Further to yesterday's post: there's been a good thread on Twitter about this, which I think you will find here.
And Ken Rice has tweeted a link to a paper from 2016 that appears to show (I only have time to scan it at the moment) that DICE models tested with 20th century growth show results nothing like what actually happened.
Interesting, but as I've been saying - why has it taken so long for people to question this whole field in the way that they finally are now?
Oh: and someone on Twitter linked to an article on GDP effects of climate change that made some interesting points - but I am having trouble finding it now. Keeping track of info via blogs used to be much easier than it is under Twitter.
Update: Jason, do you have any idea what Graeme's story about you in the comment I have left is about?
Graeme - don't get optimistic. 99% of your comments are still going to be deleted, whatever they are about.
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Put in the "too good to be true" tray?
The story has been around for a week, but I should note it:
Erecting wind turbines on the world’s best offshore sites could provide more than enough clean energy to meet global electricity demand, according to a report.
A detailed study of the world’s coastlines has found that offshore windfarms alone could provide more electricity than the world needs – even if they are only built in windy regions in shallow waters near the shore.
Analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA) revealed that if windfarms were built across all useable sites which are no further than 60km (37 miles) off the coast, and where coastal waters are no deeper than 60 metres, they could generate 36,000 terawatt hours of renewable electricity a year. This would easily meeting the current global demand for electricity of 23,000 terawatt hours.
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Speaking of composers, and listening to classical music...
Further to my post on Saturday which included a link to a recording of Camille Saint-Saëns Organ Symphony No 3 finale: I didn't know a thing about this composer, and didn't realise he was responsible for the famous Danse macabre, or The Carnival of Animals, which I am sure I have seen performed as well. (I therefore presumably have seen his name on programs, but just never been curious to find out anything about him.)
Wikipedia has a long entry on his life, and I see that he was not just a musical child prodigy (as famous composers often seem to be), but he was interested in everything:
Anyhow, I wanted to note something about listening to orchestral music that I have realised after seeing that piece live on Saturday, and then listening to it at home using earphones on a mobile phone. The earphone experience has a lot going for it. I mean, with pop music I sometimes find it initially distracting that a vocal track is happening (so to speak) in the centre of my skull. But if you like an orchestral piece, the immersive sense of being in the middle of it that earphones/headphones give can be pretty impressive. Or maybe I am just liking hiking up the volume?
Go on, put on your earphones and listen to that blast of organ at the start, and at a least a few minutes more, and tell me I'm not right..:)
Wikipedia has a long entry on his life, and I see that he was not just a musical child prodigy (as famous composers often seem to be), but he was interested in everything:
As a schoolboy Saint-Saëns was outstanding in many subjects. In addition to his musical prowess, he distinguished himself in the study of French literature, Latin and Greek, divinity, and mathematics. His interests included philosophy, archaeology and astronomy, of which, particularly the last, he remained a talented amateur in later life.But as so often is the case when reading about famous people in the 19th century, illness and misfortune in their personal life was never far away:
Less than two months after [Camille's] christening, [his father] Victor Saint-Saëns died of consumption on the first anniversary of his marriage.[11] The young Camille was taken to the country for the sake of his health, and for two years lived with a nurse at Corbeil, 29 kilometres (18 mi) to the south of Paris....
Throughout the 1860s and early 1870s, Saint-Saëns had continued to live a bachelor existence, sharing a large fourth-floor flat in the Rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré with his mother. In 1875, he surprised many by marrying.[6][n 10] The groom was approaching forty and his bride was nineteen; she was Marie-Laure Truffot, the sister of one of the composer's pupils.[58] The marriage was not a success. In the words of the biographer Sabina Teller Ratner, "Saint-Saëns's mother disapproved, and her son was difficult to live with".[5] Saint-Saëns and his wife moved to the Rue Monsieur-le-Prince, in the Latin Quarter; his mother moved with them.[59] The couple had two sons, both of whom died in infancy. In 1878, the elder, André, aged two, fell from a window of the flat and was killed;[60] the younger, Jean-François, died of pneumonia six weeks later, aged six months. Saint-Saëns and Marie-Laure continued to live together for three years, but he blamed her for André's accident; the double blow of their loss effectively destroyed the marriage.[6]...
Saint-Saëns was elected to the Institut de France in 1881, at his second attempt, having to his chagrin been beaten by Massenet in 1878.[73] In July of that year he and his wife went to the Auvergnat spa town of La Bourboule for a holiday. On 28 July he disappeared from their hotel, and a few days later his wife received a letter from him to say that he would not be returning. They never saw each other again. Marie Saint-Saëns returned to her family, and lived until 1950, dying near Bordeaux at the age of ninety-five.[74] Saint-Saëns did not divorce his wife and remarry, nor did he form any later intimate relationship with a woman. Rees comments that although there is no firm evidence, some biographers believe that Saint-Saëns was more attracted to his own sex than to women.[75][n 10]Elsewhere it notes:
Saint-Saëns was a keen traveller. From the 1870s until the end of his life he made 179 trips to 27 countries. His professional engagements took him most often to Germany and England; for holidays, and to avoid Parisian winters which affected his weak chest, he favoured Algiers and various places in Egypt.[72]Hmm...Algiers was at the time popular for the homosexual male tourist - Oscar Wilde and his boyfriend used to visit there - so I would assume that this might be a reason for suspicions about Camille too.
Anyhow, I wanted to note something about listening to orchestral music that I have realised after seeing that piece live on Saturday, and then listening to it at home using earphones on a mobile phone. The earphone experience has a lot going for it. I mean, with pop music I sometimes find it initially distracting that a vocal track is happening (so to speak) in the centre of my skull. But if you like an orchestral piece, the immersive sense of being in the middle of it that earphones/headphones give can be pretty impressive. Or maybe I am just liking hiking up the volume?
Go on, put on your earphones and listen to that blast of organ at the start, and at a least a few minutes more, and tell me I'm not right..:)
It's a wonder he had time to compose anything...
As with (I suspect) most of the public, I might know the names of the big classical composers, and have heard some of their musical highlights, but know little of their lives. Especially Bach - until I read this, I really don't think I knew the first thing about him:
As for the number of children - you would think there must be many Bach descendants scattered through Europe. However, it would seem that there are in fact none.
I’ve talked to people who feel they know Bach very well, but they aren’t aware of the time he was imprisoned for a month. They never learned about Bach pulling a knife on a fellow musician during a street fight. They never heard about his drinking exploits—on one two-week trip he billed the church eighteen groschen for beer, enough to purchase eight gallons of it at retail prices—or that his contract with the Duke of Saxony included a provision for tax-free beer from the castle brewery; or that he was accused of consorting with an unknown, unmarried woman in the organ loft; or had a reputation for ignoring assigned duties without explanation or apology. They don’t know about Bach’s sex life: at best a matter of speculation, but what should we conclude from his twenty known children, more than any significant composer in history (a procreative career that has led some to joke with a knowing wink that “Bach’s organ had no stops”), or his second marriage to twenty-year-old singer Anna Magdalena Wilcke, when he was in his late thirties? They don’t know about the constant disciplinary problems Bach caused, or his insolence to students, or the many other ways he found to flout authority. This is the Bach branded as “incorrigible” by the councilors in Leipzig, who grimly documented offense after offense committed by their stubborn and irascible employee.As the title to the post says - a big beer drinking habit and (by the sounds of it) oversexed, and he still had time for his extremely intricate brand of music. Good thing smart phones weren't around then.
But you hardly need to study these incidents in Bach’s life to gauge his subversive tendencies. Just listen to his music, which in its ostentatious display of technique and inventiveness must have disturbed many in the austere Lutheran community, and even fellow musicians. Not much music criticism of his performances has survived, but the few surviving reactions of his contemporaries leave no doubt about Bach’s disdain for the rules others played by.
As for the number of children - you would think there must be many Bach descendants scattered through Europe. However, it would seem that there are in fact none.
Great contributions by Jewish folk noted
The Spectator has a review of a book with the heading:
And for an added bonus - I get to delete probably scores of comments by Graeme - for whom this post will be like 100% irresistible clickbait.
In the body of the review is this:Is there no field in which the Jewish mindset doesn’t excel?
Norman Lebrecht celebrates the explosion of Jewish talent between 1847 and 1947 in music, literature, painting, film, politics, philosophy, science and invention
‘Between the middle of the 19th and 20th centuries,’ Genius & Anxiety opens,It's a good argument, even allowing for the later negative contributions to economics, climate change, and political discourse generally of Steve Kates and Sinclair Davidson. (Is SD himself Jewish or just married to one? He certainly notes their feasts on the blog.)
a few dozen men and women changed the way we see the world. Some of their names are on our lips for all time. Marx, Freud, Proust, Einstein, Kafka. Others have vanished from our collective memory, but their importance endures in our daily lives. Without Karl Landsteiner, for instance, there would be no blood transfusion or major surgery; without Paul Ehrlich no chemotherapy; without Siegfried Marcus no motor car; without Rosalind Franklin no model of DNA; without Fritz Haber there would not be enough food to sustain life on earth.I don’t know if Lebrecht actually buys into so simple a description of scientific progress, or whether it is just a good, combative kick-off to a book, but either way the main thrust of the argument is inescapable. For the best part of the past 200 years a small and threatened minority has exerted a creative influence out of all proportion to their numbers, and whether they flaunt it like a Disraeli or a Bernstein, or a convert like Mendelssohn, whether they hate it like Marx, are religious or atheist, Orthodox or Reform, assimilist or Zionist, the one thing they share is their ‘Jewishness’.
And for an added bonus - I get to delete probably scores of comments by Graeme - for whom this post will be like 100% irresistible clickbait.
EU history
OK, so I know pretty much nothing about the history of the EEC, the predecessor to the EU.
Hence it was interesting to read this short article at France 24 about how Charles De Gaulle opposed Britain joining it in the 1960's. (I had no idea that Harold Macmillan would have been waiting to join at that time). Here is a (large) extract:
Hence it was interesting to read this short article at France 24 about how Charles De Gaulle opposed Britain joining it in the 1960's. (I had no idea that Harold Macmillan would have been waiting to join at that time). Here is a (large) extract:
In November 1962, de Gaulle hosted then British prime minister Harold Macmillan, an Old Etonian with a famously Edwardian style, at the French presidential summer retreat of Rambouillet – an exquisite Renaissance chateau just outside of Paris. Macmillan was desperate to gain de Gaulle’s approval for British entry into the European Economic Community (EEC).
De Gaulle convened a shooting party for the very posh prime minister. The French president didn’t himself partake in blood sport, but loudly informed Macmillan every time he missed. “The General”, as de Gaulle is affectionately known for his role as head of the Free French during the Second World War, told his British counterpart that the UK would have to ditch its “special relationship” with the US if it was serious about joining Europe.
At one point, the General’s tough stance provoked Macmillan to burst into tears. “This poor man, to whom I had nothing to give, seemed so sad, so beaten,” de Gaulle told his cabinet. “I wanted to put my hand on his shoulder and say to him, as in the Édith Piaf song, ‘ne pleurez pas, milord’ (don’t cry, my lord)”.
De Gaulle kept Macmillan in the lurch for a while. Then he announced at a press conference in January 1963 his opposition to British entry into the EEC. He argued that the UK would want to “impose its own conditions” on what were then the bloc’s six countries. The “insular” character of the island nation across the Channel had created a politico-economic “structure” which differed “profoundly” from “that of continental Europeans”, the General postulated.
The UK “is maritime; it is bound by trade, by its markets, to the most diverse array of countries – and often the most far-flung”, he went on. “It has a lot of industry and commerce but very little agriculture – and its habits and traditions are very different.”
Upon hearing the news Macmillan wrote in his diary: “The French always betray you in the end.”
About climate economics
I had been posting for a number of years that economic modelling on the cost of climate change seemed dubious at best, and a complete crock at worst. I was puzzled that Pindyck's criticisms didn't have more publicity.
I think this view has finally spread more widely, not only amongst science exaggerating political movements such as Extinction Rebellion, but more broadly into mainstream opinion.
I hadn't realised that controversial Australian economist Steven Keen had thrown his commentary into the mix too. Now, I know a lot of people attack him for exaggerated attacks on various economic issues (house price bubbles especially, I think), but if he is right in his criticisms in this post, and in the video following, it does seem remarkable that it has taken this long for people to say "this can't be right".
I also note that last month And Then There's Physics had a post and thread about the related topic of Integrated Assessment Models. Many good comments about them are to be found there.
I think this view has finally spread more widely, not only amongst science exaggerating political movements such as Extinction Rebellion, but more broadly into mainstream opinion.
I hadn't realised that controversial Australian economist Steven Keen had thrown his commentary into the mix too. Now, I know a lot of people attack him for exaggerated attacks on various economic issues (house price bubbles especially, I think), but if he is right in his criticisms in this post, and in the video following, it does seem remarkable that it has taken this long for people to say "this can't be right".
I also note that last month And Then There's Physics had a post and thread about the related topic of Integrated Assessment Models. Many good comments about them are to be found there.
Monday, October 28, 2019
Kates's wonderful world of cluelessness
I don't read every word of Steve Kates - honestly, I can only take so much of his Manichean-like shtick. (He's actually Jewish, so said Sinclair Davidson in comments here once, which surprised me.)
But sometimes, I notice something so spectacularly un-selfaware, I can't help but marvel at what an utter nincompoop he is.
For that reason, I note that he was writing on the weekend, quoting an article about Lenin's rhetorical approach (my bold):
Some quotes and links from here and there:
Sinclair Davidson - you and your blog are sucking intelligence out of the universe. Congratulations on your contributions to stupidity.
Update: more from the world of utter un-selfawareness -
Update: Cult member Kates opines today:
But sometimes, I notice something so spectacularly un-selfaware, I can't help but marvel at what an utter nincompoop he is.
For that reason, I note that he was writing on the weekend, quoting an article about Lenin's rhetorical approach (my bold):
Lenin constantly recommended that people be shot “without pity” or “exterminated mercilessly” (Leszek Kołakowski wondered wryly what it would mean to exterminate people mercifully). “Exterminate” is a term used for vermin, and, long before the Nazis described Jews as Ungeziefer (vermin), Lenin routinely called for “the cleansing of Russia’s soil of all harmful insects, of scoundrels, fleas, bedbugs—the rich, and so on.”...This from a man who is completely and utterly convinced that Trump has the "right sentiment" and is the saviour of Western civilisation.
When Mensheviks objected to Lenin’s personal attacks, he replied frankly that his purpose was not to convince but to destroy his opponent. In work after work, Lenin does not offer arguments refuting other Social Democrats but brands them as “renegades” from Marxism. Marxists who disagreed with his naïve epistemology were “philosophic scum.” Object to his brutality and your arguments are “moralizing vomit.” …
Compulsive underlining, name calling, and personal invective hardly exhaust the ways in which Lenin’s prose assaults the reader.
Some quotes and links from here and there:
President Donald Trump on Tuesday equated migrants and refugees to the United States with vermin who will "pour into and infest our country."...
“The Never Trumper Republicans, though on respirators with not many left, are in certain ways worse and more dangerous for our Country than the Do Nothing Democrats. Watch out for them, they are human scum!”...
The 598 People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter: A Complete List
All of Trump's ugly campaign rhetoric in one placeAnd today I see that retiree Rafe Champion has moved away from his routine utter gullibility in believing everything Jo Nova says about climate change to joining in to note:
Picking up the thread of Leninism that Steve described yesterday on the dehumanisation and destruction of opponents. This hit me when I saw the way the left dehumanised Pauline Hanson many years ago and more generally the Bush/Howard/Abbott/Trump derangement syndromes.He thinks Pauline Hanson - the anti immigration populist from way back - was the one being "dehumanised"??
Sinclair Davidson - you and your blog are sucking intelligence out of the universe. Congratulations on your contributions to stupidity.
Update: more from the world of utter un-selfawareness -
There has been nothing, absolutely nothing that has been done by Donald Trump that has been anything other than what those who voted for him expected him to do and has entirely been within the bounds of good policy.
Things learned
Over the weekend, I learned (via some ABC Radio National listening):
* China is trying hard to break into the international film market, but they are having trouble given that they want their films to be both nationalist and appeal to other audiences. (Their film industry is under close government control.) God knows, with an awful attempt at a blockbuster like The Wandering Earth, they do have a way to go.
* The world is running out of sand for concrete. Apparently, you can't just use any sand (like from a desert), and hence too many countries are ruining too many rivers and lakes in dredging up sand. Australia also apparently sold sand to Dubai for the construction of the Burj Khalifa. Didn't know that.
* Cricket boxes, for the protection of male genitalia, don't seem to undergo much in the way of testing for efficacy. And lots of sports result can result in serious injury with cycling (if I recall correctly) at the top of the list for numbers of injuries. It's a good reason not to get into sport, if you ask me.
* China is trying hard to break into the international film market, but they are having trouble given that they want their films to be both nationalist and appeal to other audiences. (Their film industry is under close government control.) God knows, with an awful attempt at a blockbuster like The Wandering Earth, they do have a way to go.
* The world is running out of sand for concrete. Apparently, you can't just use any sand (like from a desert), and hence too many countries are ruining too many rivers and lakes in dredging up sand. Australia also apparently sold sand to Dubai for the construction of the Burj Khalifa. Didn't know that.
* Cricket boxes, for the protection of male genitalia, don't seem to undergo much in the way of testing for efficacy. And lots of sports result can result in serious injury with cycling (if I recall correctly) at the top of the list for numbers of injuries. It's a good reason not to get into sport, if you ask me.
Sunday, October 27, 2019
Saturday night
Update: Because Tim showed interest in comments - yes, the organ was played last night in one of the pieces, and it was great to hear. It was this pretty awesome piece of music, which I hadn't heard before (save for the pop song, as explained below):
The Youtube is just an audio, and is a few years old, but its description would indicate that it was still by the Queensland Youth Orchestra.
I did not know that this piece of music provided the melody to the one hit pop wonder "If I had words" from 1978. So, I learned something too...
Saturday, October 26, 2019
Friday, October 25, 2019
The mixed messages of Okja
It seemed apt, after watching the horrible horse abattoir video on 7.30 last week, that I should watch the Netflix anti-industrial meat movie Okja, which has been out for a year and two and was pretty well reviewed. So I finally did, last weekend.
Made by the well known Korean director Bong Joon-ho, it has a lot going for it:
* it looks a million bucks, as they say. The CGI for the title (giant, genetically modified, pig) character is nearly always completely convincing, and many action sequences look like they would have cost a lot to stage. It's a terrific looking, well directed, film:
* Tilda Swinton gets to act over the top in her usual scene stealing fashion. As I have written before, there is something so distinctive about her looks and acting that I can't get my eyes off her in any scene she's in. She also has a co-producer credit, which surprised me.
* the ending leaves mixed emotions, but at least it's not a complete downer likeBong's Train to Busan. [Sorry, I thought he directed it, but it was Yeon Sang-ho.]
On the other hand, as some critics noted, the changing tone of the film is pretty eccentric, and sort of puzzling.
The key point is that, for a film which seems for the most part to be intended to make the audience feel guilty about eating meat, the vegan activists are portrayed as well intentioned but both a bit dumb, and too extreme, not to mention capable of violence. They don't come out of the movie as bad as Big Meat, but their often unflattering portrayal leaves the film with somewhat confusing messaging.
I wondered whether Bong was a vegan or vegetarian and wrote the movie to promote that diet, but I have read that he only became a temporary vegan for a couple of months after visiting an abattoir for research. And he pointed out that the kindly girl lead (human) character is not a vegetarian either - she eats fish and chicken in the film. Fair enough: but the film is definitely meant to make us feel sorry for the pig like animals awaiting slaughter.
Speaking of which -
SPOILER ALERT FOR ENDING
given that I did know the terrible ending of Train to Busan, I had no confidence at all about the fate of Okja itself at the climax of the film. In fact, if it was meant to really hit people hard as a way of putting them off meat, it would have ended differently. But maybe Bong decided that would be a step too far - and audiences could react against the movie. I guess most viewers would feel like me: both somewhat relieved at the ending, but also that it undercut somewhat the apparent intention of the film. The final scenes do seem a bit flat, and Okja's friends did not get the release they also deserved.
As I say, pretty mixed messaging, but still well worth watching.
Made by the well known Korean director Bong Joon-ho, it has a lot going for it:
* it looks a million bucks, as they say. The CGI for the title (giant, genetically modified, pig) character is nearly always completely convincing, and many action sequences look like they would have cost a lot to stage. It's a terrific looking, well directed, film:
* Tilda Swinton gets to act over the top in her usual scene stealing fashion. As I have written before, there is something so distinctive about her looks and acting that I can't get my eyes off her in any scene she's in. She also has a co-producer credit, which surprised me.
* the ending leaves mixed emotions, but at least it's not a complete downer like
On the other hand, as some critics noted, the changing tone of the film is pretty eccentric, and sort of puzzling.
The key point is that, for a film which seems for the most part to be intended to make the audience feel guilty about eating meat, the vegan activists are portrayed as well intentioned but both a bit dumb, and too extreme, not to mention capable of violence. They don't come out of the movie as bad as Big Meat, but their often unflattering portrayal leaves the film with somewhat confusing messaging.
I wondered whether Bong was a vegan or vegetarian and wrote the movie to promote that diet, but I have read that he only became a temporary vegan for a couple of months after visiting an abattoir for research. And he pointed out that the kindly girl lead (human) character is not a vegetarian either - she eats fish and chicken in the film. Fair enough: but the film is definitely meant to make us feel sorry for the pig like animals awaiting slaughter.
Speaking of which -
SPOILER ALERT FOR ENDING
given that I did know the terrible ending of Train to Busan, I had no confidence at all about the fate of Okja itself at the climax of the film. In fact, if it was meant to really hit people hard as a way of putting them off meat, it would have ended differently. But maybe Bong decided that would be a step too far - and audiences could react against the movie. I guess most viewers would feel like me: both somewhat relieved at the ending, but also that it undercut somewhat the apparent intention of the film. The final scenes do seem a bit flat, and Okja's friends did not get the release they also deserved.
As I say, pretty mixed messaging, but still well worth watching.
On climbing sacred places
I'm sorry - I really, really do not wish to be showing any sympathy to the obnoxious Right in Australia huffing and puffing about Uluru being closed to climbing, but I do think it's reasonable to see the decision more motivated by an aboriginal rights power play, rather than to do with the question of respect for sacredness of the site to the local indigenous.
Generally speaking, I think humans should get over the belief that any natural formation is more inherently sacred than any other natural place; but you can't tell people they have to stop believing in local or ancient folklore relating to a site, so we have to live with that.
But let's be honest here - there might be lots of "sacred mountains" in the world, but my impression is that very, very few of them are rendered "unable to be climbed" because of that status. I've been on the side of Mt Fuji and watched some Japanese women do something like a bit of sun worship as it rose - but no one thinks Westerners should be banned from its side.
Similarly, can white liberals stop using such a trite comparison between cathedrals (oh, it's just the same as not allowing people to climb over a cathedral, because it's sacred) and Uluru? Because, let's face it, hundreds of thousands of non-Christian tourists have been allowed to ascend the domes or bell towers of the great cathedrals of Europe merely to admire the view, and that is actually the closest analogy to white folk ascending Uluru up a set path. Sure, they wouldn't allow tourists to climb up the outside of a cathedral by ropes, for reasons of both damage that could be caused and aesthetics. But similarly, no one has a problem with Uluru enforcing a one route ascent because they want the minimum of the rock damaged. In both cases, if there is one route to the top to accommodate tourists, it's a case of a "sacred" space being allowed to be accessed by people who may or may not think the spot is spiritual.
The other factor is, of course, that the rock has been climbed for a very long time, giving the impression that the sacredness being defiled was not such an important issue in the past as it is now.
And really, isn't it kind of obvious that claiming, or inflating, sacred importance is just the easiest way indigenous groups have for feeling they can exert power? Have liberals forgotten the Hindmarsh Island affair?
Having said all of this, I am not suggesting that there is any point in politically disputing the decision - I don't actually feel they should not have the right to ban climbing for whatever reason. (And actually, the safety issue is a fairly significant one, given the number who have died on the climb.)
But I don't think the populace has to feel guilty about assessing that the decision is not particularly well justified, or high-minded, even on the popularly claimed "must respect the sacredness" grounds. Hence, I won't join in the criticism of those tourists who have rushed to climb it (even though I don't really see why climbing it on a hot day has that much inherent attraction, either.) It reads more just an indigenous political power play.
Generally speaking, I think humans should get over the belief that any natural formation is more inherently sacred than any other natural place; but you can't tell people they have to stop believing in local or ancient folklore relating to a site, so we have to live with that.
But let's be honest here - there might be lots of "sacred mountains" in the world, but my impression is that very, very few of them are rendered "unable to be climbed" because of that status. I've been on the side of Mt Fuji and watched some Japanese women do something like a bit of sun worship as it rose - but no one thinks Westerners should be banned from its side.
Similarly, can white liberals stop using such a trite comparison between cathedrals (oh, it's just the same as not allowing people to climb over a cathedral, because it's sacred) and Uluru? Because, let's face it, hundreds of thousands of non-Christian tourists have been allowed to ascend the domes or bell towers of the great cathedrals of Europe merely to admire the view, and that is actually the closest analogy to white folk ascending Uluru up a set path. Sure, they wouldn't allow tourists to climb up the outside of a cathedral by ropes, for reasons of both damage that could be caused and aesthetics. But similarly, no one has a problem with Uluru enforcing a one route ascent because they want the minimum of the rock damaged. In both cases, if there is one route to the top to accommodate tourists, it's a case of a "sacred" space being allowed to be accessed by people who may or may not think the spot is spiritual.
The other factor is, of course, that the rock has been climbed for a very long time, giving the impression that the sacredness being defiled was not such an important issue in the past as it is now.
And really, isn't it kind of obvious that claiming, or inflating, sacred importance is just the easiest way indigenous groups have for feeling they can exert power? Have liberals forgotten the Hindmarsh Island affair?
Having said all of this, I am not suggesting that there is any point in politically disputing the decision - I don't actually feel they should not have the right to ban climbing for whatever reason. (And actually, the safety issue is a fairly significant one, given the number who have died on the climb.)
But I don't think the populace has to feel guilty about assessing that the decision is not particularly well justified, or high-minded, even on the popularly claimed "must respect the sacredness" grounds. Hence, I won't join in the criticism of those tourists who have rushed to climb it (even though I don't really see why climbing it on a hot day has that much inherent attraction, either.) It reads more just an indigenous political power play.
Thursday, October 24, 2019
Laser away your drone problem
Noted at Gizmodo:
The “directed energy” weapon uses an electro-optical/infrared sensor to identify potential threats before using a laser to knock dangerous drones out of the sky. The laser can be powered using a standard 220-volt outlet and when it’s hooked up to a generator it can provide a “nearly infinite number of shots.”The video:
The vexed question of economic growth and environmentalism
Noah Smith at Bloomberg writes:
Economic Growth Shouldn’t Be a Death Sentence for Earth
He writes:
Economic Growth Shouldn’t Be a Death Sentence for Earth
He writes:
Among some intellectuals and environmentalists, it’s an article of faith that economic growth must be brought to a stop. If we fail to act, we’ll use up the planet’s resources and growth will suffer a disastrous collapse. For example, British writer George Monbiot has been advancing this point of view for quite some time. In April, he declared:He may be right, but it's no doubt complicated if the world were to go aggressively to reduce fossil fuel use.
Perpetual growth on a finite planet leads inexorably to environmental calamity. The absolute decoupling [of growth from resource use] needed to avert environmental catastrophe…has never been achieved, and appears impossible while economic growth continues. Green growth is an illusion.Monbiot is simply incorrect. There are good reasons, both theoretical and empirical, to believe that economic growth can be decoupled from resource use. For many resources, this is already becoming a reality.
Just put on Nazi uniforms and be done with
Herr Trump's lawyer argues his boss could not be investigated if he shot someone in the street. Sure, 5 years later after he stops being President he could be. But no investigation while he's President.
That's the authoritarian ridiculousness that Trump Cultists shrug their shoulders about these days.
And those gaslighting numbskulls saying that it's a scandal that current impeachment evidence gathering is being done in private: yeah, just like Grand Juries do, as other congressional committess have done, and in any event, Republicans are sitting in on the hearings. It is pure gaslighting of their dumb, dumb base as the last resort defence.
And Herr Trump is now calling "Never Trump" Republicans "human scum". That's after his musing about civil war if he is impeached, a few weeks ago.
No, nothing authoritarian and cultish and stupid and dangerous about this at all.
Update:
That's the authoritarian ridiculousness that Trump Cultists shrug their shoulders about these days.
And those gaslighting numbskulls saying that it's a scandal that current impeachment evidence gathering is being done in private: yeah, just like Grand Juries do, as other congressional committess have done, and in any event, Republicans are sitting in on the hearings. It is pure gaslighting of their dumb, dumb base as the last resort defence.
And Herr Trump is now calling "Never Trump" Republicans "human scum". That's after his musing about civil war if he is impeached, a few weeks ago.
No, nothing authoritarian and cultish and stupid and dangerous about this at all.
Update:
Full on tabloid
Look, Bolt has long been on my "gone completely stupid and offensive" category in my blogroll, and you can't read much of what he posts about anyway, but I still look sometimes to see what he is writing about.
Man, has he gone trash tabloid in his topics, or what?:
Works for Murdoch, what should I expect?
Man, has he gone trash tabloid in his topics, or what?:
Works for Murdoch, what should I expect?
Wednesday, October 23, 2019
Brexit "win" not really much of a win
I was a bit confused about this - did the Parliament's passing of Boris Johnson's Brexit enabling legislation at a second reading stage mean that the ultimate approval of the deal was a forgone conclusion?
Jonathan Freedland at The Guardian says "no":
Jonathan Freedland at The Guardian says "no":
What does it mean? First, don’t fall for the hype that says that parliament approved Johnson’s deal. It did not. MPs simply voted for it to receive a second reading, some of them motivated by the desire not to endorse it but to amend it. As Labour’s Gloria De Piero confessed, she voted yes, “not because I support the deal but because I don’t”. That 30-vote majority will include MPs who wanted to propose UK membership of a customs union, others keen on conditioning the deal on public support in a confirmatory referendum. Screen out the Tory spin: those MPs should not be counted as backers of the deal.
As for the defeat on the timetable, that is the result of what now looks like a tactical misjudgment by the government. By making such a fetish of the 31 October deadline – arbitrarily imposed by Emmanuel Macron when Theresa May missed the last one – Johnson painted himself into a corner whereby even a delay of a few days looked like a humiliation. Both Jeremy Corbyn and Ken Clarke signalled that it might not need much more than a few extra days to undertake the necessary scrutiny – though Nikki da Costa, until recently Johnson’s head of legislative affairs, had said it required at least four weeks – which is hardly that long to wait. Instead of taking that pragmatic course, Johnson felt compelled to call the whole thing to a halt.
Why? The obvious explanation is that this gives the PM a pretext to grab what he really wants: an early election framed as a battle to get Brexit done, with him as the people’s tribune pitted against those wicked remainer saboteurs.
But another explanation suggests itself, too. Any period of scrutiny is unpalatable to Johnson, because he fears that the threadbare coalition that might exist to back his deal will unravel once it engages in closer examination of the withdrawal agreement. Its erosion of workers’ rights; its creation of a new no-deal cliff edge in 2020; its entrenchment of a hard Brexit in law – all those dangers would only become more visible under the spotlight of protracted (or even normal) Commons scrutiny. Bits of his coalition – especially among those Labour MPs who backed him on Tuesday – would begin to flake off.
Wash your hands
Well, this is kind of interesting:
There did genetic sequencing of the bacteria from several sources to work this out.
Antibiotic-resistant E. coli is more likely to be spread through poor toilet hygiene than undercooked chicken or other food, according to new research from a consortium including the University of East Anglia.
There did genetic sequencing of the bacteria from several sources to work this out.
Bird banned
Graeme, you have obnoxious and offensive beliefs which you insist on repeating. I'm not here to assist the broadcast of those.
All new comments I see from you, on any topic, will be deleted, sooner or later.
Go be an obnoxious, insulting nutter on your own blog.
All new comments I see from you, on any topic, will be deleted, sooner or later.
Go be an obnoxious, insulting nutter on your own blog.
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
Peaked early, maybe
I feel a bit mean making this observation out loud, because it's possible he is a fragile character who Googles himself looking for affirmation.
Anyhow - I saw Josh Thomas on ABC Breakfast this morning, and I have to say that I find him more "mannered" than ever. Maybe he's naturally nervous all the time, but he sure didn't come across as natural - it feels like it's all a performance.
They played a clip from a series he has made in the US, which is apparently another comedy/drama like Please Like Me (the charms of which escaped me), and his acting in it seemed to be a severe case of trying too hard to look awkward. I wonder how the critics are going to take it.
Thomas is also about to embark on a stand up tour, and he seems to be indicating that it is going to be yet another case of a stand up comedy act that is an attempt at self confessional therapy after a "difficult period". (He's been single for a year or so, after having 3 different relationships in his 20's. Yeah, a real tragedy.) I don't know why this has to be the basis of so much comedy now - I don't think it's psychologically healthy, and I thought Hannah Gadsby had confirmed that for everyone who didn't already realise it as a matter of common sense.
In any case, I don't wish him failure - I just have trouble seeing what his fan base sees in him.
Anyhow - I saw Josh Thomas on ABC Breakfast this morning, and I have to say that I find him more "mannered" than ever. Maybe he's naturally nervous all the time, but he sure didn't come across as natural - it feels like it's all a performance.
They played a clip from a series he has made in the US, which is apparently another comedy/drama like Please Like Me (the charms of which escaped me), and his acting in it seemed to be a severe case of trying too hard to look awkward. I wonder how the critics are going to take it.
Thomas is also about to embark on a stand up tour, and he seems to be indicating that it is going to be yet another case of a stand up comedy act that is an attempt at self confessional therapy after a "difficult period". (He's been single for a year or so, after having 3 different relationships in his 20's. Yeah, a real tragedy.) I don't know why this has to be the basis of so much comedy now - I don't think it's psychologically healthy, and I thought Hannah Gadsby had confirmed that for everyone who didn't already realise it as a matter of common sense.
In any case, I don't wish him failure - I just have trouble seeing what his fan base sees in him.
Sinclair Davidson - celebrating the dumb and inane for, what, 15 years now?
Yeah, because if you're going to devastate trillions of dollars of ocean side investment and infrastructure, it's better to do it as rapidly as possible with maximum inundation.
The animating underclass
I haven't seen much of the content of the Youtube channel Asian Boss - but a lot of it does seem interesting.
I watched this one in full, and was really surprised at the terrible pay and conditions for the (I assume) thousands of animators upon which so much Japanese TV (and movie) content depends:
I watched this one in full, and was really surprised at the terrible pay and conditions for the (I assume) thousands of animators upon which so much Japanese TV (and movie) content depends:
Big day for an Emperor
From the Japan Times:
The exact form of the ritual is still a little controversial:
Clad in a dark orange robe only worn by emperors on special occasions, Emperor Naruhito will proclaim his enthronement Tuesday at the Imperial Palace, offering a speech atop a canopied throne followed by banzai cheers from guests.Hope we get to see it on TV.
The 59-year-old monarch — who ascended the throne on May 1 following the abdication of his father, Emperor Emeritus Akihito, the previous day — will formally announce his enthronement from an elevated dais within the palace in Tokyo. The event will be attended by some 2,000 guests from Japan and about 180 countries and international organizations.
The Sokuirei Seiden no Gi enthronement ceremony at the Seiden State Hall will start at 1 p.m. in the Pine Chamber (Matsu no Ma) state room, with the emperor ascending to the 6.5-meter-high canopied takamikura throne. Empress Masako will be seated on the adjacent michōdai throne during the ceremony.
The exact form of the ritual is still a little controversial:
The Imperial House Law only states that an enthronement ceremony is held when an imperial succession takes place, and does not detail how to stage the rite. The previous rite, held in November 1990 for Emperor Akihito, followed the example of the enthronement ceremony of his father, Emperor Hirohito, posthumously known as Emperor Showa. That was based on Tokyokurei, a 1909 order on the formalities of the ceremony. The directive was abolished after World War II.
The government has decided to follow precedent despite criticism that doing so contravenes the postwar constitutional separation of state and religion, as well as the sovereignty of the people, by having the emperor proclaim his enthronement from a high place as the prime minister stands below.
Monday, October 21, 2019
Whip it
Yesterday, after making pumpkin scones for (possibly?) the first time*, I whipped some cream by hand - definitely for the first time.
It was not so hard. Sure, I wasn't sure if it was working at all, but then you get that satisfying sudden transition from thick liquid to stuff so thick it's standing up by itself. I only needed a small amount, so a small metal bowl and medium sized whisk did it fine.
Given that this woman had trouble whipping, I'm pleased it worked for me first time.
* Not entirely sure they are worth the effort - it seems a common complaint, derived from the uncertain water content in mashed pumpkin, that recipes make for too sticky a dough to which a lot more flour has to be added. That happened to me, too; but then again, I did add more pumpkin than called for in the recipe I was sort of following.
It was not so hard. Sure, I wasn't sure if it was working at all, but then you get that satisfying sudden transition from thick liquid to stuff so thick it's standing up by itself. I only needed a small amount, so a small metal bowl and medium sized whisk did it fine.
Given that this woman had trouble whipping, I'm pleased it worked for me first time.
* Not entirely sure they are worth the effort - it seems a common complaint, derived from the uncertain water content in mashed pumpkin, that recipes make for too sticky a dough to which a lot more flour has to be added. That happened to me, too; but then again, I did add more pumpkin than called for in the recipe I was sort of following.
Automation and Yang
I missed this rather good article at Slate last week that criticises Andrew Yang's automation unemployment apocalypse views as lazy and not well justified when you look at all studies on the topic.
The catastrophic Johnson
Well, I did enjoy this Nick Cohen column on Boris Johnson, who reached a "new deal" Brexit by doing a complete turnaround on key one point within a fortnight. He paints a picture of him in the following context:
There seems to be a feeling about that, despite this current (apparent) delay, Parliament will sooner or later pass this deal, in large part because they are utterly sick of having to deal with it as a problem. We'll see.
In his classic study On the Psychology of Military Incompetence, Norman Dixon analysed British generals who had led their men to pointless deaths from Crimea to Arnhem. How familiar his diagnosis feels. Dixon identified “overweening ambition dedicated to one goal – self-advancement” as a persistent fault; and that sounds familiar. Catastrophic men equated “war with sport”, he continued, and one thinks of Theresa May’s warning in 2016 that “politics isn’t a game.”
She surely had Johnson in mind. For him, it is a game and winning is all. Last year, he told the Democratic Unionist party that a border in the Irish Sea “would be damaging to the fabric of the union”. He jutted out what passes for his jaw and with a Churchillian boom thundered: “I have to tell you that no British Conservative government could or should sign up to any such arrangement.”
Last week, he signed up to “such an arrangement” because betraying his allies wins him the game of politics. Dixon noticed “an underestimation, sometimes bordering on the arrogant, of the enemy”. And one thinks of Dominic Cummings, so lost in his deluded machismo that he told EU countries that they “will go to the bottom of the queue” if they dared challenge the mighty Britain. A mere fortnight later, Johnson capitulated to Brussels so thoroughly the EU will no longer has to worry about the Irish border and can adopt the toughest of stances when and if trade negotiations begin.
No one should be surprised. It is an essential part of the catastrophic character that catastrophists do not learn from their mistakes or realise they are making them.
On the small matters as well as the large, political incompetents mirror military incompetents. Generals who display “a love of bull, smartness, precision and strict preservation of the military pecking order” are prone to lead regiments to disaster, Dixon wrote. Remember Jacob Rees-Mogg’s semi-literate instruction to his civil servants that they must address untitled men as “esq” when the practice is archaic. Or his insistence that they never use “hopefully” in his presence: even though the adverb has stood in for “I hope” for centuries and no serious linguist has the smallest problem with it.
There seems to be a feeling about that, despite this current (apparent) delay, Parliament will sooner or later pass this deal, in large part because they are utterly sick of having to deal with it as a problem. We'll see.
Sunday, October 20, 2019
Kidneys for sale
Today on CNA, I learned about poor Filipinos selling their kidneys through social media (the report fingers Facebook, which says it's against their rules, but they don't know what's going on til someone tells them.)
Interestingly, it seems the story has sparked some racism comments on Youtube:
Is that sarcasm at perceived Singaporean racism? Or actual racism?
And what about this comment?:
One other thing about watching CNA - I know that Singapore doesn't work like your normal, messy democracies, but when you see government ministers talking on CNA, my goodness they seem so, so reasonable and smart and sensible compared to 90% of the politicians in most Western nations.
Interestingly, it seems the story has sparked some racism comments on Youtube:
Is that sarcasm at perceived Singaporean racism? Or actual racism?
And what about this comment?:
One other thing about watching CNA - I know that Singapore doesn't work like your normal, messy democracies, but when you see government ministers talking on CNA, my goodness they seem so, so reasonable and smart and sensible compared to 90% of the politicians in most Western nations.
Saturday, October 19, 2019
Friday, October 18, 2019
Not even scientifically accurate
I meant to give a Muntz-ian "ha ha" when I noticed this story a week or so ago, but forgot.
Turns out Interstellar, which I consider awful, is not so scientifically accurate after all.
Could a habitable planet orbit a supermassive black hole?
Short answer: almost certainly not.
Turns out Interstellar, which I consider awful, is not so scientifically accurate after all.
Could a habitable planet orbit a supermassive black hole?
Short answer: almost certainly not.
And I don't even like horses
7.30's story last night on the thoroughbred racehorse business and it's pretence that it really takes care to avoid having failed, even relatively young, horses ground up into greyhound mince, was a gruesome expose of a sham industry that was really hard to watch.
The treatment of the horses at the abattoir at Caboolture was awful, and the attitude of the men who worked there woeful. If any man has to make a living that way, I have no respect for them unless they have some at least some empathy for the animal. There was zero on display last night.
But the whole show reinforced my prejudices against the whole racing enterprise - the alleged sport of kings that has expanded on the back of (mostly) saps with a gambling problem, as well as those who occasionally like to play dress ups and get conspicuously drunk while ignoring the inherent cruelty of breeding far too many horses and disposing of them as soon as they are too expensive to care for.
The treatment of the horses at the abattoir at Caboolture was awful, and the attitude of the men who worked there woeful. If any man has to make a living that way, I have no respect for them unless they have some at least some empathy for the animal. There was zero on display last night.
But the whole show reinforced my prejudices against the whole racing enterprise - the alleged sport of kings that has expanded on the back of (mostly) saps with a gambling problem, as well as those who occasionally like to play dress ups and get conspicuously drunk while ignoring the inherent cruelty of breeding far too many horses and disposing of them as soon as they are too expensive to care for.
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Apartment design considered.
I've realised something about typical apartment design in Australia, and what I dislike about it.
I really don't like the way so many have the entry door opening directly into the big, open kitchen/living room space. It's too intrusive and direct an entry into a space which should have more privacy when viewed from the front door. Moreover, it removes the idea of a transition space from the outside to the inside that feels important and natural in Japanese living spaces, and actually makes practical sense too.
So, I reckon no apartment entry door should open with a clear line of sight right into the living area. I like the idea of having to turn a corner after entering an apartment to be able to see the (hopefully) impressive living area. Even if it's not a solid wall that the door opens towards, a screening of some type should be used. This might mean that an entry door light just inside is often needed, but that should be no big deal.
The other thing I dislike about apartment design in Australia is the way that bedrooms will so often open directly into the main living area. There is a need for hallways to separate bedroom entries from living areas.
I also think we don't use different floor levels enough to provide a sense of separation between different areas. Or beds that fold up into walls. Why can't we have those in Australia?
As you were.
Update: examples -
This is OK:
This is good:
This is fine:
This is everything I dislike in an apartment layout:
I really don't like the way so many have the entry door opening directly into the big, open kitchen/living room space. It's too intrusive and direct an entry into a space which should have more privacy when viewed from the front door. Moreover, it removes the idea of a transition space from the outside to the inside that feels important and natural in Japanese living spaces, and actually makes practical sense too.
So, I reckon no apartment entry door should open with a clear line of sight right into the living area. I like the idea of having to turn a corner after entering an apartment to be able to see the (hopefully) impressive living area. Even if it's not a solid wall that the door opens towards, a screening of some type should be used. This might mean that an entry door light just inside is often needed, but that should be no big deal.
The other thing I dislike about apartment design in Australia is the way that bedrooms will so often open directly into the main living area. There is a need for hallways to separate bedroom entries from living areas.
I also think we don't use different floor levels enough to provide a sense of separation between different areas. Or beds that fold up into walls. Why can't we have those in Australia?
As you were.
Update: examples -
This is OK:
This is good:
This is fine:
This is everything I dislike in an apartment layout:
If you like wasabi flavour punching you in the mouth and nasal passages...
...you'll like these Doritos, which are really surprisingly strong on the flavour front:
I like it, but you can only eat so many at one sitting.
Extreme weather and climate, noted
Below is the start of a good thread on Twitter about climate change and extreme weather.
He goes on further down to talk about floods and drought, and the inherent complexity in judging overall trends in them, as well the matter of increasing hurricane strength (also quite complicated on a global scale.)
Very balanced, and it should be remembered, we are only at 1 degree average global change. Double or triple that, and where do you think we'll be?
Also, do I need to bother pointing out that this week's floods in Japan came after record rainfall intensity?
He goes on further down to talk about floods and drought, and the inherent complexity in judging overall trends in them, as well the matter of increasing hurricane strength (also quite complicated on a global scale.)
Very balanced, and it should be remembered, we are only at 1 degree average global change. Double or triple that, and where do you think we'll be?
Also, do I need to bother pointing out that this week's floods in Japan came after record rainfall intensity?
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
Nature reviews capitalism
A somewhat interesting review of three books on economics:
Update: dear readers, I know that Graeme (see comments below) holds deeply to both economic anti-Semitism (for which there is a pretty good article at Wikipedia) and whatever one might call his "Jews are ruthless covert killers playing the West and Islamists for schmucks" anti-Semitism. I usually delete his comments which are clearly in the later category, but sometimes leave those in the former category since they don't, at least, involve allegations of murder. But I am well aware that two aspects feed off each other, and am sorely tempted to try to start deleting any and all references to Jewish matters by him. It's a tiresome job. Can more visitors in comments please just start telling him he is an idiot about Jews, again? The silence he gets (and the sometimes support of Jason on economics) is, I fear, giving him a false sense that this is a "safe" place where readers maybe don't think he is a completely offensive nutjob about Jews.
Thank you.
In Defense of Open Society George Soros PublicAffairs (2019)is at Nature.com.
Capitalism, Alone: The Future of the System That Rules the World Branko Milanovic Belknap (2019)
Measuring What Counts: The Global Movement for Well-Being Joseph E. Stiglitz, Jean-Paul Fitoussi and Martine Durand The New Press (2019)
Update: dear readers, I know that Graeme (see comments below) holds deeply to both economic anti-Semitism (for which there is a pretty good article at Wikipedia) and whatever one might call his "Jews are ruthless covert killers playing the West and Islamists for schmucks" anti-Semitism. I usually delete his comments which are clearly in the later category, but sometimes leave those in the former category since they don't, at least, involve allegations of murder. But I am well aware that two aspects feed off each other, and am sorely tempted to try to start deleting any and all references to Jewish matters by him. It's a tiresome job. Can more visitors in comments please just start telling him he is an idiot about Jews, again? The silence he gets (and the sometimes support of Jason on economics) is, I fear, giving him a false sense that this is a "safe" place where readers maybe don't think he is a completely offensive nutjob about Jews.
Thank you.
News from the North
North Korea, that is.
France24 informs us:
I dunno, Kim's face doesn't look to me like he's exactly enjoying the experience. Nor is the horse, in all likelihood, give the (sort of) Regal Tubbiness on his back.
Still, I can just imagine Trump seeing this image and being jealous that he doesn't have a stead on which to at least try to look like a noble warrior king.
France24 informs us:
Aides to Kim Jong Un are convinced the North Korean leader plans "a great operation", state media said on Wednesday in a report that included lavish descriptions and images of the leader riding a white horse up North Korea’s most sacred mountain.That sounds a worry. Here's the photo they released:
I dunno, Kim's face doesn't look to me like he's exactly enjoying the experience. Nor is the horse, in all likelihood, give the (sort of) Regal Tubbiness on his back.
Still, I can just imagine Trump seeing this image and being jealous that he doesn't have a stead on which to at least try to look like a noble warrior king.
Various
As you can probably tell, I'm a bit busy this week. Here's some stuff I've noticed but not given individual posts to:
* turns out that nutty Trump economics adviser Peter Navarro has done a Trump, so to speak: invented an imaginary friend (actually himself) to give support to his positions. Some of his co-authors did not know. How embarrassing.
* I've not been able to see Ad Astra, but oddly, I have had two diametrically opposed opinions of the film from two different couples. My chances of liking it seem to be getting lower, though.
* Who is this Bruce Mountain who argues the Snowy 2 project is a dud project? Sorry, but I am a little suspicious of someone I haven't heard of before coming out as an expert and then dissing a renewable project that other experts seem to think is worthwhile.
* Saudi Arabia has paid Instagram "influencers" to go there and say how marvellous the place is (in preparation of opening the country up to tourism.) This reminds me of an old rule of thumb (actually, I must add it to my Rules for Life): do not holiday in any country where looking the wrong way at someone can get you arrested for witchcraft (or possibly, homosexuality).
* STDs still on the rise in America. Most sadly:
Seems to me that the USA is strangely bad at not getting on top of that particular problem.
* turns out that nutty Trump economics adviser Peter Navarro has done a Trump, so to speak: invented an imaginary friend (actually himself) to give support to his positions. Some of his co-authors did not know. How embarrassing.
* I've not been able to see Ad Astra, but oddly, I have had two diametrically opposed opinions of the film from two different couples. My chances of liking it seem to be getting lower, though.
* Who is this Bruce Mountain who argues the Snowy 2 project is a dud project? Sorry, but I am a little suspicious of someone I haven't heard of before coming out as an expert and then dissing a renewable project that other experts seem to think is worthwhile.
* Saudi Arabia has paid Instagram "influencers" to go there and say how marvellous the place is (in preparation of opening the country up to tourism.) This reminds me of an old rule of thumb (actually, I must add it to my Rules for Life): do not holiday in any country where looking the wrong way at someone can get you arrested for witchcraft (or possibly, homosexuality).
* STDs still on the rise in America. Most sadly:
Among newborns, syphilis cases increased 40 percent to more than 1,300 cases.Also, look where those cases mainly come from:
The 40 percent increase in congenital syphilis cases continues a dangerous trend seen in recent years. Although most states reported at least one case of congenital syphilis, five states – Texas, California, Florida, Arizona, and Louisiana – accounted for 70 percent of cases in the U.S.That seems an odd mix, no?
Seems to me that the USA is strangely bad at not getting on top of that particular problem.
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Now they complain about the violence...
I get that it's at least poor taste for wingnut Trumpers to use the Kingsman ultra violent church scene to show Trump killing "fake news"; but I think that people who find this clip offensive for its violence should have been calling it out for such in the original movie.
But no, the largely liberal leaning world of movie criticism pretty much was silent about it.
I see someone on the internet agrees.
Monday, October 14, 2019
About the monocle
An interesting history of the monocle is to be found at The Atlantic.
Count me as somewhat amused to read the sentence about its populariser:
Count me as somewhat amused to read the sentence about its populariser:
The monocle followed. It was fixed in the eye socket and held in place hands-free, wedged behind the loose skin around the eye thanks to the orbicularis oculi, the muscle that closes the eyelid. Its advent is usually associated with Philipp von Stosch, an 18th-century German baron, who in his time was better known for writing the definitive work on carved gemstones and living an active, open life as a homosexual. Notwithstanding, popularizing the monocle became his lasting legacy. By the end of the century, it was in use all over German-speaking countries. It jumped to London around the turn of the 19th century, where it took hold among the aristocracy.
Glad they haven't developed a taste for humans surfing/swimming
I never used to be all that aware that orcas were near our relatively warm coastal beaches (my image of them is always of a colder water species) but here they are not far off Ballina:
Whale watchers off the coast of Ballina in northern New South Wales have held a front-row seat to the gruesome spectacle of a juvenile humpback whale being devoured by a pod of killer whales, also known as orcas.
This is, shall we say, of limited utility...
Performance art as protest is a real "thing" with Extinction Rebellion, isn't it?
Look, I guess it's better than people setting themselves on fire, which is perhaps the most useless protest method ever devised. (And besides, it would only be adding to CO2.)
But I feel fairly certain that performance art conveys an air of "we're here to have fun with our like minded friends" which is not very effective in terms of political influence.
She's not convinced
Sabine Hossenfelder gave a good review of Sean Carroll's recent book promoting the Many Worlds theory, but she explains her issues with it at a recent post The Trouble With Many Worlds.
About flesh eating ulcers
That's surprising: apparently, at least one type of flesh eating ulcer caught from some weird ground bacteria are actually more common in Victoria than tropical North Queensland:
But doctors are concerned because, in the past two years, three cases of the usually geographically confined disease have emerged in the Atherton Tablelands, south of its usual catchment area in far-north Queensland. While the disease is much rarer in Queensland than Victoria, with an average of two cases per year, there are occasional spikes, such as in 2011 when 60 cases were recorded. Victoria saw a record 340 cases of the disease in 2018 and is approaching a similar number for 2019. Internationally renowned Buruli ulcer expert Prof Paul Johnson said that despite the comparatively low number of Queensland cases, the movement of the disease outside of its normal range was a concern.And the possible bacteria spreading culprit in Victoria:
Johnson believes it is most likely the bacteria that causes the ulcer, Mycobacterium ulcerans, is being spread in Victoria by mosquitoes and possums. In Victoria, 40% of cases are found in visitors to the Mornington and Bellarine peninsulas. The incubation period is about five months, so people often visit the beachside areas in the summer months but only present with the disease in the colder months after returning to their home areas, where doctors may not be familiar with the disease and therefore may not immediately diagnose it.So you in that State, you get the tropical sounding disease but without the benefit of warm weather. Huh.
Sunday, October 13, 2019
Back to my vaping scepticism
An article at The Guardian notes this (White is director of Quit Victoria):
White disagrees, and says the products should be taken off the shelves altogether, for not just medical but consumer safety reasons. She said there had been cases of the devices exploding, causing deaths. She also cited the death of a toddler in Melbourne after he consumed his mother’s e-nicotine liquid. Consumer safety standards were sorely lacking, she said.But also, The Lancet has weighed in:
“I can’t buy a bicycle helmet or toys from shops that don’t meet consumer safety standards, but I can go and buy a device for heating up liquids and inhale from that device for hours on end,” she said. “We have taken other products off the shelves that have less issues with them than e-cigarettes.”
She acknowledged her position had resulted in backlash from pro-vaping lobbyists in Australia, many of whom are supported by the tobacco companies that have bought a stake in the e-cigarette market.
“There are people who so passionately believe in e-cigarettes that they’re evangelical about it,” White says. “There is a divide across public health and tobacco control on this which is no doubt being fed by vested interests, and no-one is backing down.”
On Saturday, the international medical journal the Lancet published an editorial in the wake of the US deaths, and said the positioning of e-cigarettes as a quit-aid had been “vastly overstated”.OK, let's extract some that Lancet editorial directly:
“Data also suggest that smokers switch to e-cigarettes, then remain dependent long term,” the editorial said. “No solid evidence base underpins the marketing claims that e-cigarettes are healthier than cigarettes or that they can support quitting, but lax regulation has allowed e-cigarette manufacturers to pervert the success of antismoking public health messages and position e-cigarettes as healthy.”
Manufacturers of e-cigarettes, and some public health advocates, have supported their use as a smoking cessation tool and a safer alternative to cigarettes. However, the evidence for both of these claims is weak. No e-cigarettes have been tested or launched as smoking cessation products; all are sold directly to the consumer as tobacco, not medicinal, products. Three randomised trials of third-generation products show low rates of abstinence at 6 months. Data also suggest that smokers switch to e-cigarettes, then remain dependent long term. The very high nicotine levels delivered by some e-cigarettes could make them more difficult to quit than cigarettes. Very few data on long-term health effects are available to support the safety claims. The positioning of e-cigarettes as a viable cessation aid is vastly overstated, especially since the current first line treatment (nicotine replacement therapy under medical supervision) has a strong evidence base demonstrating safety and efficacy.
Claims that e-cigarettes are useful harm-reduction tools are further undermined by their high uptake among young people. Cigarette smoking among US adolescents had declined substantially in the past 20 years, but there has been a huge rise in adolescents using e-cigarettes, with rates of use at around 25% among 18-year-olds and 20% among 16-year-olds. The availability of flavoured e-liquids is cited by nearly a third of users as a major reason to start vaping, especially among younger adults. Concerns have been raised around the marketing of e-cigarettes to young adults and new users. Advertising featuring young, attractive models, sponsorship of sports events and parties, product placement, and direct payments to social media influencers are strikingly similar techniques to those used previously by the cigarette industry. In many cases, e-cigarette marketers have commandeered the public health message around smoking to promote a healthy and glamorous alternative. In response, the US Food and Drug Administration wrote to Juul Labs, criticising illegal marketing that claimed that their e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes....
No solid evidence base underpins the marketing claims that e-cigarettes are healthier than cigarettes or that they can support quitting, but lax regulation has allowed e-cigarette manufacturers to pervert the success of antismoking public health messages and position e-cigarettes as healthy. The renormalisation of smoking in the form of e-cigarettes, not only among smokers, but also among young people and never smokers, risks population-wide nicotine use and dependence on a massive scale. Surely it is time to align the public health approach to e-cigarettes with that of cigarettes.
A good Catholic movie
We watched the 2014 Bill Murray movie St Vincent on Netflix last night.
I hadn't paid much attention to the reviews when it came out, except that I had the feeling most were only lukewarm.
But I really enjoyed it.
Agreed, there's nothing groundbreaking about it, and it does carry the strong whiff of early Wes Anderson (not a bad thing, mind you); but it's pretty rare to get this type of good natured film that is funny, sometimes touching, and carries a pleasing moral message about understanding other people. Now that I think of it, it also has the feel of some John Hughes movies too, and nearly everyone had a soft spot for them, no?
Most surprisingly, the message is very genuinely Catholic in a positive way. So much so that I suspected that the screenplay may be quite old, and written well before the current period of terrible PR for the church. But I've checked, and it was written by the director Theodore Melfi in 2011, so I'm wrong. He went on to direct and co-write the very successful (and also "feelgood") Hidden Figures in 2016. I should pay more attention to his work, perhaps.
Anyway, it was the most pleasing Netflix film I have seen for some time. Yay.
I hadn't paid much attention to the reviews when it came out, except that I had the feeling most were only lukewarm.
But I really enjoyed it.
Agreed, there's nothing groundbreaking about it, and it does carry the strong whiff of early Wes Anderson (not a bad thing, mind you); but it's pretty rare to get this type of good natured film that is funny, sometimes touching, and carries a pleasing moral message about understanding other people. Now that I think of it, it also has the feel of some John Hughes movies too, and nearly everyone had a soft spot for them, no?
Most surprisingly, the message is very genuinely Catholic in a positive way. So much so that I suspected that the screenplay may be quite old, and written well before the current period of terrible PR for the church. But I've checked, and it was written by the director Theodore Melfi in 2011, so I'm wrong. He went on to direct and co-write the very successful (and also "feelgood") Hidden Figures in 2016. I should pay more attention to his work, perhaps.
Anyway, it was the most pleasing Netflix film I have seen for some time. Yay.
Saturday, October 12, 2019
Another case of "as I suspected"..
From my limited contact with social workers, I had always suspected this was true, but never really had seen it confirmed:
It's good that people want to help see that others don't go through what they have, and it's not as if past trauma should disqualify from getting into this work. But I don't think it obviously helps the profession if too many are there with that sort of background.
Such stories are common – many social work students have traumatic histories that have led them to pursue that particular career choice. ....The article argues that it is a problem that some people with convictions cannot go on to be social workers:
Social work students have a much higher incidence of various forms of childhood trauma than students of other disciplines. A 1993 US study found 22% of social work students reported childhood sexual abuse compared to 2% of business students.
... studies have found lived experiences to be helpful in a range of social work fields. These include addiction-treatment programs, mental health, domestic and family violence, and working with sex workers.But the link used to justify that claim is to one study of a pretty esoteric social work study:
A peer-led mobile outreach program and increased utilization of detoxification and residential drug treatment among female sex workers who use drugs in a Canadian setting.I remain to be convinced that too many social workers coming from a background of, say, childhood physical or emotional abuse, is actually a good idea. The problems I can see with it is that their personal experience could bias their decisions in cases too close to their own, and the psychological harm from abuse can take (it would seem) decades to get over, with some people never quite recovering.
It's good that people want to help see that others don't go through what they have, and it's not as if past trauma should disqualify from getting into this work. But I don't think it obviously helps the profession if too many are there with that sort of background.
Such a peacenik
As noted everywhere:
And more:The Trump administration will send nearly 2,000 troops and advanced military equipment to Saudi Arabia to deter threats from Iran — a move that will increase America’s presence in the Middle East, even as President Donald Trump falsely boasts about ending wars in the region.The announcement, made by Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley on Friday, continues the administration’s campaign both to increase pressure on Tehran and deepen ties with Riyadh. The US has sent an additional 14,000 military members to the Middle East since May, which the 1,800 authorized Friday will add to.
Trump is saying these things to justify his decision on Sunday to move American troops in Syria — a decision that’s drawn bipartisan pushback. It’d be one thing if he were bringing all 1,000 US troops in the country home, but he’s not. Instead, he’s moving just 50 US service members out of northern Syria to get out of the way of a just-started Turkish invasion.
That’s not all. A late September report from US Air Forces Central Command showed that the US launched the most airstrikes in Afghanistan over a single month in roughly a decade. American troops have ramped up airstrikes in Libya targeting ISIS fighters there. And the US continues its shadow war in Somalia to fend off terrorist groups there.
Friday, October 11, 2019
Where to find the only people in Australia who can detect sincerity in Donald Trump
Brilliant political analyst Tom from somewhere in Victoria lights up a durry and turns down the permanent race call on the radio so as to swoon over Trump in a live net broadcast:
When one other says he/she doesn't agree, old Tom flies the condescension flag:
The other thing that I find hilarious is how suddenly, after Trump makes a decision, most of the wingnuts at Catallaxy suddenly become experts on Turk/Kurd history so that they can nod sagely that their culture war leader has obviously made a wise decision.
Update: I see Sinclair has handed posting keys over to CL, who thinks that Trump's talk about how the families of the dead brought back to Dover AFB seem fine at first but then "scream" when they see the coffin "may be his finest". In reality, it came across like a weird and exaggerated description by an emotional cripple incapable of normal empathy himself. (It was a "sir" story, which is always a tell with Trump.) Oh, and let's not forget his telephone calls to relatives have not always gone down well. Maybe that's why he sticks to letters now.
It's back to the old puzzle for me - has the internet-led culture war culminating in Trump made idiots of people, or were they just always idiots waiting to be revealed by their inability to recognise a dumb, completely unethical, wannabe autocrat?
When one other says he/she doesn't agree, old Tom flies the condescension flag:
The other thing that I find hilarious is how suddenly, after Trump makes a decision, most of the wingnuts at Catallaxy suddenly become experts on Turk/Kurd history so that they can nod sagely that their culture war leader has obviously made a wise decision.
Update: I see Sinclair has handed posting keys over to CL, who thinks that Trump's talk about how the families of the dead brought back to Dover AFB seem fine at first but then "scream" when they see the coffin "may be his finest". In reality, it came across like a weird and exaggerated description by an emotional cripple incapable of normal empathy himself. (It was a "sir" story, which is always a tell with Trump.) Oh, and let's not forget his telephone calls to relatives have not always gone down well. Maybe that's why he sticks to letters now.
It's back to the old puzzle for me - has the internet-led culture war culminating in Trump made idiots of people, or were they just always idiots waiting to be revealed by their inability to recognise a dumb, completely unethical, wannabe autocrat?
Electricity in Africa
I see Jason's having a gut reaction again, this time to a twitter headlined article in The Economist:
How about addressing the actual arguments and studies the article cites, conservatives?
The article makes a case, citing studies in Africa mainly, but all Right wingers can do is get indignant that a magazine powered by electricity is dissing Africans getting electricity. That's outrageous!Electricity does not change poor lives as much as was thought
Getting a power connection to the poorest of the poor may be the wrong priority for a cash-strapped government
How about addressing the actual arguments and studies the article cites, conservatives?
Surely this is far from normal
The twitterverse is abuzz about what this could mean:
On the other hand - is it a case of Rupert wanting to tell Trump he's withdrawing Fox support? As I speculated earlier this week, the Turkey decision seems a valid pretext conservatives could use to withdraw support, especially if images of civilian deaths start pouring in.
Attorney General William Barr “met privately Wednesday evening with one of President Trump’s frequent confidants, Rupert Murdoch, the media mogul whose holdings include Fox News, which has recently become more critical of the president,” the New York Times reports.The most immediate and valid reaction should surely be: why is Barr making himself look like the President's personal lawyer and messenger boy? We know Rudy has been a bumbling disaster, but this just looks so far from what an AG should be doing it's ridiculous.
“The meeting was held at Mr. Murdoch’s home in New York.”
On the other hand - is it a case of Rupert wanting to tell Trump he's withdrawing Fox support? As I speculated earlier this week, the Turkey decision seems a valid pretext conservatives could use to withdraw support, especially if images of civilian deaths start pouring in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)