I bet the nurse votes Trump, too

The person who tweeted this is from New York, it seems. Although exactly where this happened is not clear.

Podcasting noted

Comparison noted

Nobody likes her

Lidia Thorpe, I mean.  She's a clear liability to the Greens, and even Marcia Langton can't stand her:

Lidia Thorpe should not remain Greens’ Indigenous spokesperson, Marcia Langton says

Langton went on to say she did not think it was appropriate that Thorpe remains the Green’s spokesperson for Indigenous Australians, adding Thorpe had shown a “significant lack of judgement” and that the Greens should largely ditch their current set of policies....

They have chosen a person with apparently no common sense or an inability to understand the rules and a willingness to break the rules. I despair that because people like Adam Bandt must surely be thinking or perhaps trying to give the impression that all Aboriginal people are like Senator Thorpe and that’s simply not the case.

Here's my previous post about how she does not get on with other activists.

Let's not pretend bugs are the future

Look, I know they're idiots, but sometimes, it just doesn't pay to feed them propaganda opportunities regardless of the truth behind the matter.

I'm referring to the now common wingnut meme "the Green Left wants us to eat bugs and insects instead of meat - it's disgusting and I'm not doing it!".  This is being pushed along with stories like this:

Aldi considers selling edible INSECTS to help families through the cost-of-living crisis

    Aldi is considering introducing a line of edible insect recipe kits in its UK stores

and people like that professional whiny moron Paul Joseph Watson is all over it, posting videos in his  intensely grating style of performative politics.  

We can try to argue with them with reason:  that there are many countries in the world in which kids and adults are happy to eat fried or raw bugs - your "yuck" reaction is a cultural thing that can, no doubt, change over time.   (They can try to counter - and I am seeing this - "but insects carry dangerous parasites"; to which I suppose one can respond "if you eat sushimi, you run the risk of getting parasites, but I don't see you worried about that."  Etc.)

In any event, given the bigger picture here, which is surely that the West turning to bug farming is rather unlikely to be a significant replacement for eating cows, pigs and sheep in anything like a near term future, why give the wingnuts potential propaganda fodder in the first place?    It just makes their "job" too easy.

I know, you get all these studies and claims about how much better for the environment eating insects would be - but surely it just isn't going to scale easily both in terms of how quickly you can change public perception, and how much replacement protein you can expect to grow quickly as a total percent of human protein consumption.   Even in the long term future, I reckon vat grown microbial derived protein has a much bigger prospect of being a significant global source of human protein than bug farming.

 In the near term, getting people to move to a vegetarian diet supplemented with eggs and the most sustainable forms of seafood should be a relatively simple exercise and have significant benefits.  As we have seen, with sales growth stalling, getting people to eat more of the good quality, plant based fake meats is a big enough task, let alone getting them to eat powdered mealworms, or whatever.  

Well intentioned people should just stop pretending that trying to sell insect consumption is a worthwhile exercise.

 

New York considered

This Cash Jordan New York real estate guy seems pretty famous, but I've only occasionally watched his videos, because All Knowing Google suggested it.  However, this one is pretty interesting - looking at the odd situation New York finds itself in.  (Namely, lots of commercial space still vacant because COVID forced businesses to realise that work from home is perfectly do-able now, but residential rents are higher than ever, and general cost of living is up.   As well as a general concern that crime is rising and not being adequately responded to.   I don't really understand how that combination of factors works - I mean, the relationship between empty office space but high residential rent especially.) 

 

There are some people in comments making the point that New York used to be much more dangerous than it is now, but it's still never great to see a place going backwards in terms of perception of safety.

An odd mix

I haven't been paying any attention to his views, but I watched a bit of a 2018 interview with John Cleese, and was surprised to learn that:

*    he had supported a change to proportional representation voting in England, and even did videos promoting it.  (I didn't even realise there was anything in the way of campaigning for it in the UK.  And now that I Google it, he's been arguing for it for a long time.)

*   While proportional representation is seen usually as thing pushed by Lefties, he was in favour of Brexit.   He is quoted back in 2017:

UK comedy legend John Cleese has reaffirmed his position in the Brexit debate, saying that while it will be five years before we know the full outcome, he thinks leaving the European Union is the correct decision.

“I don’t want to be run by a bunch of European bureaucrats because they always look after themselves first,” he commented to Screen.

The Monty Python and Fawlty Towers star admitted that “it will be five years before we know if it was a good thing or a bad thing, or if it will be a hard of soft exit”, but added that he supported the possibility of the latter option.

Now that he is going to be turning up on GB News with an "anti-cancel culture" show, I wonder if he will be offering his 5 year mark assessment of how it's gone.

And speaking of Brexit, lots of people have been watching this video from Financial Times that sets out clearly the giant "own goal" that Brexit has been: 

When, I wonder, will libertarian types (Helen Dale, Sinclair Davidson - did Jason Soon kinda support it, I forget?) come out and admit it's a complete failure and the predictions of the Remainers have been thoroughly vindicated?

Your depressing read for the day

Although this sounds a little bit like one of those New York Times Pitchbot tweets:

The Mess in Los Angeles Points to Trouble for Democrats

the article, which I have gift linked, seems pretty balanced and was more interesting about the history of race relations in the city than I expected.   But it contains depressing stuff like this:

A series of public opinion surveys of Los Angeles residents conducted by Loyola Marymount University in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2019 and 2022 suggested a recent deterioration in race relations in the city.

The Loyola study found a sharp drop in optimism concerning race relations in 2022. For example, from 2017 to 2022, the percentage of Los Angeles residents saying race relations had improved fell from 40.6 to 19.3 percent. The percentage saying relations had worsened grew from 18.0 to 38.5 percent.

Similarly, the percentage of residents saying riots were likely to happen in the near future grew from 40.8 in 2015 to 64.7 percent in 2022. From 2019 to 2022, the percentage of residents saying racial and ethnic groups were getting along well fell from 72.4 to 61.2 percent.

Metaverse humour

This was very witty, and accurate:

Trans in Singapore

I see that Noah Smith, who said he was going to visit Singapore for the first time, has cancelled that leg of his trip.  He will go there next year, though.  I am going to be disappointed if he doesn't like it.

On a whim, seeing I wrote about transgender issues today, I thought I would check what the situation is like in that country.    The Wikipedia entry indicates this:

Singapore has one of the most progressive transgender attitudes in Asia. Sex reassignment surgery is legal in the country since 1973, the first country in Asia to legalise it. A citizen of Singapore is legally permitted to change the designation of their gender on government documents through self-determination. In 1996, marriage was legalised for transgender people.^[1]

That's a little surprising, but then again, I wonder  if it might be that (as in some other countries) it's the negative attitudes towards homosexuality that leans them towards viewing trans surgery as a sort of cure for that perceived problem?  

As for the age at which this can happen (which is the most controversial issue in the West), look at this pragmatic approach from a support organisation that that just tells it like it is:

If you are under 21, you will need both your parents’ consent to start HRT. This applies even if your parents are separated, though exceptions may be made for extraordinary circumstances. HRT is not available in the Singapore public healthcare system to those under 18.

If you are presently enrolled in a local school, do be aware that trans students typically face immense challenges within the school system and are unlikely to be accommodated on issues of uniform and toilet access. You may thus have to consider options such as withholding transition until after you graduate, living as your gender only outside of school contexts, or going on HRT without social transition. (e.g. if you are a trans male student, that would mean going on T but continuing to wear the girls’ uniform and presenting as female while you are at the school. In some cases, trans people find that HRT eases their physical dysphoria enough to make social dysphoria more tolerable, although the opposite could also be possible.)

International schools are usually known to be more accommodating and even strongly supportive of transgender students, but this differs from school to school.

Those under 21 will typically have a longer and more stringent assessment process when seeking HRT through the public healthcare system. We advise you to be mentally prepared, as well as not to hold off too long if you know that you will be transitioning eventually.

Wow.  Not unsympathetic, but just advising pragmatic stoicism.  An example I wish the West could go back to.  

 

  

Will the middle ever be recovered?

It's just the most poisonous social issue on Twitter, by far:  transexual hysteria on both extremes.

I haven't yet watched all of John Oliver's episode which is a full on attack on Right wing moral panicking of the "they're coming for our children" kind in the USA.  From what little I saw, he made some good points, but also showed uncritical acceptance of a key "hot" pro-trans claim that seems very much up for debate:  the question of whether puberty blocking hormones for teens are essentially harmless (and truly reversible).   One of the biggest issues, which I have only just read about now, is how there is no doubt that the blockers during the teen years can cause serious loss of bone density, with permanent effects.   I presume the pro-trans side argue that it is manageable if monitored,  and is something fully disclosed as a risk to patients and their families; but you would have to suspect that informed consent from a young teenager who will typically (I gather)  not just have a desire to change their bodies, but also suffer depression, is a very tricky issue to be confident about.  

I strongly suspect there will be other lines that Oliver should have been more sceptical about:  such as a dismissal of the likelihood of a degree of social contagion in recent years, especially with respect to the rise in girls deciding they are trans.  

I followed a bit on the recent TERF wars in England, with Graham Norton getting a lot of praise from pro-trans people for saying people should listen to experts and families, not celebrities.  But this was after saying that "cancel culture" is really just "accountability for what people say", and I felt this was a rather weak stuff:  pretending that there isn't a serious issue from overly aggressively and censoring on line campaigns.   Then JK Rowling made comments that set off (apparently) a Twitter pile on by her supporters against Norton, which led to him cancelling his account.  Some sort of irony there. 

Rowling complains about threats of violence and rape which trans supporting extremists have made against her.   And I have to say, pro-trans people - like Greg Jericho in Australia - who refuse to acknowledge extremism on their own side of the fence are just part of the problem.

[UPDATE:  I had missed though her exact response, to Norton and something Billy Bragg said, which was this - 

 which is, to be honest, over the top in its own way.   Although, I can understand her frustration if no one on the pro-trans rights side never, ever, acknowledges that anyone on that side has made vile threats against her.] 

Rowling's key issue at the moment is the belief that it is wrong to allow any male (whether intact, or on hormones, or not) to legally have access to women's "safe" spaces by being able to simply declare he's a woman.  She is active, I take it, in the "TERF" movement to prevent that law change in Scotland.  This is the situation:

Typically, at present, successful applicants must obtain a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and must swear an oath that they have been living in their new gender for two years and that they intend to do so for the rest of their life.

They must provide one medical report outlining their diagnosis and a second detailing any relevant treatment or surgery. Other information, such as utility bills to prove how they have been living, can also be requested by the panel.

The Scottish government is proposing to relax some of these requirements, making the process "less onerous".

Under the proposals applicants would no longer need a clinical diagnosis or medical reports, and the two-year period would be reduced to three months. This would be followed, if an application was accepted, by three months for reflection before the gender recognition certificate was issued.

Cases would be handled by the Registrar General for Scotland, removing the need to apply to the panel.

Applicants would still have to swear an oath confirming that they intended to live permanently in their acquired gender, and making a false statement would be a criminal offence.

I don't see how the TERF concerns about this are controversial.  The current law seems to indicate that the change of gender normally would be for people who have been on hormone treatment for some considerable time.  I doubt that many women who were confident that a man whose testosterone has been chemically removed, so to speak, and who dresses as a woman, would be particularly concerned about him (or her, whatever) being in their toilets.   But to argue that all women in, say, a change room or (even worse) a rape refuge centre, have to accept that any fully intact, hormonally normal man in their space who simply has declared he is a woman would never represent a risk to their safety just doesn't make any common sense.   

Anyway, it's easy to despair of a middle ground ever being recovered here - although, to be honest, it's hard to convince me that JK Rowling isn't the one who is much closer to being there already.  

 UPDATE:   Oh!  I see via a video posted only 4 days ago on Youtube, and which seems credible, explains that the big, big problem many now have with Rowling is that she has appeared with, and offered support to, some very Right wing, anti-gay and anti-abortion figures, some who are supported by the worst type of Trump-ish Right wing culture warriors, as long as they align with her on the trans issues.    Apparently, there is a divide in the "TERF" world as to whether it is appropriate to ever do that, but it would seem Rowling is definitely falling on the side of "the enemy of my trans enemy is my friend", no matter how illiberal they are on other women's issues.

That really is a bad way to win an argument, at least if you claim to be a long time liberal.

Speaking of things Chinese...

I enjoyed this recent video from Religion for Breakfast that attempts to explain Daoism: 

 

For one thing: I didn't realise (or had forgotten) it had its own trinity of Gods. There is a motherly God figure too, if I recall correctly.  

Religions tend to have a hard time keeping to unique ideas, it seems...

Just a bookholder for myself

I've been puzzling about Buddhism again recently, and this article refers to the key thing that I think is very messy about it as a religion/philosophy:

Understanding Morality and No-Self in the context of Western and Buddhist Themes 

I will try to follow a couple of the links within it, to see if they help make it make any more sense....

Why the China change?

Sometimes I fear my choice in what I post might be making it seem like I'm a little bit too sympathetic to China.   I'm more puzzled by why it's gone the way it has in the last 4 or 5 years.  Noah Smith has a theory:

  And John Quiggin seems inclined to agree:

 

There's an American guy who has lived in China for 12 years, and he has a video out in which he reflects - carefully! - on what has improved and what has gotten worse about the country since he has been there.  It seemed reasonably balanced to me, even if he does complain about Western media bias giving false impression:  

Mind you, maybe Western media coverage would be better if journalists weren't treated like they are always out to harm the country and have to be tracked and monitored like they are all spies and enemies of the State.

Some champagne sarcasm here...

 

Not a RRR fan

So, that Indian Netflix movie RRR has attracted a lot of positive reviews in the USA and elsewhere, and I thought I would give it a go, given my general fondness for good foreign content.

I knew it was not going to be realistic; I knew it was going to be over-the-top and rather silly in a Bollywood way at times.   And I thought for the first 30 minutes or so that maybe I would enjoy it.

But it wore me down and I gave up at the half way mark.  I wasn't expecting the intense cartoonishness of so much of it;  the extremities of anti-colonialism in the English characters' acting and dialogue that made the cringe aspects of the Titanic screenplay sound like Shakespeare; or the unexplained motivations of the lead character, who I presume redeems himself by the end, but in the giant action sequence in the middle (the one where scores of CGI animals are running rampant in the colonial mansion) is prepared to beat his former friend to a pulp in order to gain a promotion.   Another thing  that continually bothered me was how the locations felt so inauthentic - it looked far too much like it was mostly filmed in a giant studio set, and now that I check, a lot of it was actually filmed in bits of Europe.     

So no, it didn't get my seal of approval, and I am a bit puzzled as to why so many people do like it.   If you are into film for OTT action, I think any good kung fu film has more "authentic" feeling. 

A balanced take on a complicated issue

Oh, Science has a good balanced article on the difficult question of whether young people should continue getting COVID boosters, over the issue of possible heart damage from mRNA vaccines.   The basic problem is the great difficulty in getting accurate risk/benefit analysis for a problem that may or may not cause symptoms in both the vaccinated and people who get COVID.  

Now, I know I criticised that Florida Surgeon General for this last week - and a case could be made from this article that maybe his conclusion was correct - or at least one that has a lot more support than I knew. But nonetheless, he obviously approached the problem from a highly politicised, grandstanding, point of view, and with evidence that was not properly detailed.  This was damaging the interests of public health in the long run.    

Wasteful competition

So there is a fair amount of talk about Joe Biden taking an aggressive approach to stopping China getting ahead with its technology, particularly chip manufacturing:

U.S. officials pushed to choke off China’s access to critical semiconductor technology after internal debates and tough negotiations with allies.

Noah Smith also has a long post about it, and even the (far too Right wing) guy who has taken over from Allahpundit at Hot Air finds he has to reluctantly praise Biden for this.

I guess my feeling is not that this is a mistake - just that it's a great pity that at a time you really want the globe to be working together towards significant goals, it's instead being set up now for time-and-resource-wasting duplication of technological effort for a decade or two until there is some new  realignment of mutual Western and Chinese interests.    

I noticed when shopping for a tablet in Singapore recently that Huawei still seemingly has (or is trying to maintain) a significant market there, with tablets, phones and (I think) small laptop-ish things (like Microsoft Surface.)   They all had brilliant screens, I know that much.  But no Google apps - the special Huawei ecosystem instead. (Interestingly, recent surprise survey results indicated that Singapore has weirdly - for a very capitalist country - positive feelings towards China and Xi.  I wonder if that makes them particularly inclined to give Huawei products a go, more so than everywhere else.   I do have lingering doubts, just based on a hunch, really, that the Huawei 5G ban was not well justified.) 

As far as I can tell, China has done well with high speed trains;  they are (with very little attention from the West) building a smallish but significant space station.  (According to this article, it's about 20% as massive as the ISS, and is expected to be used for at least a decade.)   They are perhaps catching up somewhat in aviation, with their first significant home grown passenger jet just getting off the ground now.

So overall, they do some pretty remarkable stuff with some pretty sophisticated technology, and it seems such a pity that instead of a global market for all technology, we seem destined to a prolonged period of two global hubs of competing technology, with little cross over.

I guess it means industrial espionage is going to be bigger than ever before, too.   At least that provides some drama and good movie plots, though.  (Trying to find the upside here.  Well, apart from the obvious one that it should presumably make their weaponry less effective?   But I want the other good stuff they can do, too.)

 

Bourdain considered

There's an article at Slate talking about the new biography, somewhat controversial for its "warts and all" approach, of the late Anthony Bourdain.   This section sounds to me like an accurate take on his appeal:

It reads as if it were written in 1999, the year that Bourdain’s life changed as a result of the publication of “Don’t Eat Before Reading This,” the sensational New Yorker article that became the basis for his bestselling book, 2000’s Kitchen Confidential.

Leerhsen likes to hover over this turning point, a time when Bourdain, 43, was living with his first wife, Nancy, in a shabby Manhattan apartment where they once left a Christmas tree lying on its side for nine months. Bourdain worked as a middling chef at a middling restaurant, and Nancy spent most of her time watching Court TV. The pair were recognizable New York types, stunned remnants of the bohemian heyday of the East Village, former junkies clinging to the fringes of a city that was rapidly shedding its grit. The haut-bourgeois exaltation of chefs and restaurants was both a symptom of this transformation and the condition that made Bourdain’s midlife success possible. He was a funny, earthy iconoclast, dishing the dirt on what went on behind the scenes at the eateries that were increasingly central to New York’s culture. Most gifted chefs are meticulous and imperious, not qualities that make for charismatic personalities. Bourdain, however, was more like a musician, specifically the kind of downtown rock ’n’ roller who once played CBGB. He wanted to become “the culinary equivalent of the Ramones.”

Bourdain’s old-timey hipness is a primary source of fascination for Leerhsen, who compares him to Frank Sinatra in an extended passage in the book’s prelude: Each is “the epitome of cool, a sad-smiling Jersey boy who combined supremely high standards with the under-appreciated art of not giving a shit in ways that seemed to excite both sexes. You wanted either to be him or to do him, especially if you’d heard the gossip about his gargantuan member.” (OK, that last line is pretty lurid, but the subject never comes up again!) Leerhsen’s Bourdain was a swashbuckling “renegade” drawn to the piratical culture of restaurant kitchens and sworn to a code of authenticity that, despite his age, seems quintessentially Gen X. His drinking and smoking and his past history of drug use were badges of this street cred. “When traveling for his show,” Leerhsen writes, Bourdain “never dealt with official tourist agencies because he disdained the authorized version of things; he balked at the word ‘brand.’ ” As a kid, Bourdain rebelled against what he once described as “the smothering chokehold of love and normalcy in my house,” which, along with the bland comforts of his suburban upbringing, irked him simply because they were bland and suburban and therefore phony.

Nothing a well aimed torpedo wouldn't cure

I'm joking, of course:  I wouldn't want the staff, nearly all of whom would be nicer people from the Philippines, to suffer.

Anyway, this is a despatch from long time Catallaxy character:

Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare says:

October 17, 2022 at 11:22 am

There are a lot of Republicans on this cruise, not surprising due to the demographic of older and spending it, and when we start talking to people the anger at what is happening in the US is palpable.

One woman today said to me she didn’t like Donald Trump ‘as a person’ but she sure as hell developed a liking now for ‘his polices and the way he got things done’. She and her husband both thought the 2020 election was rigged. However that’s just one demographic, and people express plenty of concern for the hand-out mentality of many younger Americans now. There’s a terrible sadness in these older generations about it and the decline of their country.

Rather as many of us in Australia also feel, we told them.

Discussion started with this woman and her husband when Hairy mentioned we’d had two years in Australia with no immigrants. We can give you a few, the woman dourly commented.

I used to toy with the idea of going on cruise for the experience, and I have watched a lot of Youtube videos from people who now make a living by reviewing their cruises.  But thinking about the politics of most of the people on board, at least on a US passenger heavy cruise, is kind of off putting. 

I have commented to friends before:  if there was a cruise line which specialised in catering to men (OK, OK - people - but let's be honest, it's going to be many more nerdy men than women who would like this) with a technical interest in how the massive operations are run, I would be all in on that.  Like, being able to wander up to the bridge anytime you want, and get explanations of their navigation systems, or guided tours of the engine room, kitchens, and all other "hidden" workspaces - that would be interesting.  

But just stuffing yourself full of food and drink all the time with the occasional brief shore excursion - not sure anymore how much fun I would get out of it.    

 

A very small element of truth, but too much excuse making

Megan McArdle, who I count as a far from reliable commentator, writes in the Washington Post (I'll gift the link) about why she thinks attacks on Trump tend to (somewhat counter-intuitively) only boost his support in his base.

I mean, one might say something like "that's how cults work", and "hey, Megan, perhaps you should consider the effect of nightly brainwashing sessions by Fox News", but she writes this:

It’s such a fascinating moment, and not just because it so neatly encapsulates the evolution of Republican politics in the Trump era. It also suggests a reason for why that politics is so effective — and why mainstream Washington’s frantic attempts to anathematize the Trumpian style might paradoxically have increased its appeal.

I was part of those mainstream efforts; I spent years arguing that Trump’s impulsivity and his savage attacks on everyone from Gold Star parents to those with physical disabilities ought to have disqualified him from high office. Like most of my colleagues in the media, I was astonished to find that this only made his voters love him more. Many observers concluded that this must be because Trump’s voters were simply awful bigots who loved meanness for its own sake. (“The cruelty is the point,” Adam Serwer wrote in 2018 for the Atlantic.)

Presumably, they’re right in some cases; there are bad apples in any large political movement. But as I’ve watched Trumpy candidates and spoken to Trumpy voters, I’ve begun to wonder whether there isn’t another point that we’ve been missing.

Trump voters are famously convinced that establishment Republicans sold them out — and there is a grain of truth to their belief. As political consultant David Shor noted in March, the median voter is center-left on entitlements but right-wing on immigration, yet for years an “ideological cartel” of educated journalists and political professionals kept that combination off the table for either party.

Trump got elected by promising to break up the cartel. But many politicians make such promises — almost all of them, in fact. Then they get to Washington and turn into boringly normal politicians.

There are structural reasons for that — Washington is too big and complicated for any one person to reform, so delivering for your voters inevitably means accommodating yourself to dysfunctional bureaucracy and uninspiring compromise. But to the voters, it looked as though their fiery outsiders had been seduced into betraying their promises by the infamous lure of the Georgetown cocktail-party circuit.

Though Trump voters had grown cynical about such promises, they trusted Trump to follow through. In part that’s because he was a billionaire, which meant, they thought, that he didn’t need to sell out for a plush lobbying job. But looking back, it seems that Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric was also serving as a kind of insurance policy for those voters: Having made himself a pariah with the establishment, Trump couldn’t sell out even if he had wanted to.

Trump’s norm violations functioned as what game theorists call a “credible commitment,” enabling voters to trust him even if he wasn’t particularly trustworthy. And ironically, the establishment boosted that signal by proving that we considered him utterly anathema, absolutely beyond the pale. We thought we were helping to minimize the threats Trump posed to the system, but the very vehemence of our rejection might actually have increased his power.

The problem with this type of analysis is that it takes us further down the "normalisation of anti-democractic fascism" path.  And it avoids what is really the heart of the problem - the cowardice and lust for power of pathetic Republican leadership who have let Trump walk all over them, and will not tell the truth to the voters who they know believe any old BS that comes out of Trump's mouth.

It's like Meagan is insisting "you just can't tell the truth to these people.  You just have to live with that".  

 

 

White voter problem

 It's surprising to see the racial voting divide set out so clearly, from a piece in Wapo:

A clear majority of White Americans keeps backing the Republican Party over the Democratic Party, even though the Republican Party is embracing terrible and at times antidemocratic policies and rhetoric. The alliance between Republicans and White Americans is by far the most important and problematic dynamic in American politics today.

Non-Hispanic White Americans were about 85 percent of those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020, much larger than the 59 percent of the U.S. population overall in that demographic. That was similar to 2016, when White voters were about 88 percent of Trump backers. It is very likely that White Americans will be more than 80 percent of those who back Republican candidates in this fall’s elections.

The political discourse in America, however, continues to ignore or play down the Whiteness of the Republican coalition. In 2015 and 2016, journalists and political commentators constantly used terms such as “Middle America” and “the working class” to describe Trump’s supporters, as though the overwhelming Whiteness of the group was not a central part of the story. In this year’s campaign cycle, recent articles, in The Post and in other outlets, have highlighted Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams’s supposed weaknesses with Black voters. This is a strange framing. It is likely that more than 70 percent of White voters in Georgia will back Abrams’s Republican opponent, Gov. Brian Kemp, but fewer than 20 percent of the state’s Black voters will vote for the incumbent. If Kemp wins reelection, it will be because of White Georgians, not Black ones.

If you unite both sides, you're doing it wrong

Unfortunately, not a good point being made by normally sensible David. 

He seems to have stopped ageing about 35 years ago

He's 82:

 Had some "work" I would guess.  Still looks remarkably good for his age.

This was ridiculous

I don't think this got the amount of ridicule it deserved:

 

 I mean, of course stories about AI development are interesting, but this was a silly stunt.   

In a groundbreaking hearing, a robot “gave evidence” to a House of Lords committee on Tuesday – where it read typos from its pre-written script, struggled to hear questions, and needed to be rebooted halfway through the session.

“Ai-Da”, described by its creator, Aiden Meller, as “the world’s first ultra-realistic robot artist”, appeared in front of the Lords communications and digital committee as part of its inquiry into the future of the creative industries in the UK.

The chair of the committee, Tina Stowell, emphasised at the outset that it was “a serious inquiry”, before explaining to Meller that “the robot is providing evidence but it is not a witness in its own right, and it does not occupy the same status as a human. You as its creator are ultimately responsible for its statements”.

A relatively close black hole

This was in Science last month:

Unless they’re belching up stars or rippling spacetime in a partnered dance, light-trapping black holes are notoriously difficult to spot. But a new proposed discovery of a dormant black hole may help unveil a population lurking in the darkness, New Scientist reports. Because the object emits no light, astronomers detected it by studying the warped orbit and spectrum of a nearby Sun-like star using the European Space Agency’s Gaia space telescope and multiple ground-based observatories. The black hole candidate (artist’s impression of a different black hole, above), dubbed Gaia BH1, is 10 times the mass of the Sun and a mere 1500 light-years away—three times closer to Earth than the next known neighbor, researchers report on the arXiv preprint server last week. The long orbital period and proximity make this black hole a prime target to study the physics of these invisible enigmas, which could help scientists identify many more examples in the two remaining data releases from Gaia.

Update:  Oh, just a minute.  In 2020 I posted about a black hole that might only be 1000 light years away.

A meme made me laugh

It was in response to this:

 This:

Weird science

From Nature, a story about which I am unsure how to react:

Hundreds of thousands of human neurons growing in a dish coated with electrodes have been taught to play a version of the classic computer game Pong¹.

In doing so, the cells join a growing pantheon of Pong players, including pigs taught to manipulate joysticks with their snout² and monkeys wired to control the game with their minds. (Google’s DeepMind artificial-intelligence (AI) algorithms mastered Pong many years ago³ and have moved on to more-sophisticated computer games such as StarCraft II⁴.)

The gamer cells respond not to visual cues on a screen but to electrical signals from the electrodes in the dish. These electrodes both stimulate the cells and record changes in neuronal activity. Researchers then converted the stimulation signals and the cellular responses into a visual depiction of the game. The results are reported today in Neuron.

Intelligence in a dish

The work is a proof of principle that neurons in a dish can learn and exhibit basic signs of intelligence, says lead author Brett Kagan, chief scientific officer at Cortical Labs in Melbourne, Australia. “In current textbooks, neurons are thought of predominantly in terms of their implication for human or animal biology,” he says. “They’re not thought about as an information processor, but a neuron is this amazing system that can process information in real time with very low power consumption.”

I'm betting the cells in a dish would also be easily persuaded to vote for Trump.   

 

Catholic disgrace, continued

Why would this upset him?:

What, his clear discomfit with Putin actually losing the war isn't enough to mark him as a disgrace?    

Update:  he admires Right wing trolls:

Old time commenter JC likes to mouth off in public, and chose db's "new catallaxy" as the forum in which to continue.   But if he had any real moral character, he would tell db (who he increasingly disagrees with) that his views are disgusting:

 

Stand up, JC, you coward...
 

Update 2:

 Dover beach also linked to the Revolver news story, with the title:

Love Him or Hate Him, the War Against Alex Jones Is a War Against Us All

Conspiracy believing paranoid conservatives just hate to see any conspiracy promoting and defaming  moron being punished, economically or legally.   

Dover beach and Currency Lad just illustrate daily how detached from reality and morality conservative Catholics have become.   True disgraces to their religion. 

Update 3:   Well, I guess that makes all OK, then:

He's quite the moron...

Ross sees a problem (but has no solutions)

I don't think there is too much to disagree with in Ross Douthat's column about the unresolved conflict within the Catholic Church that kicked in post Vatican II.

Except - I would say that I get the feeling his inclination is to blame Vatican II, whereas I think the current internal conflict is an inevitable result of the effect of the science revolutions starting from Darwin  making there way slowly through society.   (Vatican II was barely 100 years after The Origin of the Species, after all.)

A coherent president

Further to my wish that American journalists should stop ignoring the Right wingnut meme that Biden is a babbling, dementia riddled puppet - yes this interview was pre-recorded, but Biden comes across as smart and reasonable:  

 

In comments following, there are still some wingnuts claiming "he probably has an earpiece and is repeating words fed to him". They have become detached from reality. This needs to be pointed out by the mainstream press, often.  

Doesn't fit the Trumpy narrative

Yeah, I've read something like this quite a few times recently:

 If MAGA leaders are truly concerned about violent crime, they might look inward. Earlier this year, the centrist Democratic group Third Way crunched the 2020 homicide figures and found that per capita homicide rates were on average 40 percent higher in states won by Trump than by Joe Biden. Eight of the 10 states with the highest homicide rates have been reliably red states for the past two decades. Republican-led cities weren’t any safer than Democratic-led cities.

Among the 10 states with the highest per capita homicide rates — Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, Missouri, South Carolina, New Mexico, Georgia, Arkansas, Tennessee — most were in the South and relatively rural. The findings were broadly consistent with other rankings of states (and counties) by violent crime.

This isn’t the fault of Republican leaders, of course, any more than Democratic leaders are to blame for crime in blue states. The South, for reasons sociologists debate, has been more violent than the rest of the country for centuries. But those who are truly worried about violent crime should consider decamping to blue America. Living in a Republican state is much more likely to get you killed.

Sometimes I wonder if dedication to hyperbole causes permanent brain damage

 

Quite a few people make the following point in response: 

Update:  oh look, gullible Adam is impressed too:

Yet, as calmer people are pointing out (my God, this comes from one of the new Catallaxy blogs):

And yeah, the link is to a Nature story from Feb 21 pointing out that:

As countries roll out vaccines that prevent COVID-19, studies are under way to determine whether shots can also stop people from getting infected and passing on the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Vaccines that prevent transmission could help to bring the pandemic under control if they are given to enough people.

Preliminary analyses suggest that at least some vaccines are likely to have a transmission-blocking effect. But confirming that effect — and how strong it will be — is tricky because a drop in infections in a given region might be explained by other factors, such as lockdowns and behaviour changes. Not only that, the virus can spread from asymptomatic carriers, which makes it hard to detect those infections.

As some comments note in the thread after Adam's tweet:

Noah tries to counter

Right wingnuts are 100% committed to a belief that Black Lives Matter led to several cities being laid to waste, and that Democrats endorsed the destruction.  As with the "Obama was a disastrous President" narrative, it's difficult to not see underlying racism in the fanciful exaggeration they have convinced themselves is obviously true.  Anyway, I agree with Noah, as I do on many things:

So, how bad was that dinosaur killing asteroid?

Probably even worse than you imagined, according to a pair of stories on Science Daily.  First, wouldn't it shake your confidence to feel the planet quaking for weeks after the impact?:

66 million years ago, a 10-kilometer asteroid hit Earth, triggering the extinction of the dinosaurs. New evidence suggests that the Chicxulub impact also triggered an earthquake so massive that it shook the planet for weeks to months after the collision. The amount of energy released in this "mega-earthquake" is estimated at 1023 joules, which is about 50,000 times more energy than was released in the magnitude 9.1 Sumatra earthquake in 2004. ...

The rocks exposed on the coast of Gorgonilla Island tell a story from the bottom of the ocean -- roughly 2 km down. There, about 3,000-km southwest from the site of the impact, sand, mud, and small ocean creatures were accumulating on the ocean floor when the asteroid hit. Layers of mud and sandstone as far as 10-15 meters below the sea floor experienced soft-sediment deformation that is preserved in the outcrops today, which Bermúdez attributes to the shaking from the impact. Faults and deformation due to shaking continue up through the spherule-rich layer that was deposited post-impact, indicating that the shaking must have continued for the weeks and months it took for these finer-grained deposits to reach the ocean floor. Just above those spherule deposits, preserved fern spores signal the first recovery of plant-life after the impact.

As for the tsunami, another story notes:

"This tsunami was strong enough to disturb and erode sediments in ocean basins halfway around the globe, leaving either a gap in the sedimentary records or a jumble of older sediments," said lead author Molly Range, who conducted the modeling study for a master's thesis under U-M physical oceanographer and study co-author Brian Arbic and U-M paleoceanographer and study co-author Ted Moore....

Two and a half minutes after the asteroid struck, a curtain of ejected material pushed a wall of water outward from the impact site, briefly forming a 4.5-kilometer-high (2.8-mile-high) wave that subsided as the ejecta fell back to Earth.

Ten minutes after the projectile hit the Yucatan, and 220 kilometers (137 miles) from the point of impact, a 1.5-kilometer-high (0.93-mile-high) tsunami wave -- ring-shaped and outward-propagating -- began sweeping across the ocean in all directions, according to the U-M simulation...

According to the team's simulation:

• One hour after impact, the tsunami had spread outside the Gulf of Mexico and into the North Atlantic.

• Four hours after impact, the waves had passed through the Central American Seaway and into the Pacific.

• Twenty-four hours after impact, the waves had crossed most of the Pacific from the east and most of the Atlantic from the west and entered the Indian Ocean from both sides.

• By 48 hours after impact, significant tsunami waves had reached most of the world's coastlines.

For the current study, the researchers did not attempt to estimate the extent of coastal flooding caused by the tsunami.

However, their models indicate that open-ocean wave heights in the Gulf of Mexico would have exceeded 100 meters (328 feet), with wave heights of more than 10 meters (32.8 feet) as the tsunami approached North Atlantic coastal regions and parts of South America's Pacific coast.

 

 

What a nightmare for the parents

Noted in The Guardian:

A nurse murdered seven babies and attempted to kill 10 others by poisoning them on a hospital neonatal unit where she was a “constant malevolent presence”, a court has heard.

Lucy Letby, 32, fatally injected newborns with insulin, air or milk during night shifts when she knew their parents would not be present, a jury was told.

One of the babies was just 24 hours old when Letby allegedly injected him with air, killing him just 90 minutes after she came on shift. The nurse tried to kill his twin sister the next day, it is alleged.

The court was told that Letby, who was trained to care for the most seriously ill babies, developed an “unusual interest” in the parents of some of her 17 alleged victims and in some cases tracked them on Facebook.

Sounds like something you would read in fiction, but I don't want to see Netflix making money off it either.   

About that Florida advice

As I expected, plenty of valid sounding criticism is coming out about that Florida Surgeon General's "study" about mRNA vaccines and cardiac arrest.

Here's one article.  Here's another.  I didn't realise the Surgeon General was always a contrarian on virtually everything to do with COVID.   

But as I said before - in the Right wing information bubble world, the damage is already done.

AI as your friend, and doctor?

Odd, but I'll give it a go:

A new chatbot start-up from two top artificial intelligence talents lets anyone strike up a conversation with impersonations of Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Albert Einstein and Sherlock Holmes. Registered users type in messages and get responses. They can also create a chatbot of their own on Character.ai, which has logged hundreds of thousands of user interactions in its first three weeks of beta-testing.

“There were reports of possible voter fraud and I wanted an investigation,” the Trump bot said. Character.ai features a disclaimer at the top of every chat: “Remember: Everything Characters say is made up!”

Character.ai’s willingness to let users experiment with the latest in language AI is a departure from Big Tech — and that’s by design. The start-up’s two founders helped create Google’s artificial intelligence project LaMDA, which Google keeps closely guarded while it develops safeguards against social risks.

In interviews with The Washington Post, Character.ai’s co-founders Noam Shazeer and Daniel De Freitas said they left Google to get this technology into as many hands as possible. They opened Character.ai’s beta version to the public in September for anyone to try.

“I thought, ‘Let’s build a product now that can that can help millions and billions of people,’” Shazeer said. “Especially in the age of covid, there are just millions of people who are feeling isolated or lonely or need someone to talk to.”

In other AI news, which I'm not sure I like the sounds of (a pun there, actually): 

The National Institutes of Health is funding a massive research project to collect voice data and develop an AI that could diagnose people based on their speech.

Everything from your vocal cord vibrations to breathing patterns when you speak offers potential information about your health, says laryngologist Dr. Yael Bensoussan, the director of the University of South Florida's Health Voice Center and a leader on the study.

"We asked experts: Well, if you close your eyes when a patient comes in, just by listening to their voice, can you have an idea of the diagnosis they have?" Bensoussan says. "And that's where we got all our information."

Someone who speaks low and slowly might have Parkinson's disease. Slurring is a sign of a stroke. Scientists could even diagnose depression or cancer. The team will start by collecting the voices of people with conditions in five areas: neurological disorders, voice disorders, mood disorders, respiratory disorders and pediatric disorders like autism and speech delays.

I wonder how far this will go in future - visit the AI doctor online with a frog in the throat, and end up admitted to a psych ward?

A deeply unimpressive Metaverse

A reporter for the New York Times has an article up "This is Life in the Metaverse", and boy, it may not have been the intention of the writer, but for me, it only helps confirm all of the scepticism about what a bad idea it is.  I will gift the article so you can read in full.

The culinary workplace - does it have to be that way?

Because it has been getting favourable comments on Twitter, I decided to watch the first episode of The Bear, which is on Disney Plus in Australia.

It's a comedy drama (with, it would seem, a heavier concentration on the drama) about a talented chef who comes home to Chicago to try to keep his recently deceased brother's "Italian beef restaurant" going.

I guess I expected all of the Kitchen Confidential-esque, working-as-a-chef-in-a-restaurant-is-high-energy, high-conflict, sometimes-high-reward, stuff.   (Ratatouille and Gordon Ramsay's shows contributed to our understanding of what type of people it attracts, too!)   But my overall feeling remains:

*  gee, there seemed to be an awful lot of people needed to run that place with the limited menu options.  That felt a bit unrealistic.  Apparently, though, the show gets reasonable marks for accuracy from people in the business.

*  Given that we have had a couple of decades of public exposure to what it's like to work in these businesses, is it is really, absolutely, unavoidable that they have to be like that?   I mean, can a restaurant be started on the basis that respect and workplace harmony are prioritised, and can it possibly survive?  

Ronny Jackson was the warning

Ronny Jackson was the warning - any doctor who goes all in for support for Trumpy politicians has dubious judgement in everything, including medicine.

Hence, my initial reaction when reading that the Florida Surgeon General was promoting an unpublished analysis about the increased risk of cardiac arrest in young men from mRNA vaccines was that this was likely to be from a badly flawed analysis.  (The warning in his Tweet "FL will not be silent on the truth" pretty much seals it, that he's acting from biased political motives.)

Early commentary indicates my reaction was probably right - although we all await more detailed analysis.   But the (likely) damage has already been done in the politicised information bubble the Right has built for itself. 

No, they don't

 

Tablet time

After many years with only an old mid sized Samsung tablet, which still has a great looking screen, but a battery that will only last a couple of hours and then take 8 hours to charge again, I went and bought my self a new, larger tablet - a relatively cheap one from Lenovo.

I have to say, the way Lenovo names its models is pretty confusing - but a 10.6 inch model with 128Gb (and room for expansion) for $327 seems pretty good value.   It makes reading books much, much easier than trying to do so on phone.  In fact, I have a theory that it will turn out conclusively in the near future that the world overall has become 20% dumber due to the atomisation of information necessary to fit it on a phone screen. 

It's still a bit tricky doing blog posts, though.  Hence my last post with the dubious quality of the resized screenshot.  I'm working on it, though...

Wikipedia and physics