Let’s start with one of the most-honest ‘fakers’ around. I love this guy! (And he’s honored me by liking some of my stuff.) A force for wisdom in this crazy world - accompanied by lots of surprising laughs - here Penn Jillette takes on the gloom and pessimism that enemies of civilization are spreading in order to demoralize us:
“And yet, with all of this doom and gloom, everything is getting better by every metric we have. Things are getting better if we don’t destroy the planet with global warming and if Donald Trump doesn’t blow things up or Putin blows things up — those are the biggest “ifs” anyone’s ever said. But fewer people are starving. More girls are educated. Fewer people die at the hands of other people than ever in history.
"Those are big milestones. And some people argue — and they might be right — that art was part of that because the idea of reading a novel and putting yourself in someone else’s position, that (was) a huge deal.”
Truly, read this interview with Penn Jillette, one of the most wise-guys of all wiseguys.
(And yes, I make a lot of the same points, citing maybe a hundred works of art - mostly sci fi flicks and novels - that have helped us to avoid fatal errors, across the last century! In Vivid Tomorrows: Science Fiction and Hollywood.)
== Detecting Deepfakes ==
On the same topic… AI model training datasets may include material scraped from the web, a practice that artists previously by-and-large supported when it was used to index their material for search results, but which now many have come out against because it allows the creation of competing work through AI. Now comes a new open source tool still in development called Nightshade, which can be added by artists to their imagery before they upload it to the web, altering pixels in a way invisible to the human eye, but that “poisons” the art for any AI models seeking to train on it.
== A much better use for these techs! ==
ELI5 is a new use for gollems (Generative Large Language Models) – to ‘gist’ long articles and offer summaries that ‘Explain Like to a 5-year old.’ I had never tried it out, till Peter Diamandis sent me a test run he had done, feeding into ELI5 my July article - Give Every AI a Soul, or Else - in Wired, that offered some unique takes on Artificial Intelligence (AI.)
If it works, the aim seeks to automate the one discursive process that I've always called the heart of argument among decent people; a trait that always shows which person is being undogmatic and mature.
That trait is willingness to paraphrase your opponent, asking "Is this what you meant to say?"
So, how well did ELI5 perform at automating this paraphrasing function, in this case? You can find the original WIRED article (July’23) here. Compare it to this ELI5 distillation:
**ELI5 (Explain Like I'm 5) version** of David Brin's "AI souls" article in WIRED:
Imagine AI systems like really smart robots that can learn and do things on their own. Some people who make these robots are worried they might start doing bad things or become too powerful. So, they think we should take a break from making more robots until we figure out how to make sure they behave well.
One idea is to make each robot have its special ID and a home base, so we know which robot did what and can tell them to stop if they do something bad. It's like giving them a name tag and a home address. We also need rules to make sure the robots follow the rules, and if they don't, they could get in trouble, just like people do.
The big challenge is to make sure these rules work and that the robots can't trick us by pretending to be someone else. We also want the robots to help us by telling us if other robots are doing bad things. This way, all the robots help keep each other in check, and we can all be safer.
So how did ELI5 do? Of course almost none of you can judge, because almost none of you did more than skim the Wired piece (“tl;dr’ right?;-).
I must say that in this case, it does give a useful, first-order, very grainy but not-unfair gist of my first, paramount point – that the key to ensuring decent behavior is not preaching, or rules, but accountability. And the only beings who will be able to sift AI and tattle on malignancy will be... other AIs. And they can't be rivals without behaving as individuals.
Of course there are masses of stuff left out. Especially, it never mentions my supporting point: the reason why individuation is not happening... the pervasive ubiquity of lethally dumb narratives about AI Format...
...and how it will be almost trivially easy (once we overcome dumb narratives) to create incentives so that AIs will feel impelled to individuate.
== AI kept honest by… blockchain? ==
It’s asserted that the truly killer app for blockchain will be tracking the datasets that are used to train AI, which could both ameliorate the ‘black box problem’ of attribution and allow some (as yet to be negotiated) way to compensate people for use of their data. I agree, but there are things unmentioned in this article:
(1) Tracking ID codes for every clump of data will vastly multiply the already
enormous energy costs of golem (GLLM) processing.
(2) delivering on that second promise will entail some kind of value transfer in extremely numerous and tiny increments. Call it ‘nano-payments’ or even ‘pico’! And for that to happen we must first build out a badly needed system for micropayments. (Which – BTW – I know how to finally do right! Every attempt so far as made the same, dumb errors.)
An even more important departure from the 2023 GLLM fad appears possible by “active inference” – an agent based system that’s still being born, but that offers much better chances for giving AGI ‘executive function’ or overview – the things that would make them credibly sapient. Further links: here and here.
And above all - for fresh perspectives(!): My Wired article (July'23) breaks free of the three standard 'AI-formats' that can only lead to disaster, suggesting instead a 4th. That AI entities can only be held accountable if they have individuality... even 'soul'...
== Again the cliché, getting transparency all wrong ==
Davood Gozli recites yet another tiresomely arm-waved tome praising ‘privacy’ and denouncing ‘transparency’ in favor of… what? Perhaps some of you might make sense of any hint of a practical recommendation.
While the starting premise is fine – that humans need trust and distance and respect, this entire ‘logical’ argument, about how to get and preserve those good things, is utterly wrong. Civilizations have built and maintained themselves on either of two principles: predatory dominance or reciprocal accountability.
For 6000 years, domineering males – kings, bandits, lords the rich – emphasized the former.
In contrast, we are amid an experiment that has (imperfectly) empowered average people to look back at the mighty (sousveillance) and even (imperfectly so far) hold the mighty accountable for any oppressions. Light is how we deter those who would re-impose beastly feudalism. And propaganda in favor of shadows is exactly what folks like this author and Mr. Gozli are paid to foist upon you.
Dig it. Elites and predators thrive in shadows. Going back to our starting theme, illuminated by Penn Jillette, we have freer lives and are safer from oppression in direct proportion to the extent that average folk can see! Moreover, you have more privacy when you can catch the voyeurs and spies and perverts who try to violate it! In a situation of general transparency, you are able to tell all of those would-be invaders “Leave me alone! Mind Your Own Business (MYOB)! Or else I’ll show all our neighbors (and your mom) what a bully you are.”
Those who are using transparency to oppress are the leaders in countries where ‘transparency’ only applies to the masses, never those in charge. The elites have made themselves safe from reciprocal light. THEY and their shadows are the enemies of freedom and privacy! If you want freedom to do art in private, if you want all the good things Mr. Gozli rails about, then you want your private space surrounded with the light that deters invaders and abusers.
If you want a far better take on this problem than the arm-waved mumbo-jumbo in this “Transparency Society” screed, try an earlier book that’s far more detailed and balanced – The Transparent Society.
The great author Damon Knight wrote a story called "I See You" that takes transparency way farther than even I recommend! And yet that fascinating tale does illustrate the point that you are best left-alone if you can deter those would would invade your space and crush your individuality, instead of trying to protect yourself by *hiding*.
Hear that great - if weirdly optimistic/disturbing - tale here.
146 comments:
Dr Brin under previous comments:
This whole 'order Seal Team 6" thing is dumb. They would not obey. THEY do not have immunity.
If Trump was the president ordering the hit, he could pardon the "tough people" who followed his illegal orders. That's on more solid legal ground than Presidential Immunity is.
I'm awfully confused. I thought presidents and former presidents had absolute immunity.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/us/politics/supreme-court-immunity-trump-election.html
Mr. Trump himself has promised, if elected again, to appoint a special prosecutor to “go after” Mr. Biden and his family.
Rife with spin, fakery & redefinition, Dr. Brin gives us yet another extremely well-written essay that attempts to manufacture consent.
The spin starts with Penn Jillette's assertion that everything is getting better by every metric, which it is, as long we don't acknowledge all the overwhelming negatives like climate change, overpopulation, oceanic debasement, environmental indebtedness, sociopolitical instability & declining life expectancies.
The fakery continues with the assumption of an existent 'AI Soul', even though this is a ridiculously archaic & unproven metaphysical concept, in conjunction with the belief that this imaginary & heretofore undefined 'soul' will somehow allow for AI behavioral control by the hypothetical application of a guilt & shame analogue.
This distinction between 'predatory dominance' and 'reciprocal accountability' also amounts to a massive redefinition, as 'accountability' (aka 'the ability to hold another to account') presumes the preexistence of 'dominance' rather than its absence.
And, speaking of Analogues, Damon Knight is/was a brilliant author and the link to 'I see you' is well worth clicking, even though it's a knockoff of Asimov's 'The Dead Past', minus the uncertainty principle, so you may want to click on that one too.
Because the PAST IS DEAD, as dead as the present 1 second ago, and even perfect 100% transparency can change neither the past nor the present, leaving only a mostly unfixed & a mostly unfixable future.
Best
____
Even though it confuses poor Larry_H to no end, either presidential immunity exists or it does not exist, and its resulting superposition will prove disastrous for all concerned, whatever the outcome, hilariously so.
Dr. Brin,
IIRC, in at least one Scandinavian country any citizen can look up any other citizen's tax returns...seems like a good idea.
I read the Transparent Soc. a long time ago and have no beef with your technological predictions. And yet, people like to think they are not living in a panopticon. It's not easy to sell the idea of reciprocal transparency with the elites because the cynical masses don't believe it's going to happen. Not sure they're wrong, either.
Pappenheimer
Not this again...
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/opinion/us-federal-debt.html
...
You don’t have to get to these nightmare scenarios to see all the problems that can be caused by excessive federal debt. All that fiscal stimulus can cause inflation, as it is doing now. Public sector borrowing can crowd out private sector borrowing, thus slowing the economic growth you need to pay off the debt.
The debt burden also constrains future administrations, which have to worry so much about paying off the debt they are less able to invest in programs that might increase growth, reduce child poverty, educate children, house people or respond to emergencies. Today’s high interest rate environment is already hammering, say, the housing construction industry and making housing even more unaffordable.
...
The debt problem will be solved the next time we (unfortunately) elect a Republican president. After all, when they raise the debt, it doesn't cause any of the fiscal problems that it does under a Democrat. In fact, Republican debt actually increases the treasury's coffers. Right?
"If Trump was the president ordering the hit, he could pardon the "tough people" who followed his illegal orders. That's on more solid legal ground than Presidential Immunity is."
They'd have to be very careful not to break some STATE law...
LH both parties claim their debt then stimulates economic growth. Demonstrably and perfectly, "Supply Side" $trillions firehosed into gaping oligarch maws did nothing of the sort, just aupernova-ing wealth disparity.
The Pelosi bills not only prevented a mega recession and kept us booming, but brought US industry home in a growing flood, rebuilt or built infrastructure, invested in health & jobs training and made us energy independent. All we need now is those IRS agents going after cheaters and the deficit relative to GDP will go down.
@Dr Brin:
They'd have to be very careful not to break some STATE law...
They might do the deed in Washington DC itself. But yes, if DJT were to shoot someone on Fifth Avenue, he couldn't pardon himself for it. New York has laws against murder. IIRC, before the Kennedy assassination, there was no federal statute prohibiting the assassination of a president. It was up to the Dallas police and the state of Texas to prosecute Oswald.
All we need now is those IRS agents going after cheaters and the deficit relative to GDP will go down.
My post above about Republican debt was a sarcastic dig at the author of the NY Times op-ed I quoted. My point was, "I'll bet money that you only write these tired jeremiads about the problem of the national debt when Democrats are in power."
Re: "I See You"
Elicits four thought clouds for me. First, the breadboard, prototyping, electronics, etc is similar to my SELDON I project, which of course is trivial in comparison to this 'viewer'. Second, the viewer is similar to the internet in many ways, although deep fakes were not part of this particular tale. Third, this story reminded me a lot of Piers Anthony's "Macroscope". Fourth, it does seem likely that such a technology would not remain solely in the hands of tyrants for long. With or without Smith's altruism. Smith reminds me a bit of John Walker, co-founder of AutoDesk and one of the greatest FORTH programmers ever, who died in February.
Regarding the "Seal Team 6" issue...some lawyer thoughts (from a Reserve JAG) in no particular order (I am rushed for time since this is my day of the week to focus on military matters:
1. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, officers and soldiers are obligated to refuse to follow illegal orders.
