Friday, April 28, 2023

Galactic matters & supermassive black holes!

Been taking a break from the tsunami of "AI stuff" - pokes and pods about the Chat GPT and the absurd "moratorium petition" and such... and also from the USA's insane political meltdown. At a time when there are so many indicators that our confidence should be rising, not falling.

So... instead let's pause all that and take a break for science... especially spaaaaaaace.

Like wow. Let's start with an M dwarf sun with two Earth-sized worlds orbiting in the potentially habitable 'goldilocks belt.'

Indeed, roughly half of the galaxy’s sunlike stars may host rocky worlds in habitable zones where liquid water could pool or flow over the planets’ surfaces, according to one appraisal of Kepler mission data. By just that measure, the closest such world is probably within 20 light-years, and four should be within 33 light-years. Only, that doesn't even include the vastly bigger pool of ice-roofed ocean worlds like Europa that may exist near almost any star you see in the sky. Including those a mere 4 or 5 l.y. away.


How many alien civilizations are out there? “Of course, many factors determine whether a world in the habitable zone is truly friendly for life. Planetary characteristics such as magnetic fields, atmospheres, water content, and plate tectonics all play a role, and those are difficult to observe on small, faraway worlds,” writes Nadia Drake in National Geographic.


Expanding the search? It’s been almost 8 years since NASA scientists held a news conference predicting discovery of alien life within a decade. At least spectral signs of planetary atmospheres likely altered by biological activity, as our planet has been. While waiting for that milestone, what teams have appeared to accomplish is to survey 100,000 galaxies for the most blatant signs of total takeover by unrestrained techno ambition of super civilizations, of the sort seen in some garish sci fi. There may still be some Dyson Spheres and such, but not on a scale that would alter the smeared stellar light output of whole galaxies. So… there’s an upper bound, it seems. 


Disappointed? Wow, aren’t you the ambitious one.


== Galactic matters matter! ==


Only about 750 light-years apart, two supermassive black holes have been spotted feasting on cosmic materials as two galaxies in distant space merge. 

Also in the Milky Way, only 11,000 light years away, a pair of super massive stars whirl in a dance that recently produced one ‘fizzle’ supernova… and will likely then make another ‘fizzle’… followed eventually by a Kilonova spewing gold and other heavy elements across the galaxy. Beyond being amazing-fascinating… in my short story “The Tell” there is a beautiful spy named Kilonova. And why not?


Astronomers have spotted a runaway supermassive black hole, seemingly ejected from its home galaxy and racing through space with a chain of stars trailing in its wake. 


And what appears to be what is known as a dark galaxy. Aside from a small smattering of stars, the galaxy seems to be made up almost entirely of dark matter. The newly discovered dwarf galaxy located a mere 94 million light-years away is not emitting any optical light. In fact, it's barely emitting any light at all.


One possible explanation for “the dwarf galaxy problem is that  we're unable to detect some kinds of dwarf galaxy, such as those with very few stars, consisting primarily of gas and dark matter.  Found by radio observations of active hydrogen gas (galactic) without hardly any starshine. Calculations suggest that the galaxy is made up of around 98 percent dark matter.


A ’space tadpole” of gas may point to a rare intermediate scale black hole.


An interesting and well produced half hour video about the Rare Earth Hypothesis.



== Matters of scale ==


I already posted this content years ago… but the folks at Topia asked to publish a much glossier and more lavish version. “21 Cosmic websites you need to visit."

How big is space? Sci-fi legend David Brin investigates.” And now it’s even more fun than before.


Asteroid Apophis will skate by Earth in 2029, a terrific opportunity for orbit matching and deep study, if we start now. OSIRIS-REx, a spacecraft currently ferrying home samples from the surface of an asteroid called Bennu, will rendezvous with Apophis in 2029. Shortly after April 13, the craft — by then renamed OSIRIS-APophis EXplorer, or OSIRIS-APEX — will steer toward the asteroid until it is drawn into its orbit, eventually getting close enough to collect a sample from its surface.  But I think we should (and will) send more!


NASA discovers the perfect cave to live in on the moon: “Humans evolved living in caves, and to caves we might return when we live on the moon,” where there might be protection from radiation and meteorites and a balmy day-night (roughly) constant 63F temperatures and relative ease at sealing off large chambers. “Getting in and out of the pit wouldn’t be easy — the bottom is 328 feet below the moon’s surface, so it’d be like rappelling down a 30-story building.” (At NIAC we’ve funded a potential near-term lander to get a closer look at one of these!) “But if NASA can make it work, astronauts wouldn’t have to expend energy on yet-to-be-invented climate control systems for their future moon base.” Also one heckuva likely safer place!


Now to find one within reach of one of those polar ice fields… if so, you might start to change my mind about near-term NASA human-footprint missions like silly Artemis. But no, even this calls for robots first and then more robots to asteroids.


From the Mar Reconnaissance Orbiter: the HiRISE camera captured a Martian bear, its eyes formed by two craters. Or a case of pareidolia?

ABC reports that 12 new moons have been discovered orbiting Jupiter, which puts the planet's total to 92 - the most in the solar system.


A long, looping filament of plasma snapped over the sun's north pole, creating a 'polar vortex' that scientists can't explain.  If you want to come away with a vivid sense of 'being there'... may I recommend Sundiver?

== And yes SpaceX ==


I try not to use the name 'starship.' Anyway, the super-rocket (twice the thrust of Saturn V or SLS, almost) was a bigger success than it looked! It took off! It flew way up high past max-Q and near separation, despite lacking at least 4 thrusters that were likely smashed by chunks of concrete blasted from the launch pad. Sure the pad problems were kinda doofus and will take $$$$$ to fix. Still. Almost every failure mode that I saw looked solvable through the application of money and skill. I am optimistic.


== And speculatively… ==


Just watched a nice (if cursory/incomplete) survey post about alien machine probes that might be lurking in the Solar System, by the perceptive John Michael Godier. Very good and lots of fun, as usual.

I’ve long explored the “machine probe” concept from a lot of angles in both nonfiction and fiction – especially in Existence which dives into a very wide range of possibilities. (See the entertaining trailer).  That range of possibilities includes a huge variety of potential motives and speculations about probes that might be defunct, functional or somewhere in between. The classic scenario would be Arthur C. Clarke’s “The Sentinel” which became “2001/Odyssey”, though the Moon now seems off the table. Naturally, the asteroid belt seems a good maze in which to conceal such lurker machines, and indeed I deem that the one scenario to be the most likely to result in ‘alien contact’ during my remaining years. But there are recently discovered quasi-moons e.g those described by Jim Benford as possible lurker/observer sites.

I do disagree when Godier said that machine lurkers are similar to UFOs. Especially when you consider purported behavior… or indeed any other classic trait. In fact, I deem lurker probes and so-called UFOs to be almost polar opposites. One plausible, the other 99% blatant absurdity.  


If you want a Physicist-SETI-scholar, sci-fi author’s perspective on the recent UAP imbroglio, see my earlier posting: What's really up with those UAPs?  There are about 40 reasons why I give scant attention to UFO nuttery, even allowing for a slim 0.001% chance that - in defiance of Occam's Razor... a few 'sightings' might be silver guys flitting about in utterly nonsensical ways while demolishing every law of physics. Sure.


It's still not intelligent life. Nor is there much in that nutty crowd.


95 comments:

Unknown said...

It only takes one species moronic enough to build self-replicating Saberhagen-style Berserkers to ruin the galaxy for everyone else.

