In the past 20 years, 90 percent of major disasters were caused by nearly 6,500 recorded floods, storms, heatwaves, droughts and other weather-related events, UN spokesman hasLibertarian Senator responds: "But what about bicycle helmets, not being able to get a drink after 3 am, and the amount of tax I'm paying?"
said.
A new UN-backed report, entitled The Human Cost of Weather Related Disasters, found that since 1995, over 600,000 people died as a result of weather-related disasters and 4.1 billion people were injured, left homeless or in need of emergency assistance, Xinhua quoted UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric as saying on Monay.
The five countries hit by the highest number of disasters were the US, China, India, Philippines and Indonesia, said Dujarric.
The report issued by the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) notes data gaps, saying that only 35 percent of records include information about economic losses.
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Not much publicity in Australia to this report
The Statesman: 90% disasters are weather-related: UN report
Message to Senator Leyonhjelm
This "look at me, look at me!" tactic of yours in the Senate is unseemly in a grown man. Also - it doesn't pay off when the response of the great majority of the public is "yeah, look at the *!@%#$*&".
Just about the most improbable climate change connection, ever
What Can Nietzsche Tell Us About the Paris Conference?
I guess it's really just click bait, but still.
I'm pretty sure one of the handiest things Nietzsche could advise regarding the conference is "don't catch an STD while in Paris - use a condom!"
Update: here's a contender for an more dubious, apparently serious, contribution from 2012.
I guess it's really just click bait, but still.
I'm pretty sure one of the handiest things Nietzsche could advise regarding the conference is "don't catch an STD while in Paris - use a condom!"
Update: here's a contender for an more dubious, apparently serious, contribution from 2012.
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
Unreliable advice from the country
Red-bellied black snake bites Mirani woman, cat comes to the rescue - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
A 66 year old woman in Queensland was bitten on her hand by a venomous snake for the5 4th(!) time, and offers this quaint but dubious advice:
A 66 year old woman in Queensland was bitten on her hand by a venomous snake for the
"I'm a bit of a pro at this snake business," she said.
"My mum always said it'll be a snake that kills me, so yeah, I'm not really planning on one [a fifth experience], but who knows.
"Just be careful, and wear your glasses when you go outside, that helps."
Ms Thynne said her experience had taught her that if you were bitten by a snake you should "definitely not panic".
"If it's a real deadly looking one, sit under a tree with a cigarette, with a cup of tea and pray, but yeah wrap it up and hope."
Crazy times
I find it actually quite disturbing, what is going on in the US at the moment regarding truth and politics.
As the US media notes, both Trump and Carson can fantasise about Muslims celebrating terrorism in New Jersey, and there is no doubt tens of thousands of their followers will believe it happened.
A Republican Congressman can allege, with no evidence at all beyond what goes on at climate change denying blogs by foolish armchair commentators, that there is a grand conspiracy in NOAA to fraudulently change temperature records. And we know scores of Republican voters will believe it.
Has regard for truth and good will in politics in the US ever been at a lower ebb?
As the US media notes, both Trump and Carson can fantasise about Muslims celebrating terrorism in New Jersey, and there is no doubt tens of thousands of their followers will believe it happened.
A Republican Congressman can allege, with no evidence at all beyond what goes on at climate change denying blogs by foolish armchair commentators, that there is a grand conspiracy in NOAA to fraudulently change temperature records. And we know scores of Republican voters will believe it.
Has regard for truth and good will in politics in the US ever been at a lower ebb?
Monday, November 23, 2015
Every explanation except "self indulgent decadence is not good"
I note from The Guardian that there has been some controversy in England around something they call over there a "chemsex" subculture amongst gay men. This article talks about a documentary on the topic, but the NHS has complained that it is a public health issue given the amount of HIV and other problems it is causing.
Reading the comments that follow the article, there is some well deserved skepticism expressed of the view that gay men get into this because when they were younger and not "out", they didn't really learn about intimacy in the way most people do. But I have yet to see a comment that uses the word "decadence" in the way someone would have if discussing this years ago.
Whatever happened to politicians and doctors making the rather obvious argument that, if you need or desire a chemical enhancement to make sex more enjoyable than it routinely is while sober and in full control of your facilities, you're putting self indulgent pursuit of physical pleasure on a corrupting and harmful pedestal. It's a wonder that this has to be said at all, but obviously it does.
Maybe time to bring back teaching Aristotle to the schools?
Reading the comments that follow the article, there is some well deserved skepticism expressed of the view that gay men get into this because when they were younger and not "out", they didn't really learn about intimacy in the way most people do. But I have yet to see a comment that uses the word "decadence" in the way someone would have if discussing this years ago.
Whatever happened to politicians and doctors making the rather obvious argument that, if you need or desire a chemical enhancement to make sex more enjoyable than it routinely is while sober and in full control of your facilities, you're putting self indulgent pursuit of physical pleasure on a corrupting and harmful pedestal. It's a wonder that this has to be said at all, but obviously it does.
Maybe time to bring back teaching Aristotle to the schools?
Not entirely useful
I'm not sure what makes Henry Ergas write columns on Islamic integration in Europe and Australia. He does put up some interesting figures in today's attempt, but is it really a useful thing to address the matter of immigrants feeling they're discriminated against by telling them in a national paper that they're a bunch of whiners who don't know how good they have it?
Even less useful is the fact that Ergas apparently has no regrets about posting at Catallaxy, a blog which has become a "free speech" attractant to extreme anti-Muslim sentiment that even Sinclair Davidson has taken to calling "ugly"*. Perhaps Ergas should read the comments threads, where something like this appeared on the weekend:
and then think about the role his mates might just have in encouraging Muslim belief in discrimination.
* He won't delete the comments, though. Or tell his mate Steve Kates that he's a hysterical ratbag when he starts posting about how we are in World War 3 already. He seems to think it best for festering dung in his own back yard to be left on the ground attracting more flies, rather than disposing of it wisely.
Even less useful is the fact that Ergas apparently has no regrets about posting at Catallaxy, a blog which has become a "free speech" attractant to extreme anti-Muslim sentiment that even Sinclair Davidson has taken to calling "ugly"*. Perhaps Ergas should read the comments threads, where something like this appeared on the weekend:
and then think about the role his mates might just have in encouraging Muslim belief in discrimination.
* He won't delete the comments, though. Or tell his mate Steve Kates that he's a hysterical ratbag when he starts posting about how we are in World War 3 already. He seems to think it best for festering dung in his own back yard to be left on the ground attracting more flies, rather than disposing of it wisely.
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Talking Spectre
Caught up with Spectre today.
OK. let's get the reservations out of the way. Having re-watched most of Skyfall a couple of weeks ago, I can agree that Spectre is not as good a film. The script of the former was particularly sharp and concise; the movie looked consistently gorgeous; and it sat well with the sort of story arc that the Daniel Craig Bond had been on. In this one, by comparison, the script has its moments, but the villain is far too talky and not as convincing; and the story tries a bit too hard to put some cohesive whole on even pre-Craig elements of Bond. The look of the film is distinctive - the cinematography seems to have dusty sepia everywhere - and while some of it must be a deliberate link with the theme of Bond living in the shadows, I did miss the clear and often glowing look of Skyfall. Oh - and that bland and forgettable theme song. It's funny, but critical reception of a Bond film really does seem to have an awful lot hanging on how memorable that is...
But nonetheless: this is still an impressive and entertaining film that stands up well as part of the incredible re-invigoration of an out-dated character under Craig. (I see he is even a producer of the films now - good luck to him.)
I mean, seriously, who would have thought before he took the role that people would view Bond and take seriously its human drama elements? Sure, I was upset as a 9 year old when Mrs Bond was gunned down immediately after her marriage to that Australian imposter (quite a downer of an ending); but apart from that, there was never any sense of real humanity or loss in any of the Bonds. I also like the way each of these films have fed straight into the next. As with Pirates of the Caribbean, I can imagine watching them all in quick succession on DVD would be rewarding, because the recurring elements will be fresh in the mind and the unfolding, somewhat complicated story make clearer sense.
The things I liked about Spectre in particular: Sam Mendes's return as a director - I guess the lesson is that if you want to take Bond seriously as a character, you use a serious drama director. But the action is also handled so spectacularly well. The opening sequence in Mexico City is just superb, in particular; but all of the locations scrub up well in this movie.
SORT OF SPOILER WARNING: And despite my reservations about the script, I did like the moral seriousness of the ending, and the note of optimism that Bond is ready to "settle down" and find something more fulfilling in life. This really is a big turnaround for the character's arc as played by Craig, and in that sense, it really would be a fitting way for him to depart the series.
But if he does, it will be virtually impossible to believe the series will ever repeat the success of this present era.
And PS: remember, I don't even dismiss Quantum of Solace. Perhaps that tells you a lot about how much I have liked the Craig reign.