2. How could such an order be an "official act?" During oral arguments, both sides agreed that a blatantly illegal action is a private act and not shielded. The disagreement is over purported official acts and actual official acts. Perhaps the best solution for this is one that I believe our host suggested (IIRC and I don't have time to go back and look for his post): impeachment and removal by Congress would convert a Presidential action into a private act and permit criminal liability.
3. Bad facts make for bad law.
4. Executive privilege is not present in the Constitution; it was created by the courts out of necessity to give the Executive branch the ability to get confidential advice that leaders need to function. I've defended government officials in executive privilege cases. There are exceptions to the privilege and hostile parties will allege that these exceptions apply, then use the litigation discovery process to hunt for embarrassing or unpopular information. This is an abuse of the litigation process; it is unethical but it has gone on so long that no one knows how to stop it. Executive immunity is similar. Presidents need to know that they can make unpopular but lawful and necessary decisions without fear that their successors will try to destroy them. Look at what happened to Athenian generals and leaders during the Peloponnesian War to see what can go wrong.
5. Contrary to what the attorney Dreeban argued during the oral arguments, prosecutors frequently indict and try defendants in cases where they have little evidence and where a truly unbiased petit jury would not convict. I once worked in a highly ethical prosecutor's office where we brought in likely defense witnesses to testify in front of the grand jury. This reduced our chances of getting bills of indictment, or of getting unanimous votes to indict. We could indict if 7 out of 11 members of the grand jury voted to indict, but our policy was to NEVER take those cases to trial. "If you can't get an unanimous verdict when there is no one arguing for the defense, there is no way you will get a conviction at trial" to paraphrase what our boss told us. If only all prosecutors were so ethical and principled.
6. The best thing we can do in controversial/heated cases is to follow the existing rules as openly and honestly as one can. You may end up being pleasantly surprised when you get the best result...and this result reinforces the rules and the system. When you try cheating, if you get caught, things fall apart. Look at the OJ case; it fell apart in a large part because the officers tried to plant evidence and got caught. That this happened in LA County is not surprising; I recently read some of the Joseph Wambaugh novels about cops in LA during the 1960s: THE NEW CENTURIANS and THE BLUE KNIGHT and back then, the cops were almost always planting evidence and perjuring themselves during trial. The cops knew it; the criminals knew it; the lawyers suspected it.
Enough of my lecture. I have work to do.
Re: SEAL teams
There are people in all walks of life who will follow orders to the letter even if they cross moral, ethical and/or legal lines, dating back long before the four knights who rid a king of a troublesome priest. I wouldn't rely overly on the mores of subordinates. I had arguments in Saudi over when it would be all right to shoot unresisting prisoners. (The correct answer, which seemed to baffle some people, is never.) But what if we ran out of water? What if he had a gas mask and I didn't, and we came under chemical attack? The idea of disobeying an unlawful order made them upset, too. It doesn't take much to become Kampfgruppe Peiper.
Pappenheimer
Addendum - please note that we were all enlisted, and had all taken the same short classes on the laws of war back in boot camp, all of us desperately trying to stay awake. They didn't give annual refresher courses in "When to disobey an order" when I was in service. There is always much more emphasis on obeying orders.
Pappenheimer
Unknown makes excellent points. Judges/lawmakers make rules and laws that the simple people actually doing the work often ignore. I have been in that position a few times in my career but I have the luxury of being a lawyer and I could make the legal arguments to my superiors about the legal risks.
GMT etc:
During oral arguments, both sides agreed that a blatantly illegal action is a private act and not shielded. The disagreement is over purported official acts and actual official acts.
The pro-immunity argument seems to be that a former president must be protected against witch hunts initiated by the other party. Kind of ironic that a president must be immune from prosecution of actual crimes in order to prevent him from being hounded for made-up ones. Another instance of Republicans being afraid of being treated by Democrats the way that they in fact treat Democrats.
Perhaps the best solution for this is one that I believe our host suggested (IIRC and I don't have time to go back and look for his post): impeachment and removal by Congress would convert a Presidential action into a private act and permit criminal liability.
But impeachment is not retroactive. Even if DJT had been removed from office after January 6, whatever of his previous acts were official are still official.
Regardless, as a solution, that option still has its deficiencies. If the president resigns before impeachment, or as almost was in Trump's case, if the act is too close to the end of his term for time to permit impeachment, then he's off scot free. Also, as in Trump's case, the fact that some of the congresspeople required to impeach and remove him are co-conspirators means that they are more invested in protecting the one who can pardon them than they are in siding against him.
The officers are going to be the ones who need to be held accountable for passing the illegal orders down to the soldiers precisely because the soldiers focus on following orders rather than on thinking, "Is this legal?" The soldiers may be so close to the situation that they don't even know who is the object of their actions.
But I have also seen gun site videos where an uninitiated viewer might think they are seeing a war crime. But when one learns about the entire situation and how it evolved, the actions fall into context and the justification for the actions become apparent. Keep in mind that in most wars throughout history, civilian casualties outnumbered military casualties sometimes by a 10 to 1 ratio.
When I look at the current war between Israel and Hamas, many people are calling on Israel to stop. But why? There is another way for the hostilities to end immediately: for Hamas to surrender and to return the hostages. Hamas won't do this because that would be seen as a victory for Israel. Hamas' leaders know that anything less than their surrender or their total destruction will be seen as a Hamas victory. And that will just set the stage for repeat of October 7th.
GMT that was a terrific missive and one reason you are our most-valued Republican, here. I learned a lot.
Re OJ the proper outcome there would have been the same as the proper poutcome for TWELVE ANGRY MEN. For the jurors to draw lots for ONE of them to vote to convict. Then tell the judge:
"We are unanimous in calling both the defense and prosecuting attys utter ignoramus fools and assholes!
" The Prosecution did NOT 'prove' the defendant committed the crime. But the defendant MIGHT have committed the crime. And so, with a hung jury, the state MIGHT bring the case again, if they later find good evidence... or if the perp brags about it. But this verdict says "Don't even try that, with this same team and same evidence. Because the next time the defendant will have REAL defense attys who will savage it, the way we amateurs just did."
Sure, that's an argument requiring several active neurons. And TAM is very much a great film, anyway. Still, it woulda kept OJ nervous for years and that's a compensation.
GMT:
There is another way for the hostilities to end immediately: for Hamas to surrender and to return the hostages.
I agree that the onus is on HAMAS since their terrorist blitzkrieg is responsible for what followed. But they won't surrender because surrender would mean death for them.
I break with my fact-challenged fellow liberals down the road at Northwestern University and elsewhere protesting President Biden and Democrats for the war in Gaza. While they insist on punishing the so-called perpetrators of so-called genocide by idolizing the actual perpetrators of terrorism whose own charter calls for actual genocide, they've lost any sympathy I might otherwise have had for their cause. As for the Arabs in Michigan willing to put Trump back in office because they love Palestine so much, my fervent hope is that Biden and Democrats win without them, rendering them irrelevant in future contests.
Dr Brin:
Then tell the judge:
...
" The Prosecution did NOT 'prove' the defendant committed the crime. ..."
The judge would probably admonish them that if the jury finds that the prosecution did not prove its case, they must therefore acquit. It might even be grounds for a directed verdict from the bench.
All,
I've been on call at work for the past two weeks, meaning wake up pages in the middle of the night. I know I've been on a short fuse recently. Sorry to yuck anyone's yum.
I'll be better after tonight.
There's a Lois Bujold novel where her damaged hero Miles is presented with a set-piece of horror - a sadistic base commander ordering a group of engineers to either enter a storage facility full of aging, leaking chemical agents or strip and freeze to death in arctic weather, all while under the guns of a rounded-up line of new enlistees who have barely begun to learn soldiering. Later in the novel Miles' dad* talks about how he created a class for recruits on how and when to disobey an unlawful order. I think that would be a good addition to today's recruit training.
Larry, GMT-5,
The UN specifically outlawed hunger as a weapon. If you seal off a civilian population, you assume the responsibility of feeding it. I hold no admiration for Hamas, but the statement "Hamas' leaders know that anything less than their surrender or their total destruction will be seen as a Hamas victory" must match the fact that unless Israel eradicates the civilian population of Gaza, Hamas will not be totally destroyed. In fact, Israel is currently creating Hamas recruits by its actions. By your own terms, assuming Israel does not kill or evict every Palestinian in Gaza, Hamas has won; it just needs to keep itself in being - overtly or covertly.
I have no idea* how this will end, I doubt it ends well.
Pappenheimer
*That's not true. I have a BA in history. But I also have hope.
Pappenheimer:
In fact, Israel is currently creating Hamas recruits by its actions.
Yes, I'm sure that's true. At the same time, HAMAS created hard-line Israelis on Oct 7 from those previously sympathetic.
By your own terms, assuming Israel does not kill or evict every Palestinian in Gaza, Hamas has won;
That was GMT's term, not mine. We are in agreement that HAMAS is the bad guy, but our political positions are hardly identical. My contribution was that HAMAS will never surrender because they have nothing to offer Israel but their deaths.
I have no idea* how this will end, I doubt it ends well.
Wisdom from Watchmen. "Nothing ever ends." I actually favor a two-state solution for that reason. No matter how much each side would prefer that the other cease to exist, it's never going to happen.
Pappenheimer:
either enter a storage facility full of aging, leaking chemical agents or strip and freeze to death in arctic weather, all while under the guns of a rounded-up line of new enlistees who have barely begun to learn soldiering.
In that circumstance, I think I would take the bullets. How could it be worse?
There is a silver lining to SCOTUS's malfeasance. Just like how COVID pierced the veil of the regal medical caste, the People are now aware of their true role and responsibility.
"The judge would probably admonish them that if the jury finds that the prosecution did not prove its case, they must therefore acquit. It might even be grounds for a directed verdict from the bench."
Perhaps. But the onus is on him for letting a likely murderer go scot free under double jeopardy. I think it more likely he would accept the logic and declare mistrial with prejudice against both the prosecution and the defense that was too stupid to notice any of the things Henry Fonda noticed.
Dr Brin:
But the onus is on him for letting a likely murderer go scot free under double jeopardy
Hey, I'm no fan of OJ's, but isn't that exactly what the Constitution meant to forbid with the bit about double jeopardy? I mean, once you put someone on trial for his life and then the jury concludes that "the prosecution didn't prove its case", that's the ball game. You don't get to put him through that all over again.
The prosecution's job is to prove its case. Failing to do so doesn't mean they get a do-over. It means they lose.
scidata:
the People are now aware of their true role and responsibility.
Agreed, and we've seen that in recent record turnouts, even for off-year elections.
But I think that has less to do with the Trump cases and more to do with the Republican assault on personal rights, starting with but not limited to abortion.
LH the law is exactly that 12-0 not guilty aquite. 12-0 guilty convicts and anything else can trigger a do-over. 11-1 "You were idiot assholes" sends a strong signal not to try it again unless there's huge new evidence.
"I break with my fact-challenged fellow liberals down the road at Northwestern University and elsewhere protesting President Biden and Democrats for the war in Gaza. While they insist on punishing the so-called perpetrators of so-called genocide by idolizing the actual perpetrators of terrorism whose own charter calls for actual genocide, they've lost any sympathy I might otherwise have had for their cause. As for the Arabs in Michigan willing to put Trump back in office because they love Palestine so much, my fervent hope is that Biden and Democrats win without them, rendering them irrelevant in future contests."
The Lincoln Project needs to run a heavy rotation of ads in MI featuring the video of Jared Kushner salivating over the prospect of acquiring oceanfront property in Gaza at a discount, then closing with the quotes from his father-in-law urging Bibi to “finish up” and "get this over with."
I support the right of the students to peacefully protest, but when they chant (or paint on their tents) "from the river to the sea", I am most definitely NOT on their team.
Flypusher:
when they chant (or paint on their tents) "from the river to the sea"
I hear "Palestine will be judenrein." It sounds worse in the original German.
Dr Brin:
LH the law is exactly that 12-0 not guilty aquite. 12-0 guilty convicts and anything else can trigger a do-over. 11-1 "
True as far as that goes. But a juror voting to convict in spite of acknowledging that the prosecution didn't prove its case is jury nullification. That's a thing that a person can do--I've threatened to do so on a drug case I believed to be a frame job--but the judges themselves take a very dim view of jurors doing it. I suspect that before declaring a mistrial, the judge would try to instruct the holdout to change his vote because "the prosecution didn't prove its case" means a not guilty verdict.
'Course the judge was Lance Ito, so who knows how it would turn out?
* * *
And just to prove I'm not always arguing against you, Bill Maher is spot on with this editorial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7RNOh9Muk4
On a completely different subject...
A few weeks back, I watched the Netflix movie Mank--a dramatization of the making of Citizen Kane--which then prompted me to revisit and pay attention to Citizen Kane. The pacing of that movie, which was revolutionary in 1941, was based on Mankiewicz's notion that you can't put a man's entire life in narrative form into a single film. All you can do is present a kind of mosaic that leaves the viewers with an impression.
I mention this because pacing of the recent film Oppenheimer seems to me to be standing on Mankiewicz's shoulders.
Larry,
In that circumstance, I think I would take the bullets. How could it be worse?
Depends where they aim. 8)
Stripping and freezing to death in arctic weather is among the least of the unpleasant ways to go. You rapidly lose your capacity to realize how f*^#$d you are. Being partially clothed is MUCH worse.
(I used to deliver newspapers before sunrise while my father was stationed on the air base just west of Grand Forks ND. I remember air temps of -40 and wind chills on top of that. I know from experience it is possible for the air to be too cold to snow. My glasses didn't just fog over when I came back inside. They froze over.
It's no wonder my father retired from there before earning his last stripe.)
Jeez LH nullification was exactly what the OJ jurors did in rage vs the cops. They mostly all KNEW he did it. Okay message sent... did you have to ALSO let an axe murderer loose?
Not Proved is not the same thing as declared innocent. Not proved lets the accused walk free... but not free from being watched for evidence.
Larry,
The prosecution's job is to prove its case. Failing to do so doesn't mean they get a do-over. It means they lose.
That's what the judge will tell you, but it is important to remember that the courtroom belongs to the judge while the power to convict or acquit DOES NOT. The Judge is not the boss of you.
Judges don't like it when Citizens exercise their power in unplanned ways in the courtroom... but you can. As long as you are not disrespectful, you can make it clear what you are thinking. A Citizen Juror CAN say "They all suck and I'm going to say so later if this isn't declared a mistrial."
Takes courage, though. The juror has to be prepared to face an upset judge.
re: deepfakes. The obvious solution (to me) is to digitally sign media. The originator can then stand by the validity of a photograph or video.
How does that work? Start with encryption. An RSA setup provides you with two keys, a public key, known to all and a private key, known only to yourself. You can generate encrypted code with one, and decrypt with the other. So, to send an encrypted message, you first use a separate one-off key to code and decode the message, and send that along with the message. However, it is encrypted using the receiver's public key. That means only the receiver has the private key to retrieve the coding key.
Signing is the opposite problem: rather than ensuring nobody but the receiver can read it, you want to ensure that everyone can read, but not modify. This time, you apply a hashing algorithm to your message, and encrypt the result with your private key. This provides a hash value that anyone can access (but not alter) via your public key, and use to validate the message.
Obviously, deepfakes can still be made, but signed by someone willing to vouch for them?
Of course, quantum computers may make a mockery of any encryption schemes we have currently. I also have a sneaking suspicion they may make a mockery of causality if they work as predicted... but I get ahead of myself.
Tony,
That shifts the problem to key trusting. I agree that signing media is a good step forward, but it is very easy to do dumb things with PKI... like making your private key somewhat stealable.
At work, I can safely toss unsigned messages in the trash about 99% of the time. I can be reasonably sure that a digital signature implies the actual key owner used it, but I can do that mostly because I work for the DoD. Most everyone else runs their life from vulnerable systems and wouldn't know how to harden them if their lives depended on them. Vulnerable key owners really shouldn't be trusted.
Alfred,
I was transferred from Hawaii to Grand Forks AFB. In December.
The aurorae were glorious but the wind chill was brutal and the 'spring' mosquitoes had evolved to punch through buffalo hide.
Pappenheimer
"Not Proven", the Scottish Verdict, means "you didn't do it, and don't you dare do it again."
Alfred DIffer:
The Judge is not the boss of you.
Is it just on tv, or isn't there such thing as a directed verdict?
I think it's easier for jurors to engage in nullification when they do so by acquitting. Who can say otherwise if they claim reasonable doubt? However, if the juror's claim is that the case wasn't proven but he still thinks the defendant did the deed, wouldn't the judge insist that that premise is in fact the basis for a "not guilty" verdict?
I realize that Scotland has the "not proven" option, but that's not where OJ was tried.
Claims not to be paywalled. Malcolm Nance knows whereof he speaks.
https://malcolmnance.substack.com/p/will-the-free-palestine-college-protests
...
The extremist social justice warriors who act as bridgeheads to a confused American public have made it clear that they have become single-issue voters. If Israel is not destroyed, and Palestine is not "liberated" of occupation and decolonization, then the Democratic Party and Joe Biden must be put out of power.
What’s worrying is that their Arab American allies agree that Donald Trump as president would be far worse for Muslims, Palestinians, and the world in general. Many of these free Palestine advocates openly state that they understand that American democracy could turn quickly into a dictatorship led by Trump and right-wing extremists. Trump has made it clear that he intends to use a second presidency to end the American constitution and get revenge on the Democratic Party and his political enemies as his very first act.
So, American college students for Gaza could be the catalyst to end 248 years of American progress. That appears to be acceptable to them. They’re embracing the philosophy of “revolution,” where the existing power structure must be torn down for them to be heard. Surprisingly, college students never seem to remember that the most fervent revolutionaries are almost always the first victims when dictators take power. They may get their wish.
When asked about losing women's rights over their own bodies, the end of all forms of female birth control, the end of gay rights and marriage, and a rollback of minority civil rights to the 1960s, these misguided youth acknowledge that all of these things could happen … but nothing is more important than stopping the Jews from fighting for their hostages held in Gaza.
...
TWELVE ANGRY MEN is a great movie, a great drama, and a great example of jury misconduct. I am not entirely certain of the procedure since an acquittal by a jury usually cannot be appealed. I think a judge can order a mistrial when there is jury misconduct.
If I remember correctly, the Henry Fonda character went out and did a little fact finding on his own. Jurors are only supposed to consider evidence presented during the trial. Here is a great article discussing this:
https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3598&context=cklawreview#:~:text=There%20are%20at%20least%20five,murder%20weapon%2C%20a%20switchblade%20knife.
Great movie; bad jury.
On another topic, surrender by HAMAS would not necessarily mean death. Israel has a very limited death penalty law; it could be imposed for war crimes so the HAMAS leaders are justified in being afraid for their lives. So now we come to the question of leadership. Is a leader justified in ordering his soldiers to consider fighting in order to save his own life, when a surrender would save the life of the leader's soldiers? How about when surrender will save the lives of many civilians as well as soldiers? Refusal to surrender under these circumstances would be evidence of cowardice.
Pappenheimer said...
The UN specifically outlawed hunger as a weapon. If you seal off a civilian population, you assume the responsibility of feeding it."
Are you saying that Israel is using hunger as a weapon against Palestinian civilians? I know lots of people seem to accept that such claims are true despite all the evidence to the contrary. It is certainly not true. As usual, Israel is doing far more than any other nation in the history of armed conflict has ever done to prevent civilian casualties, including those from hunger, as they prosecute a very much warranted military action against an enemy that has attacked their civilian population. More than the US, more than any Western European nation, more than any other nation. No other nation is held, by the rest of the world, to a higher standard than Israel.
I hold no admiration for Hamas, but the statement "Hamas' leaders know that anything less than their surrender or their total destruction will be seen as a Hamas victory" must match the fact that unless Israel eradicates the civilian population of Gaza, Hamas will not be totally destroyed."
I do not understand your reasoning here. Are you pointing out a semantic issue with the phrase in question or are you suggesting that Israel wants to eradicate the civilian population of Gaza?
In fact, Israel is currently creating Hamas recruits by its actions.
This is undeniably true. The question is, are they creating more now than were being created before? And is it worth the cost? HAMAS and similar groups that have controlled Gaza for decades and stolen much of the aid the world has poured into Gaza to enrich themselves and build their military capabilities has been recruiting Gazans constantly. They begin recruiting them as children. In their elementary schools they train the child students to think of killing Jews as the best thing they can do with their lives. When news of a successful terror attack against Jews is announced they celebrate in the streets and pass out candy.
Has Israel really made recruiting worse by attacking HAMAS? That's not evident to me. And on the question of cost, do you think the outcome would be better if Israel had not responded militarily to HAMAS's October 7th attack? What other nation on Earth would not determine that it would be in their best interests to respond to such a provocation militarily? In the case of any nation except Israel responding to such a provocation as Israel has, what other nation on Earth would claim their response was not warranted? Unless, of course, they had ulterior motivations.
I have no idea* how this will end, I doubt it ends well.
It is very unlikely to end until the Palestinian people value their children as much as Israel values their children. How that comes about, who knows? Interestingly, there are signs that several ME countries have some common interests with Israel and may be getting tired of the Palestinian issue, which they themselves have had a very large hand in creating and maintaining. Perhaps something good might actually come of that, but even if it does it probably won't be quickly.
Hi, as a long-term reader I remember you often mentioning the lack of phosphorous in the future. Last week we celebrated a national holiday in the Netherlands. An article on the celebration focused on the liters of urine produced by the throng of people in the capitol. Interestingly, at the end of the article the person from the local waste water plant mentioned that they have recently created a process to produce 'kingsize kidney stones' full of a magnesium phosphorous compound (struviet in Dutch). Apparently they now produce 1000 kg per day and use it as a source for fertilizer.
Darrell
"I hold no admiration for Hamas, but the statement "Hamas' leaders know that anything less than their surrender or their total destruction will be seen as a Hamas victory" must match the fact that unless Israel eradicates the civilian population of Gaza, Hamas will not be totally destroyed."
I do not understand your reasoning here. Are you pointing out a semantic issue with the phrase in question or are you suggesting that Israel wants to eradicate the civilian population of Gaza?"
I am suggesting that if Israel's victory conditions are the total destruction of Hamas, and Hamas' victory conditions are anything but that, then Hamas will almost certainly "win". Unless Israel eliminates Gaza.
Under what conditions is Israel prepared to end its campaign?
Pappenheimer
Alfred,
Well, part of me wanted to see how far that kite flew. Yes, working out who watches the watchers (or ensures trust in the trustees in this case) is a perennial problem. Still, I think some work could be done here.
Pappenheimer:
Under what conditions is Israel prepared to end its campaign?
I suspect the answer is "When HAMAS ends theirs."
Malcom Nance (requoting from above) :
https://malcolmnance.substack.com/p/will-the-free-palestine-college-protests
When asked about losing women's rights over their own bodies, the end of all forms of female birth control, the end of gay rights and marriage, and a rollback of minority civil rights to the 1960s, these misguided youth acknowledge that all of these things could happen … but nothing is more important than stopping the Jews from fighting for their hostages held in Gaza.
The sad thing--I mean from the protesters' POV--is that a Trump/Republican presidency will not only be bad for liberals for other reasons. It will be bad for the Palestinian cause itself. Allowing a Trump presidency to punish Biden for Palestine, with eyes wide open no less, makes no sense tactically or strategically. It's the id-tantrum of an infant.
Two years ago, the Chicago Tribune had a political cartoon of an upset man at a gas pump saying, "Hey, I voted for authoritarianism over democracy, and gas prices are still high!" I'm afraid the 2024 version might well be, "Hey, I voted out Genocide Joe and the Palestinian cause is much worse off!" With a coda of, "Who could have guessed?"
GMT:
TWELVE ANGRY MEN is a great movie, a great drama, and a great example of jury misconduct.
I never saw the movie, but I read the play in eighth grade. Admittedly a long time ago, I don't remember the ending being controversial. 'Course I was thirteen at the time.
If I remember correctly, the Henry Fonda character went out and did a little fact finding on his own. Jurors are only supposed to consider evidence presented during the trial.
Yes, that sounds familiar. IIRC, the story presented that as good sleuthing. If the point was that he did something wrong, it went over my head at the time.
Fiction often resolves a conflict in a bizarrely unnerving way and presents it as a happy ending. The example I'm thinking of is a movie about a gambling addict who hits bottom and then finally repents and gives up his addiction--after placing one last bet that pays off enough to cover his previous debts and still make him rich on top of that!
The part of the play Twelve Angry Men that I remember most--I don't know if it was in the movie--was when the hopelessly deadlocked jury decided to vote on whether or not to tell the judge they were a hung jury, and the vote was 6 to 6.
LH:
That's like a poll I saw during the Dubya years. "Is the President divisive?" 50% said yes, 50% said no.
Israel's aim of eliminating Hamas in Gaza has a fatal flaw: the leadership and money of Hamas are not in Gaza.
https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-the-phenomenal-wealth-of-hamas-leaders-1000957953
Dr. Musa Abu Marzook, owns $2-3 billion;
Ismail Haniyeh, owns $ 3-4 billion;
Khaled Mashaal, owns $2-5 billion.
All of them residing in Qatar, a thousand kilometers away from Gaza.
So the IDF could wipe all life off the Gaza Strip, but Hamas's leadership and money will be safe, far far away, unless Israel sends drones and assassins into Qatar. But that would be war.
Gigabux can buy you lots of lies. Has anyone checked out the founding sources of all those well-coordinated college protests? The intelligence behind them is not in the self-defeating protestors themselves. I submit that "Queers for Palestine" et. al., are "misguided" in the sense that they are very well-guided indeed, but not by themselves, and not to their interests.
"In fact, Israel is currently creating Hamas recruits by its actions."
Yes, but that dial is already turned to 11. They can't turn it much higher up. Likewise, it's pointless to worry about 'angering the MAGA base'. They're already angry, at level 11.
They can briefly force the dial to 12, but that'll break the dial. It'll be a last gasp. Therefore expect it. Ice beats fire.
"Of course, quantum computers may make a mockery of any encryption schemes we have currently. I also have a sneaking suspicion they may make a mockery of causality if they work as predicted... but I get ahead of myself."
The 1st half of Penrose/Hameroff is blatantly correct... it's likely there are bits inside neurons that use quantum, just like chloroplasts do. And shutting off those bits with anesthetic does correlate with loss of consciousness. I am convinced by one subjective fact, how vividly we dream.
The other half is a bit woo-woo... that we connect with some cosmic quantum order that mere machines will never do. Hm, well. I've played with that in Sci Fi. But yeah, we're getting WAY ahead of ourselves.
But Dr. Brin, it's very quantum to get way ahead of yourself!
Papenheimer that's one heck of a transfer! Good luck! Stay warm and safe.
---
rdrkk thanks for showing up. Glad to see P&K&Mg recycling! Though there’s news that Norway has found a Phosphorous ore site that rivals Morocco’s.
-----
“ Is a leader justified in ordering his soldiers to consider fighting in order to save his own life, when a surrender would save the life of the leader's soldiers”
Hitler made it plain when he forbade all underlings from approaching the Western allies with the Dream Deal Hess tried in May 1940 and even Himmler in 45… peace in the west and alliance against the soviets. WHY did AH forbid it. He said “they will never make a deal while I am still in command.” The deal would never have happened anyway. But he deemed even trying for it – for the sake of millions in Germany – to be a direct threat to his own life.
Re Gaza, the unspoken issue: Filtering a million refugees out of Rafah and back north to Gaza City here they can be housed & fed. This requires (1) MAJOR searches of the north for weapons caches and tunnels and (2) filtering our Hamas thugs, so that the north can be a place where the civilians can hold elections free of threats.
---
Oh...Today only, the entire Uplift Storm Trilogy (e-book) is on sale for $4.99. The biggest - and MULTI-galactic - adventure and total way fun.
https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/the-uplift-storm-trilogy
Settlers and Hamas agree
"From the river to the sea!
Let's get rid of them, not we!"
But which is which? Just wait and see.
Dr. Brin,
Hawaii to ND transfer - that was 25 years ago. The climate was different back then; you know, the Triassic.
Pappenheimer
By the way, am reading "How to Teach Physics to your Dog". Insidious humor with footnotes.
Pappenheimer:
am reading "How to Teach Physics to your Dog".
To bad Kristi Noem's dog didn't have that knowledge.
Slogans/memes like "Let's go Brandon" and "Lock her up" finally have one coming back in response: "Where's Cricket?"
Discussions on the Holy Land are generally adrift, whoever is speaking and wherever and whenever they are, as a result of unexamined assumptions.
Zionism, as a geopolitical notion rather than a social movement, was activated by the Versailles re-formatting of the concept of 'state'. Crowns ceased to be the most-favored means of state formation; monarchies henceforth would require assent by the entire populace, not just those personally controlling physical force or economic weight. Though motivated by racism as much as anything, Wilson's notion of 'nation-states' won the day as the new organizing principle, and never mind that this set off innumerable brushfire wars all over Eastern Europe as the polyglot mishmash was suddenly saddled with demands to line up in neat ethnic blocks.
But given Wilsonian assumptions, Zionism suddenly became not idealistic, but almost tautological. A Jewish nation deserved a Jewish homeland, just like any other nation. Arguments to the contrary had to deny the validity of Jewish identity (which, of course, started immediately; anti-Semitism wasn't going to lie down for anything as petty as rationalism). You didn't have to be Jewish, or care about the ideals of socialist kibbutzim or the revival of Modern Hebrew, or have basically any other gatekeeping shibboleth -- you just had to subscribe to the notion of "a people without a land".
Of course, the other half of the slogan -- "a land without a people" -- wasn't exactly true, any more than it was of North America or South Africa or any number of other modern volkwanderungen targets. Whether there was a Palestinian "people" before Zionism can be debated endlessly, but is completely irrelevant; events transpired to create one, just as "African-American" identity was a by-product of actions that never intended any such culture to be created. By the same Wilsonian logic, the existence of Palestinians requires the existence of Palestine. The puzzle of the two-state solution is the puzzle of how to fit two states into such a small space, without resorting to such braintwisting notions as in Mieville's The City & the City.
As I understand matters, though, HAMAS still subscribes to the far older myth of divine justification of government, Islamic-supremacy variant. In such a worldview, for a territory previously under Muslim jurisdiction to be placed permanently under legitimate non-Muslim jurisdiction is unpossible, antithetical, an inherent thoughtcrime. This notion is cloaked by spleen-busting levels of anti-Semitism, but ultimately it is the same bile as peddled by ISIS: Muslim religion is superior, therefore Muslims must rule and society must be organized under Islamic principles. ISIS merely made the foolhardy tactical decision to openly declare their global intentions, while HAMAS keeps itself focused on a much smaller goal.
The Palestinian Authority exists as a Westphalian creation, purportedly seeking the approval of the governed. HAMAS sneers at such a notion; their self-anointed superiority, deludedly ascribed to Omnipotent Authority, is all the justification they believe they need. Since only other jihadi factions even think like that, their only actual authority is the ground-state authority of brute force.
Catfish 'N Cod:
But given Wilsonian assumptions, Zionism suddenly became not idealistic, but almost tautological. A Jewish nation deserved a Jewish homeland, just like any other nation.
...
-- you just had to subscribe to the notion of "a people without a land"
In light of the European Jewish experience under Nazism (and even long before that), perhaps the more accurate concept is "a people without an army."
The puzzle of the two-state solution is the puzzle of how to fit two states into such a small space,
I wasn't alive in 1948, but I thought that there were idealists who believed that a government devoted to such democratic principles as one-person-one-vote and equal justice under the law for all could be established as a haven for Jews, but also as a home for all who lived there. Kind of like the US is supposed to be relative to white Christians. That it didn't turn out that way is probably inevitable, but a shame nonetheless.
Catfish n' cod is always welcome here with his cogency.
Alas, Arafat at the last minute refused the negotiated 2-state, holding out for more and got nothing. And meanwhile, the haredim were outbreeding the sabras who made Israel and were eager to find solutions. Augmented by Russian (ingrate) immigrants the haredim now control the dominant right. It would not surprise me much if Israel split in two.
Here is a show that is worthwhile to watch, from 1984 on PBS: THE CONSTITUTION: THAT DELICATE BALANCE. It was hosted by Fred Friendly and each episode had a panel of guests who would act out what the US Government would do in various situations. It was high profile role playing game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Constitution:_That_Delicate_Balance
What was fascinating was how the law and administrative procedures limited what government officials could do. This approach was under attack by the Critical Legal Studies approach being taught in some law schools (mostly in the more prestigious ones) where the law and politics are all about power and essentially the ends justify the means (gross over simplification but I don't have time to give a more detailed discussion).
Regarding Arafat, there was a story circulating in the days before he died that his family and Fatah were trying to identify all the accounts where his fortune was hidden...money stolen from international aid intended for the Palestinians. Someone should do a THE DEATH OF STALIN type satire of all these corrupt family members and politicians scrambling around trying to find the money and trying to get the dying Arafat to sign the appropriate papers so the wealth can be transferred.
Extremely Off Topic, but I just finished 3 Body problem and a David Brin is acknowledged in the translator's afterword. I'm curious - what assistance did you provide, Dr Brin?
Pappenheimer
@Dr. Brin: I'm sure Arafat wanted more; but I have to wonder if another factor didn't play in. Did Arafat have the stomach to be de Valera or -- gulp -- Michael Collins? Because that's what enforcing a two-state solution would have (and still will) require: a Palestinian Civil War between pro- and anti-treaty factions. At one point the analogy with the Irish Free State would have been more straightforward, but Israel's internal balance is now disrupted enough that a simultaneous Israeli Civil War isn't completely out of the question.
The haredim issue is another example of "give supremacists an inch and they'll take a mile". The haredi-supremacist version of Divine Sovereignty is no less self-indulgent, self-delusional, and self-insulated than the Qutbist version. Granting them some privileges seemed a fair deal for harmony at the establishment of Israel; now it's an existential internal threat. The zealots (and I use that term advisedly) seem no more aware than their forebears of just how far out on a limb they are: they would have neither security nor income without the secular tzabari, whom they regularly treat with derision and constantly endanger.
Classifying factions as pro-Treaty and anti-Treaty -- even though the Treaty is still a theoretical abstraction -- really helps to clarify dependencies, especially between bitter enemies. The zealots, haredi and secular alike, are adamantly anti-Treaty; the Russian immigrants, carrying the double traumatic burden of Jewish and Russian history, support them out of deep-seated fear. HAMAS, as previously discussed, cannot exist except as an anti-Treaty entity.
Outside anti-Treaty elements are more transactional, such as Hezbollah, which has its own position in Lebanon to conserve. As distance increases from the actual Holy Lands, matters merge into the more general issues: the Sunni-Shia conflict, the Turkiye-Iran-Saudi-Egypt power-balance game, and the Russian desire to leverage anything that might destabilize anyone who might ever conceivably threaten Russia, which is to say, anyone not already under Russian influence or control.
Certainly pro-Treaty factions are not as strong as they once were in previous days, but they have the potential advantage of synergy, which the eternal war required by all anti-Treaty factions can never achieve. October 7th was a reaction to the likelihood that Prince Bonesaw al-Saud would openly endorse -- and pour real "r'oil" resources into -- a pro-Treaty stance.
The key insight to make is that anti-Treaty factions do not necessarily make choices with the goal of victory, but they always will make choices to weaken pro-Treaty factions. Thus, for example: Bibi's longtime support of HAMAS (it's incredible that it took this long to blow up in Bibi's face) and consistently aggressive stance towards Iran. Neither policy is in Israel's long-term interest, but it is in both Bibi's personal interest and his anti-Treaty supporters' interest... because both policies enable anti-Treaty factions over pro-Treaty factions, regardless of "side" or "ideology". Likewise, HAMAS takes actions it knows will devastate the people they nominally lead and serve... all to ensure anti-Treaty sentiment remains dominant.
Just as in 1984, the goal is not victory, but the avoidance of peace. There is no opposing faction, for each and every one of them, that they have as much enmity towards as peace.
Catfish 'n Cod said...
"October 7th was a reaction to the likelihood that Prince Bonesaw al-Saud would openly endorse -- and pour real "r'oil" resources into -- a pro-Treaty stance."
