Here's a lengthy article looking at the question of why this year's pre-monsoonal heat waves in India and Pakistan did not seem to kill many at all - a bit contrary to expectations, actually.
I've always puzzled at how (many of) the poor in India manage to survive their incredible sounding heatwaves. The answers are a bit complicated...
These Pub Choir videos, I'm talking about. The latest is a version of Running Up That Hill, a song I don't particularly care for, but again, it's just the fact that it makes Brisbane look like its full of cool, community minded, and talented, people:
(I also believe that Camarata - the ensemble playing strings - is extremely good at what they do.)
Noticed this on Twitter not so long ago, with the handkerchiefs on display in some police museum or other in Malaysia:
I can tell you, Googling the topic "folding porn handkerchiefs" or "vintage porn on handkerchiefs Malaysia" has really thrown up a lot of results I didn't want, and nothing useful!
This reminded me of the old Mad Magazine fold in cartoons. Wikipedia tells me they started in 1964, and were done by the same cartoonist - Al Jaffee - til 2020! (Jaffee is now 101! Talk about a long career.)
Anyway, I'm not sure that it took much imagination, looking at the drawings on those handkerchiefs, to see how the right fold could make it look like sex. But I wonder how common this means of distribution was - just a South East Asia thing, or were they all over the West too? Can't say I have heard of them before...
Interesting story at the New York Times (gift link for you) about a Trump supporter who has had to go into hiding due to wingnut news sites, and Tucker Carlson, spreading a rumour that he was really at the Jan 6 riot as an FBI provocateur.
He seems to have regrets, but the article avoids asking him if he still thinks the election was stolen...
Of course, I am broadly sympathetic with the views expressed by Brian Rosner in his recent article
Is it good advice to “be yourself”? Why looking inward is not necessarily the answer
Common wisdom today has it that there is only one place to look to find yourself, and that is inward. Personal identity is a do-it-yourself project. All forms of external authority are to be rejected, or at least questioned, and everyone’s quest for self-expression should be celebrated — personal happiness is the ultimate goal. Self-determination, once a principle for nations emerging from the First World War, is now the responsibility of every individual. A novelty in the history of ideas, this strategy of identity formation is sometimes labelled “expressive individualism”.
Clearly, there is nothing wrong with looking inward. There are many gains to living an examined life. And the alternative is far from attractive. As the philosopher Charles Taylor explains, the movement of expressive individualism is, in part, a reaction against a 1950s culture of conformity, which is believed to have “crushed individuality and creativity”.
Authenticity is also desirable. It is much better for a person to inhabit an identity that they own and can fully appropriate for themselves; there is something to be said for feeling comfortable in your own skin. Psychologists generally regard authenticity as a basic requirement of mental health.
So, are there any downsides to looking inward and being yourself? I can think of three pretty big ones: it seems to produce fragile selves; it’s failing in terms of outcomes for individuals and society; and it is faulty in its assumptions about human nature. Let me briefly discuss these in turn.
This is how it ends (and I think that second last paragraph needed some editing to make its meaning clearer, when it mention Nietzsche:
There is, in fact, a fourth direction to which you can look to find yourself — a direction that many believe offers a better story. They insist that personal identity requires looking up. Former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, writes: “Without the transcendent we shall find ourselves unable, sooner or later, to make any sense of the full range of human self-awareness”. On the other side of the ledger, some have argued that Friedrich Nietzsche, sometimes described as the first real atheist because of his fearless pursuit of the consequences of his antitheist stance, has no place for the notion of personal identity. Does looking up have a role to play in identity formation?
The key to an authentic, stable, and satisfying sense of self is to inhabit a narrative identity that is worth living. One that deals well with life’s joys and sorrows, triumphs, and disappointments, and responds well to injustice.
I mentioned recently having listened to one of the episodes of the CBC podcast Brainwashed, about the CIA and psychiatrists' attempts to learn how to control peoples minds, in the 50's and 60's.
I went back to listen to another episode, and it was a very incredible reminder about how top psychiatrists got away with just ridiculously unethical experiments on the basis of fanciful theories of how they might work.
Those of us of a certain age (as the idea has been dead for quite a long time) might remember cheesy ads for pillow speakers that would play (say) a foreign language while you slept, and hey presto, it would help you learn with no effort at all. I didn't know that this basis idea - which even as a child I thought sounded dubious - was in fact given a serious workout by at least one highly regarded psychiatrist working in Canada in the 1950's. His name: Donald Ewen Cameron, and the experiments he did were called "psychic driving". Wikipedia explains:
His "psychic driving" experiments consisted of putting a subject into a drug-induced coma for weeks at a time (up to three months in one case) while playing tape loops of noise or simple statements. These experiments were typically carried out on patients who had entered the Institute for minor problems such as anxiety disorders and postnatal depression; many suffered permanent debilitation after these treatments.[27] Such consequences included incontinence, amnesia, forgetting how to talk, forgetting their parents, and thinking their interrogators were their parents.[28] His work was inspired and paralleled by the psychiatrist William Sargant, who was also involved with the intelligence services and experimented extensively on his patients without their consent, causing similar long-term damage.[29]The Brainwashed episode indicated that the patients slept 23 hours a day, and although awoken to go to the toilet, the ideal result was considered a reversion to early childhood incontinence, as that indicated their mind had reverted to a childlike malleable state, into which positive messages on the tape would be absorbed by the subconscious, and replace those bad thoughts.