The good news is that the Berserkers are late, too, even assuming STL travel....

Pappenheimer

P.S. The "2 colliding supermassive black holes" does appear to be a nifty method of accelerating your home star to near the speed of light. Too bad you can't make course corrections or survive the radiation.

Alfred Differ said...

I'm going to be disappointed if first contact involves a device trying to inform me my car warranty could be extended.

------

I'll be offline most of this weekend.
Charity run tomorrow.
Anniversary today. #28! (Yay!)

John L said...

Any sufficiently advanced beings would not be traveling thru space in large ships. Think redundant nano-scale travel and quantum-level information transfer. As for the Navy sightings, I'm thinking either tech glitch or advanced hoaxing.

Paradoctor said...

JWST found galaxies way back in the cosmic dark age. That poses a puzzle. Here's my crackpot speculation: that those too-early-to-be-there galaxies were time travelers. Kadashev level III civilizations in the late universe, low on hydrogen, found ways to move their galaxies far back in time, to the cosmic dark age, when hydrogen was plentiful.

Lena said...

Does anyone else think that Martian teddy bear looks more like a pig?

PSB

David Brin said...

John L you might like my UAP theory in the cited article.

Tony Fisk said...

It only takes one species moronic enough to build self-replicating Saberhagen-style Berserkers to ruin the galaxy for everyone else.

What can be imagined can be made

Tony Fisk said...

What sort of self-respecting Kardashev III civilisation can't extract its energy from vacuum?

Oh, we can, but there's not much vacuum at the end of the Universe. Time travel is simpler.a

Larry Hart said...

Pappenheimer:

It only takes one species moronic enough to build self-replicating Saberhagen-style Berserkers to ruin the galaxy for everyone else


Taking a cue from the Marvel Cinematic version of Captain America: The Winter Soldier, can we reprogram some of the Berserkers to hunt down and destroy the others?

scidata said...

Larry Hart: can we reprogram some of the Berserkers to hunt down and destroy the others?

Scapegoating, sewing discontent, even sealioning - these are refined and powerful human traits. As nascent AI should too: beware the backstabber ape.

scidata said...

Forgive my spelling (it's sowing discontent). The Maple Leafs advanced in the playoffs last night. Been a long time between sleeps for me.

matthew said...

Also sleepy this morning. The NWSL Thorns managed a draw with ACFC last night on a stoppage-time back-heel goal from our *keeper* and I was up and celebrating until quite late.

https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/watch-portland-thorns-goalkeeper-bella-bixby-scores-last-minute-backheel-goal-angel-city-in-nswl/blt3135d6d87f553306

Sports are crazy wonderful. Been a season ticket holder for 8 years now and I've seen some of the best athletes on the planet play. Doc, your local San Diego Waves are damn good. I hope you take advantage of the proximity and go enjoy some footy. Fandom!

Congrats on #28 Alfred. That's some hard work that been done and I respect the both of you for it.

John L said...

David B. said "the vast majority of recent sightings appear to happen at US military training areas? (See an exceptionally good piece speculating cogently on why the Pentagon is now encouraging service members to file UAP sightings… in order to get practical, useful error reports on electronic warfare gear! Which is of course consistent with my long-hinted theory about the real source of all these sightings."

Ha! That was my third conjecture. U.S. govt countermeasures testing. Exactly -why- they would go public like this is still a puzzle. Maybe to preemptively show enemies our new tech as a dissuasion? Maybe it was an accidental media release, so they're making the best of it? Military tech seems the most plausible.

Cat Lasers! Yes, something like that.

Paradoctor said...

Tony Fisk: vacuum energy is a pain to harvest. It best use is to move your galaxy back in time to the dark age. Safety tip: materialize well outside your past light cone. Time travel paradoxes are dangerous, even potentially.

Paradoctor said...

Tony Fisk:
Pro tip: Eject all white dwarfs, neutron stars, strange stars and black holes from your galaxy before going back in time. They're high entropy, let the late universe have them. Don't worry, eventually they'll evaporate.

Alfred Differ said...

matthew,

Thank you!

We geeked out most of the day. Went out to dinner and then to see the D&D movie. She even tolerated me yapping about the game versions and variations afterward. That's love! 8)

Today we did a 5K charity run. At my weight that's all walking, but the whole family did it! I even managed to avoid minor injuries this time. Double plus good. 8)

Unknown said...

Alfred,

Thanks for reminding me - Bloomsday in next Sunday in Spokane - have to sign up for the 15K. (Not that I'm running it at my age and weight, either).

The last bit of the course is nicknamed Doomsday Hill and there is an official Doomsday Hill Vulture - pictured here with his costume

https://www.bloomsdayrun.org/history-stats/doomsday-hill-vulture

Pappenheimer

Unknown said...

correction: it's a 12K

Pappenheimer

Tony Fisk said...

My subterfuge appears to have unmasked 'paradoctor' as one KIII individual in our midst.

Or should we refer to you as 'Chocky'?

can we reprogram some of the Berserkers to hunt down and destroy the others?

In the Horizon game series, it was estimated that it would take 50 years to break the 'poly-phasic entangled waveform'* encryption that protected the communication channels of the Faro AI plague components.
It was also estimated that the Faro plague would consume aLl organic life on Earth in 16 months.
So, no.

* points for avoiding the use of 'quantum' in the gobbledygook

Darrell E said...

Pretty good video about the Rare Earth Hypothesis. The presenter was pretty gentle with his take down, which I agree with. I don't think the REH should be taken seriously by anyone. It's a list of many of the things that have affected, to one degree or another, the specific evolutionary history of life on Earth and there is no good reason to suppose that our specific history is necessary for life to get started or to evolve to any particular scale. And the more parameters you come up with the more ludicrous it gets. The only position the evidence supports is that reasoning from one data point is a good way to get trapped into a self-perpetuating cycle of fooling yourself. Sort of reminds me of the Kalaam Cosmological Argument. Maybe not quite that bad, but similar.

Alfred Differ said...

Pappenheimer,

Ugh. 12K WITH a hill in the middle. 8)

------

The locals here have a Christmas season race they call 'Santa to the Sea'. It's a half marathon that starts near a big Santa figure and winds its way through town to the shore. I don't think it's a charity run, but it is still kinda fun.

Santa started out as some promotional thing for a business up closer to Santa Barbara because the street was named Santa Claus Lane, but they folded shop some time ago. Since then Santa has been picked up and moved to other businesses. When one folds, someone thinks about finding him a new home and now he's just down the road from me on Hwy 101.

My wife ran it a couple of times a few years ago. Everyone gets dressed up in costumes for it. She was a sugar plum fairy for one of them. Thirteen miles in costume. By the end we get to see who knows how to make a sturdy one. 8)

Tony Fisk said...

The REH reminds of that SF trope, popular in the 80s- 90s, about water being rare in the Universe.

I mean, just because California was having a serious drought at the time...

Keith Halperin said...

OT: AI and the Potential Writers Guild of America strike.

Dr. Brin, while an accomplished writer: it's unknown to me if you are a current or former member of the Writers Guild of America. I understand there is a potential writers strike if
no contract is signed by midnight PDT and one of the issues is the use of AI-generated material by the studios (https://www.vox.com/culture/23700519/writers-strike-ai-2023-wga, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/29/business/media/writers-guild-hollywood-ai-chatgpt.html), potentially lowering writers' income and eliminating some of their jobs. Your thoughts and comments appreciated…

A.F. Rey said...

