* This is an archive of my own online blog and notes, with weekly entries collected by month.
* THE WEEK THAT WAS: The complaints about the ineffectualness of the House January 6th Committee and the indifference of the Department of Justice to the Capitol riot on that day continues on Twitter. John Dean -- one of the big players in the Watergate scandal during the Nixon Administration -- had astute comments on current events versus Watergate, which are worth reprinting here.
Before proceeding, here's a timeline of Watergate events:
So ... over two years from the crime to the major consequence -- and, if Nixon hadn't resigned, there would have been a similar delay to indictment and trial. Dean elaborated:
QUOTE:
To not charge ALL involved in planning, aiding, abetting, and conspiring regarding the 1/6 insurrection, and now covering it up, would be the historical equivalent of ONLY PROSECUTING THE FIVE MEN ARRESTED on 06.17.72 at the DNC's Watergate offices trying to bug the place.
It took 928 days to hold ALL the KEY players responsible for Watergate with the convictions of Nixon's former attorney general, chief-of-staff, and top assistant on 01.01.1975. The 1/6 investigation is early. DOJ will give NO PASSES for the democracy-harming crimes of 1/6.
The 1/6 investigations are moving faster than Watergate. Mid-term 2022 elections will not change the focus of DOJ. The 2024 election will not change DOJ's actions. 1/6 is FAR FROM OVER -- of that I am certain. To think otherwise is to misunderstand the career lawyers at DOJ!
Criminal accountability for 1/6 is a BFD at DOJ. How do we know? It is America's first former POTUS insurrection! It is the biggest investigation in DOJ's history. If they don't get it right, the USA is finished. Criminal investigations aren't televised. THEY'LL GET IT RIGHT.
I trust the DOJ, and I'm neither naive nor untutored. Unlike any time in DOJ's history, they literally carry the fate of the nation. Let them do their job. Meanwhile, good wishes for the New Year.
END_QUOTE
I would add that there's never been a more significant Congressional investigation than that of the January 6th Committee. It's the biggest deal in Congress since the 1954 Army-McCarthy hearings. The committee members know exactly what they are doing, and they don't miss any tricks. The committee is playing chess; those trying to defy it are playing checkers, and aren't very good at it.
Incidentally, January 6 is coming up, with warnings going around that there may be trouble then. Possibly, but I wouldn't bet on it. The MAGAbots are mostly mouth, and are losers. As I keep saying, the current national lunacy isn't for real, it isn't sustainable. The problem is, how long will the illusion persist?
* In another Twitter thread, one Craig Spencer MD (@Craig_A_Spencer) commented:
QUOTE:
I've seen a lot of COVID in the ER recently. With so many people getting infected recently, some folks may wonder what's the point of getting vaccinated at all? And is there really any value to a booster dose if I've had two Pfizer/Moderna or a shot of J&J?
My observations: Every patient I've seen with COVID that's had a 3rd "booster" dose has had mild symptoms. By mild, I mean mostly sore throat. Lots of sore throat. Also some fatigue, maybe some muscle pain. No difficulty breathing. No shortness of breath. All a little uncomfortable, but fine.
Most patients I've seen that had 2 doses of Pfizer/Moderna still had "mild" symptoms, but more than those who had received a third dose. More fatigued. More fever. More coughing. A little more miserable overall. But no shortness of breath. No difficulty breathing. Mostly fine.
Most patients I've seen that had one dose of J&J and had COVID were worse overall. Felt horrible. Fever for a few days (or more). Weak, tired. Some shortness of breath and cough. But not one needing hospitalization. Not one needing oxygen. Not great. But not life-threatening.
And almost every single patient that I've taken care of that needed to be admitted for COVID has been unvaccinated. Every one with profound shortness of breath. Every one whose oxygen dropped when they walked. Every one needing oxygen to breathe regularly.
The point is you're gonna hear about a LOT of people getting COVID in the coming days and weeks. Those that have been vaccinated and got a booster dose will mostly fare well with minimal symptoms. Those getting two doses might have a few more symptoms, but should still do well. Those who got a single J&J similarly may have more symptoms, but have more protection than the unvaccinated. But as I've witnessed in the ER, the greatest burden still falls on ...
... the unvaccinated. Those who haven't gotten a single dose of vaccine. They're the most likely to need oxygen. They're the most likely to have complications. They're the most likely to get admitted. And the most likely to stay in the hospital for days or longer with severe COVID.
These are all just observations from my recent shifts in the ER. But the same has been borne out by local and national data showing that the unvaccinated make up a very disproportionate share of those with severe disease, needing hospitalization, and dying from COVID.
So no matter your political affiliation, or thoughts on masks, or where you live in this country, as an ER doctor you'd trust with your life if you rolled into my emergency room at 3am, I promise you that you'd rather face the oncoming Omicron wave vaccinated. Please be safe.
END_QUOTE
* I mentioned getting a free forum from Bravenet a few weeks back for use as a scratchpad for casual postings, to be linked to Twitter postings. I figured that one free forum would do just as well for that purpose as any other, but the Bravenet forum was weak, ugly, and not easy to administer. I got to thinking I had a better deal at one time, and after some puzzling around, realized what I had was a Proboards free forum.