OK. let's get the reservations out of the way. Having re-watched most of Skyfall a couple of weeks ago, I can agree that Spectre is not as good a film. The script of the former was particularly sharp and concise; the movie looked consistently gorgeous; and it sat well with the sort of story arc that the Daniel Craig Bond had been on. In this one, by comparison, the script has its moments, but the villain is far too talky and not as convincing; and the story tries a bit too hard to put some cohesive whole on even pre-Craig elements of Bond. The look of the film is distinctive - the cinematography seems to have dusty sepia everywhere - and while some of it must be a deliberate link with the theme of Bond living in the shadows, I did miss the clear and often glowing look of Skyfall. Oh - and that bland and forgettable theme song. It's funny, but critical reception of a Bond film really does seem to have an awful lot hanging on how memorable that is...
But nonetheless: this is still an impressive and entertaining film that stands up well as part of the incredible re-invigoration of an out-dated character under Craig. (I see he is even a producer of the films now - good luck to him.)
I mean, seriously, who would have thought before he took the role that people would view Bond and take seriously its human drama elements? Sure, I was upset as a 9 year old when Mrs Bond was gunned down immediately after her marriage to that Australian imposter (quite a downer of an ending); but apart from that, there was never any sense of real humanity or loss in any of the Bonds. I also like the way each of these films have fed straight into the next. As with Pirates of the Caribbean, I can imagine watching them all in quick succession on DVD would be rewarding, because the recurring elements will be fresh in the mind and the unfolding, somewhat complicated story make clearer sense.
The things I liked about Spectre in particular: Sam Mendes's return as a director - I guess the lesson is that if you want to take Bond seriously as a character, you use a serious drama director. But the action is also handled so spectacularly well. The opening sequence in Mexico City is just superb, in particular; but all of the locations scrub up well in this movie.
SORT OF SPOILER WARNING: And despite my reservations about the script, I did like the moral seriousness of the ending, and the note of optimism that Bond is ready to "settle down" and find something more fulfilling in life. This really is a big turnaround for the character's arc as played by Craig, and in that sense, it really would be a fitting way for him to depart the series.
But if he does, it will be virtually impossible to believe the series will ever repeat the success of this present era.
And PS: remember, I don't even dismiss Quantum of Solace. Perhaps that tells you a lot about how much I have liked the Craig reign.
Saturday, November 21, 2015
Saturday morning physics
Quantum nonlocality has been getting a good run on the web lately (and here) due to some recent papers confirming its reality.
Nature has had a feature up discussing in some detail the promising idea (to many physicists, apparently) that quantum entanglement is actually at the heart of space-time:
Anyhow, the article explains more.
I've also noticed an interesting paper on arXiv by someone from the University of Bristol, of all places. I think it's fair to summarise his proposal as being that quantum non locality derives from a geometry you can get by fiddling with the "time" part of space-time. Here's his introduction:
And as for gravity and the detection of gravity waves: it's good to see via a post at Sabine H's Backreaction blog that the Parkes Radio Telescope (which I forced my family to visit last Christmas) has been doing valuable work on trying to detect gravity waves via careful pulsar watching.
The sort of sad result, though, is that they haven't found them; which, as Bee says, is "the birth of a new mystery in physics". Not sure is that is "cool" or not....
Nature has had a feature up discussing in some detail the promising idea (to many physicists, apparently) that quantum entanglement is actually at the heart of space-time:
All that’s needed, he asserted, is ‘entanglement’: the phenomenon that many physicists believe to be the ultimate in quantum weirdness. Entanglement lets the measurement of one particle instantaneously determine the state of a partner particle, no matter how far away it may be — even on the other side of the Milky Way.The story includes some graphics which help, a little bit, but here is perhaps the key one:
Einstein loathed the idea of entanglement, and famously derided it as “spooky action at a distance”. But it is central to quantum theory. And Van Raamsdonk, drawing on work by like-minded physicists going back more than a decade, argued for the ultimate irony — that, despite Einstein’s objections, entanglement might be the basis of geometry, and thus of Einstein’s geometric theory of gravity. “Space-time,” he says, “is just a geometrical picture of how stuff in the quantum system is entangled.”
Anyhow, the article explains more.
I've also noticed an interesting paper on arXiv by someone from the University of Bristol, of all places. I think it's fair to summarise his proposal as being that quantum non locality derives from a geometry you can get by fiddling with the "time" part of space-time. Here's his introduction:
An elementary discrepancy between quantum theory and relativity is that quantum theory is inherently nonlocal, whereas spacetime has the structure of a manifold, and is thus local by construction. The discrepancy is resolved on the level of information, since the intrinsic randomness in the measurement of a quantum state prevents instantaneous signaling (by the no-communication theorem [10, II.E]). This resolution is satisfactory if information is considered to be fundamental [10, III.C]. However, if one considers geometry to be fundamental, then the discrepancy remains.Of course I don't understand all of that, but its sounds rather interesting.
Here we pursue a possible resolution from the perspective that geometry is fundamental, with the aim that it may shed light on the nature of quantum gravity.1 Just as simultaneity has no universal meaning in special relativity, we propose that a ‘moment of time’ has no universal meaning, and different observers will in general disagree about the ‘duration’ of a single moment of time. In particular, even clocks in the same inertial frame may disagree. The paper is organized as follows. We first propose a new operational definition of time using the identity of indiscernibles: we postulate that time passes if and only if a system undergoes a transformation which is not local and invertible. We then show that this postulate is compatible with the thermodynamic arrow of time in a generic example. Furthermore, the postulate results in a spacetime with positive dimensional events, thus giving rise to Bell nonlocality without requiring retrocausality.
Finally, we examine the ontology of the wavefunction in this framework. In particular, we show that if spacetime events are topologically closed, then the wavefunction is epistemic. Moreover, we find that the preparation assumption of the PBR theorem does not hold using the worldlines of 4-photon entanglement swapping.
And as for gravity and the detection of gravity waves: it's good to see via a post at Sabine H's Backreaction blog that the Parkes Radio Telescope (which I forced my family to visit last Christmas) has been doing valuable work on trying to detect gravity waves via careful pulsar watching.
The sort of sad result, though, is that they haven't found them; which, as Bee says, is "the birth of a new mystery in physics". Not sure is that is "cool" or not....
Friday, November 20, 2015
A huge year in gaming
My son is more a wannabe gamer than an actual one - we don't own a gaming console, and are refusing to upgrade the desktop so that he can spend even longer in front of it playing the latest hyped games than he does playing games that are 3 or 4 years old, but still good.
But I have to admit - the games companies have done an outstanding job at generating interest this year in two enormous releases - Fallout 4, and Star Wars Battlefront.
The Fallout 4 campaign strikes me as a extremely clever, if not devious, in using whimsical cartoon characters virtually unrelated to the actual gameplay, presumably to calm any concerns of adults that their 10 or 12 year old is going to be sucked into a world of some pretty bloody killing which is inappropriate for their age.
But the Star Wars games have always avoided the exploding blood bag killing style of other games, for which they are to be commended. And this ad, which I noticed on twitter, is really the most appealing one I have ever seen:
Notice the age group that it is clearly aimed at - more the 20 or 30 year old than the teenager.
And it references the key line in the original Star Wars that always seemed to be one that Christians would most respond to - the reference to letting yourself be struck down as a means to ultimate victory is clearly close to what could be said happened with the sacrifice of Christ. (Sure, Lucas has famously said that he's from California, where they are all Buddhists, and maybe he didn't even realise the Christ-like implications of the line, but it's there.)
You could even argue that the apparent disappearance of Obi Wan (instead of his body falling to the ground) is a bit like the ascension of Christ, or the (somewhat peculiar) Catholic belief that Mary was bodily taken into heaven.
Anyhow, I think it's a great ad, and there are probably tens of thousands of middle aged men around the world contemplating upgrading their PC just for this game.
But I have to admit - the games companies have done an outstanding job at generating interest this year in two enormous releases - Fallout 4, and Star Wars Battlefront.
The Fallout 4 campaign strikes me as a extremely clever, if not devious, in using whimsical cartoon characters virtually unrelated to the actual gameplay, presumably to calm any concerns of adults that their 10 or 12 year old is going to be sucked into a world of some pretty bloody killing which is inappropriate for their age.
But the Star Wars games have always avoided the exploding blood bag killing style of other games, for which they are to be commended. And this ad, which I noticed on twitter, is really the most appealing one I have ever seen:
Notice the age group that it is clearly aimed at - more the 20 or 30 year old than the teenager.
And it references the key line in the original Star Wars that always seemed to be one that Christians would most respond to - the reference to letting yourself be struck down as a means to ultimate victory is clearly close to what could be said happened with the sacrifice of Christ. (Sure, Lucas has famously said that he's from California, where they are all Buddhists, and maybe he didn't even realise the Christ-like implications of the line, but it's there.)
You could even argue that the apparent disappearance of Obi Wan (instead of his body falling to the ground) is a bit like the ascension of Christ, or the (somewhat peculiar) Catholic belief that Mary was bodily taken into heaven.
Anyhow, I think it's a great ad, and there are probably tens of thousands of middle aged men around the world contemplating upgrading their PC just for this game.
More ISIS stories
I didn't realise that the Middle East had a problem with use of a particular amphetamine drug, and that it is likely helping fuel many of the IS. And I guess that this is what happens when you ban alcohol:
Captagon has been around in the West since the 1960s, when it was given to people suffering from hyperactivity, narcolepsy and depression, according to the Reuters report. By the 1980s, the drug's addictive power led most countries to ban its use.