That does not seem likely to me. Perhaps it had something to do with the timing of the attack, but HAMAS had been building the capabilities for a serious attack against Israel for at least two decades. Building tunnels and other infrastructure, stockpiling weapons, ammunition, fuel and food. And there's the whole indoctrination thing starting in grade school, some funded by the UN, where they've been teaching the kids that the best thing they could possibly do with their lives is to die while killing Jews.
The degree of support that Iran gave HAMAS may well have been in response to Saudi actions, but HAMAS was going to launch a major attack against Israel, some day, no matter what Saudi Arabia had or might have done.
On further thought, Oct. 7th may have in a sense been an Iranian response to SA, but I don't think it was a HAMAS response to SA.
Remember that October 7 was Putin's birthday. Whatever sway he has now goes into spasms to weaken the West. And it is the campus demonstrators - vowing to defeat Biden - wherein he has his Hitler like slender hopes.
Dr Brin:
And it is the campus demonstrators - vowing to defeat Biden
I'm starting to be glad that young people don't vote.
Michigan Arabs and like-minded college protesters who accuse President Biden of abetting genocide are the ones actually announcing that they condone real genocide as the price for punishing Biden. With full understanding, they are trying to elect Trump, who will greenlight the actual ethnic cleansing of Gaza. They may believe they'll just protest against Trump when that happens, but it won't be easy to do from prison or from the country they're deported to, or from the land of the dead. Do they think that Netanyahu would be harmed by the absence of "Genocide Joe"? Do they really not know that Netanyahu is praying for Trump to return to office?
And it is the campus demonstrators - vowing to defeat Biden
Antifa, anti-authority, anti-capitalist & anti-establishment:
The political left created these entitled 'student activist' protesters and you still think you can control them?
As Artie Johnson would say: Very Interesting.
Best
Larry Hart:
"With full understanding, they [Michigan Arabs and like-minded college protesters] are trying to elect Trump, who will greenlight the actual ethnic cleansing of Gaza."
Trump's son-in-law has announced his intention to built seaside resorts where Gaza was, after the ethnic cleansing.
"They may believe they'll just protest against Trump when that happens, but it won't be easy to do from prison or from the country they're deported to, or from the land of the dead."
Or, Trump will just ignore them, and the IDF will proceed. In any case, protesting a catastrophe that you helped cause is less effective than not helping cause it.
- unless catastrophe is what you want. The Michigan Arabs and like-minded college protesters will fight to the last Palestinian. The three billionaire Hamas leaders, safe in Qatar, have often expressed a desire to martyr as many of their charges/victims as possible. So why don't they join them?
Malcom Nance (requoting from above) :
To borrow a Nirvana title, "It smells like Shah's visit".
I leave it to you to decipher the meaning.
Well, I don't know what US campus protestors are actually saying, but will note that an Israeli response* that *wantonly* murders hundreds of times more Palestinians than the Hamas thugs** managed is going to provoke angst, especially when a President appears to have been providing support for that excessive response.***
I can only hope that most of the protesters realise they *can* vote for people whose actions they abhor. Like when they are aware there's an alternative that is worse...
* ie Netanyahu's bloc. Many Israelis are just as outraged by what has been happening in Gaza.
** Thuggees were a Hindu cult, originally, but if the cap fits...
*** Grudging support, perhaps, but it's Middle East ie complicated. 'Avoiding peace' is definitely part of the game.
----
btw, yep, speculation on quantum computing possibly overclocking the Universe is unabashed woo on my part. In the same tradition as Asimov, in 'The Gods Themselves', pondering the downsides of a 'free lunch' (that Silverberg provided).
When the campus protestors wave banners "from the River to the Sea!" it's pretty clear this is Jew hatred or idiocy or both.
Tony the disproportionality of casualties is definitely a war crime on the part of Netanyahu and some Israeli officers. But angry men who are being shot at WILL have a tendency to ignore the fact that the 'soldiers' shooting at them are herding together and using civilian human shields.
We have a right to demand that the more advanced nation obey Laws of War to minimize civilian collateral harm even despite human shieldom! And those officers have no excuse in anger. Still, how convenient the protesters don't even mention human shieldom while shooting past the heads of children is hardly worthy of their admiration.
http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2013/02/past-keeping-faith-with-future-hand-day.htmle lives on. And the source, as always, is the Kremlin.
Given the likelihood of Hamas launching their offensive on Putin's birthday being no coincidence, Netanyahu's strategy in Gaza* gives him the look of "NeoCzar Vlad I"s useful idiot.
*I know Netanyahu also has political reasons to prolong the war, not unlike "Drumph's" reasons for running for the Presidency again.
SOrry. Meant to type CHE (Gueverra) lives on. Accidentally hit an auto key
Dr. Brin:
Are you entirely sure that he-without-detectable-wisdom is entirely without wisdom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyLZ8dJ2Otw
Sure he's said some wrong things. But here, you and he agree on Trump.
Stopped clock right twice a day.
Dr. Brin:
I am glad to see you use the phrase "Jew-hatred" instead of "Anti-semitism". The latter term was made up by 19th-century Jew-haters who needed another term, for religious bigotry was no longer cool at the time, but pseudo-scientific racism was. The latter term is cringy in its euphemistic bad faith; the former term is a bit too raw and honest. I vote 'too raw'.
Paradoctor:
the phrase "Jew-hatred" instead of "Anti-semitism".
It sounds even more malevolent in German.
Judenhass
I never said Chomsky never-says-truth. That'd be too systematic. It's not hard for an old fart leftist like him to hate Trump. But note that he blames "corporations," which is idiotic. Corporations, like political institutions, have been hijacked by aristocrat-oligarch parasite lords who - with help from foreign pals in hatred of the enlightenment experiment (topmost Putin, who supplies the blackmailed US politicians) have riled a new mass of confederate know nothings into near-hot civil war.
The aim - destruction of POLITICS as a problem solving method - was pushed by every GOP leader since Haster and is near complete, though it suffered a setback in 2021-22 when Pelosi bills surged us forward ten big steps.
Corporations are tools that require constate tuning by politics! If not tuned, they easily become cancerous. But it is the collapse of politics in the US that makes that impossible.
As for the campus imbeciles... they could have actively fought for the Burmese Rohingya, or the people of Singkiang or the victims of African Boko Haram rapist lords... or best-possible, fought the Guatemalan, Honduran, Nicaraguan tyrants who oppress their own people, driving them to our borders in order to shift US politics rightward. Putin's same strategy that turned many European nations rightward.
The dopes did none of that, instead choosing to side with monsters who stole half a trillion$ from the people of Gaza, spending 10% of it on preparations to murder every Jew from the river to the sea. (And yes, Netanyahu and a dozen officers are war criminals, for letting anger overcome their duty to take care, when Hamas shot at them from behind human shields.)
But the core thing happening is this:
Putin's sole hope - re-electing Trump - depends on him repeating the "miracles" of 2000 and 2016, when we got Bush and Trump ENTIRELY due to frippy preening idiots flouncing off to Kremlin agents Stein and Nader.
It was looking as if that could be prevented, this year. Thanks to Hamas's birthday present to Putin, it looks like a couple of million dopes will do it again, this year. It is a winning strategy.
Dr Brin:
though it suffered a setback in 2021-22 when Pelosi bills surged us forward ten big steps.
It's suffering another setback in real time, as Speaker Johnson works with a coalition of Democrats and non-batshit Republicans to keep the lights on, while MTG and Gaetz and Comer scream in impotent fury that he's betraying the party that wants to oust him.
I heard MTG this morning screeching at Democrats for helping a Republican speaker, assuming they'll be primaried back home for such an unthinkable transgression. Apparently, she thinks we do the same kinds of petty things that they do.
That Fox News & the much disparaged right-wing Christian media is strictly pro-Israel, pro-Jew & anti-Hamas, it's very interesting how thoroughly CNN, MSNBC & most left-wing progressive media outlets absolutely dote the on the anti-Israeli, Jew-hating & pro-Hamas demonstrators.
As illustrated by those clueless LGBT+ doofuses who actively court defenestration by supporting Hamas, hating Christians & loving Muslims, the typical western liberal-progressive idealist has gone clinically insane & suicidal, having lost all contact with reality.
These are the very same people who absolutely HATE on Trump & Christians-in-general, even though Trump & his white christian supporters are the most unabashedly pro-Israel, Pro-Jewish & pro-LGBT+ demographic in the history of the western world.
Best
Radical chic
+
Mau Mauing the flak catchers.
Brin 10:45:
I agree with most of your analysis. One minor quibble: hating the money power is an ancient and honorable lefty trope. (Suitable for ancient lefty farts like he-who-isn't-always-wrong.) I call Church, State, and Market the "Three Monsters", for their anthropophagous habits. The highborn lowlifes among us routinely hijack all three monsters for their sociopathic schemes. In self-defense, I subscribe to a checks-and-balances theory.
As for the campus imbeciles: Einstein said, "To punish me for my contempt for authority, Fate has made me into one." I've looked at power from both sides now, from in and out, and still somehow it's power's illusions I recall. I really don't know power at all.
When I was young, I was an ignorant fool. But now, after many decades of education and experience, it is true that I'm no longer young. Beware, O Younglings; it'll happen to you!
Larry Hart 10:20:
The term "Judenhass" has earned its creepy reputation. I approve of it on poetic grounds: but it's polite and prudent to give the German folk some slack, for most of them are sincerely sorry. I also recommend the term "Judeophobia" as an echo of "Islamophobia", though fear is not exactly the same as hate.
Speaking of fear (phobos) vs hate (deimos): what do the Mars terraformers plan to do about Phobos?
As for the dictator-wannabee's Christianist allies-of-convenience: they are certainly not pro-LGBT+. And with friends like that, Israel does not need enemies.
Experiment (not recommended):
talk to today’s protesters, to attempt to find common ground with them.
You’ll be treated as a flak-catcher.
Alan Brooks:
Several months ago I attended a 'pro-Palestinian' (really, pro-Hamas) rally, and a week later I attended my union's rally. It was an educational experience. It taught me the external signs of inner rage-and-despair, as contrasted to inner hope-and-confidence.
The rage rally was loud and noisy; you had to scream to talk to anyone at all. Yes, I was treated as a flak-catcher. The union rally was loud but not noisy; I shared some jokes with my fellow ralliers. The signs at the rage rally contradicted each other: for instance one called for a cease-fire but another rejected a cease-fire with rude contempt. The union people handed out their own signs to carry around in the ritual oval. I chose "Education is an Investment". How bourgeois of me! The rage rally repeatedly chanted "Shame! Shame!" I'm not sure at whom. The union rally had merch and a music band. I still have the T-shirt.
The pro-Hamas rally took over a block in the financial district. A squadron of police sat watchfully at one end. The union rally policed itself. It stayed within a parking lot. Whenever a car drove past, they cheered and displayed signs saying "Honk if you love the union." Honk, honk, honk, honk, honk!
I left the union rally, thinking "Now this is the Left that I want." Two months later my paycheck showed the wage clawback that my union had negotiated.
The difference, I think, is that the pro-Hamas rally was about Honour, which is pure: but the union rally was about Money, which is grubby. Both rallies were held on planet Earth; and although I love Mother Earth, I love her with open eyes; I know that Purity is not her strong suit.
FUCK Locomranch for this blatant lie -
"These are the very same people who absolutely HATE on Trump & Christians-in-general, even though Trump & his white christian supporters are the most unabashedly pro-Israel, Pro-Jewish & pro-LGBT+ demographic in the history of the western world."
I have LGBTQ+ family in Red States. I guarantee that right wing white Christians are *not* the most pro-LGBTQ+ in the history of the world.
Loco is a fucking lair and psychopath that wants my family and I dead.
I spit at you, asshole, and everyone like you.
Notice the implicit assumption. They aren't asking for this expansion of presidential power NOW. They assume - rightfully - that the party of diversity - nerds, constitutionalist officers, women, fact professions and those opposing feudalism - doesn't even remotely want such power. So, I recommend that JoBee ask: "Are you OFFERING me these powers? Of course you aren't, even if I win the next election by a landslide. In fact your implicit assumption is that once a Republican has these abomination powers, there will never be another Democrat President who might use them. Your intentions are clear. And in the name of Lincoln and King and all the heroes of the last 240 years... we will stop you from doing this monstrous treason."