That was like ten years ago. I looked up Proboards and signed up for a forum again. It's much more capable, prettier, and easy to administer. I just got it minimally set up; to my surprise, I found out that a simple menu entry that generated a cross-post to my Twitter account. "This just looks better and better!" [ED: It didn't turn out to be useful.]
I also mentioned a week ago that I'd got the GARFIELD KART game for my Windows game PC for cheap. I liked the kart racing enough to see if I could find a kart racing game for my Android phone. Some hunting around led me to a free BEACH BUGGY RACING (BBR) game, which I downloaded and found entertaining. Controls for smartphone games tend to be troublesome, but BBR uses tilt for steering, and is easy to play.
Working from there, I wondered if I could find BBR on the Steam game website, and sure enough I did, buying BEACH BUGGY RACING 2 with the HOT WHEELS EXPANSION pack for $13.50 USD total. I can play with a bluetooth game controller, and I have a lot more different racetrack options. Pity I don't have so much time to play it.
BACK_TO_TOP* THE WEEK THAT WAS: The anniversary of last year's Capitol riot came and went. Predictions of Right-wing violence, to no surprise, turned out to be wrong. Gratifyingly, Donald Trump wanted to have a press conference on that day, but was convinced it would be a bad idea. Trump is in decline.
President Joe Biden delivered a speech at the Capitol Building on 6 January, lighting into Trump, without naming him. Significant excerpts of the speech included:
QUOTE:
Outnumbered in the face of a brutal attack, Capitol Police, the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, the National Guard and other brave law enforcement officials saved the rule of law. Our democracy held. We, the people, endured. We, the people, prevailed.
For the first time in our history, a president had not just lost an election, he tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power as a violent mob breached the Capitol. But they failed. They failed.
... This wasn't a group of tourists. This was an armed insurrection. They weren't looking to uphold the will of the people, they were looking to deny the will of the people. They weren't looking to uphold a free and fair election, they were looking to overturn one. They weren't looking to save the cause of America, they were looking to subvert the Constitution.
... My fellow Americans, in life there's truth and tragically there are lies -- lies conceived and spread for profit and power. We must be absolutely clear about what is true and what is a lie. And here's the truth: The former President of the United States of America has created and spread a web of lies about the 2020 election.
He's done so because he values power over principle, because he sees his own interest as more important than his country's interest, than America's interest, and because his bruised ego matters more to him than our democracy or our Constitution. He can't accept he lost even though that's what 93 United States senators, his own attorney general, his own vice president, governors and state officials in every battleground state have all said: He lost. That's what 81 million of you did as you voted for a new way forward. He's done what no president in American history, in the history of this country, has ever, ever done: He refused to accept the results of an election and the will of the American people.
While some courageous men and women in the Republican Party are standing against it, trying to uphold the principle of that party, too many others are transforming that party into something else. They seem no longer to want to be the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Reagan, the Bushes.
... The "Big Lie" being told by the former president and many Republicans who fear his wrath is that the insurrection in this country actually took place on Election Day, November 3, 2020. ... The former president?s supporters are trying to rewrite history.
... Here's the truth: The election of 2020 was the greatest demonstration of democracy in the history of this country. More of you voted in that election than have ever voted in all of American history. Over 150 million Americans went to the polls and voted that day, in a pandemic, some at great risk to their lives. And they should be applauded, not attacked.
Right now, in state after state, new laws are being written not to protect the vote, but to deny it -- not only to suppress the vote, but to subvert it. ... The former president and his supporters have decided the only way for them to win is to suppress your vote and subvert our elections. It's wrong. It's undemocratic. And frankly, it's un-American.
... Every legal challenge questioning the results in every court in this country that could have been made was made and was rejected. Often rejected by Republican-appointed judges, including judges appointed by the former president himself. From state courts to the United States Supreme Court, recounts were undertaken in state after state.
... Even before the first ballot was cast, the former president was preemptively sowing doubt about the election results. He built his lie over months. It wasn't based in the facts. He was just looking for an excuse, a pretext to cover for the truth. He's not just a former president. He's a defeated former president.
Defeated by a margin of over 7 million of your votes. In a full and free and fair election. There is simply zero proof the election results are inaccurate. In fact, in every venue where evidence had to be produced, an oath to tell the truth had to be taken, the former president failed to make his case. Just think about this: The former president and his supporters have never been able to explain how they accept as accurate other election results that took place on November 3rd. Elections for governor, United States Senate, House of Representatives, elections in which they closed the gap in the House.
They challenged none of that. The president's name was first. Then we went down the line: governor, senators, House of Representatives, somehow those results are accurate on the same ballot. But the presidential race was flawed. And on the same ballot, same day, cast by the same voters. The only difference: The former president didn't lose those races. He just lost the one that was his own.
... We're engaged anew in a struggle between democracy and autocracy, between the aspirations of the many and the greed of the few, between the people's right of self-determination and self-seeking autocrat. From China to Russia and beyond, they're betting that democracy?s days are numbered. They actually told me democracy is too slow, too bogged down by division to succeed in today's rapidly-changing, complicated world. And they're betting, they?re betting America will become more like them and less like us. They?re betting America?s a place for the autocrat, the dictator, the strongman. I do not believe that.
... This is not a land of kings or dictators or autocrats. We're a nation of laws, of order, not chaos, of peace, not violence. Here in America, the people rule through the ballot, and their will prevails. So let us remember together: We're one nation, under God, indivisible, that today, tomorrow and forever at our best, we are the United States of America.
END_QUOTE
Echoing last week's installment, there's still a lot of complaint on Twitter that Trump hasn't been busted yet -- this when the House January 6th Committee seems to be going gangbusters. Anyone who thinks that taking down Donald Trump is going to be quick and easy is not living in the real world.
* French President Emmanuel Macron made a bit of a stir this last week by throwing down the gauntlet to French COVIDiots:
QUOTE:
The unvaccinated, I really want to piss them off. And so, we're going to continue doing so, until the end. That's the strategy.
... I won't send them to prison, I won't vaccinate by force. So we need to tell them, from January 15, you won't be able to go to the restaurant anymore, you won't be able to down one, won't be able to have a coffee, go to the theater, the cinema ...
END_QUOTE
The term he used was "emmerder", from "merde" (shit), which can be translated in a number of ways, being at best informal, at worst rude. It seems in this context it means "screw with them". The French Right howled at the comment, but Macron lost nothing from it: they hate him anyway. Certainly, here in the USA, there is little sympathy for COVIDiots, the general feeling being that they need to be deported to Mars.
As a case in point, one Dr. Robert Malone -- who apparently did some research on mRNA vaccines in the past -- attacked the conventional wisdom on vaccination against COVID-19, claiming it was the product of, ahem, "mass formation psychosis". This is the classic conspirobot mindset: "I'm not going the wrong way on this street, everyone else is." Malone is a silly person.
* Having got booted out of Twitter and got back on by jumping through some hoops, I was startled this last week when Twitter asked me to verify that I was a real person. The problem was that they wanted to send a verification code to my phone -- and the phone number, a Google Voice number, was linked to my old banned account.
It didn't take much tinkering to discover I was locked out again. Twitter would not accept my free Textfree number as an alternate, which is what I expected. This was bad news, since Twitter is key to my current writing efforts. After some stressed-out thinking, I thought: Maybe I could get another Google Voice number?
It turned out to be straightforward. I couldn't get a second number, but I could get a replacement number for $10 USD without any hassles, so I did. My old number was forwarded to the new number; I could get calls on it, but not make any calls with. It would go away in 90 days, but I could pay $20 USD and it would persist; I did that, too.
To test the new Google Voice number, I sent a message to it from Textfree. That's why I have a Textfree number, just to run tests. Even though I'd just set up the number, the message went through fine. I used the new Google Voice number on Twitter, and was back in operation. I was relieved, all the more so because, having got rid of the old number, Twitter was unlikely to make more trouble for me. $30 USD was nothing, worth the money just for that.
My Signal secure messaging app on my Android phone needed to be updated to the new Google Voice number. It was slightly tricky; I had to delete my Signal account and then re-install the app, but that didn't take any time. Now I've got to make sure my contact number is updated with the bank and other places.
* Another reason for feeling safer on Twitter is that I take few chances there. I've come to realize that the discussions on Twitter tend to be like shouting haphazardly inside of a mob -- and some large component of the mob is simply there to spread disinformation and propaganda. Sometimes they're obvious fakes, but does it matter if they're fake or not? No. There's no real communications, I could just as well talk back to the TV.
I've become much more cautious. In the meantime, I've expanded my posting of ads for my ebooks to add replies to other tweets. The trick is in figuring out whose tweets make sense to use to carry along my ebook ads. US Air Force tweets are no problem; a big organization like that won't care about, will hardly notice, my ads. Other tweeters may be more problematic. Replying to tweets from professional societies? I don't think so, they won't be receptive to amateurs. I'm still trying to figure out the best strategy.
* I've got into the custom of regularly sending out holiday emails to family and friends, and I got to wondering if I could find a holiday for every month. Some US holidays, like President's Day, Labor Day, and Memorial Day won't do, because they're just days off, not celebrations. So what about joke holidays? Star Wars Day? "May the 4th be with you!" Which is, of course, followed by: "Revenge Of the 5th". On that cue, I put together a list:
Apparently, there is some dispute over the exact date of the founding of the United Federation of Planets in 2161. I'm voting for 12 August. It's about as interesting a holiday as there is in August anyway.
* As discussed in an article from CNN.com ("Those Annoying Robocalls Aren't Going To Stop Today. But They Could Slow Down Soon" by Clare Duffy, 02 July 2021), the telephone has not adapted perfectly well to the digital age, being targeted by spam via "robocallers". Measures are being taken in response, however; now the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has set up a program to help stop the robocall spam.
The program is named "Stir/Shaken", and is a set of technical standards that mobile carriers are required to adopt to help prevent call "spoofing" -- that is, indicating a call is coming from a number when it's actually coming from a different number. Robocallers often use call spoofing to make a call look like it's coming from a local area code, so targets are more likely to pick it up. Scammers invariably use faked numbers. Under the Stir/Shaken protocol, carriers are required to certify, with graded confidence levels, that calls really are coming from the numbers displayed on caller ID. All the major US carriers have signed up.