The United State classified fenethylline ("commonly known by the trademark name Captagon") as a Schedule I drug under the federal Controlled Substances Act in 1981, according to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Still, the drug didn't exactly disappear.
VOA notes that while Westerners have speculated that the drug is being used by Islamic State fighters, the biggest consumer has for years been Saudi Arabia. In 2010, a third of the world's supply — about 6.3 tonnes — ended up in Saudi Arabia, according to Reuters. VOA estimated that as many as 40,000 to 50,000 Saudis go through drug treatment each year.
"My theory is that Captagon still retains the veneer of medical respectability," Justin Thomas, an assistant professor of psychology and psychotherapy at the UAE's Zayed University and author of Psychological Well-Being in the Gulf States, told VOA in 2010. "It may not be viewed as a drug or narcotic because it is not associated with smoking or injecting."
I would say, though, that if IS troops only get through the day by popping amphetamines, this is not the way to keep a successful army going. I'll claim it as further evidence that IS is weak as a long term prospect.
In other news, there's an interesting article at Bloomberg - Why ISIS Has All the Money it Needs - about the lack of success in shutting down the IS oil trade. Not sure that I would necessarily believe everything coming out of the Rand Corporation, but still it's worth reading.
Thursday, November 19, 2015
Let's be precise about what "weak" means - and does the Right never learn?
I think there is a bit of a silly debate going on around the matter of whether IS, or whatever you call it, is "weak" or not.
This guy seems to know a lot about the extremely complicated ethnic and religious groupings around Syria, and he says they aren't "weak". And other Right wing commentators - man, have you seen Andrew Bolt, Steve Kates and the commenters at Catallaxy bouncing off the walls since last Friday? - are calling it a Lefty (hello Waleed Aly) claim to argue they are weak.
But surely this is just a definition thing: I reckon that most people using "weak" just mean that IS doesn't have long term prospects as a viable State, as they claim is their aim. Sure, they are dangerous, both locally and in the encouragement of international terrorism: but it's at heart an apocalypse inspired movement - and how long do they ever last when their Prophet or Messiah does not appear in the sky as predicted?
I don't even think that acknowledging that ground troops will be needed to remove them totally from captured cities means that they are "strong". Give any group enough guns and explosives and they are capable of creating major violence and digging in for a long time. But they are ideologically weak if they think their indiscriminate violence against civilians won't hasten their downfall.
And as for the matter of the need for ground troops - I find it hard to credit that those on the Right could think that it should be Western ground troops in large numbers who need to do the job. The matter of identifying the "good guys" from the "bad guys" will be incredibly difficult for Western forces, even more so than it was in the original invasion of Iraq; and have they forgotten the insider attacks on Western military bases trying to train up Afghani soldiers?
Besides that, the whole conflict is tied up with a centuries old fight between the two main branches of Islam - it's not up to the West to try to sort that one out militarily. (Although involvement in political negotiations is another matter.)
Are they also not paying attention to the detailed reporting that most IS dimwits believe they are about to have the End Times war with the forces of the Infidel who are going to come to the Middle East for the fight? This has been explained in parts of the press for many months now, but here is the condensed version, repeated again in the Washington Post a couple of days ago:
As I have made clear before, I don't have a problem with air operations, especially if targetted to isolating IS economically, or even directly on the battlefield when the targets are clearly IS. And I still don't even feel overly critical of the West's initial decision to invade Iraq, even though it now looks like a (very) bad idea in hindsight. (No one can know with full confidence what may have happened if Saddam stayed on - I doubt he was above letting guest terrorists hide out and plan further attacks on the West from the deserts of Iraq.)
But seriously, I can't believe that neo-cons or nutty conservatives think that another large scale Western ground invasion in that part of the world is a good idea.
As with climate change, they just seem incredibly resistant to evidence, or lessons, or common sense.
This guy seems to know a lot about the extremely complicated ethnic and religious groupings around Syria, and he says they aren't "weak". And other Right wing commentators - man, have you seen Andrew Bolt, Steve Kates and the commenters at Catallaxy bouncing off the walls since last Friday? - are calling it a Lefty (hello Waleed Aly) claim to argue they are weak.
But surely this is just a definition thing: I reckon that most people using "weak" just mean that IS doesn't have long term prospects as a viable State, as they claim is their aim. Sure, they are dangerous, both locally and in the encouragement of international terrorism: but it's at heart an apocalypse inspired movement - and how long do they ever last when their Prophet or Messiah does not appear in the sky as predicted?
I don't even think that acknowledging that ground troops will be needed to remove them totally from captured cities means that they are "strong". Give any group enough guns and explosives and they are capable of creating major violence and digging in for a long time. But they are ideologically weak if they think their indiscriminate violence against civilians won't hasten their downfall.
And as for the matter of the need for ground troops - I find it hard to credit that those on the Right could think that it should be Western ground troops in large numbers who need to do the job. The matter of identifying the "good guys" from the "bad guys" will be incredibly difficult for Western forces, even more so than it was in the original invasion of Iraq; and have they forgotten the insider attacks on Western military bases trying to train up Afghani soldiers?
Besides that, the whole conflict is tied up with a centuries old fight between the two main branches of Islam - it's not up to the West to try to sort that one out militarily. (Although involvement in political negotiations is another matter.)
Are they also not paying attention to the detailed reporting that most IS dimwits believe they are about to have the End Times war with the forces of the Infidel who are going to come to the Middle East for the fight? This has been explained in parts of the press for many months now, but here is the condensed version, repeated again in the Washington Post a couple of days ago:
According to the group’s extremist ideology, the caliphate will eventually triumph in a great war against infidel forces, culminating in a final end-of-days battle in Dabiq, an obscure Syrian town near the northern city of Aleppo.How much sense does it make to encourage them that this confrontation is indeed about to happen? ("None at all" is the correct answer.)
The group’s online propaganda magazine is titled “Dabiq.” Each edition features the same prophetic quote about how the conflict will unfold: “The spark has been lit here in Iraq, and its heat will continue to intensify — by Allah’s permission — until it burns the crusader armies in Dabiq.”
As I have made clear before, I don't have a problem with air operations, especially if targetted to isolating IS economically, or even directly on the battlefield when the targets are clearly IS. And I still don't even feel overly critical of the West's initial decision to invade Iraq, even though it now looks like a (very) bad idea in hindsight. (No one can know with full confidence what may have happened if Saddam stayed on - I doubt he was above letting guest terrorists hide out and plan further attacks on the West from the deserts of Iraq.)
But seriously, I can't believe that neo-cons or nutty conservatives think that another large scale Western ground invasion in that part of the world is a good idea.
As with climate change, they just seem incredibly resistant to evidence, or lessons, or common sense.
Slightly depressing news
You Won't Live to See the Final Star Wars Movie | WIRED
According to this story, Disney plans on having a new Star Wars universe movie out every year (for as long as people are buying tickets.)
There's worse news in the world, but as with their relentless use of Marvel stories, this is all a bit too much, surely.
According to this story, Disney plans on having a new Star Wars universe movie out every year (for as long as people are buying tickets.)
There's worse news in the world, but as with their relentless use of Marvel stories, this is all a bit too much, surely.
Einstein's helpers
History: Einstein was no lone genius : Nature News & Comment
The description here of the maths and ideas that Einstein was working on is pretty dense, and it's interesting to think that even a 100 years later, very few people in any society ever get close to a mathematical understanding of relativity. We mostly just understand it via popularised picture or story form.
The description here of the maths and ideas that Einstein was working on is pretty dense, and it's interesting to think that even a 100 years later, very few people in any society ever get close to a mathematical understanding of relativity. We mostly just understand it via popularised picture or story form.
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
The screening issue
Early Prostate Cancer Cases Fall Along With Screening - The New York Times
I kind of suspect that the doctor in the article who says the anti-screening policy was a bit of an over-correction might be right. But that's just a hunch.
I kind of suspect that the doctor in the article who says the anti-screening policy was a bit of an over-correction might be right. But that's just a hunch.
What a surprise...
Latinos disagree with Republicans on Trump — and a lot of other things - The Washington Post
Polling shows 80% of Hispanics have an "unfavourable" view of Trump. Way to win back their vote, Republicans.
Polling shows 80% of Hispanics have an "unfavourable" view of Trump. Way to win back their vote, Republicans.
Capital flows problem
Interesting post from the Lowy Institute blog about some push back against academic economics on capital flows:
The traditional conventional view among policy and academic economists was that capital flows were unambiguously a Good Thing, a beneficial element of globalisation. The policy prescription which followed was that emerging economies should open the capital markets to foreign flows. The promise was that, provided they let their exchange rates float, things would work out well.
The experience of the past two decades has been less benign. The sloshing backwards and forwards of foreign capital has typically been driven by the abnormal circumstances in advanced economies, rather than by macro-policy mistakes in the emerging economies. A policy framework that presumes these flows to be beneficial is irrelevant to the policy challenge the emerging economies face.
Over the past decade, the policy debate has been inching forward to incorporate the inconvenient reality that the flows may be disruptive. Olivier Blanchard, recently retired as the IMF chief economist, has co-authored two papers from his new base in the Peterson Institute. As he did at the IMF, Blanchard continues to strive to bring the consensus policy framework closer to the real world.
One paper argues that capital inflows can push up asset prices in the recipient country, over-stimulating domestic demand in the process. This might seem like an obvious-enough insight, but is the opposite of the conventional academic model on which much policy prescription had been based.
The second paper argues that foreign exchange intervention can be effective in stabilising the exchange rate in the face of excessive capital flows. Again, this contradicts most academic models, which see intervention as futile or distortionary.I think I posted once about Krugman musing about the value of a more "hands on" approach to capital flows, too.
Permanent 400ppm probably reached
The final days of sub-400 ppm carbon dioxide - Mountain Beltway - AGU Blogosphere
From the link:
From the link:
...this week is probably the last time you or me or anyone now alive on planet Earth will ever see concentrations of CO2 lower than 400 ppm. Ralph Keeling published a short piece about it, here. Unless something fundamentally changes in our relationship with the atmosphere (such as developing and deploying effective artificial carbon sequestration), the gas’s long-term accumulation will keep rising, and the planet will keep hanging on to a little more heat than it used to the year before. Though “400” is simply a round number with no inherent particular significance in and of itself, passing it for good seems a valid enough reason to pause for a moment and reflect on this massive thing we’re doing to our planet. Every additional increment of CO2 is likely to be a moderately long lived addition to our atmosphere. Its heat-trapping capacity is a major force driving our climate system into new, uncharted terrain for a long time to come. We depend on our climate. People we will never meet on the other side of the world do, too. Our children will depend on it. Grasshoppers and bluebirds and rattlesnakes and whales depend on it. Fungi depend on it. Grasses depend on it. Coccolithophores depend on it. And though this should be obvious, I’ll go ahead and say it explicitly: to a greater or lesser extent, we depend on them. Everything’s interdependent. We all live downstream – and we’re polluting that stream.
More ISIS commentary I agree with
From Ezra Klein at Vox:
ISIS isn't strong. It's weak. That doesn't mean it's not dangerous, or that it can't hurt us. But we shouldn't pretend these are invincible superterrorists. They're murderers fighting a war that they will lose and we will win. Part of how they recruit young fighters is by pretending that's not true — pretending they have a chance in this fight, that they are strong, that they have the West on its heels. We shouldn't indulge their fantasies. We can mourn their victims without believing their propaganda.
The thing you need to remember about ISIS, says Gartenstein-Ross, is it is not just weak in the West, it's also loathed across the Middle East: "America is unpopular in the Middle East, but if we had ISIS's approval rating, we would see that as a very, very serious strategic problem. They have a terrible brand. So part of what we need to do is simply avoid making mistakes that will let them present themselves as a defender of Muslims. We need to make sure Muslims continue to overwhelmingly reject ISIS."
Rich kid problems
The Atlantic has a lengthy, somewhat interesting, story about student suicide in the rich, high tech town of Palo Alto.
I found this interesting:
And this, especially:
I found this interesting:
In training, they’d learned that one key to heading off copycats was not romanticizing the death, so they struggled to hit just the right tone. They had to avoid turning Cameron into a hero or a martyr without insulting his memory or his devastated family. They had to make a space for the kids to grieve without letting wreath-and-teddy-bear memorials take over the campus. In 2009, to commemorate Jean-Paul “J.P.” Blanchard, the first kid in that cluster to die on the tracks, students had spread rose petals all over the school. Tarn Wilson recalls them as beautiful and haunting but also morbid, and exactly the kind of prop that a depressed teenager might imagine as a backdrop to his own future tragedy.
And this, especially:
In the late 1990s, when she was an assistant professor in Yale’s psychiatry department, Suniya Luthar was doing research at an inner-city school in Connecticut. She wanted to know whether misbehavior correlated more with poverty or with a stage of adolescence. She needed a second school to use as a comparison. An undergraduate student she worked with had connections at a school in a Connecticut suburb that was more upscale, and Luthar got permission to distribute her surveys there. The results were not what she expected. In the inner-city school, 86 percent of students received free or reduced-price lunches; in the suburban school, 1 percent did. Yet in the richer school, the proportion of kids who smoked, drank, or used hard drugs was significantly higher—as was the rate of serious anxiety and depression. This anomaly started Luthar down a career-long track studying the vulnerabilities of students within what she calls “a culture of affluence.” ....I think the lesson is that it's good to be middle class.
Convincing people that rich kids are at high risk isn’t easy, she said. But she has amassed the most thorough data set we have on that group, from schools scattered across the country. Luthar’s data come from school districts where families have median incomes of more than $200,000, and private schools where tuition is close to $30,000 a year. Her research suggests a U‑shaped curve in pathologies among children, by class. At each extreme—poor and rich—kids are showing unusually high rates of dysfunction. On the surface, the rich kids seem to be thriving. They have cars, nice clothes, good grades, easy access to health care, and, on paper, excellent prospects. But many of them are not navigating adolescence successfully.
The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.
Wah wah wah!
So, David Leyonhjelm finds the NRA awesome. The NRA youtube which he was happy to participate in features many gun owners still torn up emotionally because they had to give up some guns (with compensation) nearly 20 years ago! As well as complete total paranoid bullshizer about what a scary, scary place Australia is because they can't have a gun for self defence.
What a disgraceful bit of propaganda from a Senator who should pack up and live in Texas.
Update: I should have guessed. The Australian's report on the NRA "documentary" that features Leyonhjelm's interview days it is just a repackaged one from many, many years ago. So the people whining about their beloved gun losses might by now have gotten over it. Or not, as Leyonhjelm never has. The Australian says the video is deceptive in many ways, and even the Bald One is backing away from it to some extent.
What a disgraceful bit of propaganda from a Senator who should pack up and live in Texas.
Update: I should have guessed. The Australian's report on the NRA "documentary" that features Leyonhjelm's interview days it is just a repackaged one from many, many years ago. So the people whining about their beloved gun losses might by now have gotten over it. Or not, as Leyonhjelm never has. The Australian says the video is deceptive in many ways, and even the Bald One is backing away from it to some extent.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
A near perfect Krugman column
Fearing Fear Itself - The New York Times
A great bit of commentary here on the Paris terrorist attack by Paul Krugman.
A great bit of commentary here on the Paris terrorist attack by Paul Krugman.
Dimwits, indeed
On Sunday evening I called ISIS "violent dimwits", so I was pleased to have find some backing for the "dimwit" bit from someone who apparently was their captive:
As for their apocalyptic views:
And, indeed, it would seem Tom Switzer feels the same way.
But that's where I would disagree. I have long suspected that Islamic State simply can't have a future as a successful economic state. As Switzer writes:
They present themselves to the public as superheroes, but away from the camera are a bit pathetic in many ways: street kids drunk on ideology and power. In France we have a saying – stupid and evil. I found them more stupid than evil. That is not to understate the murderous potential of stupidity.
All of those beheaded last year were my cellmates, and my jailers would play childish games with us – mental torture – saying one day that we would be released and then two weeks later observing blithely, “Tomorrow we will kill one of you.” The first couple of times we believed them but after that we came to realise that for the most part they were bullshitters having fun with us.
They would play mock executions. Once they used chloroform with me. Another time it was a beheading scene. A bunch of French-speaking jihadis were shouting, “We’re going to cut your head off and put it on to your arse and upload it to YouTube.” They had a sword from an antique shop.
They were laughing and I played the game by screaming, but they just wanted fun. As soon as they left I turned to another of the French hostages and just laughed. It was so ridiculous.
As for their apocalyptic views:
They are totally indoctrinated, clinging to all manner of conspiracy theories, never acknowledging the contradictions.The writer, a Frenchman, then goes on to argue that France ought to back away from increased bombing, saying that it will only make matters worse.
Everything convinces them that they are on the right path and, specifically, that there is a kind of apocalyptic process under way that will lead to a confrontation between an army of Muslims from all over the world and others, the crusaders, the Romans. They see everything as moving us down that road. Consequently, everything is a blessing from Allah.
With their news and social media interest, they will be noting everything that follows their murderous assault on Paris, and my guess is that right now the chant among them will be “We are winning”. They will be heartened by every sign of overreaction, of division, of fear, of racism, of xenophobia; they will be drawn to any examples of ugliness on social media.
And, indeed, it would seem Tom Switzer feels the same way.
But that's where I would disagree. I have long suspected that Islamic State simply can't have a future as a successful economic state. As Switzer writes:
It controls mainly desert in north-west Iraq and south-east Syria. Its gross domestic product is roughly the equivalent of Barbados or Eritrea. It has no navy, air force or ballistic missiles. Its army amounts to about 40,000 soldiers. It is not, contrary to what Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop said, more menacing than Soviet communism during the Cold War. Underestimating terrorism is a mistake, but so too is endowing jihadists with far more capability than they have.
If bombing campaigns can be directed especially towards harming their ability to sell oil or trade in any way, I can only see that helping.
And sorry, libertarians, but Switzer is also right when he concludes that a response to terrorism does involve "anti-terror laws that allow electronic surveillance to track terrorists at home and abroad."
In other articles that are a decent counter to the dimwit Right view (hello, Tony Abbott, most Republicans and Rupert Murdoch) that it's the Greatest Crisis to Western Civilization Ever, I thought this one by Peter Beinart in The Atlantic was good. Sure, we can expect terrorism to be attempted (or succeed) in the US and Australia because of our (limited) involvement in the Iraqi/Syrian problem. While I certainly do not want an escalation of that, I can't find it in me to wish that all Western military involvement towards ending the territorial success of IS stop now.
And finally, The Guardian linked to John Oliver's profane, funny, but accurate explanation of why IS is doomed to fail. It may be hard for the French to laugh yet, but mocking IS certainly seems an approach that they won't like.
(Oh, and good luck to the hackers who say they will up their cyberattacks on IS propaganda. Why has it taken this long? My only complaint, though is that IS dimwits act like they are in a movie, and I don't care for Anonymous hackers doing the same.)
Monday, November 16, 2015
Maybe not mindless, but still doomed to fail
Mindless terrorists? The truth about Isis is much worse | Scott Atran | Comment is free | The Guardian
There's parts of this column which are interesting, such as this:
There's parts of this column which are interesting, such as this:
There is a recruitment framework. The Grey Zone, a 10-page editorial in Isis’s online magazine Dabiq in early 2015, describes the twilight area occupied by most Muslims between good and evil, the caliphate and the infidel, which the “blessed operations of September 11” brought into relief. Quoting Bin Laden it said: “The world today is divided. Bush spoke the truth when he said, ‘Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists’, with the actual ‘terrorist’ being the western crusaders.” Now, it said, “the time had come for another event to … bring division to the world and destroy the grey zone”. The attacks in Paris were the latest instalment of thisAnd this sounds about right, when it comes to explaining the appeal of ISIS to disenchanted young men:
strategy, targeting Europe, as did the recent attacks in Turkey. There will be more, much more, to come.
As I testified to the US Senate armed service committee and before the United Nations security council: what inspires the most uncompromisingly lethal actors in the world today is not so much the Qur’an or religious teachings. It’s a thrilling cause that promises glory and esteem. Jihad is an egalitarian, equal-opportunity employer: fraternal, fast-breaking, glorious, cool – and persuasive.But overall, I think he's too pessimistic about how long it can last as a successful, on the ground, movement.
Inappropriate responses
Let's start with the soft Left: of course some of them make soft headed, inappropriate, or nasty tweets after Islamic terrorism attacks.
But there's something deeply ironic about the likes of Sinclair Davidson and the increasingly dotty Rafe Champion (who has a recent post at Catallaxy with the catchy title: "Naming the enemy: The progressive left as a religion of hatred and division") getting outraged over a Lefty no body wishing Tim Wilson had been a victim in Paris, when their blog threads pretty routinely have comments after any terrorism attack recommending that Mecca be "nuked" as a means of solving all Islamic sourced problems. Wishing the death of hundreds of thousands of anonymous residents of a city is not worthy of condemnation, apparently. Being nasty towards a mate: well, that's different.
Back to the Left again - talking about the situation in Libya and climate change is seen as some silly, opportunistic connection-making by many on the Right. But as this Vox article makes clear in a very nuanced argument - it may be opportunist, and is capable of overstatement, but it's not wrong to see a likely climate change influenced drought and the subsequent massive displacement of its rural population as one factor that led to the Syrian civil war. Nor is it silly to be concerned about climate change making the (already barely livable, it seems to me) Middle East an even worse tinderbox for trouble. As Roberts notes in the article, the Pentagon has been workshopping that for years, already.
And so back to the Right - this time, of the libertarian bent. I wondered whether wingnuts from America would be quickly having fantasies about how, only if there were people like carrying pistols everywhere in Paris, one of their fellow gun lovers could have done a John McClane and stopped it all. And yes, of course they were.
Who within Australia would be joining in? You might have guessed, but yes, David Leyonhjelm, who has form on this, was busy re-tweeting with approval pathetic things like this:
Not only a fantasy prone fixation on guns and how terrorism happens, but hard not to see it as involving an offensive bit of "blame the victim" political gamemanship. A true jerk.
Update: Henry Ergas is great at running around and shouting "Radical Islam! - Something must be done!" (see his column in The Australian today), but not so good at explaining what, exactly.
But there's something deeply ironic about the likes of Sinclair Davidson and the increasingly dotty Rafe Champion (who has a recent post at Catallaxy with the catchy title: "Naming the enemy: The progressive left as a religion of hatred and division") getting outraged over a Lefty no body wishing Tim Wilson had been a victim in Paris, when their blog threads pretty routinely have comments after any terrorism attack recommending that Mecca be "nuked" as a means of solving all Islamic sourced problems. Wishing the death of hundreds of thousands of anonymous residents of a city is not worthy of condemnation, apparently. Being nasty towards a mate: well, that's different.
Back to the Left again - talking about the situation in Libya and climate change is seen as some silly, opportunistic connection-making by many on the Right. But as this Vox article makes clear in a very nuanced argument - it may be opportunist, and is capable of overstatement, but it's not wrong to see a likely climate change influenced drought and the subsequent massive displacement of its rural population as one factor that led to the Syrian civil war. Nor is it silly to be concerned about climate change making the (already barely livable, it seems to me) Middle East an even worse tinderbox for trouble. As Roberts notes in the article, the Pentagon has been workshopping that for years, already.
And so back to the Right - this time, of the libertarian bent. I wondered whether wingnuts from America would be quickly having fantasies about how, only if there were people like carrying pistols everywhere in Paris, one of their fellow gun lovers could have done a John McClane and stopped it all. And yes, of course they were.
Who within Australia would be joining in? You might have guessed, but yes, David Leyonhjelm, who has form on this, was busy re-tweeting with approval pathetic things like this:
Not only a fantasy prone fixation on guns and how terrorism happens, but hard not to see it as involving an offensive bit of "blame the victim" political gamemanship. A true jerk.
Update: Henry Ergas is great at running around and shouting "Radical Islam! - Something must be done!" (see his column in The Australian today), but not so good at explaining what, exactly.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Ultimately pointless terrorism
The "meta" tragedy of Paris is that it is part of a fight with a bunch of violent dimwits who are too stupid to realise their apocalyptic dreams of global Caliphate don't have a chance in hell of working in the long run.
As the New York Times wrote:
As the New York Times wrote:
Al Qaeda, the Islamic State’s principal forebear, built its identity around spectacular terrorist attacks because its leaders saw themselves as insurgents seeking to overturn Arab governments that they deemed apostates. Al Qaeda wanted to bait the West into military actions that would destabilize Arab states. The Islamic State, in contrast, has increasingly styled itself a state and, in many ways, behaved like one.As for the question "why France?" right now, The Guardian noted that country's leading role recently in air attacks on IS that are of the type that may well make a long term difference:
The ideology and motivation behind the change may be opaque for years. Analysts suggest that the messianic and apocalyptic side of its jihadist ideology may have gotten the better of the pragmatic impulse that had previously appeared to guide the group’s expansion. Or, experts say, the Islamic State may be seeking to use large terrorist attacks the way a more conventional power might use an air force as a tool of its defense policy, to retaliate against enemy attacks and seek to deter them.
But, if so, its tactics may be shortsighted, causing redoubled Western attempts to crush the militant organization — even as the spreading Islamic State structure makes those efforts more challenging.
The Isis claim of responsibility for Friday’s Paris attacks referred directly to French aircraft “striking Muslims in the lands of the caliphate”.
Earlier this week, French warplanes attacked oil and gas installations in the Deir ez-Zor area, describing this as part of an effort to destroy Isis infrastructure and undermine its financial resources. President François Hollande also announced the deployment to the Gulf of France’s only aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, to support operations against Isis in Syria and Iraq. French warplanes struck their first targets in Syria in late September.
On 8 October, France attacked an Isis training camp in Raqqa, capital of the group’s self-proclaimed caliphate in north-eastern Syria. It was believed to house foreign fighters, including French nationals, but Hollande denied they were targeting a specific individual.
Le Monde reported that the target was Benghalem Salim, 35, responsible for the reception of French and francophones into Isis. Hollande repeated that about 600 French nationals were currently fighting in Syria and Iraq.Well, the immediate motivation for the attack is not as unclear as I initially thought.
In all, France has carried out about 1,300 sorties in Iraq, with 271 airstrikes destroying more than 450 terrorist targets. Only a few strikes have been carried out in Syria. It is using six Rafale multi-role fighter jets stationed in the United Arab Emirates and six Mirage 2000 fighters deployed in Jordan.
But get real, IS. Your arcane and violent medievalist world view has no hope of sustained success against the West, and your apocalyptic fantasies will come to nought, as have hundreds of previous examples of the religious who thought they were acting out the End Times.
If you didn't force millions of the more sensible to flee into Europe, kill the innocent on the streets of Paris, or insist that the your centuries old feud with another branch of Islam still had to resolved with violence, you might have had a chance of running a desperately poor bit of desert in whatever stupidly repressive way you wanted. But you've blown that chance.
Friday, November 13, 2015
Just get on with it
Machine Being Built to Receive Messages from the Future : Discovery News
I don't know what prompted this recent short story on Ronald Mallett's long standing idea that he could build a machine to receive messages from the future for only $250,000. Mallett has been talking about this for years. I'm not exactly sure on what the hold up might be for such a project. Some rich tech guy should surely be prepared to fund it. Or perhaps, as his Wiki entry explains, the criticisms of Mallett's idea are entirely valid.
I don't know what prompted this recent short story on Ronald Mallett's long standing idea that he could build a machine to receive messages from the future for only $250,000. Mallett has been talking about this for years. I'm not exactly sure on what the hold up might be for such a project. Some rich tech guy should surely be prepared to fund it. Or perhaps, as his Wiki entry explains, the criticisms of Mallett's idea are entirely valid.
Always look on the dark side
Why we shouldn’t be fooled by the fall in unemployment figure | The Australian
Adam Creighton is certainly looking on the dark side today.
I find him a confusing fellow. He has the usual small government/libertarian fetish against the government paying for things to be done, and hence unless a government is busy downsizing continually and reducing taxes he assumes they are a failure. On the other hand, in some column or other before, he seemed surprisingly sympathetic to Piketty's take on increasing inequality as being real and of concern.
Overall, I still don't think he is to be trusted.
Adam Creighton is certainly looking on the dark side today.
I find him a confusing fellow. He has the usual small government/libertarian fetish against the government paying for things to be done, and hence unless a government is busy downsizing continually and reducing taxes he assumes they are a failure. On the other hand, in some column or other before, he seemed surprisingly sympathetic to Piketty's take on increasing inequality as being real and of concern.
Overall, I still don't think he is to be trusted.
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Cool club
Australian life expectancy jumps to new highs | Australia news | The Guardian
Australians born now are expected to live longer than ever before.
Life expectancy for females at birth rose from 84.3 in 2013 to 84.4 last
year, while for males it jumped from 80.1 to 80.3, according to new
figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
There are only six other countries in the world where both men and
women have a life expectancy over 80 years, Beidar Cho from the ABS said
in a statement on Thursday.
Those countries are Japan, Italy, Switzerland, Iceland, Israel and Sweden.
“Australia has a higher life expectancy, at both the male and female
level, than many similar countries to ours such as New Zealand, the UK
and the US,” she said.
An alert
Although they have attractive packaging, and are from Canada, which I like to think has clean waters and nice fish, I do not care for Brunswick brand sardines at all. (Too large, too smelly, needs salt.)
That is all....
That is all....
Busy
Update: no reader has asked, but I tell you anyway: created by putting a photo of a flower I had taken through some kaleidoscopic filter on an Android app, the name of which I currently forget. I think the result is pleasingly psychedelic.
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Still nuts
The fourth Republican presidential debate, explained - Vox
Amongst the other criticisms of this woeful bunch of Republican wannabe Presidents is this:
Amongst the other criticisms of this woeful bunch of Republican wannabe Presidents is this:
Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Donald Trump have thus far all releasedAnd Cruz wants to return to the gold standard.
tax plans that are detailed enough to be assessed in terms of their
impact on Americans of different income levels. The plans all differ
slightly from one another, but they all have the same basic shape — huge
gains for the top one percent that dwarf what anyone else will get.
But the debate revealed that these are actually the
responsible, sober-minded plans in the field. Ben Carson continues to
insist that the government could be funded with a 15 percent flat tax — a
number that would yield a laughably inadequate level of revenue. Ted
Cruz and Rand Paul are all pitching plans centered around the
introduction of a Value Added Tax, a move that would likely raise
taxes for lower-income Americans (especially retirees) in order to
finance staggeringly large tax cuts for the wealthy. Carly Fiorina,
meanwhile, keeps insisting that she can deliver a three-page tax code
but can't quite seem to say what will be on the pages.
Julia and the Old Gray Lady
Being Dishonest About Ugliness - The New York Times
How did Julia Baird get a gig doing opinion pieces for the New York Times? At the risk of sounding bitchy, on the Drum she always seemed a pleasant enough person, but really rather dull as a host. And this piece in the paper shares those qualities.
How did Julia Baird get a gig doing opinion pieces for the New York Times? At the risk of sounding bitchy, on the Drum she always seemed a pleasant enough person, but really rather dull as a host. And this piece in the paper shares those qualities.
The real lesson
...from this incident is probably more "it's likely to be counterproductive to use a public figure pretty widely regarded as a ****head (and a pretty aggro one at that especially when it comes to people he disagrees with on guns*) as your support person at an employer's disciplinary hearing."
Having said that, I would say it's a near certainty that the employee will win at the Fair Work Commission (which, incidentally, I didn't think libertarians had a lot of time for.)
* Yes, we have a Senator who has said he agreed with the sentiment that John Howard "deserved to be shot" for his gun laws.
Having said that, I would say it's a near certainty that the employee will win at the Fair Work Commission (which, incidentally, I didn't think libertarians had a lot of time for.)
* Yes, we have a Senator who has said he agreed with the sentiment that John Howard "deserved to be shot" for his gun laws.
The Carson explanation
She's hardly my favourite writer, but I reckon Amanda Marcotte is right about Ben Carson:
His exaggerated tales of sin and redemption sound bizarre to most Americans, but they are par for the course in the evangelical circles that Carson is trying to win over...
Hammering messy real world experiences into trite fables about sin and redemption is standard operating procedure in conservative Christian circles. So is the exaggeration. Tales of your behavior before you were saved are embellished for maximum drama. What’s important is not the literal truth, but reinforcing fundamentalist notions that the world outside of the Jesus bubble is a depraved hellhole.
Take, for instance, Christine O’Donnell, the 2010 Republican candidate for Senate from Delaware. During her campaign, tape surfaced of her claiming she had been to a “Satanic altar” with “blood” on it during her days when she supposedly “dabbled into witchcraft”. The story was obvious nonsense and she tried to downplay its significance without coming right out and admitting what was likely true, which is that she had taken some silly incident from her youth and reformed it into a tale of Satanism and depravity with which to impress her fellow Christians.
Carson’s claim that he was a violent youth who renounced his sinful ways after praying has to be understood in this light. In Christian circles, the literal truth of such stories doesn’t matter nearly as much as their usefulness in spreading the word that Jesus is the cure for all your problems. A story about Jesus’s ability to save you from murder is just more memorable than, say, a tale of renouncing your habit of shoplifting.
A quote from a Gruen
I thought Nicholas' comment at his blog (arising out of that somewhat controversial paper about poor white Americans dying faster) was good:
Education is good, looking after those at the bottom of the ladder is good. Of course the left’s tendency to valorise ‘victims’ can go too far. I think it does and it’s a growing problem (#TriggerAlert you may not agree and this may trigger anxiety, depression and flashbacks to traumatic events in your childhood when you discovered you weren’t the only person in the world). But ethically it seems like so much less a crime than the right’s demonisation of those at the bottom and their valorisation of those at the top. Perhaps it’s also a practical mistake.Yes, that last bit is about the ugly, poisonous influence of libertarian thought on the American Right that you see frequently at the Australian Tea Party blog Catallaxy. I don't think the Right in America and Australia used to be like that.
More on the Lomborg deception
And Then There's Physics has his take on the Lomborg deceptive counsel of despair.
I repeat my formula for Bill and Labor
I think it would be a trap for Labor to oppose any increase in the GST. It also seems doubtful that they can do enough to increase revenue quickly enough (yes, Australia needs to both increase revenue and be more careful in spending) via superannuation tax concessions and welfare related changes (welfare restrictions not being Labor's strong point, exactly.)
I therefore repeat my common sense call: compromise with a GST increase to 12.5% - it's sounds much better than 15% - and look at increasing its scope modestly. Don't go overboard in compensation for the poor. Also make changes to superannuation concessions. Make changes to the negative gearing rules that ease in over a few years, don't try to do it in one big bang.
You might even get away with a modest carbon tax replacing Direct Action, but that is riskier, 'cos folks are too, too easily confused on this. On the other hand, Labor has plenty of ammunition from Turnbull's own mouth as to how Direct Action can't work in the long run, and it is a hit to the budget bottom line. (The problem is, of course, that just as Labor is too easily motivated to make a scare campaign of any GST increase, the Coalition is too easily motivated to do the same for any carbon pricing scheme.)
I therefore repeat my common sense call: compromise with a GST increase to 12.5% - it's sounds much better than 15% - and look at increasing its scope modestly. Don't go overboard in compensation for the poor. Also make changes to superannuation concessions. Make changes to the negative gearing rules that ease in over a few years, don't try to do it in one big bang.
You might even get away with a modest carbon tax replacing Direct Action, but that is riskier, 'cos folks are too, too easily confused on this. On the other hand, Labor has plenty of ammunition from Turnbull's own mouth as to how Direct Action can't work in the long run, and it is a hit to the budget bottom line. (The problem is, of course, that just as Labor is too easily motivated to make a scare campaign of any GST increase, the Coalition is too easily motivated to do the same for any carbon pricing scheme.)
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Electric powered death from the skies
Israel Is Already Selling Kamikaze Micro-Drones That Will Change Modern Warfare
I must go looking for a video of them in action. Will add later if I find one...
Update: here it is, the advertising blurb for this very futuristic weapon:
Update: sorry, the video seems to have gone private since posting it here. Maybe the company (or Israel) doesn't like the world to see how it operates?
I must go looking for a video of them in action. Will add later if I find one...
Update: here it is, the advertising blurb for this very futuristic weapon:
Update: sorry, the video seems to have gone private since posting it here. Maybe the company (or Israel) doesn't like the world to see how it operates?
And (some) people defend Lomborg
Indefensible Lomborg Analysis Misleads On Paris Climate Pledges, Ignores China | ThinkProgress
Pretty damning critique of Lomborgian analysis which was (as I guessed as soon as I saw Andrew Bolt promote it) simply designed to convince the gullible that the Paris conference is useless.
Pretty damning critique of Lomborgian analysis which was (as I guessed as soon as I saw Andrew Bolt promote it) simply designed to convince the gullible that the Paris conference is useless.
Fun physics
There's an essay on arXiv (Living in a Superposition) that is about a fun thought experiment. Here's the abstract:
This essay considers a model quantum universe consisting of a very large box containing a screen with two slits and an observer (us) that can pass though the slits. We apply the modern quantum mechanics of closed systems to calculate the probabilities for alternative histories of how we move through the universe and what we see. After passing through the screen with the slits, the quantum state of the universe is a superposition of classically distinguishable histories. We are then living in a superposition. Some frequently asked questions about such situations are answered using this model. The model's relationship to more realistic quantum cosmologies is briefly discussed.
Good question
What happened to passenger hovercraft? - BBC News
I did take the hovercraft service across the English channel in about 1986. The article explains why they never caught on as widely as 1960's futurists may have expected.
I did take the hovercraft service across the English channel in about 1986. The article explains why they never caught on as widely as 1960's futurists may have expected.
The columnist with the common touch
I wonder what inspired Bolt to start telling us how well he has traveled? I would have thought his occasional opera and art appreciation posts were distancing enough for most of his readership, but expanding it to "let's talk about the great places I have stayed" seems to be pushing it somewhat.
The next degree won't take as long
Here's a good, short post from And Then There's Physics explaining how the next degree of global average temperature increase won't take as long as the first:
[But, hey LDP, please continue to concentrate on how irritating it is to have to wear a bicycle helmet and not be able to vape nicotine while riding to the bar that's going to shut at the ridiculously early hour of 3 am. We have to get our priorities right: I understand.]
Just a quick post to highlight that – according to the UK Met Office – 2015 is likely to be 1oC above pre-industrial – well, 1oC above the 1850 to 1900 average. If you think that we should have a target of staying below 2oC, then this is something of a milestone; we’re halfway there. Or, are we?The comments following are well worth reading, too.
Well, it depends on how you consider this. It’s taken us about 160 years to warm by about 1oC. This is associated with emissions of about 550GtC (550 billion tonnes of carbon, or ~2000 billion tonnes of CO2). Current emissions are around 10GtC/year. If we continue emitting as we are, we will double our cumulative emissions in about 50 years. If we continue to increase our emissions, it will be even sooner (H/T Aaron on Twitter). If we want to have a >66% chance of staying below 2oC, then we have a carbon budget of only about 250GtC (850GtCO2) from 2015, which we could reach in only 25 years at current emissions.
So, we might be halfway to 2oC in terms of temperature, but we’re much more than halfway there in terms of time.
[But, hey LDP, please continue to concentrate on how irritating it is to have to wear a bicycle helmet and not be able to vape nicotine while riding to the bar that's going to shut at the ridiculously early hour of 3 am. We have to get our priorities right: I understand.]
Monday, November 09, 2015
The 2011 Australian floods revisited
The abstract from a paper to appear in GRL:
Extreme rainfall conditions in Australia during the 2010/11 La Niña resulted in devastating floods claiming 35 lives, causing billions of dollars in damages, and far-reaching impacts on global climate, including a significant drop in global sea-level and record terrestrial carbon uptake. Northeast Australian 2010/11 rainfall was 84% above-average, unusual even for a strong La Niña, and soil moisture conditions were unprecedented since 1950. Here we demonstrate that the warmer background state increased the likelihood of the extreme rainfall response. Using atmospheric general circulation model experiments with 2010/11 ocean conditions with and without long-term warming, we identify the mechanisms that increase the likelihood of extreme rainfall: additional ocean warming enhanced onshore moisture transport onto Australia and ascent and precipitation over the northeast. Our results highlight the role of long-term ocean warming for modifying rain-producing atmospheric circulation conditions, increasing the likelihood of extreme precipitation for Australia during future La Niña events.
Tax or not?
I see that David Leyonhjelm is again writing in praise of the Singaporean health system, which operates largely by requiring compulsory employee contributions to medical savings accounts. (I see he was making the same argument back in 2014, and it is also LDP official policy.)
Now this seems a bit odd to me - when it comes to arguing about whether we are a high or low taxing country, Leyonhjelm is happy to claim "the tax burden figure for Australia is artificially kept down by the exclusion of superannuation guarantee payments", which is extremely close to the Judith Sloan line that "we have a system of compulsory superannuation that must be regarded as a tax". (Yes, the very special type of "tax" that goes into the taxpayer's own account, is largely untouched by the government, and is available for spending only by the taxpayer or their estate.)
Let's be a bit more consistent here, hey libertarians? If you are for compulsory savings for medical care, but like to claim compulsory superannuation should be treated as part of the "tax burden", then you're actually for a brand new tax, using your own peculiar (or opportunistic) categorisations. On the other hand, if neither are a tax, stop pretending one of them is.
And as for comparing the health costs of the Singaporean system to that in Australia or other countries - goodness gracious me, I would bet there would health economists out there ecstatic at the idea of what they could do to stream line health services if they were doing it for one city state compared to providing coverage for an entire continent.
Update: OK, so I guess Leyonhjelm might concede such a scheme is the same type of "tax" that compulsory superannuation is, but one which would be compensated for by the government (now with a reduced health spending burden) reducing income taxes. Because he is, of course, fundamentally against ever increasing total taxes. (Good luck with working out that transition with any fairness, though. Let's face it, it ain't going to happen.)
Nonetheless, isn't it peculiar that the party that is all about personal responsibility and letting people act as grown ups actually agrees with Labor, which effectively says you can't rely on people to save for their retirement adequately and therefore compulsory super is required?
Now this seems a bit odd to me - when it comes to arguing about whether we are a high or low taxing country, Leyonhjelm is happy to claim "the tax burden figure for Australia is artificially kept down by the exclusion of superannuation guarantee payments", which is extremely close to the Judith Sloan line that "we have a system of compulsory superannuation that must be regarded as a tax". (Yes, the very special type of "tax" that goes into the taxpayer's own account, is largely untouched by the government, and is available for spending only by the taxpayer or their estate.)
Let's be a bit more consistent here, hey libertarians? If you are for compulsory savings for medical care, but like to claim compulsory superannuation should be treated as part of the "tax burden", then you're actually for a brand new tax, using your own peculiar (or opportunistic) categorisations. On the other hand, if neither are a tax, stop pretending one of them is.
And as for comparing the health costs of the Singaporean system to that in Australia or other countries - goodness gracious me, I would bet there would health economists out there ecstatic at the idea of what they could do to stream line health services if they were doing it for one city state compared to providing coverage for an entire continent.
Update: OK, so I guess Leyonhjelm might concede such a scheme is the same type of "tax" that compulsory superannuation is, but one which would be compensated for by the government (now with a reduced health spending burden) reducing income taxes. Because he is, of course, fundamentally against ever increasing total taxes. (Good luck with working out that transition with any fairness, though. Let's face it, it ain't going to happen.)
Nonetheless, isn't it peculiar that the party that is all about personal responsibility and letting people act as grown ups actually agrees with Labor, which effectively says you can't rely on people to save for their retirement adequately and therefore compulsory super is required?
About time I commented on this
Yes, I keep forgetting to post about the peculiar phenomena of the adult colouring in book. The Atlantic has a story up from a recent convert, and there was an article about it in the Sydney Morning Herald back in April, and another a few weeks ago asking the question:
Adult colouring books are all the rage, but are readers mindful or mindless?Nearly all articles err on the generous side, and so would I, given their popularity.
The key to it (as the article from The Atlantic argues) is the involvement in a pattern: it's a chair bound way to meditatively walk a maze, and that has a certain appeal to people like me with an aversion to sweating.
But in order to cross the boundary between mindful pattern building and more analytical thought, I think I'll work on creating my own version with patterns involving certain politicians heads, or media commentators. Watch this space...
Update: it's a rough first attempt, but I call it "The Leyonhjelm Mandala":
Sunday, November 08, 2015
For satellite watchers
Google Play suggested it for me, and it would seem that, indeed, the Heavens-Above app on a GPS enabled smart phone or tablet makes spotting and identifying satellites, the ISS, and even Iridium flares, ridiculously simple.
I've never gone out to watch for an Iridium flare, but I will now.
I've never gone out to watch for an Iridium flare, but I will now.
Gravity and spandex
This video has been up for a few years, but was just recommended on the Open Culture site.
Now, we've all seen this type of illustration for General Relativity before on various science shows, but it is worth watching for a couple of phenomena that this teacher helps explain with his stretchy set up. Give it a few minutes and you will see:
I should also note that this month marks the 100th anniversary of Einstein's lectures on his theory. The New York Times gives a handy short history of how the theory subsequently progressed under the weight of 20th century politics.
Now, we've all seen this type of illustration for General Relativity before on various science shows, but it is worth watching for a couple of phenomena that this teacher helps explain with his stretchy set up. Give it a few minutes and you will see:
I should also note that this month marks the 100th anniversary of Einstein's lectures on his theory. The New York Times gives a handy short history of how the theory subsequently progressed under the weight of 20th century politics.
About Kiribati
Before we drown we may die of thirst
I see that a couple of weeks back, Nature had a balanced article about climate change and its effects on the small Pacific Island nations.
Long time readers may recall that I have always backed away* from relying on the celebrity victim status (as it were) of these islands for communicating the seriousness of climate change, because it seemed to me that their continued existence, being barely above sea level anyway, was always in doubt.
I think, on the whole, this article vindicates that position. The islands have several problems and indeed climate change will exacerbate them, but in the big picture, the seriousness of a metre or two of sea level increase on the vastly populated and developed regions of other countries is really the much more profound problem. (As well as the regional effects on food production, handling more frequent flooding, and the possible vast changes in the ocean food chain.)
* Yes, that linked post was written back in 2006 when I was taking a "sitting on the fence" approach to climate change, before I became convinced that it (and ocean acidification) were indeed serious issues.
I see that a couple of weeks back, Nature had a balanced article about climate change and its effects on the small Pacific Island nations.
Long time readers may recall that I have always backed away* from relying on the celebrity victim status (as it were) of these islands for communicating the seriousness of climate change, because it seemed to me that their continued existence, being barely above sea level anyway, was always in doubt.
I think, on the whole, this article vindicates that position. The islands have several problems and indeed climate change will exacerbate them, but in the big picture, the seriousness of a metre or two of sea level increase on the vastly populated and developed regions of other countries is really the much more profound problem. (As well as the regional effects on food production, handling more frequent flooding, and the possible vast changes in the ocean food chain.)
* Yes, that linked post was written back in 2006 when I was taking a "sitting on the fence" approach to climate change, before I became convinced that it (and ocean acidification) were indeed serious issues.
Saturday, November 07, 2015
The paywall issue
I've never put a lot of effort into avoiding paywalls and page view limits: I use "Google the headline" sometimes, but page view limits I've generally lived with. Media organisations have to make money, after all.*
So given that there are some publications with page view limits I'm prepared to try to get around, and deleting history gets a bit tedious, I realised this week when I stumbled across something about the Tor network that this might be an easier way around the limit.
Turns out for those using android that there is simple Tor accessing app (Orbot) and an associated browser (Orweb.) The browser is pretty terrible, though; but I have found a Tor version of Firefox too (Orfox), and it is much better.
Of course it won't work as fast as normal browsing, given the way Tor works. But as far as I can tell, although you would not be wanting to trust this system on your phone or tablet to divulge state secrets, it seems to let you keep browsing past page view limits as long as you want.
* unless it's owned by Rupert Murdoch - but then again, I don't want to spend a lot of time wallowing in his right wing clubs anyway. For those with fewer scruples, here's a fairly recent guide to getting around some paywall schemes, and here's another - even though I don't think incognito mode works well now.
So given that there are some publications with page view limits I'm prepared to try to get around, and deleting history gets a bit tedious, I realised this week when I stumbled across something about the Tor network that this might be an easier way around the limit.
Turns out for those using android that there is simple Tor accessing app (Orbot) and an associated browser (Orweb.) The browser is pretty terrible, though; but I have found a Tor version of Firefox too (Orfox), and it is much better.
Of course it won't work as fast as normal browsing, given the way Tor works. But as far as I can tell, although you would not be wanting to trust this system on your phone or tablet to divulge state secrets, it seems to let you keep browsing past page view limits as long as you want.
* unless it's owned by Rupert Murdoch - but then again, I don't want to spend a lot of time wallowing in his right wing clubs anyway. For those with fewer scruples, here's a fairly recent guide to getting around some paywall schemes, and here's another - even though I don't think incognito mode works well now.
Friday, November 06, 2015
Such is the worrying state of America
Egypt's pyramids for grain storage, not pharoahs' tombs, Ben Carson said in 1998 remarks - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
The Atlantic notes that this idea is an old medieval one. I find it remarkable that it could still be held by creationists today, since it suggests their ability to dismiss evidence extends to even being able to ignore the interior design of a building in front of their eyes. What hope is there for convincing them they are wrong on the age of the universe, evolution, or climate change?
The Atlantic notes that this idea is an old medieval one. I find it remarkable that it could still be held by creationists today, since it suggests their ability to dismiss evidence extends to even being able to ignore the interior design of a building in front of their eyes. What hope is there for convincing them they are wrong on the age of the universe, evolution, or climate change?
Please make him stop
The only good thing about Slate going behind a 5 article a month paywall (just clear your history and start again) is that it might stop you from reading another extremely silly bit of writing from the world's most irritating gay writer J. Bryan Lowder. This one about how much he hates spooning.
Or perhaps you should read it (or, like me, just scan it and decide how embarrassingly bad it is within a couple of paragraphs) and then skip to the amusingly derisive comments. Such as these (each is a separate comment):
Or perhaps you should read it (or, like me, just scan it and decide how embarrassingly bad it is within a couple of paragraphs) and then skip to the amusingly derisive comments. Such as these (each is a separate comment):
This article is seriously making me reconsider being a Slate+ member. Yes, it is literally that bad of an article...
I can't tell whether this is satire or not.
I can imagine the Slate editorial meeting this morning. "Lowder! An editorial piece on my desk in fifteen minutes or else! I don't care what you write about as long as I see a text file in my inbox fifteen minutes from now, got it?"
Not every idea one has needs to be shared, though I understand that idea is alien to millennials. And calling something like spooning "sexist" is why people stop taking accusations of sexism seriously.
Well, that was, um... ah...
Seriously? This was green-lighted?
I finally realized what's going on: Lowder hates Slate and everything it stands for and is trying to destroy it from the inside out. He is SPOONING SLATE! BRILLIANT!
Waves discussed
My son last night had a science question on his homework that asked how a change in frequency affects the speed of a wave. I could remember the answer, but not a good way to explain it. I thought there must be a decent Youtube video out there showing what happens, but on stuff like this, it can be surprisingly hard to find a good video for a high school level.
The best I could come up with, and it is pretty good, is from the Khan Academy talking about the speed of sound. (It's the second in a series, but I don't think its essential to watch the first. It also has more detail than necessary, but in the last 60 seconds, they deal with the frequency/speed issue pretty well.)
So, for all other parents with a similar problem, here it is:
Speed of Sound:
The best I could come up with, and it is pretty good, is from the Khan Academy talking about the speed of sound. (It's the second in a series, but I don't think its essential to watch the first. It also has more detail than necessary, but in the last 60 seconds, they deal with the frequency/speed issue pretty well.)
So, for all other parents with a similar problem, here it is:
Speed of Sound:
Thursday, November 05, 2015
Strange polling
Andrew Bolt is celebrating apparent skepticism showing up in the CSIRO polling story that I noted yesterday, yet if one reads more widely on the topic (he never does), there is reason to be somewhat skeptical of the CSIRO results.
This chart from ongoing polling (with a 1,000 person sample - which sounds reasonable) from the Lowy Institute, for example, indicates attitudes that hardly seem consistent with the CSIRO poll.
Odd that about 88% on this poll think there is a problem to be addressed in some form if (according to Bolt's reading of CSIRO) more than half of Australians aren't even sure there is a problem.
On the other hand, Essential polling from 2013 indicates that the CSIRO result may not be too far off the mark, but the "climate change is real and is caused by humans" has a clearer lead.
It's all a bit confusing.
I see that the CSIRO itself has studied the question of how the phrasing of questions on this topic affects outcomes.
It is one of the trickier areas for polling.
This chart from ongoing polling (with a 1,000 person sample - which sounds reasonable) from the Lowy Institute, for example, indicates attitudes that hardly seem consistent with the CSIRO poll.
Odd that about 88% on this poll think there is a problem to be addressed in some form if (according to Bolt's reading of CSIRO) more than half of Australians aren't even sure there is a problem.
On the other hand, Essential polling from 2013 indicates that the CSIRO result may not be too far off the mark, but the "climate change is real and is caused by humans" has a clearer lead.
It's all a bit confusing.
I see that the CSIRO itself has studied the question of how the phrasing of questions on this topic affects outcomes.
It is one of the trickier areas for polling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)