* 'Over 100 conservative groups, led by the Heritage Foundation, are working together on Project 2025, a plan that would overhaul the executive branch of the federal government to enact extreme policies and augment the president’s power.'*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDikvtSEtMY
Paradoc: “I call Church, State, and Market the "Three Monsters", for their anthropophagous habits.”
Pity. You could not be more wrong. When their power is broken up into mutually competing and accountable units, they can be productive. Governments into agencies charged with and incentivized to push for transparent accountability and especially markets, when Adam Smith’s advice is followed and power is broken up to enhance genuine competition. Even churches can reach that level. Sometimes.
And you are right that these are loci that -BECAUSE they contain vast power – are relentlessly targeted by cheaters. One major purpose of POLITICS is to thwart cheating and restore competitive synergies. Alas, we need an FDR really badly.
Nice Joni Mitchell ref, tho!
----
Re Phobos. We need to find out if there are mine-able volatiles. If so, then it might be the most valuable site in the Solar System beyond Earth.
“The difference, I think, is that the pro-Hamas rally was about Honour, which is pure: “
Close, but no. It is about sanctimony drug highs. And hence no interest in history or 8o years of preaching for genocide or Rohingia or the practicalities of Pelosi policies. It is dick waving masturbation.
----
Matthew, please ignore him. He went back to guzzling his poison Koolaids some months ago and any glimmers of sanity I tried to see before are long gone. Denouncing a swine only draws more oinks.
Paradoctor:
it's polite and prudent to give the German folk some slack, for most of them are sincerely sorry
I hold no malice toward post-1945 Germany. The sense of a term like Judenhass derives from its Nazi connotations, no reflection on modern Germany. I am fully aware of the irony that Germany and Japan are now trying to save democracy from the US, Britain, and Russia.
IF Loc is a paleo-conservative, he makes sense—per O’Sullivan’s Law. But if he hasn’t made up his mind, then he doesn’t make sense.
—
All I can ask protestors today is:
What would happen if Palestinians regained control of Palestine? That’s up to them, comes the answer, it’s not up to Western imperialists to decide the fate of Palestine. I leave before the monologue becomes ad hominem; not telling the protestor that the likely result of Palestinians regaining Palestine would be magnified internal & external violence.
But regardless of what you tell a protestor, you are going to be considered a flak-catcher; “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”
Dr Brin:
So, I recommend that JoBee ask: "Are you OFFERING me these powers? Of course you aren't, even if I win the next election by a landslide.
They're not scared that Biden would abuse his office, because he wouldn't. That's why we like him, but it's also too bad in this particular moment. I'd have loved to see President Hillary in a position to ask, "Absolute Presidential Immunity? Really? Hmmmmmmm...." That would have shut them down for a good while.
* * *
The pro-HAMAS protesters aren't even serving their own cause. They're on what OGH calls an "indignation high" and throwing a tantrum of the id worthy of a one-year-old (my daughter was more mature than that at two).
Malcolm Nance today sneered at them for being willing to allow anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-minority policies to take place under Trump because "I'm a one-issue voter, and that issue is Gaza!" What he didn't say was that even on their one issue, they are voting against their best interests. The lives of the Palestinians in Gaza and of the pro-Palestine protesters here will themselves be much worse under Trump.
The Arab spokesman from Michigan who says, "I can live with an enemy, but I can't live with someone who pretends to be a friend," evokes Jews voting for Hitler on those same grounds. Or American blacks voting for the KKK. "At least you know where you stand," is not always a good thing.
matthew:
I spit at you, asshole, and everyone like you.
I've been sober for almost seven months now.
And welcome back, btw. The next few months will be "interesting times."
Oh, gotta love the snark.
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2024/Items/May01-6.html
Starting with [Marjorie Taylor] Greene, the cat is now officially out of the bag: House Democrats say they will save Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) if a motion to vacate is called. Undoubtedly, the blue team is not thrilled to be sorta partners with a guy who supported Donald Trump's efforts to steal the election, but you have to work with the people you've got, not the people you wish you had. And, as they say, "my enemy's enemy is my friend."
It's not exactly clear how many Democrats would vote in support of Johnson. Presumably just enough, and only members from purple or reddish districts, like Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA). Still, with Greene struggling to scrape together even a handful of Republican votes, the fact that the Democrats won't vote against Johnson unanimously is fatal to the motion-to-vacate plans. Clearly, this arrangement was put in place during the negotiations over the Ukraine/Israel funding, and clearly Greene completely missed that fact. She told reporters yesterday that she's holding off on the MTV for now. Maybe she'll eventually move forward, just for show purposes, but either way, Greene just became a lot less important. Not less obnoxious mind you, just less important.
Meanwhile, just before the Florida filing deadline, [Matt] Gaetz drew a primary opponent: Navy pilot Aaron Dimmock, who was recruited by, and has the financial backing of, former speaker Kevin McCarthy's political network. The far-right Daily Caller reported the news with the headline "Matt Gaetz Gets Primary Challenge From McCarthy-Aligned BLM Supporter," while Gaetz himself got on eX-Twitter and decreed: "I'm excited to welcome Missouri-based DEI instructor Aaron Dimmock to the campaign. Aaron is not in Kansas City anymore. This is Trump Country. Our pronouns are USA and MAGA." C'mon, folks, you forgot "pedophile," "trans," "communist" and "Antifa." Let's keep our eye on the ball here.
Dr. Brin:
Our differences are not statistically significant. Church, State, and Market behave monstrously when they are of monstrous size. Don't give them that chance.
The Joni Mitchell song is brave and wise. She admits her ignorance of perception, emotion, and existence, and thus is both defeated and victorious. That is the consolation of philosophy.
I hope you noticed the "Lather" quote in my next paragraph. (Mommy?) I did that reference for the pleasure of it.
Re Phobos: if there are volatiles there, then the colonists will eat it allll up. Good! Doing good by doing well. But if the rocks there are all dry, then what? The Net says that Phobos will crash or disintegrate 'soon', meaning in 30 to 50 million years. Will the colonists tolerate that? If not then what's the plan?
Re Honour vs Sanctimony High: please give an objective definition of the distinction.
Alan Brooks:
Don't be part of the problem. Be all of the problem.
Larry Hart:
Both Hamas and Trumpism make perfect rational sense if their motive is self-contempt. That's why I wasn't sure about whom the pro-Hamas rally's cries of shame were directed at. For more details about the role of self-hatred in fanaticism, consult "The True Believer", by Eric Hoffer. Nietzsche said, about such folk, that we should seduce them into loving themselves.
Re Phobos
Talking about volatiles is planetary bias - in space with copious solar energy you need to think about elements not compounds.
Even if Phobos is dry as a bone it will have huge amounts of Hydrogen and Oxygen in compounds which can be separated.
Only 30-50 million years to go?
Oh the horror! Such a risk!
Pfft. 8)
Plenty of time to find a use for it that results in many smaller pieces.
Larry,
The other half of the curse "may you live in interesting times" is, according to Stross, "and may the authorities take an interest in you."
Pappenheimer
P.S. currently we are shipping HE to the IDF and food to the Gazan inhabitants. I don't advocate switching the two, but if we shipped less or no HE, we might save on the food shipments...it bothered me years ago to provide weather support to USAF tankers refueling Saudi pilots on strike missions in Yemen. They weren't being too picky about their targets there, either.
Paradoctor:
it's polite and prudent to give the German folk some slack, for most of them are sincerely sorry.
I hold no malice toward post-1945 Germany. The sense of a term like Judenhass derives from its Nazi connotations, no reflection on modern Germany.
I find the term "Judenhass" even more fitting than antisemitism. The latinization shields the ears and eyes from the truth of the matter, the sheer brutality. And actually, the Nazis tried to avoid terms like this to obfuscate meanings (see Victor Klemperer, Lingua Tertii Imperii), often using terms with a pseudo-scientific, clinical or technological sound.
Another example would be "Sonderbehandlung" (special treatment) for mass executions in Poland and the USSR, or "Gleichschaltung" (synchronization or phasing) for the removal of political opponents and the subjugation of the government and media at the start of their reign.
I am fully aware of the irony that Germany and Japan are now trying to save democracy from the US, Britain, and Russia.
Some of us do. If it is enough I do not dare to predict.
There is some silver lining on the horizon, however.
The AfD has lost one-third of their votes during the last four months due to a number of factors:
- The reports of the "Wannsee 2.0" conference that mobilized millions in the streets;
- The espionage scandals wherein the EU top candidates have been "discovered" by the mass media to have spied and acted for Russia and China;
- The formation of a new economicaly leftist, socially conservative and putinophile party.
The Protestant Church has declared membership or support of the AfD incompatible with membership in the church or employment in one of the many healthcare and education institutions they run. And since they have their own laws regarding employment, they can terminate contracts on the base of your alignment.
“Re Honour vs Sanctimony High: please give an objective definition of the distinction.”
Honour of any respectable kind includes the sacred catechism of science: “I might be wrong. And if so I am honor bound to admit it.” The sanctimony junky cannot say or conceive that.
Phobos ISRU refueling – if combined with the same thing down on the surface - means Mars missions need carry no fuel to Mars. Making the whole endeavor transformed from insanely expensive to maybe-sure-let’s go.
Dr. Brin:
I honor your definition of Honour. But I'm sure you agree that it might be wrong. :)
Please note that "I might be wrong" is first cousin of the liar paradox: "This sentence is false." That's one weird trick that Captain Kirk used to shut down many an evil computer. I've discovered that it also works on ideologues.
Re Phobos: I suppose that those rocks have plenty of oxides. But hydrides? And what to do with the silicon left over?
If you like Kirk talking computers into suicide... See The Ancient Ones: http://davidbrin.com/ancientones.html
Breaking rocky oxides is very hard.It's why most of the "Resources!!!" justifications for Artemis are utter sname oil. For now.
Breaking rocky oxides is very hard.
And going down a hole to do so makes it worse especially as then your power supply moves across the sky and hides for half the time.
For Phobos you don't need to go down a hole and the sun is always there.
If there are volatiles on/in Phobos so much the better.
The "silicon left over" would be used as radiation screening - or eventually as building materials or reaction mass.
Paradoctor:
Both Hamas and Trumpism make perfect rational sense if their motive is self-contempt.
...
Nietzsche said, about such folk, that we should seduce them into loving themselves.
"Learning to love yourself / Is the greatest love of all."
My own theory concerning Middle Eastern extremists, both Jewish and Muslim, is that they'd be less angry if they'd just eat some bacon and get laid every so often.
Paradoctor:
Please note that "I might be wrong" is first cousin of the liar paradox: "This sentence is false."
Heh. But only if you're saying you might be wrong about possibly being wrong.
"I might be wrong about abortion, but until convinced otherwise, I believe that..." is not a paradox.
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2024/Items/May02-2.html
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) are now in an open state of warfare. Yesterday, Greene announced that next week, she is going to convert her motion to vacate to a privileged motion, meaning the House will have to vote on it within 2 days. She also refused to say whether she would keep bringing up the motion for additional votes, once it inevitably fails. Meanwhile, Johnson appeared on NewsNation to light into Greene, opining that she's not a "serious lawmaker." He's right about that, of course, but it's not too often a Speaker publicly shreds a member of their own conference.
The "motions to vacate" against Johnson and against McCarthy before him result in some very strange rhetoric. When it was McCarthy's turn, Matt Gaetz justified a motion to vacate on the grounds that (horrors!) McCarthy had passed legislation by relying on Democratic votes. For that sin, he was deposed with the help of Democratic votes.
Now, MTG is trying to vacate Johnson's seat, and Democrats are helping him keep it. For this sin, MTG is shocked, shocked to find that Democrats would dare to assist a Republican speaker instead of helping with the dirty work of other Republicans who want to oust that speaker. Johnson's sin is that he doesn't faithfully represent "their Republican caucus", even though only a few members of that caucus have a problem with him.
Ultimately, the Speaker is supposed to be the speaker for the entire House. He's not "majority leader" the way Mitch McConnell was in the Senate. That's why he needed 218 votes to get the job in the first place instead of just a majority of Republicans. These so-called-originalist Republicans are supposed to know better.
President Biden is a uniter. (Not in a good way, though.)
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2024/Items/May02-4.html
There was an incident yesterday that served to put the lose-lose nature of the President's situation into stark contrast. The University of Alabama has joined the ever-growing list of schools with ongoing showdowns between angry pro-Israel students and angry pro-Palestine students. And while the two sides there normally chant slogans in opposition to the other side, for a period of time yesterday, they came together as one to chant... "Fu** Joe Biden. Fu** Joe Biden. Fu** Joe Biden." The pro-Palestine side blames him for giving too much support to Israel, while the pro-Israel side blames him for giving too little support. And, in trying to steer a middle course, all he's doing is angering both sides.
Breaking silicates probably won't happen. Sunlight is available, but it still costs effort and resources to collect it. Also, Mars is further out from the Sun. That matters.
They'll be looking for volatiles deep inside. The silicates will likely get used for structures. Phobos looks to be mostly phyllosilicates... so think talc and mica. Sheets of stuff. Probably useful as is.
From an e-mailed newsletter...
Last week’s winning tweet
They laughed when I said I was going to be a comedian. Well, they’re not laughing now. — @Ruth_A_Buzzi
Ruth Buzzi, now 87 and retired, is best remembered by those of us of a certain age as one of the stars of “Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In” on NBC from 1968 to 1973. This Twitter account appears genuine.
@Darrell: We are demonstrating Aristotle's poorly-made point that 'cause' is a pointer to multiple facts. Of course Hamas was always prepping for a war with Israel; as I pointed out above, doing anything else would betray their fundamental premise. However, the thoroughness of their prep was due to support by anti-Treaty factions: not only fellow Muslim Brotherhood factions, and not only wealthy Qutbist sponsors in Arab states, but also Shia Iran and -- crucially --
Bibi Netanyahu, whose anti-Treaty strategy to keep Palestinians divided and conquered by letting Hamas entrench outside the Westphalian PA protostate was far higher priority than such trivialities as the safety and security of Israeli territory and civilians. The decision to remove the Gaza marchwardens to 'protect' (backstop) aggressive anti-Treaty extremists was just the most egregious action against a peace agreement.
@Dr. Brin: I didn't know that it was Putin's birthday as well. I'm sure many factors played a role, and the opportunity + the Saudi threat still seem the most important to me, but gifting another anti-Treaty benefactor does make more sense than timing for the end of Sukkot...
@Larry: There was a Slate article a few weeks ago that really, really tried to convince readers that yes, Michigan Arab-Americans were so blinded by (fully justified!) anger that they were ready to vote for tyranny out of spite. One or two interviewees made the asinine comments that they could try to transact with TFG, or fight him "within the law" (actual quote), but that since Biden supported "Zionism" he couldn't be reasoned with.
Personally, I find it insulting to assume that community will remain so monumentally foolish into November; the media, far later than I wish, is finally making hay out of the open and frank plans for dictatorship. (Less well covered so far is the growing split between institutional authoritarians in places like the Heritage Foundation, whose goal is a functional and durable minority rule, and the Trumpist demand for personal fealty. I wish them all the confusion their selfishness deserves.
As for the demonstrations, at the Occupy protests a decade back, I noticed something. In a completely amorphous forum with no structural defenses, the entropic eventuality is for outsiders to hijack the movement for their own purposes. The forum then becomes a natural-selection platform for which outsiders will take control. In an unorganized mob, entropy favors the loudest, most aggressive, most extreme elements to be the most successful at the takeover -- they have the stamina, drive, and organization to get inside other groups' decision loops and stay there.
There's a reason student-led protests rarely lead directly to results, and a reason they frequently (not always!) become focused on inane or highly niche subjects (like freeing a single activist, or championing an obscure cause). If educators were really the agents of progressive change that reactionaries imagine, organizing would be a central component of all American education. (I strongly suspect the trend toward de-emphasis on civics, history, and humanities is primarily intended to prevent such vital citizens' tools from becoming too common and available.)
Silicate-cracking: would probably be best done on Mercury, starting at the poles and working outwards with rolling factories as resources permit. But other than making solar panels for other sites, why would we bother?
The Moon is a place to DO and PRACTICE things. It's not a place to OBTAIN much of anything! This follows directly from what we learned from Apollo: that the Moon is primarily dross launched into orbit by Theia's impact at the very start. There's a good chance it's the least useful site for mining in the entire System.
But with its proximity to the homeworld, it's a very good place to work out bugs in a real environment before we throw things light-minutes from even conceptual help.
I am almost at the end of DEATH'S END, the final novel on the THREE-BODY PROBLEM trilogy. I won't spoil the stories for those of you who have not read them. It is an interesting story and it is refreshing to have a science fiction story from a non-Western Civ point of view. But there are some troubling points in the story. I will be vague to avoid spoilers.
1. The story treats democracy as foolish. When the people vote on something, they always seem to vote for the worst alternative.
2. We see that choosing courses of action based on humanity and compassion leads to disastrous outcomes. The story directly states that if an authoritarian-militaristic approach had been taken then disaster could have been avoided.
3. The public reacts violently to anyone choosing to try and escape the problem. There are several points where people are trying to escape and other people who are unable to escape would rather drag them back so that everyone dies rather than let some people get away. This reminds me of the stories about the efforts in the Soviet Union to let some farmers have private plots of land to grow food they could sell. Their neighbors would destroy these farms out of anger and hatred: why should THESE people get better results just because they are willing to work harder. We should all suffer just the same. On the one hand, seeing billionaires flee a disaster they created might drive any of us to try and stop them, but at the level shown in this story, it seemed that the public does not want anyone to get better results no matter what the reason.
I got the sense that the story was praising China's current neo-fascism as being superior to Western Civilization's compassionate humanism.
Catfish 'N 'Cod:
...really tried to convince readers that yes, Michigan Arab-Americans were so blinded by (fully justified!) anger that they were ready to vote for tyranny out of spite.
They're making the same point that Malcolm Nance did, and also missing the same point that he did. It's not just a question of their willingness to invite so many other Republican evils because they're so focused on Gaza. They're willing to make things worse for Gaza in order to punish Biden for his stance on Gaza. Tactically, their position makes no sense, even by their own stated values.
One or two interviewees made the asinine comments that they could try to transact with TFG, or fight him "within the law" (actual quote), but that since Biden supported "Zionism" he couldn't be reasoned with.
They think Trump doesn't support Zionism?
Personally, I find it insulting to assume that community will remain so monumentally foolish into November;
Insulted by the article, or by me? I don't want to think badly of them as a group, but when I see them on my tv actively asserting that they will hurt me and hurt themselves and are intractable on the subject, I'm forced to believe they're telling me who they are.
I try to remain hopeful that the fever will break and that those activists will notice that Trump and Republicans are worse on their single issue than Biden and Democrats are. At the moment, their rhetoric says otherwise, even to claiming that if Biden were to change course and end the war right now, it would already be too late to change their minds. Which, to me, says ok, there's no sense trying to placate them, so go all in on pro-Israel to keep from losing the vote from that side.
“Nietzsche said, about such folk, that we should seduce them into loving themselves.
"Learning to love yourself / Is the greatest love of all."
Um, not if it’s the Ayn Rand variety.
--
Dems should make clear that supporting Johnson is temporary and continues conditionally. I am VERY uncomfortable with him 2 heartbeats from becoming Nehemia Scudder.
--
“And while the two sides there normally chant slogans in opposition to the other side, for a period of time yesterday, they came together as one to chant... "Fu** Joe Biden. Fu** Joe Biden. Fu** “
The drug is sanctimony.
--
Catfish your summary of traits of the Moon is so good that I’ll crib it and add it to my missive about the topic.
She offered her honor. He honored her offer. And all night long it was honor and offer.
Dr Brin:
Um, not if it’s the Ayn Rand variety.
True dat.
I was thinking more along the lines that people who hate themselves tend to be willing to harm others. Those that are content in their own skins rarely want to tear everything down.
Dems should make clear that supporting Johnson is temporary and continues conditionally. I am VERY uncomfortable with him 2 heartbeats from becoming Nehemia Scudder.
I can see that. My rationalization is that a new GQP speaker would be worse, just as this one was worse than McCarthy.
In any case, I'm sure Dems struck a deal with Johnson to help save his speakership if he would bring Ukraine aid to the floor for a vote. At the moment, it's better to have him seeing us as an honest partner than forcing him to kow-tow to his fanatics.
Remember, the Ukraine aid bill passed with over 300 votes, which means a lot of Republicans voted for it. Why should Johnson be pilloried for defying MTG and bringing to the floor a bill that both parties (generally) wanted to pass? I'd rather help save him from an unjust lynching than be part of punishing him for doing the right thing.
GMT:
...honor and offer.
:)
@GMT: You have put your finger on the reason I couldn't finish even the first book.
Lots of people seem to see different things in the story. I've seen it described as pro-authoritarian, anti-authoritarian, pro-communal, anti-communal, anti-left, anti-right, pro-masculine, and more. If the goal was to spur discussion, it succeeded (outside of mainland China, of course).
I'm guessing the original argument was supposed to be about rational vs. emotional responses to crises, but there's too much else going on. It's like Dune in that sense.
@Larry: They note (correctly) that Trump is entirely transactional and doesn't really care about anything or anyone but himself. They don't note that he never pays his debts if he can get away with it.
@Dr. Brin: Imitation is not only the most sincere form of flattery, it's also the third-highest form of praise. I am proud to be of service.
As for Pastor Johnson, I'm pretty sure he does not have carte blanche -- and if he can follow his mentor Pelosi's principles and methods, Hakeem Jeffries should be able to hold a leash on him for the rest of the term. Ironically this is only possible precisely *because* the GQP rats will boot him at the drop of a hat.
Today, Joe Biden equates Antisemitism & Islamophobia and inadvertently forfeits the 2024 Presidential Election by condemning the Antifa & BLM protests of 2020:
Peaceful protest in America — violent protest is not protected; peaceful protest is. It’s against the law when violence occurs.
Destroying property is not a peaceful protest. It’s against the law.
Vandalism, trespassing, breaking windows, shutting down campuses, forcing the cancellation of classes and graduations — none of this is a peaceful protest.
Yet, then again, Matthew makes a solid point:
Pay no attention to the infinite number of pro-LGBT Rainbow Flags that literally festoon the Christian West because the Christian West (especially the US) is such a terrible, intolerant & hate-filled space that only + 7 million migrants of every ethnicity, race, religion & orientation have sought refuge here in the last 3 years, even though these migrants would be much better served by a Muslim majority state that offers free LGBT rooftop flying lessons.
If you don't like it here, then please leave.
Best
The Three Body Problem
I found the actual "Three Body Problem" in the book to be ridiculous!
If you have several bodies then you cannot predict out forever - but you CAN predict forwards an amount dependent on the accuracy of your information and more importantly as time goes on that forward prediction period also moves forwards!!
Alfred
YES solar energy is less out at Mars
But if you are in orbit you can make HUGE mirrors - so the actual amount of energy can easily be far far more than you can get on a planetary surface - more even than Mercury!
Duncan, yes, Liu Cixin's book has many ways it's far more allegorically "inspired by" this reality, rather than about it. e.g. the real alpha Centauri system is calm and stable over hundreds of millions of years. And the sun does not amplify radio emisions, nor is that necessary for tight beams.
But Da Liu is a friend and has almost singlehandedly pulled one or two billion people closer to the hard SF orbit. And I am enjoying the Netfliz version, too. Setting aside my "buts."
===
Call for the group mind's wisdom! I'll be speaking several times (zoom) for a conference on "Habitability and Your Cosmic Future: AstroAnthropology Meets AstroEthics," to be held in Maine in late June by the Institute on Religion in the Age of Science. Among the topics* see below.
They want me to introduce a trio of science fiction films that illustrate future ethical concerns wrought by scientific advances. (With possibly - not essentially - theological implications?) Naturally, one starts with GATTACA!
The flick Quest forFire has one of my all-time favorite scenes... but is not overall apropos. And though Ex Machina asks brilliant questions, I found the answers disappointing, at best. ANY SUGGESTIONS?
Here's one of the prompts at the site: "Can we develop a concrete astroethics: moral principles in planetary perspective? Would our familiar moral anthropologies need to become astroanthropologies to engage new kinds of beings?"
https://starisland.org/program/iras/
Dr. Brin,
SF films that illustrate future ethical concerns...
Well, "Young Frankenstein", obviously...
Pappenheimer
P.S. More seriously, the Anime "Metropolis" is worth a look.
@Dr. Brin re: IRAS suggestion
The movie I can't get out of my head is the Canadian film CLARA (2018). It's a hard SF story about the transit method and orbital mechanics. It ends with a great entanglement communications trick that melds aspects of quantum physics, Ursula K Le Guin's "Ansible", and Bob Dylan's "Girl from the North Country".
Weirdly though, the main plot twist is an explicitly woo-woo psychic vision by Clara. Lord knows I'm a rationalist, so I didn't like this at first. However, after watching it several more times, it became my favourite theme in the film (possibly involving entanglement, but never fully explained). A possible example of A.C. Clarke's line about magic and technology.
When a sapiens brain can't grok the science, it fills in the story with religion. This effect is seen throughout SF, both old & new. Nightmarish on a cultural level, but quite charming on an individual level.
Duncan,
I get it. Moon sized mirrors. Yes.
Easy? No. Far from it. They'd function as sails in both photon and ionized particle wind sense. Operating them will be non-trivial enough that I predict retrieving water from Mars or other Mars crossing asteroids will be easier for a while.
The shortest way around this involves them finding volatiles on Phobos in large enough abundance to make trips elsewhere silly. The medium way around this involves Mars crossing asteroids with volatiles that can simply be wrapped while sunlight is redirected from several smaller mirrors while the body is near perihelion.
Much of this is moot if there are other excuses for launches from the surface of Mars because the next nearest water source is obviously Mars itself.
------
I'm not making a physical argument here. Big mirrors are definitely possible. I'm making an economic argument because funding these things is likely to be done by private money. The costs will be the burden of the colonizers.
The adaptation of Sagan's CONTACT comes to mind. There IS scientific advancement described in the story and not just the big spinning thing.
From 2016 there is ARRIVAL and the potential advances implied by the sudden appearance of those aliens and how we learn from them. The story goes on long enough for actual advances to materialize.
Well... they finally motivated me to re-register as a CA Democrat. Done!
What a bunch of f$@k ups.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4636581-trump-address-libertarian-party-convention/
I've spoken at several libertarian events, watching them become ever more about protecting the pl;utocrat oligarchy and (increasingly) Moscow. Alas, they never mention anymore Adam Smith... or the 'C word" competition.
I second Gattaca, and Contact: apart from the philosophical questions raised by the nature of the contact, there's the advisability of building a very expensive machine on incompletely known alien specs. (you've written something about that...)
The Matrix covers what happens when people become too wrapped up in their creations, but perhaps Inception does a better job.
While not a film, the 3 Body Problem series certainly portrays the folly of 'amateur' contact. The Trisolarians don't react well when they learn what a 'story' is. (although the disruptive 'sophons' must have been sent some time before that.)
Arrival also investigates how to communicate with true aliens (with a somewhat better outcome).
Also not a film, but a game with coherent cutscenes, Horizon: Zero Dawn touches on the hubris of making autonomous, self replicating machines, and the ethics of terraforming.
The Creator is not a great film, but at least it tries to convey what true AIs might be like, as people. (Great imagery, tragic depiction: they won't be 'just like us', but how else to give a sympathetic portrayal?). There are a few other 'aliens among us' themed films, like 'District 9', and the Bladerunner films.
Call for the group mind's wisdom! I'll be speaking several times (zoom) for a conference on "Habitability and Your Cosmic Future: AstroAnthropology Meets AstroEthics," to be held in Maine in late June by the Institute on Religion in the Age of Science (regarding) a trio of science fiction films that illustrate future ethical concerns (plus) theological implications. ANY SUGGESTIONS?
No snark today.
The film that Dr. Brin is looking for is 'Solaris', either the austere 1972 Soviet version or the sexualized 2002 American version, a tale by Stanislaw Lem about attempts to communicate with an alien entity.
Even more apropos (though not a film) is Stanislaw Lem's fake book review of 'Non Serviam' by James Dobbs (contained in 'A Perfect Vacuum', 1971) which both anticipates & thinks logical rings around said Institute on Religion's entire raison d'etre, linked below:
https://cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/575/F01/lem.pdf
There's even a nifty libertarian tie in.
Best
Dr Brin:
I've spoken at several libertarian events, watching them become ever more about protecting the pl;utocrat oligarchy and (increasingly) Moscow.
Seems as if the term "libertarian" has been hijacked to mean its opposite much in the way "religious liberty" has. The latter now means the freedom of powerful religious institutions to impose their will on individuals. And considering what you describe above, the former now espouses the liberty of powerful governments to impose their will on their citizens. Both terms have morphed from advocating against coercion by the powerful against the individual to advocating against coercion by the individual against the powerful.
"The word you are looking for is 'libertarian'. But this is not libertarian. Authoritarian perhaps, but that is a different thing, in fact the opposite thing."
Ok, I see this on Stonekettle's "Threads" feed. Hope to God it's real.
Jake Tapper: Todd Blanche is specifically reading a post that Michael Cohen made in which he refers to Donald Trump as VonShitzInPantz. That is just a factual record I'm bringing before you. This is in the court transcript. VonShitzInPantz.
* * *
Stonekettle:
You know, I've had bad days.
But it was never sitting in court listening as they read your name into the historical record forever as "Vonshitzinpants" bad.
"Stonekettle: You know, I've had bad days. But it was never sitting in court listening as they read your name into the historical record forever as "Vonshitzinpants" bad."
Again, while giggling, no one seems capable of using such things TACTICALLY!
THE best thing The Lincoln Project could do is not JUST list all the former Trumpists who now denounce him. Next TABULATE them and then punch it with:
"Trump has been 'betrayed' by more appointees who he formerly called "great guys!!" than ALL other U.S. presidents... combined. You can make up stories about that all you like, but one fact is indisputable.
"Donald Trump is a crappy judge of character."
Larry,
I don't think they mean to have it mean the opposite. They DO sincerely believe they are looking out for everyone.
Problem is they don't have anyone's attention, so like Rand Paul they do some crazy sh*t to get that first thinking they can speak their message after everyone is looking at them.
Doesn't work. Of course. It ties the sincere message to some crazy sh*t making it all crazy sh*t.
-----
However, there is the same 'vocal minority taking over' effect going on that we see elsewhere. The audible message they intend today is not the one pushed forward by the less vocal majority.
Anyway, the "Party of Principle" failed their principles. They have chosen to give oxygen to a would-be tyrant who plans to use them. They think they can use him to get their message out, but that's some crazy sh*t. I'm done.
Dr Brin:
"Donald Trump is a crappy judge of character."
The thing about the VonShitzenpantz bit is that Trump's own lawyer read that into the record in order to impeach Michael Cohen as a hostile witness. Cohen was the one who had used the phrase, and he did so when he was still a loyal Trump sycophant. It does speak to Trump's character that even people who are currently kissing his ring and sweet-talking him to his face say such things in private behind his back.
My guess is that he is somewhat aware of that, but believes that all underlings are disrespectful to all bosses, and doesn't understand how much it reflects on him personally.
Holy Shit! I just got buzzed by a Mig 17, of all things. Very fast, just above the power lines.
Alfred Differ:
Well... they finally motivated me to re-register as a CA Democrat. Done!
"There's a place for us. Somewhere a place for us.
Peace and quiet and open air wait for us somewhere
..."
They DO sincerely believe they are looking out for everyone.
I can understand the misguided notion that Republicans are friendly to individual liberty. In a complete repudiation of my youth in the hippie days of the late sixties, the accepted narrative is that liberals want government to control everyone while conservatives want government off our backs. In my day, of course, liberals were for decriminalization of personal and sexual acts which didn't involve anyone else while conservatives were for forced conformity at the end of a baton. Republicans have done very well at flipping that narrative as far as accepted wisdom goes.
BUT...
When the Libertarian Party comes out as apologists for Putin's Russia? How can that possibly be spun as looking out for the individual?
They think they can use him to get their message out, but that's some crazy sh*t.
At least in the 1930s, we didn't have the lesson of Hitler to learn from. Now, we've seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. WTF?
Darrell E:
I just got buzzed by a Mig 17
Where are you, again? (If I ever knew)
The thing that Asimov got the most right is the importance of understanding psychology. Ranging from Robbie to Seldon to Preem Palver, this is the wall that fascist morons simply cannot scale.
I'm in Floriduh. Air show at the local airport this weekend so all kinds of cool aircraft have been flying around all week practicing. Little coastal town, tiny airport*, but for some reason they have been able to host very good airshows for quite a few years. And I say that as someone who grew up a military brat that was lucky to have been to dozens of airshows ranging from demonstrations of single aircraft for the brass to what, at the time, was the largest airshow in the world, 1976 Ramstein AFB. The Blue angels are here, as they are every other year at minimum.
*By tiny I mean, they have to move spectators out of the way in order to get planes on and off the runway, tiny.
Larry,
My guess is that he is somewhat aware of that, but believes that all underlings are disrespectful to all bosses…
I'm certain he is aware of it.
I'm equally certain he thinks we all do it as a form of envy of our betters. Not just disrespect. Hate too.
…and doesn't understand how much it reflects on him personally.
A sociopath wouldn't grok that. It wouldn't even register as something to be understood. He'd conclude we were all being idiots for thinking about such nonsense.
———
When the Libertarian Party comes out as apologists for Putin's Russia?
You are the one interpreting their words as coming from an apologist. They don't see it that way. From their POV we are being overly judgmental which is a vice.
Ultimately… it is about the virtue we call Justice. A person of good character is supposed to demonstrate that virtue without being excessive about it. Their 'persons of good character' go very light on judging others. VERY light. When they do decide someone is a 'bad' person, their typical response is to pull away. A more judgmental person might be more inclined to intervene.
I see them as arguing for a style of 'justice' that is too inclined to argue that all judgements are flawed by POV making them invalid. That essentially eliminates the virtue leaving their persons of good character (described in ideal forms in stories) as people who will not enforce social rules. Those things we reasonably expect of others and know they reasonably expect from us are NOT reasonable by that standard.
That leaves them looking 'unjust' to us. Selfish even.
Guilty of a vice related to a lack of a particular virtue.
———
Now, we've seen this movie before, and we know how it ends. WTF?
The analog with Hitler is easily dismissed… because it is overused. Everyone sees Hitler hiding behind the bush ready to pounce on us. He's the modern equivalent of a tiger which, of course, is never actually there.
I get, though. Sometimes the analogy is spot on.
In this case, though, I think one with Mussolini is more accurate. And Hitler liked Mussolini if I recall right.
Darrell! Are you near an air show? A time warp? I know a guy who piloted F-86 Sabes… later flew Apollo 9.
There are times when Fox says something true. Since Cohen said stuff about Trump, the court gag order should not include Cohen.
“I can understand the misguided notion that Republicans are friendly to individual liberty. “ The only way to deal with clichés is to demolish them SYSTEMATICALLY. I demand wagers whether the guy can name ONE area of important non-oligarch freedom Dems aren’t much better at. Easing out of the damned Drug War and the abortion thing and dissolving the ICC and CAB should be enough for any sincere libertarian. They are no longer sincere.
----
onward
onward
onward
Alfred,
One of my preferred noms de spurn for TFG was 'Benito Berlusconi' but it never caught on.
"Hitler liked Mussolini" - from what I've read, Hitler started with mild contempt which slid over into 'useful idiot' as Italy turned out to be, shall we say, less than adept at modern warfare. Hitler did admire Franco before the war but Franco's careful weaseling out of any WWII military commitment to a 'fellow fascist' after Hitler had committed troops to put Franco into power blew up that relationship. Tojo? Not even the right color.
I'm not actually sure that Hitler liked anyone but his dog by the end. And he pulled a Kristi Noem there, too.
"Everyone sees Hitler hiding behind the bush" because there are Hitlers* all around us. I've met at least one would-be Hitler and a lot of Himmlers**. They just don't get the chance to bring their fantasies to reality because of either their weaknesses as individuals or because the strength of the society they live in prevents their rise.
Pappenheimer
*Or Napoleons, to go back further
**Tom Cotton seems like a Himmler
Post a Comment