Stir/Shaken involves certification of callers; if a caller isn't certified as legitimate, a carrier can block it. The FCC waivered small carriers, with 100,000 or fewer subscribers. Of course, the Black Hats will get busy, trying to certify their bogus calling numbers, but that will become more difficult as the holes in the scheme are patched up.
ED: Since I've only got a Google Voice IP number, robocalls are no longer an issue to me. All my calls go to a web page; if I get a sequence of calls from the same number and no message is ever left, I block the number. The caller then gets a DISCONNECTED response. Google Voice has some limitations, but overall it's a good deal, particularly because it's free. I long hated to have to pay specifically for phone service; it's like having to specifically pay for email, but not as useful.
BACK_TO_TOP* THE WEEK THAT WAS: There has been a peculiar parallelism between British and American politics since 2016, when Britain voted to Brexit and the USA voted in Donald Trump. Both took sharp turns to the Right, and both resulted in the ascendance of dubious leaders with silly haircuts -- though the UK didn't get to Boris Johnson until after a stint with Theresa May. In any case, it seems at times as though the Right was invincible on both sides of the Pond -- Trump handily surviving impeachment, the Tories dealing Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party a brutal defeat in the 2019 general election. Nothing seemed to dent Boris Johnson's broad popularity.
How things can change. A by-election in North Shropshire this last December was a stinging defeat for the Tories, with a seat held by the Conservatives since 1904 lost by a good margin to a supposedly marginal Liberal Democrat. Worse, it came to light that, while the UK was under pandemic lockdown, Boris Johnson was presiding over a series of informal parties, in defiance of the government's own rules against gatherings. The fact that Johnson also got a very bad case of COVID-19 did not help his credibility.
Under Keir Starmer, Labour has revitalized -- Starmer's eviction of the bright Red Corbyn from Labour's councils had the desired effect -- and is now leading the Tories by ten points in the polls. It appears that the British public's appetite for Right-wing trolling has greatly declined. Senior Conservative politicians are talking about a vote of no confidence to depose Johnson. The government just moved to cut BBC funding, it seems to throw red meat to Tory trolls sitting in the back benches.
Beyond that lies the problem of what to do about Brexit. Brexit is, to be sure, a given; there's no going back on it. That, however, ignores all the details of implementation, which were so poorly thought out and which haven't been resolved yet -- above all, the relationship between the two Irelands. That, however, is another problem.
In the USA, Donald Trump retains much influence, though he is also much diminished. He continues to scheme, though he must have bad moments when he sees the House Select Committee on the January 6th Capitol riot passing out subpoenas that penetrate ever more deeply into his inner circle. Can we see in the fall of Boris Johnson the fate of Donald Trump?
* As discussed in an article from REUTERS.com ("Iraqi Cleric's Push To Sideline Iran-Backed Factions Risks Clash" by Ahmed Rasheed & John Davison, 14 January 2022), Iraq's parliamentary elections last October resulted in a shift of power away from Iranian-backed Shiite militias. The prominent Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr (MaS), who has no liking for Iranian meddling in Iraqi affairs, has rubbed in their marginalization. As the new parliament moved to select and install a president, he said: "We are on track to form a national majority government." -- with "national majority" including Sadrists, Sunnis, and Kurds, but no Iran-backed parties. One senior Sadrist official added that the Iran camp ...
QUOTE:
... should face reality: election losers can't make the government. We have a real majority, a strong front that includes us, the Sunnis, most of the Kurds and many independents and can form a government very soon.
END_QUOTE
Iraqi politicians and analysts say that the ascendance of the Sadrists and the decline of the Iranian camp is welcome in Washington DC and American allies in the region -- even though MaS fought the US occupation of Iraq, at least for a time. Internally, the Iranian camp is going to resent being sidelined and push back, but how far will it go? An Iraqi government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he expected those in the Iran camp to use the threat of violence to get a place in government, but not to escalate into a full-scale conflict with MaS.
MaS is perfectly aware of the possibilities, but has thrown down the gauntlet. He wants an independent, unified, and -- by all appearances -- democratic Iraq, and will fight to achieve it. A second Sadrist politician, who also spoke anonymously, said: "We're powerful, we have a strong leader, and millions of followers who are ready to take to the streets and sacrifice themselves." Such is the power of the Shiite reverence for martyrdom.
* As mentioned in earlier installments, I've been working on properly establishing my online ID, which has -- not really to much surprise -- turned into a project. One aspect of this was that I determined I needed to be able to rely on the "MyColorado" smartphone app. The problem was that I didn't have a phone contract, and it wouldn't work once I left my house and didn't have a wi-fi hookup.
I don't really otherwise need a phone contract, since I live by myself, spend most of my time at home, and wouldn't make calls while I was out shopping or whatever anyway. It didn't make sense for me to pay like $45 USD a month for a full phone service, when I'd only use a tiny fraction of it. Accordingly, I got to searching around for budget phone services.
It turns out there are a lot of them around, examples being Ting, Mint, and Tello. It was confusing to sort through them, but I finally found "Trustpilot", a reviews site, and thousands of reviews gave Tello a 90% Good-Great rating. Ting, in comparison, got more bad reviews than good ones.
Sorting through the plan options from the various vendors was confusing, but I finally figured out that I could get a plan from Tello that only cost me $8 USD a month -- $6 USD for the service, $2 USD for surcharges, primarily to support the Colorado 911 emergency phone service. I would get 100 minutes of voice -- which I wouldn't use except for emergencies -- plus unlimited texts -- which I might use a bit -- and 500 MB of data -- which I likely wouldn't dent very much. Later I found out that once I overflow the data limit, I'm not cut off, just constrained to 3G transfer rates.
There was the issue of whether my Samsung Galaxy S10+ was compatible with the Tello service. The Tello website told me to figure out the IMEI ID number of my phone, accessed through the phone app by dialing in "#06#", and after fumbling a bit, figured out that it was. I signed up for the Tello service, paying $10 USD for a month's service, including $2 USD for a Tello SIM chip.
I had the S10+ in an armor case. It is very difficult to get the case off without breaking it -- I broke it -- so I ordered a cheap lightweight case instead from Amazon.com, and got it before the SIM chip arrived. When I got the SIM chip, I popped out the chip tray with a pin tool and stuck in the SIM -- it came as a pop-out item in a card, nested in full-size, micro, and nano frames, the S10+ using the nano frame. I plugged the tray back in, then got on the Tello site and entered the activation code I got with the SIM.
At that point, I was ready to fly, though I'm not quite flying yet. I still have to configure my phone service with an auto-answer message, and forward the phone to my Google Voice number, which is the one I use -- I don't have the phone on very much, and won't use its number except if I need to. I also have to puzzle out how to get connected to the GSM phone network while I'm out and about, and make sure I'm not gobbling up my data limits unintentionally by leaving the wrong app active. I doubt it's rocket science, but there are always a few glitches when I start on something new. One thing I did find out already: Turn off airline mode. Little things like that.
Again, I'm only using the phone for ID, and possibly for emergencies. I was thinking of using it to make contactless payments with Google Pay, but that idea mostly fizzled out. One problem is that contactless terminals are by no means universal yet, but the bigger problem is that so few people use smartphone payment systems. That's because they're not particularly useful, not doing much that a contactless charge card can't do -- while a contactless card can also be inserted, or even swiped, if one wants to take the low-security approach.
Since I don't have a contactless card right now, I'll tinker with Google Pay just for fun. One minor advantage is that I can use it to make interactive payments with Paypal, and it's not so easy to get a Paypal charge card. I was wondering if Paypal would charge me for the transaction, but Paypal says NO. Eventually, I'll get a contactless card and move on.
* As discussed in an article from NEWATLAS.com ("Disruptive Iron-Air Grid-Scale Battery Is 10% The Cost Of Lithium" by Loz Blain, 26 July 2021), a Boston-based startup named Form Energy is working on a pilot installation of a grid-scale battery installation -- based on iron-air batteries that cost only a tenth as much as lithium batteries of the same capacity.
Renewable energy tends to imply energy storage, to handle times when energy production is down -- at nighttime for solar power, for one obvious example -- and huge banks of batteries are the go-to solution for the present. Tesla more or less got the ball rolling in 2017 when the company built the world's biggest battery installation in South Australia, with comparable projects following. However, lithium is a relatively scarce metal, and lithium batteries are an expensive solution for grid-scale power storage.
Metal-air batteries feature a metal anode and an air-porous cathode, enclosing an electrolyte -- possibly aqueous potassium hydroxide (KOH), which dissolves into K+ and OH- ions, though it seems other, more sophisticated formulations are much more effective.
In the iron-air battery, the anode is made up of iron pellets, which effectively rusts thanks to the hydroxide ions by a two-stage process:
Fe + 2OH- --> Fe(OH)2 + 2e- 3Fe(OH)2 + 2OH- --> Fe3O4 + 4H2O + 2e-
-- which generates four electrons. The porous cathode has a catalyst on one side that promotes the breakdown of water in reaction to oxygen into hydroxide ions, boosted by electrons obtained through the load circuit:
O2 + 2H2O + 4e-
The overall cell reaction is then:
2Fe + 2O2 -> Fe3O4
-- with a cell voltage of 1.28 volts. Put cells in series, of course, the end result is as much voltage as desired. The reaction is reversible, meaning the battery is rechargeable. Compared to lithium batteries, iron-air batteries are much bulkier, and can't discharge as fast -- but they are several times cheaper. They are also relatively easy to recycle.
A startup named Form Energy, out of Somerville MA, is pushing iron-air batteries for grid storage. Each Form battery is about the size of a washing machine, with thousands of them in each installation. The array will likely have a small component of lithium batteries, to provide quick power. The company is now working on a commercial-scale project in Minnesota capable of delivering a constant megawatt of power for 150 hours.
BACK_TO_TOP* THE WEEK THAT WAS: Last week was a bad week for Donald Trump, the blows coming in on a nearly daily basis:
There is a faction that doubts that Trump will be held accountable in the end, one reason being that a good portion of Americans don't care about his criminal acts. The response to that is: so what? Once Trump falls under the shadow of the American justice system, his fate is not really up to a vote any longer. Sure, maybe a Republican will become president in 2025 and decide to pardon him -- but there's no saying how the 2024 election will turn out, and no saying if Donald Trump will really be a thing then, or even still alive. Trump was always something of a fad; now, is he anything more than a has-been?
* Incidentally, Trump has been complaining that the investigators are now going after "children". Ahem: Ivanka is 40 years old. Trump also once again complained about wind turbines in an interview with Sean Hannity:
QUOTE:
Stop with all of the windmills all over the place that are ruining the atmosphere. They're killing the birds. You look at what's happening to these beautiful prairies and plains and these gorgeous areas of our country where they have these rusting hulks put up all over the place where -- that are noisy, they're killing the birds.
END_QUOTE
Same old tune, different verse. Incidentally, some Republican Members of Congress from prairie states, where wind power is economically powerful, have disagreed with Trump on this matter. The interview also included:
QUOTE:
HANNITY: There's no course correction with [Biden]. He seems locked into every one of these failed policies, so it's, you know, you keep banging your head against a wall -- why would you expect a different result?
TRUMP: So we would've had the wall completed in three weeks. It was largely completed. We did almost 500 miles of wall, and the southern border.
END_QUOTE
Hannity didn't skip a beat. That makes sense: they were both talking nonsense, what difference did it make what kind of nonsense it was? It does pose the question: Was Trump always this bad, or is he getting worse? Is he a has-been? Or never really was?
* As discussed in an article from REUTERS.com ("Yellen Rebrands Biden Economic Agenda As Modern Supply-Side Economics" by David Lawder & Andrea Shalal, 21 January 2022), US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen suggested in a speech this last week that the Biden Administration's economic agenda is "modern supply-side economics", re-inventing a concept that favored by Ronald Reagan. She said:
QUOTE:
Our new approach is far more promising than the old supply-side economics, which I see as having been a failed strategy for increasing growth. Significant tax cuts on capital have not achieved their promised gains. And deregulation has a similarly poor track record in general and with respect to environmental policies -- especially so with respect to curbing CO2 emissions.
END_QUOTE
Reagan's view of "supply-side economics" was that the US government would cut taxes and regulations, unleashing capital investment that would "trickle down" to the wider economy, fueling growth, and hiring. According to Reagan, the tax cuts would "pay for themselves" through supercharged growth. There was always a lot of skepticism over "trickle-down", and it would seem that the end result was the creation of a class of the uber-rich -- while the tax cuts never paid for themselves.
Yellen stated that Biden Administration policies to assist in child and elder care will help grow the workforce. She criticized the Republican-passed tax cuts of 2017, saying that rather than encourage investment in the USA, they perpetuated the "perverse corporate tax incentives" that have encouraged companies to shift productive capacity overseas as countries compete on taxes. Yellen said the deal for a global 15% corporate minimum tax, which depends on passage of Build Back Better for implementation, would end this "race to the bottom".
This pitch for the Biden Administration's economic agenda had an underlying message: the Reagan Era is over. To be sure, the Biden plan is stalled in Congress for the moment, Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema saying they won't consider changing the current Senate filibuster rules. The recent result was yet another failure to get the Democrat voting rights act through Congress.
Much anger has been focused on Manchin and Sinema, but much of it seems like over-reaction. Sinema follows Manchin's lead, and what Manchin clearly wants to do is pass the voter rights act with Republican support. That would be a great thing if it could be done, but can it? What happens if the Republicans simply refuse to play along? If GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell flatly says a voter rights act is out of the question? Obviously, Manchin can use the implied threat of leashing in the filibuster to gain leverage on the GOP -- but a credible threat implies a willingness to follow through on it. We'll just have to wait and see what happens next.
* I've been proceeding on course with my SIM-enabled smartphone. On Tuesday, I was over at the bank, and sent a text message from my phone to my Google Voice account. It was the first time in my life I'd ever communicated over an "untethered" phone, always using a wi-fi connection to make calls.
That done, I made sure the MyColorado ID app was properly configured. On Friday morning, I went to McDonald's to pick up an Egg McMuffin, my habit for that day, and tried out MyColorado in the parking lot, also sending a text to my nephew Graham in Texas to see if I could get through. It all worked fine. Incidentally, I can send as many texts as I like, though I only get 500 megabytes of data a month. No problem, I went back home and checked my phone account online, to find out I'd used maybe 1.5 megabytes of my allotment. I doubt I will use the MyColorado app very much in the near term, but the USA is entering the era of robust digital ID, and what seems like a gimmick now is likely to become an unavoidable necessity in the future.
Next up, I install Google Pay. It appears Google is enhancing the app to make it more useful; I'll have to see if I find it so. Incidentally, after visiting the bank on Tuesday, I got a hamburger at McDonald's and was driving home with it -- to notice a clutch of people at a corner in a residential neighborhood. I glanced at them at as I went past, to see what appeared to be three, maybe four teens plus a big adult, wearing a black shirt labeled SECURITY. He had one of the teens in a headlock.
I thought: What was THAT all about?! And then replied to myself: I DON'T want to know!
* A great deal is written about consciousness, much of it being confusing. One of the more confusing ideas is "panpsychism", the idea that the entire Universe is conscious.
Taking a step back from this grand vision, we know humans are conscious, and have no reason to doubt that many animals are, too, if in a more limited way: humans and animals see, assess, and think things over. We don't see any evidence that inanimate matter can see, assess, and think things over -- so what basis do we have to believe inanimate matter has any consciousness at all?
The reply focuses on what has been called "the hard problem", associated with philosopher David Chalmers. If we think about things, why do we have this particular conscious experience in doing it? Yes, we know that when we think, it's the product of the firing of neurons, and we know a fair amount about the processes -- but that, so the story goes, isn't enough to explain it.
In reality it is; there is no "hard problem". Clinging to it misses the fact that all we can know about the material Universe is what we observe of it -- reliably observe, that is, meaning any honest and competent skeptic can make the same observations and repeatably get the same results. We observe what happens, and then devise a model, a theory, to allow us to predict the same sort of happenings in the future. Once we run out of reliable observations, that's the end of the road, we can know no more: "What you see is what you get, and what you see is all you get."
In the 17th century, Isaac Newton came up with his law of universal gravitation, showing how gravity worked. He didn't explain why it worked the way it did, famously saying: "I frame no hypothesis." Later, Albert Einstein would come up with a refined theory of gravity named general relativity -- but he was in the same boat, he could say how it worked, but not why it worked that way. Newton recognized that there was no "hard problem" of gravity, instead recognizing the futility of trying to go beyond observations, to see beneath appearances, to ask questions that don't have a real answer.
Ultimately, we don't know why the entire Universe works the way it does; yes, we can examine it in ever-finer details to understand its structure, interactions, and dynamic history, but if the question is asked: "Why is the Universe exactly the way it is?" -- the answer is: "Because if it wasn't, it would be exactly some other way." There is, and can be, no better answer.
The "hard problem" is like asking: "Why is it light in the room when we turn on the lights?" If the answer is not about the operation of the light source, the physics of light, or the operation of the eye -- all of which are factually explicable -- then the answer to the question is: "It's light in the room because you turned on the lights, silly."
If there's an insistence on knowing more, then the follow-up answer is: "The magic light fairy did it." That's a fair answer: when people decide the explicable answers are inadequate, then all we have left are the inexplicable ones, and any one is as good as we like it to be. The "hard problem" is a "pseudo-problem", spinning the wheels, never going anyplace.
We have no observations that suggest inanimate matter is conscious -- claiming that it is requires a vacuous definition of "consciousness" -- and no cause to think there is some undetectable "smidgen of consciousness" in the particles of the Universe. The operation of the brain is can be accounted for by the action of neurons, just as the ability of a mechanical clock to keep time can be accounted for by the coordinated function of its parts. In neither case is there any need for the neurons and clock gears to have some unseen and unseeable property that, if it went away, the brain or the clock would visibly not work right any more. If it is then stated that there would be a change, but we couldn't see it -- then how would we say there was any change? We can't.
If people want to believe that the Universe is conscious, without being able to point to observational evidence that it is, they are free to do so. The difficulty is that they are no wiser about a single material fact of the Universe whether they believe it is conscious or not. Take it or leave it.
BACK_TO_TOP* THE WEEK THAT WAS: An editorial from ECONOMIST.com ("Russia's Roulette", 29 January 2022), inspected Russian President Vladimir Putin's maneuverings against Ukraine and considered his options. Does he intend to attack? Or is he bluffing to extract concessions?
The most drastic possibility would be a full-scale invasion, the goal being to crush the Ukrainian state and install a regime friendly to Russia. That would be very difficult and expensive, in terms of both casualties and sanctions. A military campaign would likely have more modest objectives -- one plausible scenario being that Russia would "save" Kremlin-backed separatists in the Donbas, an eastern separatist region of Ukraine, from the "wicked" Ukrainians, while hammering Ukrainian forces with air and missile strikes.
Even such a "small" campaign would have risks, first and foremost that a small war might not stay small. It might also not yield an outcome to Putin's liking. He is unhappy about Ukraine's Westward drift, the Russians raising loud objections about the idea of Ukraine becoming part of NATO. Having the Poland and the Baltics in NATO was bad enough, from their point of view, but Ukraine in NATO would be much worse. However, might a small war accelerate that drift instead of retard it, without doing much to impair Ukraine's military capabilities?
A limited conflict would still mean tough sanctions on Russia, with its banks penalized and access to Western technology limited. The Russian oligarchy would be constrained in its movements and actions abroad. The Russian economy has been in decline; sanctions would accelerate that decline. There is also the lurking possibility of a massive cyber-attack on Russia. Western cyber-fighters have long strained at the leash in the face of Russian cyber-provocations, and are eager to show how much damage they can do in return.
Of course, such a demonstration of aggression would encourage NATO to beef up military power in the East. Sweden and Finland might join the alliance as well. Putin clearly wants to challenge NATO, but he could end up simply reinforcing it. In the meantime, a military campaign would create global economic chaos that would not benefit Putin. He clearly believes his actions are to his advantage, but rash action could instead undermine his regime. The best, if not the only, outcome, would be for the West to offer comforting but insubstantial concessions -- and for Putin to accept them and declare victory. "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes!"
* There's a great deal of "pandemic weariness" out there, and the arrival of the highly contagious Omicron variant has made it worse. However, there is cause for thinking that we're getting out of the woods now. One reason is that the contagiousness of Omicron means that it climbs rapidly to a peak, infecting everyone it can, and then runs out of steam, to decline rapidly. This is what has happened in South Africa, where it apparently originated.
OK, there's obviously much more to the story, but a Dr. Tom Frieden -- previously a CDC director under the Obama Administration -- gave a report on Twitter saying that things may well be looking up.
QUOTE:
We've lost nearly 900,000 people to COVID in the US alone. Most of those deaths could have been prevented. But now, we can have the upper hand over COVID because our defenses are multilayered and strong, starting with immunity. Based on antibody seroprevalence among people who donated blood, an estimated 94% of Americans had at least some protection against COVID -- either through vaccination or prior infection -- in November, BEFORE the Omicron wave.
Immunity against severe infection is holding up, especially after boosters. In December, the rate of COVID-associated hospitalization was 16 TIMES higher in unvaccinated adults than among adults who were up-to-date on their vaccination. 10 billion doses of lifesaving vaccines have been administered globally in just over a year. That's a stunning achievement, although vaccine inequity continues to cost lives and create the conditions for wily variants such as Omicron to emerge.
We have new drugs that are highly effective at preventing severe COVID. Lab studies suggest they'll work just as well against Omicron as Delta. Generally, medical treatments don't have anywhere near the life-saving impact of vaccines, but they help. These pills could be a life-saver for people at high risk of severe COVID, though we must still overcome supply challenges, pair testing with early treatment, and make sure there's equitable access for everyone who needs them.
Most people understand that masks work, and that better masks (such as N95s) work better. Masks can stop airborne spread of whatever variant COVID throws at us. We can learn from East Asia, masking if we're sick or vulnerable to resist not just COVID but flu and more. Although there have been bumps in the road, testing is more widely available, including rapid antigen tests that can be done at home. When COVID is spreading, we can test before gathering indoors with vulnerable people or in large groups, or if we feel sick.
Genomic surveillance is another tool that we've sharpened. South Africa set a great example by warning the world about Omicron. Many countries have increased their capacity to do robust sequencing. We can stay ahead of the virus by continuing to be on the lookout. Genomic surveillance alerted us to a version of Omicron, termed BA.2, that's becoming more common in several countries. This has generated concern, but @UKHSA findings suggest BA.2 doesn't escape immunity more than the version we've been dealing with.
All the above are reasons for optimism, but there are wild cards. Protection from Omicron infection may not be strong or long-lasting. And although vaccine protection has held up well against severe disease, we may need additional doses to stay up-to-date.
Long COVID is another question mark. We don't yet know how often an Omicron infection leads to long COVID, or how best to treat people who are suffering from the condition, although we're learning more every day and eagerly await NIH study results. If further study confirms the findings, they could lead to ways to prevent and treat the complex condition. It is known that long COVID is more unusual in the vaccinated.
The biggest wild card: SARS-CoV-2's ability to mutate. It's highly unlikely that Omicron will be the last variant. What's to say a deadly, highly transmissible, immune-escape variant won't arise? Frankly, it could. But even if a worse variant emerges, we're better prepared than ever: More immunity, more vaccines, more treatments, better masks and more of them, better tests, more understanding of COVID, more sequencing. COVID doesn't have to dominate: soon we can resume many activities.
Another reason for optimism? We have a unique opportunity to put public health systems in place to find, stop, and prevent health threats when and where they emerge, anywhere in the world. The world has a once-in-a-lifetime chance to boost funding for preparedness. @GlobalFund, which is celebrating its 20th anniversary, has made impressive progress against AIDS, TB & malaria and should play a key role in preventing the next pandemic. If the Global Fund receives the necessary resources and organizes appropriately, the world is far less likely to experience another pandemic as disruptive as COVID-19.
Every country and organization has made mistakes, and challenges remain, but we've come a long way. The most important lesson we can learn from COVID is that we're all in this together. We have a better chance for a safer world than ever in our lifetimes.
END_QUOTE
We are entering the post-COVID era, where it will be a nuisance but, given widespread exposure, yearly vaccinations, and antviral drugs, not the really dangerous threat that it was. There is also the interesting possibility that, over time, COVID-19 will mutate into a strain that is highly contagious but not troublesome. We will then have learned to live with it.
* This last week, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer announced his retirement. It was expected; Breyer had been under pressure to do so, on worries that the Republicans would derail a Biden nomination to the Supreme Court if they regained control of the Senate. Joe Biden had announced during his election campaign that he would nominate a black woman to replace Breyer, and quickly moved to do so.
There was a shrill outpouring of complaint from the Right, saying that the selection should be on the basis of competence -- as if someone without the best qualifications would be selected -- and not on race and gender. A video clip made the rounds in response, with Ronald Reagan on campaign announcing he would appoint a woman to the Supreme Court, to later appoint Sandra Day O'Connor. The nutjobs didn't shut up, but they kept getting Reagan shoved in their faces after that.
In even less substantial news, fashion designer Stella McCartney -- daughter of Sir Paul -- designed a blue-black polka-dot pantsuit for Minnie Mouse, to wear at Disneyland Paris. Minnie, of course, has always worn polka-dot skirts.
Hillary Clinton tweeted: "Tres chic!" What? Oh right, pantsuits, Hillary. There was some objection from the nutjob Right, not merely against the connection to Hillary, but also because -- somehow -- Minnie trying something new in fashion was supposed to represent "cancel culture" against something or other. I thought in reply: They'll get over this one quickly.
BACK_TO_TOP