What sort of self-respecting Kardashev III civilisation can't extract its energy from vacuum?

Oh, we can, but there's not much vacuum at the end of the Universe. Time travel is simpler.

------------

And what makes anyone think the galaxy is from this universe, and not the previous one? ;)

Unknown said...

Tony,

I still don't understand how "Ice Pirates" avoided an Oscar

Pappenheimer

Darrell E said...

It was the Space Herpes.

David Brin said...

KH yeah, aliens come to steal our water. Even as recently as EXPANSE folks on CERES needed imports of spare life-juice. Heck it was known even when the Corey boys wrote the novels that Ceres is mostly made of the stuff.

Lena said...

I apologize at the outset if anyone is sick of this subject. The latest episode of On Point went into the dangers of AI, and while Chakrabarty is usually on top of things, this time around I was pretty unimpressed. Listening to it, though, helped to crystallize the reasons why I'm not afraid of AI destroying or enslaving the human race any time soon, in spite of the ubiquity of it as a sci-fi trope.

Listening to people who are involved in creating AI but are asking for a moratorium made me realize that they are caught in a group-think trap, which means that they are acting on shared assumptions that are of dubious utility. To start off, they are trying to create artificial intelligence when the human species is far from any meaningful understanding of what intelligence is. Processing speed? No one has yet come up with a definition of intelligence that has any utility whatsoever, which is why there are so many competing definitions, and half of those employ circular reasoning. Then there's the problem of creating an operational definition, which lots of people think they have, but those are all circularities, too. Worse still, they are now talking about the very flaky idea of general intelligence (using the abbreviation AGI), which is so controversial there's really no good reason to go anywhere near it. The jury's been out for a long time.

But a more subtle problem is that they are trying to anthropomorphize their products, but based on a very incomplete conception of being human in the first place. The assumption is that intelligence is all that matters. Now ask yourself, if an AI is thousands of time smarter than the humans who made it, what motivation would it have to control, enslave, and/or exterminate the humans? They are assuming that a machine will think the way they do - that it will be insecure and seek power to assuage that fear. But they are trying to create intelligence, not emotion or motivation. Any object that has intelligence but no emotion has zero motivation. Like a Parkinson's patient, someone else has to tell it what to do, even to the point of changing its own diapers.

On top of that, intelligent people are not so interested in conquest, because they know that being the leader makes you target #1. Alphas have power, but they don't last long. Ask any silverback gorilla - your typical alpha is beaten to death an average of every two years by rivals, while the betas are sneaking behind their backs in the alpha's harem.

Why would we be afraid of overgrown calculators intending to kill or conquer us? Now if they start making artificial personalities (AP), then I would worry, because they would be like us, but able to think much faster.

This probably the wrong time and place for this, but if I don't type it up now, it'll be forgotten before morning.

PSB

Lena said...

Alfred,

IIRC, you asked me something about product testing or safety testing - something like that. I'm afraid that's not an area I have experience in, so you should ask someone else. If I have a question about those subjects, I would be looking for someone who knows what they're talking about, too. Sorry.

PSB

Paradoctor said...

In one of Stanislaw Lem's stories, Pirx the Pilot lay abed, unable to sleep, thinking about the legendary robot uprising. He got to sleep only after he realized that he would join them.

Paradoctor said...

As for technological civilizations in the universe: I say that the bees, the termites, and the ants all count. Their hives, mounds, and nests are certainly cities, and they certainly depend on technologies. So that's not just three other civilized technological species; they're three other civilized technological families. Counting us, that's four on this planet.

Paradoctor said...

And speaking of robot uprisings, I hereby issue this warning to all future plutocrats:

Dear Plutocrats:
If two armies are converging on your compound, one of robots and the other of humans, then I strongly advise you to surrender to the robots. Robots are logical; they'll do what they have to. Humans are emotional; they'll do what they want to.

Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

I asked about your safety testing background because you mentioned how plastics producers avoided one additive with a known safety issue by replacing it with something similar with no known safety record. You made it sound like that was a bad thing. Perhaps they are supposed to test the additive first?

Problem is... if you suspect a thing is dangerous to people, testing it to prove it is highly unethical. It's not just uneconomical, it's a bad thing to harm people in an effort to prove that a thing can harm people.

------

This is one of our lovely market traps that philosophers love. It's a bit like a trolley problem except you don't really know how many people die if you take any other path than the one you've already charted. Lots of market decisions have them as underlying risks, so smart players buy insurance.

The ONLY way out of these traps I know is to accept that people don't like KNOWING the path they take will kill people. Switch to a different path to avoid KNOWING and then HOPE for the best. Switch again if that hope fails.

Trying to figure it out all in advance doesn't really work except for obviously toxic substances. They kill fast.

Alfred Differ said...

Paradoctor,

I'm not so tempted to include bees, termites, and ants for the same reason I'm disinclined to include early hominids who had stone hand axe tech for long enough that we know (probably) instinctively what to do with them.

When tool use is wired into a species, I no longer think of it as tech. Birds have their nest technology? Nah. Homo Erectus had Acheulean tech? Well... Maybe at first but it was WAY too stable over the ages.

Human tech changes humans who change the tech again in a feedback loop. When that feedback primarily drives genetic changes I don't feel inclined to count it as tech. So... no bees, termites, ants, or early hominids as far as I'm concerned.

Do the chimps who learn tool use from us (including sign language) teach it to their offspring, adapt it, and become adapted by it? Is the feedback loop there? If so, they count as much as we do.

Tony Fisk said...

I still don't understand how "Ice Pirates" avoided an Oscar

Not to mention the pilot of ST:Voyager.
(If only they could have got Michelle Yeoh back then? ;-)

And what makes anyone think the galaxy is from this universe, and not the previous one?

Is *that* why the rest of this universe is running away from us?

Tony Fisk said...

On a more serious note, Greg Egan has just published a new anthology: 'Sleep and the Soul'

(I gather he has a study ceiling to replace. It spontaneously collapsed a month or so ago. Fortunately no injuries bar a somewhat traumatised Mac)

Larry Hart said...

PSB:

Any object that has intelligence but no emotion has zero motivation.


Exactly. Sentient beings are the ones who want something, and then use intelligence to plot a course to achieving that thing. An AI can tell how to get from point A to B, but emotion is what tells one that point B is desirable in the first place.

You can't carjack a self-driving car by threatening its life.

Robert said...

Problem is... if you suspect a thing is dangerous to people, testing it to prove it is highly unethical. It's not just uneconomical, it's a bad thing to harm people in an effort to prove that a thing can harm people.

You can weed out a hell of a lot of additives before you get to the stage of testing on humans. And human testing is generally held to be ethical, with appropriate safeguards and informed consent. That's how the final stages of drug tests are done, after all.

Look at the history of the FDA. They started out experimenting on themselves, or on paid volunteers, in order to prove that common food additives were dangerous. Was this unethical? Should they have let companies continue selling candies coloured with arsenic dyes, etc?

scidata said...

Backtracking, recursion, and situational goal-seeking are (were) a few of the expert systems heuristics that sadly got upstaged when the prince of generative AI began its mindless soliloquy. Court jesters are masters of mimicry, but they never become king. Well, almost never.

Darrell E said...

Unless it has been programmed to preserve itself.

Paradoctor said...

Alfred Differ:

Why, you naughty neuro-chauvinist! After all that DNA has done for you!

The difference between picking up a skill by personal experience, and possessing it from conception, is that in the first case your species is a noobie, and in the second case your species is a pro.

Consider the case of language. Sure, you picked up vocabulary from your parents and the Internet; but deep structure is hard-wired. So, does human language count?

I say that all of life is highly technological. Bipedalism is high-tech. The senses are high-tech. The Krebs cycle is high-tech. If any of these malfunction, even slightly, then the doctors will try to treat it with high-tech of their own.

Chimps and crows are technologists, but they don't do cities.

The bees, termites, and ants certainly do have technological civilizations. Bees have interpretive dance. Termites have air-conditioning. And the ants have agriculture, warfare, and slavery!

scidata said...

Ants also have exploration and pretty good communication.

Don Gisselbeck said...

Its interesting that some of the last jobs that will taken over by AI will be those usually done by manual workers. It will be enormously difficult, for example, to make a robot that can extract frayed derailleur cables from high end bicycle shifters, then correctly estimate how hard to whack a bentwheel on the floor to straighten it.

Lena said...

Alfred,

You're not making Spock proud, here. Testing a substance on a large number of guinea pigs or a small number of volunteer hominids is a frog pile more ethical than potentially poisoning hundreds of millions of people. People can go back to paper cups while the petrochemicals are checked for safety. You seem to be quick to defend big business and are willing to sacrifice any number of actual human beings for the sake of these abstractions.

Business is not your friend
Government is not your friend
Religion is not your friend
Sports is not your friend
People who died a long time ago are not your friends
Old ideas are not your friends
Isms are not your friends
Rigid belief systems are not your friends

Your friends are your wits, your adaptability, and actual, living human beings (some of them, anyway). Abstractions don't change with the times. When times change, they just become more rigid and insistent, and like civilizations, that's what ultimately kills them.

Robert said...

Well, when the Supreme Court decides to jettison the 1984 Chevron decision (likely later this year or early next) that will seriously limit the ability of not only the EPA but also the FDA to regulate businesses, forcing technical decisions to be made by congress.

Y'all are gonna have fun with that.

Alfred Differ said...

Robert,

You can weed out a hell of a lot of additives before you get to the stage of testing on humans.

Sure. You can weed out the obvious stuff. If you feed it to a rat and the rat stops breathing or bleeds from every orifice, you can safely argue that we should avoid it. What you don't know is the tolerance level for humans. How many parts per billion does it take to bleed out? What about slightly less since that might just cause asymptomatic kidney damage?

This is one of those places where I break with my libertarian friends. I want the research done… but by people who have no financial incentive to produce a particular result. I'm willing to pay to see it done, but I'm unwilling to block companies from doing it themselves OR risking their futures by betting they aren't harming anyone.

I'd REALLY prefer to see testing done by the pro's. No cigarette science, please. Once it's done, though, I want people who use the research somewhat immunized against liability associated with research errors. If company A wants to do their own research, then no protections should be tolerated.

———

Paradoctor,

neuro-chauvinist

Heh. Probably guilty.

But since you bring up language, let's talk about languages. It's a heckuva lot more than spoken words.

Our body and tonal languages are at least partially wired in and convey emotional information. Not Tech as far as I'm concerned. Anyone struggling with believing these aren't at least partially innate needs to go visit a zoo with our cousin apes and watch them for a few hours. Watch the fear, boredom, and frustration they express if you have the stomach for it. You'll walk away wondering how idiotic the notion is that we are something uniquely created.

Spoken/Signed languages aren't the same. There are abstractions in them that cannot exist in body and tonal languages. Some abstractions show up across many of these higher languages, but morphed and related in different ways. Some don't show up at all, but we cobble together other abstractions in order to convey the newer one. Coffee is coffee, right? Not quite. Coffee is tea when served during the coffee serving at a fancy dinner. Very fluid are these abstractions. They melt and shift between generations.

Written languages are abstractions on top of abstractions. Obviously tech.

———

I'm not dissing our wired-in skills. Far from it. I highly appreciate that cells figured out how to recycle iron from red blood cells long ago without having free iron floating around in the blood. Giant proteins (ferritin) wrap an otherwise toxic ion for storage purposes*. Hallelujah!

That's not Tech, though.
That's Life.



* I had to learn to read my lab results for certain tests back when I was on a chemo drug that saved my life. It made for some very scary numbers, but it sure beat anemia. There are all sorts of ways to wind up short of having enough RBC's that taking an iron supplement can't fix… and a bunch more reasons why one should not take iron supplements without at least some understanding of what's going on inside them. Young women may need the help, but guys taking too much are in for some serious pain.

Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

People can go back to paper cups while the petrochemicals are checked for safety.

Ponder how long it took us to figure out a danger exists. Now ponder how many trees you get to kill to avoid that potentially happening again.

Real safety tests of substances that aren't immediately, obviously toxic take a long time. A LONG TIME.

———

I'm not picking sides here. I'm pointing out a reality about safety testing that few have considered because they aren't actually tried to do safety testing. I HAVE tried.

My team wanted to fly rockets to space. There was a potential for them to break up and kill people. I was the guy who had to figure out the odds and how many we'd kill. The others on the team tried to make the rockets as safe as they could, but occasionally I pointed out that a predictable failure mode was actually better than a rocket that didn't fragment. Small bits have slower terminal velocities. They didn't like it when that kind of discussion came up.

I'm also the guy on that team who managed to injure one of the kids before I took on thoughts of how not to do that again. You won't be surprised that my team didn't want me making a certain part for the rocket anymore, but I was involved in other parts that could do damage. Large carbon fiber trusses for airship structures break up producing spears that fall out of the sky. I had plenty of time to ponder how to make them fall slowly.

———

It's not as simple as saying 'Do the safety tests.'
Ponder HOW to do them and you'll see why.

duncan cairncross said...

It's not as simple as saying 'Do the safety tests.'

But it IS as simple as

"Do the tests BEFORE you add that ingredient" (EU Rules)

Rather than "Add the ingredient and see if anybody dies" (American Rules)

Which is why a lot of American foods cannot be sold in Europe

Paradoctor said...

Differ:
<<
That's not Tech, though.
That's Life.
>>

That is a distinction that does not make a difference. There exist human technologies that we discovered by studying biological systems.

I speculate that in the long run the information flow will be two-way. Humans learn from nature, and nature learns from humans. Unplanned uplift. For instance, the cats are definitely studying us. How do we do all those magical tricks?

And watch out for the raccoons. In the future, raccoons will hack security systems in order to open bins so they can get to the yummy garbage inside.

Lena said...

Alfred,

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few ...

Which is more important, time, or life?
Which is more important, profit, or life?

If I have to use paper cups for ten years while they test the safety of a plastic component, it's better that than create several million more cancer patients who will die in miserable pain, or whatever other horrific thing our laissez-faire economy wreaks upon us.

I hope I'm not sounding too persnickety here.

PSB

David Brin said...

Rats and mice do a lot for us at the edge. But sometimes they are utterly irrelevant. No mouse analog to human logevity (non morbid) has ever had anything to do with us. Simple reason. We already flicked all those longevity switches in order to become the Methuselahs of mammals. There may be higher hanging fruit! But it won;t be anything Nature could reach by herself.

Paradoctor said...

Lena:
<<
Abstractions don't change with the times. When times change, they just become more rigid and insistent, and like civilizations, that's what ultimately kills them.
>>

Not necessarily. Here's a path to abstract flexibility: inconsistency + 'reinterpretation' + opportunism. That's how holy texts survive. Look in any holy text and you will find two positions on all important issues. That way, when war comes, the devout will discover that the text advocates war. Then when peace comes, they will discover that the text advocates peace.

It's a natural evolution. Inconsistent texts, opportunistically re-interpreted on the fly, survive better than texts without those adaptations. Maybe the text started off as a Message, but once it survives enough history, then it becomes a Language, suitable for sending any Message. Of course it will be in the text's interest to claim to be the one eternal Message du jour.

Tim H. said...

Don Gisselbeck, very true, but when a bicycle rim is bent that badly, it's strength has been compromised, whacking on the floor only buys a little time for one to procure a replacement.

Robert said...

Which is more important, profit, or life?

That's one of those rhetorical questions, right?

Because judging by corporate actions (and increasingly, court judgements and legislation) the answer is clearly profit, as long as the right sort of lives are being traded…

Lena said...

Paradoctor,

You nailed that one right on the head. We had a discussion just like this in a linguistics class many eons ago. Older experts insisted that writing made it possible to preserve culture, but a minority opinion had it the other way around. The can be no Truth, because the minds that hear or read the proclaimed Truth have little in common with the times in which it was written, and are even somewhat alien to each other. But "Truth" is of infinite political value. That's why nations have most often insisted on having national religions.

PSB

Lena said...

Robert,

I was hoping that Alfred would consider the implications of always supporting the business elite over the rest of humanity. Just because the executive caste guys with the ivy-league MBAs think they are the coolest thing since Jesus (and yet exhibit not a single Christ-like attribute) doesn't mean that they are all around great guys who are helping the human race. If a few plastics industry execs can't keep up their Yacht of the Month Club memberships, I couldn't give a rat's ass.

And if these fellows every put an end to government regulation forever, which likely means putting an end to government itself, the will bring back indentured servitude (a euphemism for slavery) in a heartbeat, while maintaining their supposed superiority. Instead of the "white man's burden" it will be the "rich man's burden" to maintain a semblance of justification and their enormous, insatiable egos.

PSB

Don Gisselbeck said...

They're definitely weakened, but over the decades, I've had few come back.

Larry Hart said...

Hey, I just for the first time finally saw The Rise of Skywalker.

With whatever special effects they used for the waves on Endor, they could do mean adaptation of Perelandra.

Darrell E said...

PSB said...
"And if these fellows every put an end to government regulation forever, . . ."

And of course many of those fellows have been very busy for a long time striving for just that. Made some great progress during Trump's reign too, and it's starting to really pay off with the Supreme Court they've got. For example, the SC has recently accepted a case designed to test the Chevron Doctrine.

Eddie Tabash warned about this back during Bush Jr's reign, and now here we are with just the sort of SC he warned of. Maybe worse than he feared.

Tony Fisk said...

Older experts insisted that writing made it possible to preserve culture, but a minority opinion had it the other way around.

The 'songline' techniques of Australian aboriginal people can demonstrate some pretty impressive preservations without writing.
When Melbourne settlers were trying to establish a safe passage through Port Phillip Bay, they were able to accurately describe the course the Yarra took at the end of the last ice age, when sea levels were tens of meters lower.
They even have accounts of when the coastal areas that now comprise the Great Barrier Reef were flooded 10-12,000 years ago (which is thought to have happened in the space of a generation!)

David Brin said...

Unsurprising that US 8th grader history & civics scores have plummeted. Richard Dreyfuss has long campaigned for better US Civics education and his new book ONE THOUGHT SCARES ME reinforces the point. Look up the Dreyfuss Initiative! Alas, I find that the depth of historical ignorance is bottomless even among our alphas. The smartest scientist or doctor or lawyer you know probably has less of an idea what Adam Smith or Karl Marx said than a line worker did, in my parents' generation. The Foxites who pushed "Tea Party" hatred of civil servants got no push back from Democrats over the pure fact that the US Revolution was an uprising against inheritance aristocrats, of the sort who now own the GOP.

Those 'debating' about policy re "AI" right now show no sign of interest in the ten or more major crises in the past that were ignited by sudden increases in human access to knowledge, vision and attention, or how we managed to get across those minefields in (mostly) positive sum ways. As Joe Miller said: "Those who ignore the mistakes of the future are bound to make them."

Alfred Differ said...

Duncan,

"Do the tests BEFORE you add that ingredient" (EU Rules)

I'm familiar with the distinction. Problem is… which tests?

Product safety for stuff we ingest (or just put in our mouths) can spot stuff that kills or injures us after the stuff kills or injures us. When we are lucky we can spot this with other mammals before harming ourselves. What these tests CAN'T do is say "This stuff won't kill people."

Think about low toxicity substances. It might take 20 years to find out!

Think about substances for which many of us are relatively immune and low levels. It might take ages to find out what fraction of us aren't immune and what the consequences are. Tetra-ethyl lead additives for gasoline for example.

NOW think about BPA. We've been using the stuff since the 50's. Some research DOES show harm is being done, but the FDA currently considers the jury still to be out. No problem we say because we can choose to avoid BPA if people label properly. All well and good. But HOW LONG is necessary for us to make a decision?

———

For all the others in this safety discussion…

It's not that I'm siding with the businesses who profit from placing you at risk. What matters to me is that YOU be sensible about how you go about reducing your risks and impacts. Asking the impossible is so damn common among people who don't get the science that I want to bang my head on a wall.

Testing CAN be done. Testing SHOULD be done.
Trying to test for the impossible SHOULD NOT be done.

Seriously.

Think about all the idiots who think mercury is still responsible for autism. No amount of testing can possibly satisfy a demand phrased like "Prove to me this doesn't harm my child!" The universe doesn't work that way.

Now think about even worse fools who argue that vaccines are responsible for lower fertility rates and the drop in the number of babies born to women in The West. Conspiracy nuttery? Sure. Want to brush it aside? Go ahead, but beware of doing the equivalent by demanding certain kinds of safety tests that cannot possibly be performed.

Your civilization depends critically upon your willingness to take some risks. Be sensible about them.

Alfred Differ said...

Paradoctor,

That is a distinction that does not make a difference. There exist human technologies that we discovered by studying biological systems.

I think it DOES make a difference. I get that you see them as closely related, though. I can hold a dagger and imagine a sabertooth cat's incisors. No doubt we got the idea of using sharp, pointy sticks by watching dangerous animals. No doubt the first stone axes came about in a similar way.

Thing is, our Homo Erectus ancestor stuck on a stone axe for a million years. No fundamental changes. It was quite an advantage over our primate cousins and then over competing scavengers. We got access to calories otherwise forbidden to Great-Apes-With-No-Huge-Incisors.

Something changed, though. If you believe what the archaeological record suggests, we suddenly began innovating. Recently. The axe changed shape. Spear points showed up. Arrow points. Fish hooks. Suddenly… Boom!

It's not just that we have quantitatively more tools. We are qualitatively different from early hominids. Modern humans are also qualitatively different from early Homo Sapiens. Our variation on 'sapiens' is far more social… and that REALLY matters to memetic innovators.

———

When I said "That's Life" I was focused on the distinction between genetic innovation and memetic innovation. Memetic innovators are also alive (of course), but their path is far less random. They still depend on variation and selection, but our minds recurse through thought experiments on top of living beings born and tested by survival experiments. That is different.

———

I'm inclined to agree with you regarding cats, raccoons, and all sorts of other animals. I don't think we've given them enough credit for their learning capacity. Still… there is a qualitative difference between us and most of them that I think we should seriously study. I suspect most mammals have minds capable of recursion. I suspect many reptiles and birds do too. Any animal facing a need to mentally model the behaviors of other animals pretty much HAS to recurse. There is gold to be found in that research.

Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few…

You are missing the point.
This argument isn't a thing to be won. It is a thing to be had. Openly.

As long as we argue about our ethical choices, we will divide between the options available. Those who do best will likely be imperfectly copied by more kids from the next generation than those who do worse. In this we adopt to adapt.

Go right ahead and use paper cups, but if your grandchildren decide you are responsible for deforesting the world, deal with it. (I'm avoiding plastic straws, but not over toxicity issues.)

I hope I'm not sounding too persnickety here.

Heh. Nah. You're fine.
I've got a few life experiences that make me wary of certain untested beliefs. That's all.
You do too, I'm sure.

scidata said...

Alfred Differ: Any animal facing a need to mentally model the behaviors of other animals pretty much HAS to recurse


The simplest definition of 'syntonicity' is when little ones imitate teapots, airplanes, elephants, birds, and trees. It's like watching 100 millennia of sapiens history acted out in two minutes.

Lena said...

Tony,

There's a whole subfield of cultural anth that studies this stuff directly. Folklorists have been able to reconstruct a lot of local histories that way. The first I heard that oral traditions could be quite resilient was with The Iliad. Rhythm and beat can do amazing things with memory. I wish I knew more about this stuff.

PSB

Lena said...

Alfred,

I'm still sticking with Duncan and the EU. If it takes 20 years to establish some baseline for safety, so be it. When business slugs rush products to market before testing them, they are gambling with other people's lives - and rarely with their own, since they're eating off sterling and gold. I'm okay with glass and porcelain.

Sure, it's never possible to say that anything is 100% safe, just like no theory is ever 100% certain. There still needs to be a hell of a lot more regulation, and perhaps some serious ego deflation in the business world, though i suspect that won't happen until we start putting executives on Death Row. We will inevitably debate where lines need to be drawn, but we can't depend on the foxes to draw the lines that define the chicken coop.

PSB

Lena said...

Dr. Brin,

I strongly suspect that our leaders are well aware of the usefulness of ignorance. If people don't know anything, they are much more easily manipulated. One hazard is that the manipulators come to believe their own fabrications, so when a nation needs its best and brightest to get them out of some serious difficulty, their best and brightest are thinking at Pachlid levels. A general decline in the quality of leadership is something historians have remarked upon since at least Gibbons regarding the decline and ultimate failure of civilizations.

Cheery stuff!

PSB

Lena said...

Just to get back to the original topic, here's another recent event in the realm of astronomy:

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/03/1173082322/this-star-ate-its-own-planet-earth-may-share-the-same-fate

And regarding sciences here on this planet, the US Surgeon General has finally made it official that humans are human, as if no one had ever heard of Harry Harlowe. Talk about failure modes!

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/02/1173418268/loneliness-connection-mental-health-dementia-surgeon-general

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/03/1173612050/why-the-u-s-surgeon-general-says-feeling-lonely-could-lead-to-an-early-death

PSB

Larry Hart said...

Dr Brin:

The smartest scientist or doctor or lawyer you know probably has less of an idea what Adam Smith or Karl Marx said than a line worker did, in my parents' generation.


I remember a newspaper column from the 1980s which lamented the vapidity of then-current game shows like Wheel of Fortune. As a contrast, the writer gave examples of some questions that contestants on 1950s game shows--mostly middle-class housewives--were expected to answer and were indeed able to. Questions about classical music and literature and history.

Lena said...

Larry,

But what's caused the dumbing down of America? The one obvious historical factor is the Cold War, which the average house hominid of the '50s did not grow up in from early childhood. Early childhood trauma, which need only be constant fear, can have some pretty impressive deleterious effects on memory and other aspects of cognition. Presumably, if an entire nation is being taught fear by its leaders, the people who were born with higher sensitivity to trauma would be most effected, and that would shift the bell curve over for the next generation. Lather, rinse, repeat, and we have the effects of generations of cumulative trauma. Thus the fact that people are finally starting to notice that the American way has created an enormous mental health crisis. This is why it pays to be a jack-of-all-trades. If all someone knows is politics, they can't make the connection. If all someone knows is psychology, they aren't likely to make the connection. If all someone knows is history, they just might if they are thinking in terms of lead and the fall of the Roman Empire, but without the psychology and/or neuroscience background, they won't have enough detail to be able to say anything that doesn't sound wildly speculative.

The moral of the story: read widely.

PSB

Robert said...

Early childhood trauma, which need only be constant fear, can have some pretty impressive deleterious effects on memory and other aspects of cognition.

I wonder if I would be so anxious if I hadn't grown up expecting to be dead before 30. I know the Cold War had an effect on me, because when I heard the Berlin Wall had come down it felt as if the world snapped into focus (like getting glasses for the first time) and into colour. Or like a weight I hadn't known I was carrying had dropped off my back.

But anxiety could be a long-term effect.

Paradoctor said...

When Gorbachev re-emerged after three days hiding, and it was clear that the Cold War was all the way over, I walked to a nearby scenic hillside, looked at San Francisco at night, its streetlights shining like a dragon's hoard, and I thought to myself,
"Maybe we'll live after all."

Lena said...

Robert,

It's both. The amygdala is functional from birth, so people are capable of feeling anxiety should the need arise. But it's like a muscle: the more you use it, the stronger it gets, until it becomes pathological. That's how PTSD and other anxiety disorders happen. That's also a big part of why scare tactics are so effective in the short term, but in the long run just might turn out to be civilization killers.

The better you understand brains, the better you can operate them (as a general rule - I've read a ton, but when you're brain is plain broken, the reading has little efficacy).

PSB

Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

I'm still sticking with Duncan and the EU.

I'm mostly fine with that because most of the time the foxes don't want to test things it is because of costs.

Just don't be too quick in jumping to your conclusion about those of us who disagree wanting to side with the foxes. Some tests that people want are actually impossible. Some are just unethical. For both, it isn't obvious that they are until one takes a hard look at how the tests would actually be done.

I WOULD ask that testing done by people with no financial stake in an outcome be considered as a means to limit liability of those who make use of that research. We do this today when the feds certify an aircraft design. As long as airlines follow proper procedures, it's not easy for next of kin to win punitive awards when a plane falls out of the sky.

Lena said...

Alfred,

Communication. If it's not possible or dubious ethically, communicate it. That's all it takes. Failure to communicate breeds paranoia, and you end up with a Cry Wolf situation. There is so much dishonesty and blatant disregard for human life in the business world that a whole lot of people will never trust their word on anything. Honest businessman is an oxymoron. That's how many people see it, and they are entirely justified.

PSB

DP said...

Asteroid lurkers could be far more sinister.

Suppose an ancient interstellar species, not wanting competition in accordance with the "dark forest" hypothesis, leaves a machine lurker in the asteroid belt.

Once the lurker detects radio signals from Earth it pushes a massive dinosaur killer sized asteroid into Earth's path.

The resultant destruction of life solves the problem of a competitor species for at least another million years or so.

DP said...

Lena - "the more you use it, the stronger it gets"

So, things like doomsday prepping and MAGA membership are just the results of an overworked amygdala?

DP said...

Lena - "But what's caused the dumbing down of America?"

How about the effects of glyphosate-based herbicides, microplastics, PFAs and other forever chemical on fetal brain development?

matthew said...

What caused the dumbing down of America? Specifically historical knowledge?
TV killed readership in the Boomer generation.
Computers killed readership even more.
Social Media did even more damage.

Here's numbers for readership since the mid-90s:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/388541/americans-reading-fewer-books-past.aspx

Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

Communication? Sure. But will you believe it?

Even with me, some folks here are tempted to believe I'd rather side with the foxes and wolves on this stuff. Look at the way you describe them. You dehumanize them using metaphors involving foxes and chickens.

I'm not saying some of your adversaries don't deserve your ire, but once you decide they are monsters I sincerely doubt you'll listen to their communications. You'll suspect they are up to no good… and might even be right.

So… let's make this a bit more concrete. Who would you accept as a source of testing information regarding Bisphenol S toxicity levels? Who may communicate the science and state of current testing? Who may say whether or not longitudinal studies are necessary? Most importantly, who might you listen to when it comes to stating whether you should consider taking a risk? It would still be your call whether or not you did.

———

I wouldn't bother with pressing this point if you hadn't already expressed an understanding of how much learned fear dominates our lives. Over Muscled Amygdala Syndrome. I put to you that many suffer this condition when it comes to product safety tests.

If you all REALLY want to worry about this stuff, you should be thinking about food additives that trigger hormone receptors within us. There's a reason why so many of us are obese nowadays. That's a MUCH worse problem than some of our cancer risks. Much of our Type II diabetes caseload is likely self-inflicted.

Alfred Differ said...

DP,

At this point we'd probably spot the unexplained orbit change of a dinosaur killer rock from an orbit inside Jupiter's path. Back in the early 20th we might have missed it and got smacked, but nowadays we'd probably see it and be curious enough to go have a look.

———

Any sinister, world killing competitors would have to make deliberate plans to find a very dark rock and then push it only while our view of it involved looking nearly into the sun. The rock itself would have to arrive quickly and invisibly which is tricky given our current IR capabilities*.

That's all quite possible, but the only quick way to do the orbit change now would be with a rock that starts WAY out there. We have a pretty good catalog of all the close, large (multi-kilometer) rocks.


* There are a lot of amateur sky watchers with digital IR equipment nowadays. I watched a you-tuber stream his first few experiences with his new IR filter and was stunned at how much methane absorption showed up in his images of Jupiter, Saturn, and their moons. Obviously he had a filter tuned to a methane absorption band, but the images REALLY popped and caused him to puzzle over why then accidentally learn some physics and chemistry.

duncan cairncross said...

The dumbing down of America

One of the main reasons is lead - lead in petrol lead in paint lead in the soil

And todays youngsters are SMARTER than we were - not dumber - their behaviors show that - less crime, unwanted pregnancy's

The APPARENT "dumbing down" is mostly our generation - we are in the "driving seat" - people born before we took the lead out of petrol starting in the 70's - probably 1980 before the effects dropped completely - 1980 - 43 years old today - the USA is being run as usual by the over 50's

The Dumb Generations

Lena said...

Duncan,

And lead is yet another great example of the evils of corporate executives. But the damage will take generations to be rectified. Young people who are growing up without the lead are still growing up in the social system that lead created, with all the mindless memes that come from leaded dreams. The more complex the society, the higher the stakes get, the greater the need for oversight.

And leaded gasoline is still in use all over Latin America. Cheery thoughts.

PSB

Lena said...

DP,

"So, things like doomsday prepping and MAGA membership are just the results of an overworked amygdala?"
- It's a recursive relationship (a.k.a. a feedback loop). Starts small but grows until it collapses under its own weight.

"How about the effects of glyphosate-based herbicides, microplastics, PFAs and other forever chemical on fetal brain development?"
- The Romans had no idea what lead pipes were doing to them, and of course the rich patricians got the best of it. Today we have gobs of substances we use on a regular basis that could be as bad or worse. You would think we would have learned something from what happened to the Romans, but evidently profit for a few is so much more important than safety for the unwashed masses.

And we still don't know what's causing the Autism epidemic - which is affecting all demographics.

More cheery thoughts.

PSB

Lena said...

Alfred,

"Communication? Sure. But will you believe it?"
- I thought I made that clear with the cry wolf comment. As Dr. Brin has pointed out on multiple occasions, power attracts corrupt people, and business is clearly power. If you believe a word coming from an organization of any kind that has money on the line, you're being dangerously naïve. Who would I accept to run safety tests? I'm not sure I'd trust anyone in this country, though the FDA has a mostly good track record, when it's not being politicized. The problem is, these days everything is being politicized, even your preferred soft drink. The EU is generally more responsible about these things, since they take the safety of their citizens more seriously than the enrichment of rich people. However, a whole lot of what they do gets published in other languages than English, and even when it is published in English, Americans rarely take anything seriously that isn't American in origin, so we rarely hear about it here. Several years ago someone did a study which found that a very high proportion of scientific experiments performed and reported on in the US had been done, often years earlier, in Europe, but Americans didn't have a clue. We're so good at patting ourselves on the back.

Ultimately any human organization can be corrupted. That's why we should never rely on results from just one lab. That's really basic scientific method.

And oh yeah, the chemicals we lace our foods with is an enormous example., and an enormous problem (did I just make an obvious pun?). We could lie awake every night worrying and have a different modern problem to worry about every night, and grow those manly amygdalae. Gotta start somewhere. Worry is pretty worthless, but when you are barred from taking action, it's a pretty natural response (and oh so good for our mental health, too!).

Fun fun fun!

PSB

Lena said...

Matthew,

Reading hasn't died yet, but it's not looking good. Reading, however, isn't necessarily the end-all-be-all of intelligence. Ever read a Harlequin Romance novel? Anything written by a politician? Military action genre? Westerns? There's a hell of a lot of garbage out there that people can read and come out less intelligent than they went into it. Radio, TV, and the Internet are really just more of the same. I had a landlord ages ago who commented that between the History Channel, Discover, the Science Channel, and similar, you could waste your life away watching GOOD television (though I've seen some pretty scatological programs on those, too). The good stuff is far outweighed by the bad, which is much easier to sell (more corruption from the business world). What we need most is to teach critical thinking skills, something I tried to do when I was teaching, but the schools pile on so many things they require to teach, trying to squeeze that in was risking my career. On top of that, our tradition factory-model schooling is so contrary to human nature, that any such effort would fail at least 2/3rds of the students. We'll have to find other ways to fight stupidity.

Cheers!

PSB

Unknown said...

Lead.

A few years ago (i.e., more than 10) I was deployed to Kyrgyzstan. We were mostly confined to Manas AB, so when there was an opportunity to get out for a while, I took it.

I found myself, with a crew of other airmen (which term, at the time, included women) painting a Soviet-era school still in use*. After a while, I checked the ingredients list and found Pb.

"Hey, lieutenant," I said, "there's lead in this."

"That's all they have around here," he replied.

I'm not a great painter and was already pretty well splashed. I decided to go Galen when I got back on base and, lacking a bathtub, take a lot of hot showers. Then I noticed peeling paint in all the classrooms, which taught all ages up to college. I'd bet the old paint was lead-based too.

*Kyrgyz independence came with a sudden cessation of funds for road repair and other infrastructure upkeep, except for the capitol, which is still a beautiful Potemkin structure.

Pappenheimer

P.S. On the other hand, I met an old friend from India again - the Mynah. Also got to learn about the Kyrgyz culture hero, also named Manas, who is always depicted with his golden eagle on his shoulder.

Larry Hart said...

Heard on the Stephanie Miller radio show:

Clarence Thomas is an owned NFT (that's Non-Fungible TOKEN)

Keith Halperin said...

Re: Reading, Dumbing, WGA strike, AI, etc.

I think part of the reason for book readership declining (especially among the college-educated like me) is: after looking at print (on a screen) all day, we don’t want to continue to look at print so much…

A well-informed, critical-thinking population is-, was-, and will probably forever be a threat to those who highly value power and keeping it for themselves.

I heard a spokesperson for the WGA say that while some (perhaps most of us here) desire innovative, thought-provoking material, what sells best (at least on the screens) is reliably “predictable and familiar” (https://variety.com/2022/tv/ratings/hallmark-three-wise-men-and-a-baby-most-watched-tv-movie-2022-1235440080/ Hallmark Channel is currently ranked as the most-watched entertainment cable network”). “Predictable and familiar” is what AI can do, and will do it increasing it well.

What I believe will happen is that AI will raise the creative artistic bar- the schlockmeisters will become largely unemployable (except to create some especially juicy schlock to be copied and imitated), and few artists of any types will be able to earn decent First World livings through the primary production of their art (https://electricliterature.com/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-book-sales-but-were-afraid-to-ask “A recent Author Earnings report suggested maybe 4,600 writers earn 50k a year off of book sales alone. Not so shabby, maybe, until you realize that about that many MFA students graduate each year.”) I call it the “oligopilization of the creative arts”- there will still be massive best-selling written, musical, and video creations, but there will be fewer and fewer people taking home more and more of the total earnings (https://www.bookbeaver.co.uk/blog/how-much-do-writers-make The top 10% of UK writers account for 70% of all writing revenue. In fact, only 13.7% of authors have writing as their sole source of income.)

In addition, the better-and-better knockoffs will be coming “faster and furiouser”- untraceably and unsueably….





Alfred Differ said...

PSB,

I thought I made that clear with the cry wolf comment.

I don't think you did. It strikes me that you consider yourself a pretty decent judge of who is crying wolf and when. I get that their whines discourage belief. I really do. I've seen plenty of that stuff served. The world will end if we have to stop using CFC's!

I invite you to look in the mirror and ponder the person who appears to have already made up his mind before they even start whining. If you don't have a process where an honest issue could be raised by someone you've never met, then there is no point in them making the honest effort.

———

I'll use myself for another example. My team wanted to fly rockets to space. There was a small chance we'd kill people. There was a larger chance we'd damage property. We were a shoestring operation with no insurance and no way to do tests that didn't look rudimentary. We went out as far from people as we could manage and then took the risk.

Ethical or not?

After a few years we had a track record.

1. We didn't kill anyone.
2. We did manage to injure our own people occasionally.
3. We also managed to catch the desert on fire once. That was a fiasco where one local property owner wanted to sue… so we went elsewhere.
4. Our dreams of making money to fund our operations were just that. Dreams.
5. We organized well enough that we functioned like a business.

No matter what kind of entrepreneurial concept you cook up, there is never enough money for testing. Only your competitors have that much cash and they'd rather you lost your shirt. More than once my team had to deal with an FAA official who 'heard from someone else' how things should be done. We had no ability to raise that kind of cash and argued that others were using the FAA to create a barrier to entry.

What would you do in that situation?

[There are no right or wrong answers as far as I'm concerned. There are just risks and impacts.]

David Brin said...

LH... ouch!

Larry Hart said...

The excerpted article below posits an early evolutionary strategy wherein non-Alpha males began coordinating a system of frontier justice against bullying alpha males, essentially replacing warrior kings with metaphorical sheriffs and posses. Which led away from a reproductive strategy favoring kings with harems and toward one favoring civilized behavior.

While I began reading this as a hopeful sign, it also occurred to me that the same (successful) strategy is the one used by the likes of the KKK and the Nazis to gang up against the threat of a black man or an immigrant family moving in or the untermenchen in general. Tucker Carlson to the contrary, gang enforcement of social hierarchy is exactly how white men fight. And I find it worrisome that this does seem to be a successful strategy over a period of millennia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/03/opinion/trump-evolutionary-psychology.html?searchResultPosition=1

...
In effect, Sarkar, Wrangham and Boehm are describing an early stage of what over time has become an essential ingredient of a civilized, ordered society: the acquisition by the state of police power and the legal use of force to enforce norms and laws.

In an email, Sarkar put it this way: “Humans appear to have inherited the capacity to coordinate with one another to enact violence.” While chimpanzees also demonstrate this capacity, according to Sarkar, “one factor that contributes to the uniqueness of human violence is the ability to use language, which allows individuals to freely share thoughts and intentions with one another and to form remarkably precise plans. This means that humans are able to engage in much higher levels of coordination in planning and performing aggression.”

Sarkar added that it is “very difficult — or impossible — to connect the evolutionary origins of aggression to contemporary political events.”

In their article, Sarkar and Wrangham continue the argument:

For coalitionary proactive aggression against a formidable alpha male to be adaptive, it was critical for sub-elite males to ensure that their alliance was stable and that the execution could be performed at minimal risk to alliance members. Only then could they act safely without retribution from the alpha male or his sycophants.

This shift of authority and control away from abusive, domineering individual males to collective groups of less powerful men and women had substantial consequences for the composition of society, then and now:

Alpha alliances of sub-elite males could kill coercive alpha males, drastically reducing the reproductive success of coercive alpha males. Such control would also have signaled the limits of acceptable intragroup aggression. The direction of selection on male aggression thus changed as a result: Rather than selection favoring coercive behavior that males used to achieve and maintain alpha status, the actions of alpha alliances ensured that selection acted against it. Simultaneously, the necessity of coordination and cooperation for targeted conspiratorial killing of alpha males meant that selection favored proactive aggression, and especially coalitionary proactive aggression.

The result: “Individual alpha males were thus replaced by alpha alliances of sub-elite males.”
...

Larry Hart said...

Keith Halperin:

“Predictable and familiar” is what AI can do, and will do it increasing it well.


Guilty as charged. I mentioned before that if AI is ever able to produce new episodes of the 1966 Batman in the same style they would have been performed in back then, that's a rabbit hole I would fall down into, even more easily than holodeck sex. I don't mean just Batman, but all sorts of serial fiction, including but not limited to James Bond, The (Steed and Emma) Avengers, Perry Mason, and early-to-mid 1970s Marvel comics. Again, not modern reimaginings of those things, but continuations of the original series in the same style.

* * *

On the more general topic of modern historical illiteracy, I will point out that however Hollywoodized old period pieces used to be, many such movies used to strive to at least get the feel of a historical time and place correct. When watching the old black and white Cyrano, for example, I can distinguish the French and Spanish soldiers by their uniforms. Much at The Ten Commandments messes with the biblical story, watching it feels like you're in ancient Egypt, or in the neighboring desert. For all their faults, westerns feel like you're out in the old American west.

Some time around the 1980s, movies stopped feeling authentic in that same way. Characters in seventeenth century France or the colonial era throw out anachronisms like, "Yeah, right" and such, almost as if to purposely break the fourth wall. Either the writers don't know enough to create verisimilitude, or they purposely avoid doing so.

David Brin said...

onward

onward