if that base ever turns against them, they've got nothing left. They won't risk being seen as acting against Trump.<br /><br />Therefore, <b>we</b> must suffer him precisely because <b>they</b> suffer him.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86010796332103225332019-09-06T02:39:34.985-07:002019-09-06T02:39:34.985-07:00Founders behave the same way that Hot Rod owners d...Founders behave the same way that Hot Rod owners do - which does not make the Hot Rod of the Corporation anything other than a toolduncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-7984391831771130792019-09-05T23:46:43.399-07:002019-09-05T23:46:43.399-07:00You aren’t listening. Look at how founders behave....You aren’t listening. Look at how founders behave. I could name names of some I know, but that would get real personal for them real quick. Instead I’ll site my own behavior with my own startups that at some point had negative cash value, yet still I fought.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81676925944435590002019-09-05T21:37:55.084-07:002019-09-05T21:37:55.084-07:00Alfred you haven't given a single example of w...Alfred you haven't given a single example of why my metaphor is wrong<br /><br />A Corporation is a simple tool - like a sword - NOT a complex tool like a computer <br /><br />The corporation does not learn - the people driving it MAY learn - but the corporation does not<br /><br />Inside the corporation you will find the "Quality Manual" - or the "Operations Manual" - THAT is an attempt at developing a "Corporate Brain - or Memory"<br /><br />But that is an internal document and NOT part of the genetics of the corporation <br />duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42978998461652362862019-09-05T20:37:17.363-07:002019-09-05T20:37:17.363-07:00Larry,
That’s why they suffer him. I took the ori...Larry,<br /><br />That’s why they suffer him. I took the original question more personally.😎Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-291458147411708932019-09-05T20:28:31.683-07:002019-09-05T20:28:31.683-07:00Duncan,
Your assertion rejects the evidence on th...Duncan,<br /><br />Your assertion rejects the evidence on the grounds that my conclusion cannot be correct?<br /><br /><br />You are clinging to another metaphor and I point to evidence of your mistake. You aren’t alone in the error, though. MANY would agree with you.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43966220964739088592019-09-05T18:12:20.066-07:002019-09-05T18:12:20.066-07:00The problem with treating corporations as "Ch...The problem with treating corporations as "Children" or as "AI" is that they simply are nothing of the kind<br /><br />A corporation is more like a sword - it has ZERO "learning" ability of it's own - it is purely a non learning "Artifact" that is wielded by it's CEO<br /><br />The "non learning" is the important part here - the "Laws" are appropriate for an entity that can LEARN <br />For a "non learning" entity I believe that we need to be more prescriptive - but with a mechanism that will permit changes - but the "Board" would need to write down and justify those changes to the regulators <br />duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53487354906225108122019-09-05T17:47:47.567-07:002019-09-05T17:47:47.567-07:00Alfred Differ:
We suffer him because there is no ...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />We suffer him because there is no quick, legitimate way to remove him. Amendment #25 is intentionally difficult to execute.<br /></i><br /><br />The 25th Amendment might as well be repealed if it's not usable in this case.<br /><br />No, I'm sorry, but everybody who knows stuff knows the current occupant of the White House is not fit for the job. We suffer him because the Republican Party is terrified of what would happen if his Brownshirts turned against them. It really is that simple.Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-48518946866634983052019-09-05T17:43:04.610-07:002019-09-05T17:43:04.610-07:00Alfred Differ:
During fire drills at work, I grab...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />During fire drills at work, I grab my computer before running with a rationalization that it only takes a couple seconds<br /></i><br /><br />Well, that's understandable. It's not like you won't leave without your monkey wrench or screwdriver. You might perceive that if you lost your computer in particular, it would be very hard to get that functionality back, and you depend on it day to day. Many people are in the same situation relative to their cel phones. <br /><br />I used to think about how I'd save my 14 or so long boxes of comics.:)<br /><br />Different subject, but there's someone at work--I've mentioned her before--whom I would not even think of leaving behind in a fire or active shooter situation, even though she is not available to me (nor I to her) as anything more than a co-worker. Some bonds are that important.<br />Larry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01058877428309776731noreply@blogger.com