The podcast episode paints a much worse picture of how the experiments were done - if I recall correctly, Cameron first tried just playing the tape in the undrugged patient's bed 24 hours a day, which the patient found absolutely unbearable, so it was drugged sleep for weeks at a time, to get around that problem!
There's a very good and lengthy article about Cameron here, which explains that for many people, Cameron exuded much charm, and his obituaries in 1967 were full of praise. He apparently was very fond of gadgets and technology, and loved science fiction. There is a detailed description of "psychic driving", although I would say inadequate attention given to this obvious problem (the failure of successful "rebuilds"):
Cameron reported that once the patient’s resistance had been conquered, the result was therapeutic. Depatterning then proceeded to a final level of “disorganzation” in which the patient experienced utter “loss of orientation as to space and time,” near-total amnesia for his or her identity, often double incontinence, and (relatedly) childlike dependency on care staff. 56 The goal now was to rebuild, to retrain the patient to pursue healthy behaviors and leave behind the unhealthy behavior patterns that had previously vexed him or her. Despite the labor-intensive tasks it generated for nursing staff, the method at its core served to put the whole process at a distance by automating it: “this method of activating psychotherapeutic mechanisms not only created a great deal of time saving for the therapist but also appears to operate much more rapidly than ordinary psychotherapeutic procedures and hence constitutes a time-saving for the patient,” Cameron and his assistant asserted.57 Cameron’s method was at heart an efficient device.
It all turned out after his death that money had flowed to him from the CIA, although it is not clear whether he knew that was the true source. Somehow, it would seem, he managed to convince himself this was a genuinely successful treatment enough of the time to take the risk of ruining other patients who were permanently broken by it. In fact, I haven't yet read about that aspect - I mean, it's kind of hard to be believe it was ever a clear success, in anyone.
The article I linked to talks a lot about the connection of his ideas to behavourism, which has generally fallen from grace. I must admit, I have long found it frustrating that the present popular thoughts on psychology and personality are rarely seen in light of how previous "fashions" for how we think of ourselves have come and gone. The idea that every person's true goal and only way to happiness is to be "true to yourself"* that now completely dominates much of the western world makes it is well worth reading about other ideas that have come and gone.
* What is the best term for that? Personality - or identity - essentialism? Someone has probably named it, I should go looking...
So, how's my Covid going, asked no one. Coming up to a week since I first thought I was coming down with something. I'm still feeling like the tail end of a cold now - still a little bit of post nasal drip, but not much, but twinges of sinus pain, and an actually throbbing head if I have to cough (which I don't need to, often.) I'm still putting down the head throbs to sinus pain, and I have actually had this at other times over perhaps the last year (periods where I have no blocked nose, but mild pains at various points around the face where I assume my sinuses are, but if I cough, forehead throbs badly.)
I've actually looked up on the web recently, and I see that headache relating to coughing is described as follows:
Cough headaches are fairly uncommon. There are two types: primary cough headaches and secondary cough headaches. Primary cough headaches are usually harmless, are caused only by coughing and get better quickly without treatment. A primary cough headache is diagnosed only when a provider has ruled out possible causes other than coughing.
A secondary cough headache may be triggered by a cough, but it is caused by problems with the brain or structures near the brain and spine. Secondary cough headaches can be more serious and may require treatment with surgery.
Primary cough headaches
The cause of primary cough headaches is unknown.
Secondary cough headaches
Secondary cough headaches may be caused by:
- A defect in the shape of the skull.
- A defect in the part of the brain that controls balance (cerebellum). This can happen when part of the brain is forced through the opening at the base of the skull (foramen magnum), where only the spinal cord should be. Some of these types of defects are called Chiari malformations.
- A weakness in one of the blood vessels in the brain (cerebral aneurysm).
- A brain tumor.
- A spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid leak.
So, this sounds like a condition ripe for hypochondria! And one where a GP is likely to be uninterested, especially if the pain I am complaining about only lasts - I don't know, 30 to 60 seconds?
Sinuses (which I would say are still my most likely issue) are a real example of one of the body bits which are poorly designed and fixing them becomes guesswork. Like backs when they go bad.
Anyway, all pretty minor, and I can't say I am feeling any "brain fog" from Covid, which is something I would find annoying. Am sleeping very well at night, and kind of enjoying that aspect, actually.
Yeah, I didn't even need to sleep during the day yesterday (Sunday). Throat feels pretty normal again, but a bout this morning of serious cleaning of my bedroom (not physically demanding, just moving around a lot more than I have for several days) made me feel briefly unwell. Still, the progress is generally in the right direction.
I saw that Samantha Maiden tweeted yesterday:
%20_%20Twitter.png)
and it was interesting to read the comments following, of some noting a similar very mild effect, and others how it was much worse for them, and some with lingering serious issues.
As I have been saying virtually from the start, it seems a disease that's perfect for making life extremely complicated for public health officials and government: the wide variety of responses mean that people will extrapolate from their own experience in a way that they shouldn't. The unvaxed getting a mild response are particularly likely to feel vindicated, ignoring all detailed research on the benefits of vaccination at the community level. And on the side of "panic", some people can point to legit studies indicating that even an apparently mild case might be causing lingering harm that is so not immediately apparent. But the seriousness of the harm is still up in the air.
It may not have made me very sick, but it's still a terrible disease...
I see that it was July last year that I had a cold, or something, which didn't turn out to be COVID. Same thing happening now, perhaps: mainly just a thick head with a bit of post nasal drip; throat feels a little sore but not dire; coughing really can hurt the sinuses in the forehead, but fortunately, I don't have to cough often. Oh, and I did feel not warm enough in bed on a night of sufficient covers that I should have been OK, but I don't think I have felt feverish today. Lets see how I feel tomorrow...
I saw mention of this somewhere else - perhaps on a Youtube video I never linked to? - but there's an article in Science which makes it clear that it is a very serious problem for the prospects of fusion as a viable energy source:
A shortage of tritium fuel may leave fusion energy with an empty tank
Fusion advocates often boast that the fuel for their reactors will be cheap and plentiful. That is certainly true for deuterium: Roughly one in every 5000 hydrogen atoms in the oceans is deuterium, and it sells for about $13 per gram. But tritium, with a half-life of 12.3 years, exists naturally only in trace amounts in the upper atmosphere, the product of cosmic ray bombardment. Nuclear reactors also produce tiny amounts, but few harvest it.
Most fusion scientists shrug off the problem, arguing that future reactors can breed the tritium they need. The high-energy neutrons released in fusion reactions can split lithium into helium and tritium if the reactor wall is lined with the metal. Despite demand for it in electric car batteries, lithium is relatively plentiful.
But there’s a catch: In order to breed tritium you need a working fusion reactor, and there may not be enough tritium to jump-start the first generation of power plants. The world’s only commercial sources are the 19 Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) nuclear reactors, which each produce about 0.5 kilograms a year as a waste product, and half are due to retire this decade. The available tritium stockpile—thought to be about 25 kilograms today—will peak before the end of the decade and begin a steady decline as it is sold off and decays, according to projections in ITER’s 2018 research plan.
The article does mention that there are other fusion fuels theoretically possible, but require something like ten (ok, seven) times the heat to work:
TAE Technologies, a California startup, plans to use plain hydrogen and boron, whereas Washington state startup Helion will fuse deuterium and helium-3, a rare helium isotope. These reactions require higher temperatures than D-T, but the companies think that’s a price worth paying to avoid tritium hassles. “Our company’s existence owes itself to the fact that tritium is scarce and a nuisance,” says TAE CEO Michl Binderbauer.
The alternative fusion reactions have the added appeal of producing fewer or even no neutrons, which avoids the material damage and radioactivity that the D-T approach threatens. Binderbauer says the absence of neutrons should allow TAE’s reactors—which stabilize spinning rings of plasma with particle beams—to last 40 years. The challenge is temperature: Whereas D-T will fuse at 150 million degrees Celsius, hydrogen and boron require 1 billion degrees.
I know it is risky to ever bet against technological advances - but on the other hand, someone in the 1940's who pooh-poohed a science fiction magazine's cover showing flying car highways in the sky in the 21st century would be looking prescient.
Hence, I'm strongly tempted to bet against fusion ever being a viable energy source, in any century.
I complained a lot about the 2011 Brisbane flood investigation that gave many people the impression that the flood was solely caused by improper operation of Wivenhoe Dam. Having personally driven around the dam a couple of days before the flood, in remarkable rain, I never believed it. (We tried to have a day out, and drove up to Mount Glorious for lunch. The rain started again on the return trip, and it was intense and long lasting.) What I thought could come out is that lots of houses which were flooded to a certain height may have had the height reduced, but still have been extensively flooded regardless of how the difficult decisions the dam operators were making were made. Why should those people get any compensation at all?
And it turns out that this is exactly what has happened. People who thought they were going to get money are getting none, or trivial amounts, and they are not happy that Maurice Blackburn either didn't explain (or explain clearly enough is probably more likely?) that winning the case may not mean that everyone who was affected and joined the action would get money.
Law firm Maurice Blackburn said the payouts were determined by the flood adjustment factor, which is essentially how badly a property would have been affected if the dams had been handled properly.
"The case was run on the basis that there would have been some flooding in Brisbane, no matter what, even if the dams had been operated properly," principal lawyer Rebecca Gilsenan said.
"The difference, or the degree of difference, literally differs for every single property.
"About half of the claims in the case wouldn't have flooded at all on the model that the court ultimately upheld.
"People are finding out now and in some really unfortunate cases, they're finding out that the flooding would not have been a whole lot different.
Ms Gilsenan said they were not able to tell individual people what would have happened to their property along the way.
"Because we didn't have a model yet that had been upheld by the court," she said.
"People were told in theory that this would be an issue and damages would need to be adjusted but people didn't know individually what would happen to them."
One high profile guy sums it up like this:
He had to split his interim payment with his ex-wife and received $797.67, despite his Goodna home sustaining $556,000 worth of damage.
"The less you got damaged, the more you're going to get," he said.
"I mean it's laughable.
"We were not told that we may get nothing, even if we won the case.
"[Maurice Blackburn] advertises 'We fight for fair'. Is this fair?"
Well, it is, actually. If your house had 3 m of water through it, and different dam operation could have lowered it to 2 m, you don't deserve compensation.
I've been meaning to post this for weeks now, but this is easily that coldest Brisbane winter that I can recall, probably for decades.
A week or two ago it was waking up to 3 degrees on a Saturday and Sunday, and although it was sunny and clear it still seemed to take to midday to start feeling warmth from it. Yesterday and today it's like living in a Melbourne (or Tasmanian) winter: grey, wet and while the minimums are not as bad as under clear skies, never warming up more than 2 or 3 degrees all day. 14 degrees yesterday, and my weather app says that now (1.40pm) it's 12 degrees.
Remarkable.
It's pretty remarkable, isn't it, that a mass shooting at a 4 July parade in a well off part of the US comes in at news story number 5 or 6 in Australia this morning (and only a short time devoted to it), because we are so used to such news. (Yeah, there are local floods crowding it out, but still, it does seem a case of "oh, another outrageously violent event in a nation that is too stupidly in love with guns. Meh.")
By the way, I see that the prime suspect sounds like a disturbed young man who has imagined the crime for a long time - just the sort of person who doesn't get to live out his violent fantasies in other countries where it is much, much harder to get the tool necessary to make it a reality.
Yes despite this, I am in a general sense still on side with Noah Smith's overall take on being (kinda) optimistic that the USA will get over its current problems, and the most dire predictions not come to pass. He sums it well in this free post at his Substack.
Inspired about 6 weeks ago by a delicious Filipino style beef empanada bought at West End markets, I tried making them myself this weekend.
There are a lot of difference versions of how to make the dough in particular, and very often with non metric measurements. For my future reference, this worked fine for a fried empanada (don't know how they would go baked, but frying does make for a more interesting texture, I reckon. Basically, it's this recipe, although it took a bit more water:
3 cups plain flour
115 g unsalted butter (cold and cubed)
1/2 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoon sugar (although I only used one)
1 egg
3 (maybe more?) tablespoon ice water
You can guess how this is made: mix the dry ingredients, rub in the butter, beat the egg with water and add to made a pretty firm dough. Wrap in cling wrap and put in fridge for 15 min before using.
As for the filling: I just followed an amalgam of a few recipes, but yeah, using 500 g of mince makes more than you can use with that much pastry. Fried one medium onion, about 4 or 5 garlic cloves, in with the small cubed potato and carrot, then mince. A substantial amount of tomato paste. Add raisins (I thought I was overdoing it with 1/3 cup, but no), about half a cup of beef stock, lots of pepper, a half cup of peas, let it simmer and liquid reduce, check seasoning. Oh, I used a couple of tablespoons of soy too, and maybe a tablespoon of worcestershire sauce too. Sounds a lot of saltiness, if you included the tomato paste, but it was 500 g of mince.
I also put a baton of cheese in the middle of the filing in the empanadas, which doesn't appear in any recipe, but was in the ones I bought at the markets.
They were nice, but not as nice as the market ones. I have to have another and examine its contents more carefully.
He perhaps should be spending a bit more time walking rather than sitting and chatting to his ambiguously sentient AI buddy, but nonetheless, this interview with the Google guy who went public with his AI claims is really quite interesting, and makes me feel like we are at least close to living in a science fiction movie:
I particularly liked how it was an apparent AI joke that influenced his thinking. And one about Jedi!
The guy does appear genuinely thoughtful, and not a complete nut.
When I first heard about it, I thought that this project sounded fanciful, because I didn't imagine the power transmission over that long a distance (and via undersea cable) would be efficient enough. But it would seem I was wrong:
SINGAPORE: The company behind a megaproject to deliver up to 15 per cent of Singapore’s energy requirements via a 4,200km undersea cable from northern Australia aims to start construction in 2024.
The project took a step closer to being realised last week, after being deemed investment-ready by Infrastructure Australia, a statutory body that advises the country’s government on key projects of national significance.
This potentially opens the US$20.7 billion intercontinental cable operation - called the Australia-Asia PowerLink - to investment that could include public funds.
Before construction can begin, all financing documents will need to be signed and prior conditions for the availability of financing will have to be fulfilled.
Sun Cable wants to build the largest solar farm and battery storage facility in the world in Australia’s Northern Territory and send clean power to the regional city of Darwin as well as Singapore.
Singapore is currently a gas burning nation, so it must be feeling the pinch at the moment:
It comes as Singapore looks to expand its renewable energy options and moves to import power as a solution to lowering its carbon emissions footprint - it currently generates about 95 per cent of its energy from burning natural gas, a fossil fuel that contributes to global warming.Anyway, the undersea cable is HVDC, which is maybe the only way it could work?:
“We need that ability to transmit electricity on an intercontinental basis to get from where that resource is abundant to where those large loads are and where they're growing fast. And that's what the evolution of high-voltage direct current submarine cable technology allows,” he added.
This article talks about HVDC undersea cables. Seems there are only relatively short ones around, so I hope the challenges of 4,000 km of such cable are not too much to overcome.
Monty, Monty, Monty.
I see you tried to engage dover beach with your "defending institutions" argument.
It has gotten you no where, of course, because all he is interested in is institutions defending (or rather, forcing on the citizens as a whole) his conservative Catholic values on abortion, marriage, etc.
Here's the thing: people like him who can watch the violent riot and death calls at the Capitol, and all of the evidence from the Congressional hearing, and still think Trump was the one unfairly treated, are just plainly too stupid to bother arguing with. They are willfully blind and are more sympathetic to Christian flavoured fascism than anything else, because it gets them the laws they want forced on everyone.
They love you dropping in because it gives them a thrill that you think they are worth engaging with.
They aren't.
The only thing I think you should ever say to them is just "you are too stupid to argue with."
I noticed on Twitter some people saying that Trump lunging from his seat to try to stop the driver of his vehicle taking him to the White House instead of the Capitol would not be possible, because of a screen between the back and the driver.
The Washington Post is onto that already, and it appears this is not going to work as a defence.
The most depressing and stupid thing to realise from that article, however, is that Trump getting physical with his staff probably appeals to a significant section of his nutjob base, as to them it makes him sound like an action hero who nearly thwarted his kidnapping:
On that message board, some conceded that her testimony actually showed another way in which Trump had faced unfair treatment. One poster said the story showed that “the Deep State coup plotters” of the Secret Service had “effectively kidnapped the President of the United States of America against his wishes” as part of a “C.I.AMilitary Industrial Complex coup d'etat.”
Some there argued she should be “locked up for lying under oath,” while another poster there suggested her wild testimony was just Washington as usual.
“Even if she’s telling the truth,” the anonymous patriots.win poster said, “where’s the f---ing problem?”
Allahpundit points out, by the way, that it would be unlikely the committee would let Hutchinson give this evidence if it didn't know it was going to be backed up by one of the first hand witnesses.
The other bit of evidence, not being given enough attention, I think, is that not only did Hutchinson talk about the aftermath of one plate throwing incident, she said he did something similar several times.
Update: Allahpundit is now going on about how damaging it will look if the secret service isn't backing her up, as some leaks are now suggesting. Meh. It was never going to be evidence at a Trump trial, anyway.
Before I start forgetting the details completely, I seemed to have a long, but basically enjoyable, dream last night which went something like this.
I was a younger version of myself, returning at night to the house I grew up in (I think my parents were still alive) only to find that the suburban block it was on was the subject of some sort of military action. I ran away, but eventually decided to give myself in, finding that the new rulers (of uncertain origin) were putting local residents in trains for re-location elsewhere. I was worried about how this felt like the Holocaust, but the trains were quite OK.
We were then on a cruise ship, again quite OK standard, and being shipped to Germany.
The thing was, no one knew exactly who the aggressors were, in what appeared to be a global wide conflict of some type.
Scott Morrison appeared in one scene, and I asked him, in public, that when he was PM he must have had some idea where this threat may come from, so couldn't he tell us who the aggressors likely were? He said "nope", he had no idea at all, there was no warning of this conflict.
Sinclair Davidson (!) then featured amongst a group of others in front of which I declared I had worked it out: the orders for this were probably coming from the sentient global AI that the internet had become. I mean, people were just following orders given via emails on screens - the global AI could easily be producing those.
I did spend a bit of time asking what the best term for our new AI overlord was, as I thought some science fiction writer had come up with one, but I couldn't remember it. No one else could either.
The relocations, by the way, were more about balancing where the best places for humans to live for efficient use of resources - there was no evil intent about it as such.
And that's about it...
A story from the Washington Post, and what an appalling one:
As the top comment says, in the context of the Supreme Court last week deciding people carrying handguns was cool:
This is precisely the consequence of last Thursday's dreadful SCOTUS decision - apparently their "appetizer" for all the dreadful decisions they had lined up for us - and of all the hypocrisy for a right wing that supposedly believes in states' rights and didn't allow New York to protect its citizens from exactly this kind of impulsive fatal violence ... These 'carry' laws are all an unmitigated outrage and yet instead its the protective laws that SCOTUS goes after. The founding fathers would be appalled. This is not remotely what the 2nd amendment was ever intended to allow. And the pretzel illogic that is used by every single Justice appointed by a GOP President on the current court is the most transparent bunk covering their actual Trojan horse cabal to overthrow American democracy, not just from the inside but from the ultimate tribunal of the inside. Two Bushes and a Trump managed to find and plant the most anti-democracy, anti-sanity Justices imagineable for this systematic dismantling of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the majority of us at least.
Just a quick note, based on having watched a Youtube video that explained that the Marvel cinematic "Universe" (now really a cable TV plus cinema universe - not to everyone's satisfaction) is doubtlessly heading towards a series of stories (already in comic book form) in which the multiverse plays a key role:
The storyline involves the destruction of the Marvel Universe and various other alternate universes (including those seen in the Ultimate Marvel and Marvel 2099 imprints, the "Age of Apocalypse" storyline, the Marvel 1602 universe, and the "House of M" storyline), with each universe's respective Earth combining with each other into Battleworld, a planet that exhibits the aspects of the various universes. The planet itself is divided in many territories that are mostly self-contained and where a "pocket universe" composed of a specific storyline or universe reside and evolve. Various versions of individual Marvel characters can be present multiple times on the Battleworld. For example, there is a Tony Stark present in many of the territories where the Kingdom of Manhattan has both the Earth-1610 and the Earth-616 versions, and many versions of Thor serve as a peace-keeping force. The stories depicted in the miniseries about each domain's characters' powers and personal histories vastly differ from the ones portrayed in the main Marvel universe(s).
Now, I'm already not the biggest fan of superhero movies, and my enjoyment is very dependent on them not taking themselves too seriously. (The next Thor movie looks to be a continuation of the rather comedic last one, so I'll still see it if it has good reviews.)
But even so, isn't it obvious that the problem with multiverse storylines is that when anything is possible, it quickly starts to become boring? There are too many options. You might get away with dealing with the multiverse in one movie, or maybe two, but if you keep on going, how can you really keep it dramatically (or creatively?) interesting.
And is it possible that audiences are already starting to sense that, despite the box office success of the last Dr Strange movie?
Someone on Twitter noted these today:
More from the Douthat column:
....the scenarios that have been spun out in reputable publications — where Trump induces Republican state legislatures to overrule the clear outcome in their states or militia violence intimidates the Supreme Court into vacating a Biden victory — bear no relationship to the Trump presidency we’ve actually experienced. Our weak, ranting, infected-by-Covid chief executive is not plotting a coup, because a term like “plotting” implies capabilities that he conspicuously lacks.
What a specious argument it was...
The BBC asks Will electric motorbike sales take off across Asia, and gives some interesting figures:
Asia accounts for more than half of all global motorbike sales, and in some countries it is unusual for a family to not own one.
Take Thailand, the nation with the highest per person use of motorcycles. There 87% of households own at least one motorbike. These are typically the scooter variety, whereby the rider sits with his or her feet directly in front.
Thailand is closely followed by Vietnam (86%), Indonesia (85%), and Malaysia (83%) for households with motorbikes. The figures then drop to 60% and 47% respectively, in giant markets China and India, but that still dwarfs the UK's 7%.
The vast majority of Asia's motorbikes currently run on petrol, but transport experts say that a big switch to electric versions is now gathering pace.
I like this innovation:
While the big Japanese motorbike manufacturers like Yamaha and Honda are now making electric models, the Asian market has been led by newer companies.
Taiwan's Gogoro is one such firm. In addition to a range of electric motorbikes, it has come up with a solution to the problem of a rider having to stand around while their bikes charge.
Instead of charging points, Gogoro's users in Taiwan simply need to drive to one of more than 2,200 battery stations, and swap their batteries for free. The outdoor stations run 24-hours a day, and are said to be able to withstand the typhoons and searing heat of Taiwanese summers.
Gogoro is now planning to make this battery-swapping hardware and technology available to partner companies across Asia. These include Hero in India, Gojek in Indonesia, and DCJ and Yadea in China. Gogoro is also working on a partnership with Yamaha.
Horace Luke, Gogoro's chief executive, says the company is trying to become the "Android" of the electric motorbike world, providing the invisible scaffolding for other brands He likens it to the mobile phone system which encourages innovation by giving device makers more freedom to customise phones. In this spirit, Gogoro also intends to share its battery-management software, which helps to extend the life of the batteries.
Cool.
One of the most interesting articles about it was this one in the New York Times (it's a gift link so you'll be able to read it) about Justice Alito's life long determination to see it overruled.
His statements at confirmation fitted the usual deceptive pattern that all conservative judges follow:
Later that year [1985], Mr. Alito applied for another position in the Justice Department, proudly citing his role in devising a strategy for those cases. “I personally believe very strongly,” he wrote in an application, that “the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion.”
Years later, when those documents were disclosed during his Supreme Court confirmation, he assured senators that while that statement reflected his views in 1985, he would approach abortion cases with an open mind as a justice, with due respect for precedent and with no ideological agenda.
“When someone becomes a judge,” he said, “you really have to put aside the things that you did as a lawyer at prior points in your legal career and think about legal issues the way a judge thinks about legal issues.”
Amongst other things of note I only learnt since the decision - about 50% of American abortions are via medication now. How States expect to stop the inter State movement of the few pills that are needed remains to be seen. But there will probably be States that seek to punish a woman for taking them, despite (I think) most (or all?) States saying they will criminalise abortion providers, not the women seeking an abortion. Anyway, I still suspect that this method (not around at the time of Roe) is going to reduce the effect of this court decision in preventing access to abortion.
Also - there has been talk around how how American abortion rights were (under Roe) more liberal than those in many European countries. (Noah Smith was going on about it.) As many people were pointing out to him, and others, this can be very deceptive, as anyone who has experience of Australian laws would know. Women might have the right to an abortion for any reason up to a certain time, but if they retain the right after that to have an abortion for their health, and this is broadly interpreted to include their mental health, then you can have de facto liberal access anyway.
And I am pretty sure that it was long established that, within Australian states, having access to abortion as of right, and having it only by claiming it will hurt your mental health, resulted in virtually the same rate of abortion in each jurisdiction.
Pro-lifers like to go on about the apparent depravity of having a right to abortion up to birth, without recognising the difficulty of getting doctors to actually agree to a late procedure. As someone I saw on Twitter said, with rare exception, very late term abortions are about wanted pregnancies in which a serious medical problem with the baby has been discovered very late.
Update: Allahpundit notes this:
Once red states ban abortion entirely, forcing local pregnant women to find providers out of state, demand will quickly overwhelm supply and create long waits that will lead to women getting abortions later in their pregnancies. A 15-week national ban would prevent those abortions — but as I say, that won’t pass until 2025 at the soonest. In the short term, the perverse outcome of today’s decision is likely to mean more abortions getting pushed off into the second and even third trimesters, when babies are viable.
That is from a post about Republicans now talking about a Federal 15 week limit on abortion. He starts:
In December I predicted that the traditional conservative rationale for overturning Roe, that the 50 states rather than the Court are the proper venue for regulating abortion, would expire five minutes after the Dobbs decision dropped. At which point it would shift instantly to “national restrictions!”
I was wrong. It took about two hours after the ruling for that decades-old federalist credo to be dumped in a ditch by House Republicans.
Here’s something I rarely say about these chuckleheads, though. The idea of a national 15-week ban is … good politics.
I think?
He's the only conservative commenter who does nuance well.
On the up side, I guess, it's a benefit to other Western countries that we get to see the effects of slack regulation in the US and hence avoid problems before they can happen here.
I mean, this is just kinda nuts, isn't it:
Although recreational cannabis is illegal in the United States for those under 21, it has become more accessible as many states have legalized it. But experts say today’s high-THC cannabis products — vastly different than the joints smoked decades ago — are poisoning some heavy users, including teenagers.
Marijuana is not as dangerous as a drug like fentanyl, but it can have potentially harmful effects — especially for young people, whose brains are still developing. In addition to uncontrollable vomiting and addiction, adolescents who frequently use high doses of cannabis may also experience psychosis that could possibly lead to a lifelong psychiatric disorder, an increased likelihood of developing depression and suicidal ideation, changes in brain anatomy and connectivity and poor memory.
But despite these dangers, the potency of the products currently on the market is largely unregulated.
In 1995, the average concentration of THC in cannabis samples seized by the Drug Enforcement Administration was about 4 percent. By 2017, it was 17 percent. And now cannabis manufacturers are extracting THC to make oils; edibles; wax; sugar-size crystals; and glass-like products called shatter that advertise high THC levels in some cases exceeding 95 percent.
Meanwhile, the average level of CBD — the nonintoxicating compound from the cannabis plant tied to relief from seizures, pain, anxiety and inflammation — has been on the decline in cannabis plants. Studies suggest that lower levels of CBD can potentially make cannabis more addictive.
THC concentrates “are as close to the cannabis plant as strawberries are to frosted strawberry pop tarts,” Beatriz Carlini, a research scientist at the University of Washington’s Addictions, Drug and Alcohol Institute, wrote in a report on the health risks of highly concentrated cannabis.
Although cannabis is legal for recreational use in 19 states and Washington, D.C., and for medical use in 37 states and D.C., only Vermont and Connecticut have imposed caps on THC concentration. Both ban concentrates above 60 percent, with the exception of pre-filled cartridges, and do not permit cannabis plant material to exceed 30 percent THC. But there is little evidence to suggest these specific levels are somehow safer.
I have been saying for a while: if you're going to legalise cannabis based products, why wouldn't you set regulations about the apparently protective part of it - the CBD levels?
And really, why would you let such a plethora of cannabis containing products exist in the first place - like candies and cookies, with their obvious potential risk of being eaten by little kids?
How did she manage to stay with him for this long, if this is true:
The billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch and Jerry Hall, a former top model, are reportedly set to divorce....
Before the wedding, a friend of the couple told the Guardian: “They are very sweet together, in a little couple bubble. They act like a married couple already, talking over each other, holding hands.
“She puts her feet up on his legs, they disagree on things like any married couple. She hates Trump, he understands Trump, it’s been like that from the beginning.”
Not sure if I had seen the giant Minotaur of Toulouse before, but it's pretty impressive (and reminds me a lot of something that could be in a Miyazaki film - especially Howl's Moving Castle.)
It also reminded me of some giant puppets from somewhere - turns out it was probably Montreal:
Even though I doubt I will ever fully understand the appeal of watching drag artists, I agree with Yglesias that we are in the midst of a full blown conservative panic:
The history of that movement is relatively short, and set out in this Wikipedia article. (It started in San Francisco - no surprise there.)
The events that are held in libraries are no doubt attended by children with parents who are already highly motivated to expose to children to "diversity" - and the relatively small number of families involved should be of no great concern to anyone.
On the other hand, I do think it a bit odd that schools should partake of these shows (as they have in New York).
But where ever these events are held, I have strong doubts that any but a relatively small proportion of the children in attendance would find them especially entertaining or of particular interest. In fact, an article in the Wall Street Journal "What I saw at Drag Queen Story Hour" made this point way back in 2019:
The adults present loved Drag Queen Story Hour. They laughed at Venus’s jokes, and they sang the children’s songs along with her, rolling their hands and shaking their fingers Hokey Pokey-style as she did. When she stuck out her tongue during a ditty about a frog, so did the mothers and fathers. It was the children who . . . didn’t react at all. They either stared transfixed at Venus, squirmed restlessly, or crawled and toddled off to find their own entertainments. After the reading a mother brought her little daughter up to meet Venus, who offered to let the girl try on one of the massive rhinestone bracelets she wore on both wrists. The mother, delighted, slipped a bracelet onto her own wrist; the little girl shrank back and turned her head away.
I couldn’t tell what was going on inside those small heads, of course. Perhaps they were shy, or bored. Perhaps some of them were too young. Or perhaps Venus and her 6-inch eyelashes terrified them. Heavy stage makeup can look flattering under stage lights, but in ordinary indoor daylight the effect can be more Medusa than goddess of love. Spike heels and glitter viewed up close might seem scary to a small child whose mother’s fashion inspirations are New Balance and Lululemon.
Still, drag is a time-honored form of comic entertainment, from the Greek stage to RuPaul. Perhaps if the drag queens toned it down and positioned themselves less as “queer role models” and more as comedians in the Milton Berle tradition, they’d be less off-putting. Also if they ditched the propagandistic reading lists: How many kids really want to hear one more tiresome lesson about “individuality,” much less same-sex marriage?
The last paragraph makes a valid enough point - it's not that I can't find some drag funny if part of a comedy act; it's just that I don't get the point of gay glamour drag, like Ru Paul, with its over the top visuals that are often more a parody of feminine glamour. (I guess some of the more ridiculous looking drag artists use it with ribald humour in shows with a primarily gay audience - so I suppose I "get" that aspect of drag show - but I still don't understand the appeal of the "serious" side of song or dance performance as a drag queen. And I seriously doubt that most children can understand the vibe of most drag playing to them, either.)
Anyway, while I find all gay drag rather strange and unappealing, I also know that conservative panic about it is ridiculous in its own way. I mean, seriously:
And in a San Francisco suburb, men invade Panda Dulce’s reading at a library’s Drag Queen Story Hour, shouting homophobic and transphobic slurs.
After focusing on transgender athletes and youths, anti-LGBTQ rhetoric is now targeting drag storytimes — conceived as a way to educate and entertain children by appealing to their imaginations — with interruptions and other protests reported across the country in the past two weeks, since Pride Month began.
I think drag is perhaps at a peak of cultural attention at the moment, and I can understand parents thinking it is a dubious use of school funds. But if I am right, and most kids don't really respond that well to the shows, the movement might never gain widespread footholds in schools. Or perhaps continue just as a thing you might see once during all of primary school - big deal.
Anyway, regardless of the degree of cultural visibility of drag, I very much doubt that it's ever going to be an evil influence over children who would otherwise not become gay. I mean, just common sense based on our childhood feelings tells us that, doesn't it? If a 6 year old boy gets a thrill that he doesn't quite understand from realising the "woman" is a man, it would seem a fair bet that he might not be destined for a purely straight life in future in any event. Isn't that sort of obvious to conservatives? Apparently not....
Update: Ha! Dover Beach at his New Catallaxy is still fanboying Ed Feser, the only Catholic philosopher in the world who still thinks the existence of (Catholic version) God is a lay down misere by force of logic alone, and has a completely over the top reaction to the issue:
Two recent-ish stories I overlooked posting about:
* Salmon really don't like warming water (even in frigid New Zealand oceans):
New Zealand’s biggest king salmon farmer says it is shutting some of its farms after warming seas prompted mass die-offs of fish, warning that it is a “canary in the coalmine” for climate change.
New Zealand is the world’s largest producer of king, or “chinook” salmon, a highly valued breed which fetches a premium on the world market. The country’s farms account for about 85% of global supply, New Zealand King Salmon chief executive Grant Rosewarne said.
Now, increasingly warm summer seas mean the fish at some sites are dying en masse before they can reach maturity, leaving farmers dumping thousands of tonnes of dead fish into local landfills.
I see (now that I Google the topic) that increasing temperatures in Alaska have been a worry for years. here is a story from early 2022:
ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Feb 25 (Reuters) - With marine heat waves helping to wipe out some of Alaska’s storied salmon runs in recent years, officials have resorted to sending emergency food shipments to affected communities while scientists warn that the industry’s days of traditional harvests may be numbered.
Salmon all but disappeared from the 2,000-mile (3,200-km) Yukon River run last year, as record-high temperatures led to the fish piling up dead in streams and rivers before they were able to spawn. A study published Feb. 15 in the journal Fisheries detailed more than 100 salmon die-offs at freshwater sites around Alaska.
* Just how many rogue black holes are wandering the galaxy? Way, way too many, by the sounds:
A rogue black hole wandering the space lanes of our Milky Way galaxy alone could be the smallest black hole yet found, according to one estimate of its mass.
Earlier this year, astronomers led by Kailash Sahu of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, Maryland, announced the discovery of the first known isolated stellar-mass black hole.
The black hole is 5,000 light-years away and was discovered thanks to the power of its gravity to act as a gravitational lens, magnifying the light of a background star 19,000 light-years away.....Even though stars with more than 20 solar masses account for just 0.1% of all the stars in the Milky Way, there are so many stars in the Milky Way (an estimated 100–200 billion), and the Milky Way is so old (approximately 13 billion years) that there should now be 100 million or more stellar-mass black holes in our galaxy.
Many of these are found in binary systems, where their presence is evident from their gravitational pull on their companion star and their accretion of matter from their neighbor. One has even been found inside a star cluster, NGC 1850 in the Large Magellanic Cloud. However, many others will be wandering between the stars, going unnoticed until a chance alignment with a background star means we spot them creating a gravitational lens.
As noted at Hot Air, by never-Trumper Allahpundit:
The survey of 1,541 U.S. adults, which was conducted from June 10-13, found that if another presidential election were held today, more registered voters say they would cast ballots for Donald Trump (44%) than for Biden (42%) — even though the House Jan. 6 committee has spent the last week linking Trump to what it called a “seditious conspiracy” to overturn the 2020 election and laying the groundwork for possible criminal prosecution…
Biden’s job approval rating has been atrophying for much of the last year, and the new survey shows that it has never been weaker. A full 56% of Americans now disapprove of the president’s performance — the highest share to date — while just 39% approve. Three weeks ago, those numbers were 53% and 42%, respectively…
How bad is it? Many more independents say Biden shouldn’t run again (76 percent) than say Trump shouldn’t (57 percent). Among Biden’s own voters in 2020, more say he shouldn’t run again than say he should, 40/37.
While there will likely be many theories floating around about how this could possibly be correct (not Biden's unpopularity - inflation and an apparent inability to convince the rogue elements in his own Party to put Democrat policy into effect account for that - but the willingness to consider Trump as a better alternative), I really think you have to consider the brokenness of the media landscape to be the major factor.
In any event, I am dubious about the polling of hypothetical contests - it's surely the kind of polling that is most likely to generate off the cuff gut reactions.
And besides, all serious people know it's already clear that Trump's position in history as a danger to democracy and the worst President who ever got into office via a cult following generated by the internet and the Murdoch media is secure. Biden, on the other hand, is likely to be seen as a victim of circumstance, pretty much like Jimmy Carter.
Nonetheless, I would prefer the polling was not like this. It doesn't inspire confidence in the future of the country...
Update: further to the title of this post:
