"History is a constant re-invention of hope and meaning in all forms - mythological, technological, philosophical. We keep questioning, answering, building, destroying. Questioning, answering, building, destroying. We can't help ourselves from helping ourselves."
All reasonable people are upset about the recent, current state of the world, but I see that Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times has taken on the brave taste of trying to partially remedy that in his column In Which I Try Valiantly to Cheer You Up. (It's a gift link - go read the whole thing.)
Here's how he opens:
This is the season when I customarily argue that the year just ending has been the best in human history.
So I dutifully sat at my laptop and tried to write something along the lines of: Sure, democracy is eroding, politics are toxic, wars are raging, America is losing allies, the planet is burning, and young people will never afford homes. But other than that …
I’ve done these “best year ever” columns annually, irritating Eeyores. But now I just can’t. The year 2025 was a setback for humanity — and unfortunately, the United States is a reason for the retreat.
He nonetheless goes on to point out the ways in which, despite the dire setbacks of 2025, there are reasons to be hopeful of more progress in certain areas. Some examples:
A starting point is to gain perspective and acknowledge that in the arc of human history, we’re still in good shape. While 2025 wasn’t the best year in human history, measured by child mortality, it was one of the five best years ever. Fewer than half as many children died in 2025 as in 2000.
It also seems likely that the positive trajectories will resume after slippage in 2025 and 2026. The Gates Foundation forecasts that while the trend of declining child deaths will be slowed, deaths will at least drop in the coming years. Similarly, the share of children stunted by malnutrition will most likely be lower in 2030 than it is now, the foundation suggests, but perhaps not as low as if aid funding had been sustained.
Until around 1970, a majority of adults had always been illiterate. Now we’re at 88 percent adult literacy, in part because of increasing numbers of girls going to school — and those educated women transform families, economies and societies.
And further down:
Another area that inspires me with its progress is clean energy. Climate change is still an enormous challenge, but energy economics have turned upside down and now offer a path forward — if we are willing to take it. My old college buddy Bill McKibben, who perhaps has done more than anyone else to raise alarms about climate change and who often as a result sounded rather bleak, is now surprisingly upbeat.
In his terrific new book, “Here Comes the Sun,” about the revolution of solar energy, Bill acknowledges all the challenges, but adds, “We’re also potentially on the edge of one of those rare and enormous transformations in human history — something akin to the moment a few hundred years ago when we learned to burn coal and gas and oil, triggering the Industrial Revolution and hence modernity.”
It took 68 years from the invention of the solar cell in 1954 to install the first terawatt of solar power on the planet, in 2022. It took two years to get the second.
This is because solar is increasingly cheap and simple — balcony solar systems are common in parts of Europe — and because batteries are making immense strides. Remember the line in “The Graduate” about the bright future to be found in “one word,” “plastics”? Today that one word might be “batteries.”
This reminds me, I never linked to this recent article in Science magazine, which you should be able to read for free:
The topic is clear from the title, and it gives the tiniest bit of reason for optimism. But the challenge is still enormous, as shown on this illustration in the article:
New battleships: President Trump announced on Monday that the Navy would build two new “Trump Class” battleships, with the eventual goal of acquiring 25. The announcement by Mr. Trump was the latest example of the president rebranding an aspect of the federal government in his image. The Navy secretary, John Phelan, called the vessels “just one piece of the president’s golden fleet that we’re going to build.”
(From the Washington Post.)
I was only vaguely aware of estimates of dementia according to age, but this Nature article puts some more certainty to it:
Nearly one in ten people over the age of 70 have Alzheimer’s disease dementia, shows a first-of-its-kind study that paired blood-based markers and clinical assessments to study the disease in Norway1.
That prevalence is in line with previous estimates for some other white populations2. But there were also unexpected differences, including higher disease rates than anticipated in individuals older than 85...
The study, published today in Nature, shows that blood-based tools can improve epidemiological estimates of neurodegenerative disease.
But exactly how to use these tests remains controversial, warns Jason Karlawish, a geriatrician and co-director of the Penn Memory Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Blood-based markers can be helpful for physicians treating people with dementia and for answering research questions, but they aren’t ready to be rolled out widely as health screening tools.
“It is the kind of test that, in the wrong hands, could cause a lot of harm,” says Karlawish, who was not involved in the study.
Of course, things get worse the older you get:
Around 10% of participants over the age of 70 had dementia and AD pathology, showing both cognitive impairment and high pTau217, they report. Another 10% had mild cognitive impairments and high pTau217. And 10% had high pTau217 but no signs of cognitive impairment, which the authors refer to as preclinical AD.
These findings are broadly in line with expectations, but there were surprises, too.
Some 25% of people aged 85–89 had dementia and AD pathology, up from previous estimates of around 7% for men and 13% for women in this age group in Western Europeans3. And the incidence of preclinical AD in younger individuals was 8% in those aged 70–74, down from a previous estimate of around 22%.
Anders Gustavsson, a member of the team that compiled the earlier estimates, welcomes the latest data. “I’m not surprised that this study gets somewhat different numbers,” says Gustavsson, who is an adviser to the health-economics consultancy Quantify Research in Stockholm.The discrepancies probably reflect selection bias, says study co-author Anita Lenora Sunde, a physician and dementia researcher at Stavanger University Hospital in Norway. Previous estimates were made by recruiting participants for brain scans, and people with dementia might not have wanted to or been able to participate.
The article eventually gets cut off at a paywall, just as it notes that the study indicates (as many others seem to) that higher education may have a protective effect. Good!
Axios has this good article about a recurring problem, and I will be naughty and post it here in full:
Amongst the many things that have been annoying me greatly in the last few months (I can't wait for 2025 to end) has been the switch to Windows 11. I put it off for as long as possible, and I guess I am glad I did at least that.
The persistent problem: when I take the work laptop home and connect it to my home network (something I used to do regularly under Windows 10 with no issues at all), it connects to the internet, but will not see all websites. It has a particular dislike for some big media ones - the New York Times and Washington Post (but, oddly enough, I can get to The Guardian) - and it has also affected banking websites. I just get an instant message that it can't find the website. It always lets me get to this blog, which allows me to complain, at least! Emails are OK.
The thing is, on one occasion this happened, the laptop was able to do a diagnostic which fixed it. I thought that was the end of it. I recall getting a message saying what the fix involved, but I have forgotten what it said. I also remember something about "this diagnostic tool is being moved/will no longer be available" or something like that.
And then, the problem returned the next time I bought the laptop home. (I don't bring it home every night.) I have tried running diagnostics again, but it just says I am connected to the internet, the network all looks OK. It makes some other suggestions, which all seem useless.
Searching the internet for what causes it brings up many, rather complicated, issues to check. It seems it is not one of the commonest issues.
Maybe I should try searching Reddit.
Anyway, it is very annoying to have an issue which Windows once knew how to fix, and then has forgotten.
When is the replacement for 11 coming?
Of course, so many words have been written already on Trump's intensely narcissistic and offensive comment on Rob Reiner's death. There were few who tried to support it, but in the local scene I saw that old JC at New Catallaxy, who I think occasionally might come here, refused to condemn it because Reiner had promoted the "Russia conspiracy" and been mean to Trump, so Trump could be mean in response (even in death.)
Even ignoring the fact that JC is part of the intense stupidity that has engulfed MAGA world that refuses to believe the reports of bipartisan committees on the involvement of Russia in support of Trump, what I don't get is this: how can anyone possibly excuse the fact that Trump went on a narcissistic fantasy WITH ZERO EVIDENCE that Reiner was murdered because of his "Trump Derangement Syndrome". I mean, it's an absolute invention (and an extremely unlikely one at that, given that the drug addled son was the suspect from the very start) that truly indicates a fabulist imagination so chronic that in many settings, you could see it cited as evidence for dementia and incapacity to make sound decisions.
I mean, how are doctors going to reliably diagnose this man with dementia when he has invented bullshit, if not for his entire life, at least for the last couple of decades, and people just shrug and say "that's just Donald"?
Given the attacks on Biden being tired and sometimes rambling, it just continues to be ridiculous that the media follows the MAGA line of "that's just Trump" when it comes to his continual lies and fabulist rhetoric.
In a Washington Post article:What a scientist who studies protein and healthy aging eats in a day:
The National Academy of Medicine says the amount of protein the average adult needs on a daily basis is 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight, or the equivalent of 0.36 grams per pound of body weight. That’s about 54 grams of protein for a 150-pound person — or roughly the amount of protein in a 4-ounce chicken breast and one cup of Greek yogurt. Some health influencers point out that this amount — known as the recommended dietary allowance, or RDA — is the bare minimum you need to avoid being malnourished and argue that you should be eating as much as one gram of protein per pound of body weight each day.
Phillips says the truth lies somewhere in the middle. He says that for optimal health, the average adult should aim to eat around 0.54 to 0.73 grams of protein per pound of body weight daily. Eating this amount — along with regular bouts of strength training — can help you build and maintain lean muscle as you age and stave off conditions such as sarcopenia.
Well, that's annoying how they jump between grams per kilogram and grams per pound! If you are going metric for one, why not for both?
Perplexity tells me it converts to 1.19g to 1.61g per kilogram.
My previous post on this topic settled on 1.2g per kilogram, so this still sounds right...
This guy presents his videos very well, but only has 21K subscribers. Looking at his channel, it seems he had occasional higher numbers on his videos, but the Almighty Algorithm must really hate him or something, because his usual views are in the mere hundreds. It's hard to see why he keeps doing it!
But anyway, I thought this video about human monogamy was interesting:
What with Rob Reiner being murdered, Trump making it about himself (and still having his defenders in the process), the attempt to blame all criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza and the West Bank as being unfair anti-Semitism and lack of control of protest - this is a really good December for unhappy doomscrolling.
Maybe 2026 will be better...
Now, I did say here in August that I didn't see the point in countries saying they recognised a Palestinian state when it was still (and remains today) hopelessly unclear how one was to be governed, and worried that it gave Hamas some sense of encouragement.
That said, what a stupid Right wing tosser freakout we are seeing in blaming Australia's recognition of the state (in September - I don't think I have ever commented on it) for the Bondi Beach terrorist attack.
On Twitter X, your guaranteed source for commentary by Right wing tossers from all over the world, the freakout was happening before anyone even knew definitely what was happening. The ABC was blamed for not mentioning fast enough that there was a Hanukkah festival happening; Channel 9 ruffled feathers by having a Muslim reporter on the scene.
Campbell Newman - now a libertarian party figure after ruining Brisbane's King George Square as Lord Mayor, and going on to be the least popular Premier we have ever seen - was reliably hyperventilating, as was clown head Rowan Dean whose outrage (that the Albanese government caused it) was enough to launch his permed head into orbit.
And now the Opposition Leader we are all waiting to be deposed - Susan Ley - is politicising it before the dead are buried:
‘Clear lack of leadership’ over antisemitism, Sussan Ley says
The opposition leader says there has been a “failure” to protect Jewish Australians.
She says there is “palpable anger” in the community and a sense of “bewilderment”.
Antisemitism in Australia has been left to fester … We have seen a clear failure to keep Jewish Australians safe. We have seen a clear lack of leadership in keeping Jewish Australians safe. We have a government that sees antisemitism as a problem to be managed, not evil that needs to be eradicated ...
We’ve seen synagogues fire-bombed, orchestrated by foreign terrorist states. Every single day for the last two years the lives of Jewish Australians have been made harder by this rising tide of antisemitism.
Ley says she’s spoken to antisemitism envoy Jillian Segal this morning, who has been urging the government to respond to her report.
Here's my prediction: unless there turns out to be some specific intelligence warning given to the government of plans for this attack, this will not have the political blowback the Liberals (and even nuttier Right) think it will. That's because all normal people will see it as a revenge attack, likely by individuals acting alone, for the extent of the attack on Gaza in reaction to the wildly stupid terrorist attack on Israel. And of course, it wasn't warranted, and statements of sympathy to Australian Jews are entirely appropriate.
But only the stupidest of the stupid would say that the Albanese government encouraged it.
One of the more amusing things on Twitter/X at the moment is the way all of the wildly gullible and very, very serious UFO believers are freaking out over the posters that have just made an appearance promoting next year's Spielberg movie (which is a return to science fiction and UFOs in particular).
Does it mean his movie will be part of the super secret government plan to soften the public for the disclosure of the reality of UFOs, or what they are about, or whatever? (Or is it just, you know, an entertainment? I know which take I believe.)
And in a way, I would say that it has rehabilitated Spielberg in the mind of the Right, which previously had been holding him in some disdain for being a Hollywood Lefty. But now, given that the recent wave of wild UFO claims has obviously come from the conspiracy world that is the natural mindset of gullible MAGA, it would seem some of them are hoping Spielberg is a good'un will help their cause, after all.
The poster itself (given that the plot of the movie seems a well kept secret) is a pretty great one for creating conversation:
Another six months to find out...
The New York Times runs some commentary on the AI bubble situation: Why the A.I. Boom Is Unlike the Dot-Com Boom.
I have heard this argument before, as some Youtube video argued that the money being put into AI expansion is largely cash the giant tech companies have brought over from the tax haven of Ireland, so who really cares if they blow it away, big time? They are still making wild amounts of money from what they have been doing pre-AI, anyway.
The article does claim this (my bold), without further explanation:
A.I. is very different, Mr. Horowitz contended. The internet is a network, and its value increases as more people are added, he said. Online retailers in 1996 could reach only a small fraction of the population. Amazon now reaches just about everyone.
A.I., on the other hand, is a computer, Mr. Horowitz said. “Computers can be valuable immediately. A.I. is certainly valuable immediately,” he added. “A.I. products are working so well that we are seeing revenue growth that dwarfs anything that came before it.”
Really?
The irony is that, even before scores of new AI centres are built, there is an obvious online backlash against AI slop and its unreliability in many fields. I myself could tell some stories about that from my work, but that would disclose a bit too much...
An article at the Washington Post says that while it seems the numbers of religious young adult continue to decline, those left are perhaps a bit more intensely interested?
Interestingly, it notes a rise in young Catholic enthusiasm in college, but I really wonder where they are coming from culturally. I mean, I thought that there was no doubt that older American Catholics had embarrassingly swung towards Trump (due to the culture war, and abortion, I guess); but it would seem the leadership has started to talk out against him, and we do have a quasi liberal-ish American Pope. For ages, conservative Catholics have claimed that those parts of the Church with a conservative, traditionalist bent were the only parts growing. (Even though numbers were actually tiny.) So, where do these alleged reinvigorated, spiritually seeking Catholics on the culture war/political spectrum?
The other part that is pretty odd sounding to me, a sports skeptic, so to speak:
Zach Golden grew up going to church but never really connected with Christianity. A Baltimore high-schooler during covid lockdowns, he started meditating out of boredom and an affinity for “Star Wars,” which draws heavily from Taoism.
Now a senior at American University, Golden meditates and practices Qigong. Earlier this year he launched a program that combines sports and spirituality, exploring topics like how trauma impacts athletics and the way people experience their bodies and movement.
“We see all these things and we’re so numb. Our generation — we’re the test dummies for the internet and social media,” he said. “That’s what’s leading to what I guess is a spiritual revolution.”
Sports and spirituality?
I'm late to the party, but as many people online have commented, the FIFA hastily invented peace prize (for easily bribed narcissists) has a weirdly creepy design:
Someone on X said "looks like it was based on a scene from the Walking Dead."
Apparently, SNL's take was: “FIFA actually invented a fake peace prize in Trump's honor, and that's why the trophy shows Trump's gnarled hands dragging Earth into hell,”
This is what leapt to my mind when I saw it, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone, somewhere, has already pointed it out:
