Junk Science

Headline of op ed in Tuesday's Wall St Journal, "How bad is the Government's Science?"  It speaks to the reproducibility crisis in science, where a large number of published scientific papers simply cannot be reproduced by other workers.  Which says that the published paper was just plain wrong.  A 2015 study estimated that $28 billion a year was spent on wrong science.  Which is a terrible waste of both money and the time of scarce and hard to train scientists. 
   I ran into the reproducibility problem myself back when I was developing a portable heart monitor.  I needed a way to compress the sampled EKG so that the device could store more EKG data in its limited memory.  I researched the literature, and bingo, I found a paper discussing compression of EKG and offering a method that claimed much higher performance than the standard technique.  I read the article thru, and then programmed the new algorithm into our prototype monitor.  It worked, it did compress the data, and the decompressed EKG was of good quality, but, I could only obtain one half the amount of compression that the author claimed.  I troubleshot and debugged and finally telephoned the author to ask for help.  The author rather sheepishly, admitted that he had left out a key factor in his paper, and that yes, the compression obtained would be only half of what he had claimed.  I managed not to express my dismay over the waste of two weeks of the project's time. 
   One thing legislators could do about this.  Require that all government financed researchers publish all their raw data.  Right now, a lot of researchers keep their data private, hoping to either use it for another publication, or to prevent skeptics from going over it looking for faults.  Far as I am concerned, if the taxpayers are paying the freight,  the taxpayers own the results.  This policy would go far to squelch the likes of leftie greenie "climate scientist" Michael Moore, inventor of the global warming hockey stick. 
  Another thing, someone ought to keep score.  Any scientist who publishes unreproducible results should be barred from future government research grant money.  That will make them a bit more careful. 

Friction? Would you believe real hostility?

Front page of Monday's Wall St Journal.  "Friction between the president and Comey resurfaced after details from the former FBI director's new book reopened the debate over his firing. "
  If that's "friction" I'd hate to see real hostility.

Graduation from College, and College Guidance Councilors

You can graduate High School by merely attending classes until you make it thru 12th grade.  College is trickier.  You have to have enough course credits to get your degree.  Just attending classes for four years isn't enough.  You have to have all the required credits in the required courses.  Missing just a single credit in physical education can deny you a diploma.  And tie you up for another year, and another year of tuition payments.  Nobody wants this.
   The number and type of credits you need depend upon your major.  At my Alma Mater, engineering majors required about 15% more credits than education majors or liberal arts majors.  And each major required different course credits for graduation.  So, you need to pick your major early on, like freshman year.  Early in freshman year.  Before Christmas for sure.
   To pick your major, you have to have some idea of what your want to do with your life after you make it thru college.  You need a major that makes you employable in your chosen field.  Don't have a chosen field?  Do some serious thinking, talk to your parents, friends, relatives, get some advice, cause this is one of the most important decisions you will ever make in your life.   Colleges offer a fair number of interesting sounding majors that are totally worthless when you go job hunting.  Avoid them.  Gender studies, ethnic studies, anything studies, art history, sociology, anthropology, and some others won't get you a job anywhere.
   Then, get the college catalog, and make a list of all the courses you need to take for your chosen major.  The senior level courses will all require you take some lower level courses, prerequisites they are called.  Make a spreadsheet, enter all the courses, in the order you have to take them.  Add up all the credits and see if it is enough.  Check for booby traps, like courses that are only offered one semester.  Miss getting into that class when it is offered, and you can loose a whole year.  Neaten up the spreadsheet and print it out. 
   Now you are ready to meet your college guidance councilor.  He will be a junior faculty member, who has about a hundred other students assigned to him, and courses to teach, research to do, and papers to grade.  He cannot afford you much time.  He views the job of his department as training new professors to teach in his department.  When discussing majors, he will probably push you toward majoring in his department.  Listen politely, but you don't have to take his advice.  Show him your spreadsheet and  ask him if it looks correct.  If he offers suggestions or criticism, take notes.  Check your notes against the college catalog.  Make sure you have the current version of the catalog.
   One further thing you have to do, namely get into the courses you need.  Popular courses are mobbed and not everyone gets in.  The college has a day when course registration opens for each semester.  Know that day.  Get down to registration first thing on the first day and you improve your chances of getting into the courses you need. 

$75 million worth of cruise missiles.

That's just the replacement cost of the ordinance expended.  About 100 cruise missiles at $750,000 apiece.  Does not count fuel costs, dollars per flying hour, pay for the troops, operating costs of all the warships used, etc. etc.
Let's hope the Syrians get the message better than they did the last time we did this.
We cannot make idle threats.  Once we make a threat (draw a redline) we have to mean it, and carry out the threat.  If we are not prepared to back up our threats, we should not make them.  The Syrians used poison gas, and so we had to follow thru on the threats we made the last time the Syrians used poison gas. 
  

Isolationism caused WWII

In between the two world wars, America went isolationist.  We came to believe that the first world war was a big mistake, we should never have entered it, and we should never again get sucked into a European war.  America withdrew from Europe. 

    And then Hitler came on the scene.  He gained control of Germany in 1932, and by 1936 he felt strong enough to start causing trouble in the international scene.  All of Europe, even including Germany, was still in shell shock from World War I.  Both the British and the French feared to oppose Hitler in the early days when he could have been deposed fairly easily.  Without Hitler, Germany might have thrown her weight around for a few years, but she would not have started WWII.  Nobody in Europe wanted to go thru another world war, they had had enough of that in the First World War. 

   If France and Britain had at the very first, the Rhineland takeover in 1932, mobilized their armies, and marched into Germany, they could have easily defeated the 100,000 man army which was all the Versailles Treaty allowed Germany, occupied the country, deposed Hitler and put him on trial for crimes against humanity.  But, neither the French nor the Britons did anything, partly thru fear of kicking off another world war, partly from fear that they would loose, and partly from domestic political problems.  If, America,  by this time a Great Power, had told the British and the French that the US was 1000% behind them, and had dispatched troops to Europe, a division or two would have made the point,  and had stood forth in the League of Nations and  condemned German violation of the Versailles Treaty, then something might have been possible. 

   Well, that didn't happen.  American isolationists forced the US to put on the turtle act, don't move, retract head and feet into shell, and do nothing.  With no US backing, the British and the French lacked the stones to take on Hitler when they could have beaten him with ease. 

     We can see and hear isolationists coming back to life today.  Last time they caused a world wide catastrophe.  What can they do this time?

We are gonna miss Paul Ryan

He is one of the very very few Congresscritters who was well educated, well informed, and had a good store of commonsense. He studied the issues and worked to get his issues passed into law, as opposed to the ordinary chucklehead Congresscritter who is only good at bad mouthing his opponents in he press. In short Paul Ryan had his head screwed on, nose to the front. 
  We are gonna miss him. 

Zuckerberg does OK on TV yesterday

He managed to avoid a pissing match with anyone.  Getting into a pissing match always makes you look petty.  He was glib, never at a loss for words.  He sounded reasonable.
   He mostly managed to avoid saying anything of substance.  Lot of those "use-up-airtime-and-say-nothing" phrases.  He said he would be OK with regulation but never said just what sort in regulation he would favor.  He did put on coat and tie for the TV hearings.  He got full time live coverage on Fox, he was on for hours, without any of those network voice overs calling him a crumb bum.  He avoided making any yes or no answers.
   My assessment.  Zuckerberg is slick.  Made a few mea culpea's.   Avoided getting pinned down on anything.  Probably plans on keeping Facebook on the same path it has been on.  And his stock is up 4%.
   I plan to continues to limit my Facebook posts to pictures of my cat, pictures of my children and grandchildren, pictures of snow storms, comments about the weather.  When I get the urge to make a political rant, I'll do it on this blog.  

Regulating Facebook???

Supposing that our noble Congresscritters could agree on a bill, and that Trump would sign it, how would that work?  Facebook's data resides on Facebook's computers, under the control of Facebook IT people.  Even if they gave the regulators the run of their server farm, how would the regulators be able to find anything, change anything, or even figure out was was happening?   Inquiring minds want to know.
   Me, I don't think it can happen.  Who gets to see how much of Facebook's data trove is solely under Facebook's control, and Facebook can keep all transactions secret.   Pass all the laws you like, hire as many well paid regulators as you like, and Facebook is still running the show, the way it wants to run it. 
   If I knew of a competing website that offered the chit chat and picture posting opportunities that Facebook does, I'd switch, and talk all my facebook friends into following me.  Instagram perhaps? However, at this time, building up a competitor against Facebook' s market dominance would be tough.  

Light machine guns of the world

Modern infantry tactics are based on the squad, a dozen men with one light machine gun.  In action the squad moves forward until resistance is encountered.  At which time the machine gun is set up, and under  cover of its fire, the riflemen advanced to the next likely piece of cover.  Then the riflemen provided covering fire while the machine gun is moved up to the new position.  By WWII, the old close order tactics, which go back as far as the Greeks at Marathon,  had given way in all armies to the modern tactic.
   The light machine guns in question varied from army to army.  But they all fired the standard rifle round of the period, which was 30 caliber (7.62 mm) and a lot more powerful than modern military rounds such used by weapons like the US M16. The weapons all fired from the open bolt, a machine gun design feature that leaves the breech open after firing stops, allowing air to circulate thru the hot gun barrel for cooling.  It also avoids leaving a live round in a red hot chamber where it might cook off from the heat.  The down side to the open bolt design is the slight jar when the bolt goes forward and chambers a  round which can throw the gun slightly off target, a minor concern, only of importance when firing single rounds, sniper fashion. 
  Since the LMG was back packed into action, light weight was very important.  The American Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) was the lightest at 15.5 pounds (unloaded).  Figure another pound and a half for a loaded 20 round magazine.  The heaviest was the Russian DPM at 26.9 pounds., with the German MG42 right behind at 25 pounds. 
    Most of them (BAR, BREN, and DPM)  fired at 500-600 rounds per minute, which was considered the optimum rate of fire by authorities of the period.  Those authorities felt higher rates of fire merely wasted ammunition.  The exception was the German MG42 which fired at double that, 1200 rounds per minute, which gave the German gun a unique and scary sound. 
   The BAR with a 20 round magazine, held the least ammunition.  The BAR magazine was located on the bottom of the weapon which made swapping magazines somewhat awkward.  The British BREN gun had a 30 round magazine on top of the gun, making magazine swaps easier.  The Russian DPM had a 47 round drum magazine on top.  The German MG42 was belt fed,  allowing long sustained bursts of automatic fire. 

Ivanhoe, 1982 version

The old 1952 version, with Robert Taylor and Elizabeth Taylor has been a favorite movie ever since I saw it as a child in the old Cinema at Shopper's World in Framingham MA better than 60 years ago.  So, when I saw the 1982 remake on Netflix I ordered it, thinking it wouldn't measure up to the old classic.
Well, surprise.  It was pretty good.  It has James Mason as Isaac of York, John Rhys-Davies as Front de Boeuf, and Anthony Andrews as Ivanhoe himself.  Andrews is a good looking hunk.  "Production values" are first rate, costumes, sets, locations.  Sound is good, I could hear all the dialog.  The cameraman used a tripod, no annoying shake the camera shots, and he turned on the lights for filming. They used a real medieval castle for Torquilstone.  In this version, Rowena comes off a very cute, just as cute as Rebecca of York.  The story gets changed around some from the 1952 version, but it doesn't seem to hurt anything.  I read the book once, but that was a long time ago and I don't remember anymore just  how the book went.  Plus, movies are a different medium than books, and some changes are often required to make a good movie from a book.
   It's far better than a BBC remake of some years ago.  The BBC got on a medieval realism kick.  Everyone's costume was homespun brown or butternut, making it extremely difficult to tell who was who.  Except for Isaac of York's silly looking straw hat, costumes for this one were convincing enough for me.  I'm not an expert on medieval fashions, so I'm not the last word, but I say they were plenty good enough for the purposes of a movie.  
    They changed Ivanhoe's final duel with Bois Gilbert.  In the 1952 flick, Bois Gilbert used mace and chain, Ivanhoe used an axe (from horseback no less)  When the duel was over, my younger brother said, very seriously, "The guy with the axe always wins."  In this version, both fighters use swords, and we see that Ivanhoe is not fully recovered from wounds received from tournament.  Bois Gilbert nearly kills him, but Ivanhoe gets lucky and pulls out a win at the last minute.
   Anyhow, if you are into medieval romantic movies, with lots of action, Ivanhoe is good, either the original 1952 flick or the 1982 remake for TV flick.

CAFE Clash

Can you pass a law that will make cars get 50 mpg?  Well yes, but don't expect the cars to comply.  The only thing that will do 50 mpg is a motorcycle.  And, much as I like bikes, I owned one for years, I don't want to ride a bike to work in a New England snow storm.  Or bring the groceries home on one. Or take the kids to youth league soccer on one.  Or bring anything home from the lumber yard on a bike.  Once you get married, you need a vehicle big enough to hold you, the wife, the kids, the luggage, the picnic lunch, and the skis.  And a real vehicle like that is never gonna do 50 mpg.  You are doing well if you can get 25 out of it.
   The Greenies, and the lefties, are crying a lot of tears now that Trump's EPA is gonna dump the magical 50 mpg by 2025 rule.  It's magical because only magic will produce such a vehicle.  In fact, even the EPA understood that nobody could reach that mileage in the real world.  They offered incentives like giving all your cars a sizeable boost in mileage rating if they would run on alcohol.  It was such a juicy bennie, that was I running a car company I'd tell production to make 100% of my vehicles run on alcohol.   It isn't hard, all you have to do is select fuel system hoses and gaskets and such (elastomers) that can withstand alcohol.  And add some code to the engine microprocessor programming to richen up the mixture when running on alcohol since alcohol  doesn't provide nearly as much heat energy as gasoline does.  And presto, magic happens, the EPA says my vehicle fleet, my CAFE, gets a substantial boost. 
   In actual fact, the car companies have plenty of market incentive to build the best fuel economy they can.  It sells.  Good fuel economy is as important as styling to customers.  We ought to shut down the whole CAFE bureaucracy, lay off all the bureaucrats, save a little money, and get on with it. 

Does your Firefox have a memory leak?

Mine does.  I'm running V52.7.3  Firefox on Win XP.  Start up Firefox and check Task Manager, and Firefox will be using 168K of RAM.  Let it run for a while, visit some websites, do whatever, and notice that it starts running slower.  Takes longer to open a new site, to switch from tab to tab.  Check Task Manager and find Firefox is using 500K and more of RAM. 
   Something like Firefox which needs large and unpredictable amounts of RAM, is built to acquire the needed RAM from Windows, making system calls to get it.  And when finished, Firefox is supposed to return the borrowed RAM to Windows.  Common coding error, program forgets to return no longer needed RAM.  This is called a memory leak.  I think Firefox has one.  At least in the 32 bit XP version.  I have a newer computer running Win10 that doesn't seem to have the problem. 

We need the Line Item Veto

But we are unlikely to ever get it.  The line item veto would allow the president to go thru pork laden spending bills and veto individual items without killing the whole thing.  The "everything including the kitchen sink" policies of our Congress make the line item veto necessary.   Congress allows absolutely anything and everything to be included in any bill, whether it has any logical connection with the bill's purpose or not.  For instance they tried (and failed) to tack an immigration reform (DACA) onto the omnibus funding bill.  Since the omnibus funding bill was a "must pass" bill (the government shuts down if they don't pass it) evry Congresscritter made sure to add his pet piece of pork (federal spending in his district) to the bill.  Result, a lot of wasteful spending.  If the president could go thru the omnibus spending bill and veto the more offensive pieces of pork, we could reduce federal spending by a lot. 
   Line item veto is unlikely to ever happen.  Congresscritters love their pork.  The thought that a president could veto a bit of pork they had worked hard to get into the funding bill just frosts Congresscritters.  Since a line item veto requires at least an act of Congress, and perhaps a constitutional amendment, the Congresscritters can stop it by simply voting against it, should it ever come up for a vote.  And Congress has plenty of file 13's entomb unwanted legislation, killing it with out having to go on record by voting against it.

Would you tell the Census you are an illegal alien?

Probably not.  I'd figure the Border Patrol would be on my case if I told them I was an illegal.  And gave them my name and address on the Census form.   
   I figure the illegals will  either lie, claiming to be citizens, (exposing themselves to prosecution for lying to the Census Bureau), or just not return the Census forms at all, or leave the question blank (which is as good as confessing to being illegal).
   I certainly would not believe any statistics based upon responses to the citizenship question.  

Out in California they are gunning for a President McKinley statue

Damn.  McKinley has been dead for better than 100 years.  Some anarchist shot him in the back, shortly after he got elected president.  He didn't live long enough as president to do much that got into the history books.  But the California SJW's are agitating to pull his stature down.   They must be out of  things to do. 

Capitalism or Communism?

Winston Churchill once said "The vice of capitalism is that it stands for  unequal sharing of blessings; whereas the virtue of socialism is that it stands for the equal sharing of misery."   Socialism being a politer word for communism.  Why is this? 
    Communism was invented to "level the playing field" by taking everything and dividing it equally and sharing it equally among all the people.  The biggest down side of  Communism, why even the Russians gave it up in 1989, is it gives no incentive to anyone to work hard.  Why work hard when you get paid the same for slacking off?  Other downsides come when ordinary fallible people take up the divide and share business.  Being fallible, these people skim plenty off the top for themselves before  doing any sharing.  Since nobody works very hard, there isn't much to share in the first place. 
  Under capitalism, people are allowed to own stuff (land, houses, factories, everything) and to keep the proceeds.  By hard work, or genius, it is possible to become wealthy, powerful, and important.  This motivates a lot of people to work really hard, take risks, invent stuff.  The overall result is a never ending fountain of material wealth, food and drink, clothing, shelter, toys for children and grownups, all at decent prices, and vast quantities.  Aided by capitalism's law of supply and demand which efficiently matches production with demand.  The entrepreneurs who create all this goodness get to keep a goodly share of it, but there is enough that everybody gets some.  Compare the standard of living for ordinary people in communist places like Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, with the standard of living in the United States.  This is why the United States has an illegal alien problem whereas the Communist countries have long lists of people wanting to leave, and not permitted to.
    This is what the Cold War was about, the Russians wanted to convert the entire world to Communism and we wanted to keep the entire world capitalist.  We won, and the wonder of our victory is that we managed it without touching off the Last War with the Soviets.   

It's the Post Office's problem

President Trump was bashing Amazon the other day. Among other things, he said the US Post Office is losing $1.50 on every parcel Amazon sends by mail.  And it's all Amazon's fault.
I beg to disagree. 
   If the Post Office is losing money on Amazon's business, it's up to the Post Office to either improve efficiency, or raise prices.  It isn't Amazon's duty. 
   As a matter of fact, back in the 19th century, when Congress authorized the Post Office to offer Parcel Post,  the original legislation demanded the Post Office set rates high enough to cover costs.  Probably because Congress didn't want to subsidize the big mail order companies of the day, Montgomery Ward and Sears Roebuck.   Sixty years later some business writer commented that the Post Office would never offer much competition to Fedex and UPS because of it's inefficiencies and high wages.   

I'd like to be just a plain American

All those questionaires that want you to classify yourself as white, black, Asian-American, hispanic, purple with polka dots, are offensive to me.  I want to check off an "American" box.  All those other categories are just fodder to fuel divisive identity politics.  I don't want to be classified as one or another identity group.  I am an American, and my sympathies lie with my country, not my narrow identity group. 
   And, while the Democrats are busy finding new identity groups, and talking them up, they don't actually promise these identity groups anything while campaigning.  No promises of  special treatment, special tax breaks, extra funding for pet projects, nothing.  I don't see any reason for the identity groups to vote for the Dems, there is nothing in it for them. 
   Trump on the other hand has lowered black unemployment to the lowest level on record.  That oughta be good for something. 

Vermont wants to regulate Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Sounds cool.  But what the newsies call "AI" is really just well programmed computers.  In the programming world, "AI" is a flexible sort of programming, where decisions (if-then branching) can be done with less than 100% positivity of the evidence.  And "AI" can be written to find it's goals by looking at data, which is more flexible than having the programs goals written into it by the programmers. 
  But when you get right down to it, what they are calling "AI" is really just programs running in microprocessors.  Modern programming is more flexible than the early FORTRAN programs that handled well understood problems like printing up the payroll checks.
    Long talk on Vermont public radio about the wonders of a Vermont state program to regulate "AI".  They don't have it yet, but this program was pushing the idea.  Since "AI" is really any programming, we are talking about regulating every product with a microprocessor in it.  Which is just about everything these days.  Your microwave, your automobile, your cell phone, your TV,  your FM radio, just about everything that uses electricity.  Do you really want to give a state commission the power to regulate just about everything?  I don't. 
   The free market is perfectly capable of controlling computer programs on the market.  Look at what's happening to Facebook over some data breaches.  Same thing will happen to any product or company that offends the broader market place. 

Pacific Rim, (a movie)

Youngest Son was up for the weekend.  He wanted to see it.  I had never heard of it before.  This was the opening weekend. So after skiing on Saturday, we went to the matinee in the mighty metropolis of Lincoln NH.  It was playing, but by the time the end was reached and the credits rolled, we were the only two people in the theater.  It must have done better somewhere, the Wall St Journal mentioned it in their weekend movie box office piece. 
   It's a giant robot movie.   Same  general idea as the Godzilla movies, except it's robots stamping on the high rises in down town Tokyo instead of Godzilla.  The robots, who got much of the screen time, looked like CGI, rather than modelwork, and  they were pretty good, they moved smoothly,  they even had facial expressions (on robots no less). The robots were big enough to have two man control rooms inside them.  The crew made the robot move by moving their arms and legs.  When the human crew ran inplace in the control room, the robot would run down a Tokyo street.  What was left unsaid is how the two man crew coordinated between them selves.  Like what happens if one crew member swerves left and the other swerves right?    The movie opens with a lot of robot on robot violence.   The robots are all painted the same color, and don't have national insignia painted on their chests, so it's hard to tell the good robot from the bad robot.  About the best I could do was assume the robot that walked away after the fight was the good robot and the one that lay broken on the ground was the bad robot.  Later a bunch of sea monsters surfaced in the harbor and all the robots fought against them.
   None of the cast was anyone I had ever heard of before.   There was a little love interest, a very young chick, assigned as co pilot to the leading man's robot.  I never did catch any of their names.  What little dialog ensued between young chick and  leading man was of the "Keep a stiff upper lip" sort.  What ever sort of relationship they might or might not have enjoyed, it wasn't a lovey dovey one.   Two good points, the camera man kept the camera on the tripod, no shake the camera shots, and he put the lights on, no pure black scenes.  And the soundman did a decent job, most of the dialog was audible and understandable. 
   According to Youngest Son,  this was a sequel to a previous version that had been wildly successful in China.  So that made a sequel, hoping to rake in a bit more money.  Far as I can see, it was aimed at 12-14 year old boys. 
  If this is the future of Hollywood movies, it's gonna be a tough year at the box office. 

Personna Non Grata (PNG)

The US and its allies are getting some press coverage by kicking Russian "diplomats"  (intelligence agents actually)  out of the country over the poisoning of a retired Russian spy and his daughter in England last week.  We used to do this pretty often during the cold war.  I assume the Russians will retaliate shortly, probably by kicking a bunch of  allied diplomats out of Russia. And, after the shouting dies down, both sides will replace the expelled diplomats/intelligence agents with new people. 
   Back before electrical communications (telegraph, telephone, radio, and such)  the whole system of diplomacy, ambassadors, diplomatic immunity, extraterritoriality of embassies, the diplomatic pouch, and so on was developed.  A country's ambassador, knowing that communication with his national capital takes weeks, acted on his own say-so in matters such as declaring support or opposition to host country's military moves, (invading or being invaded),  hiking tariffs, arresting your nationals, fitting out warships for use by a rebel movement, anything.  Nowadays, the ambassador doesn't do anything until his home government sends him a cable.  We keep the diplomatic system up partly from habit and largely for the intelligence it can gather.  There is a lot of very valuable legal intelligence that can be gathered simply be reading the local press, and buying maps and books. 

The Facebook API interface

Face book has a lot of data, gathered over the years, on its computers.  According to youngest son, there was an undocumented, but not secret, interface to the public internet.  He say he used it himself to conduct searches for stuff that interested him (space travel, fusion power).  He tells me this is the interface Cambridge Analytics used to access those fifty million Facebook user's data.  He says that Facebook wised up and closed that interface quite recently.  As well they might, Facebook's business model is built around selling their data, not giving it away free to savvy hackers. 
    There has been talk about regulating Facebook and its ilk.  I frankly cannot think of  any simple enforceable regulations that would do anything useful.  Far as I am concerned, the free enterprise system is perfectly capable of shaping up Facebook.  If Facebook offends enough users, who then leave Facebook, Facebook will loose money.  They won't be able to charge as much for ads and data.  That oughta be enough incentive to shape 'em up. 
   I use Facebook, but only to exchange chit chat with old school friends, family,  and the neighbors, and to post photo's of my children, grandchildren, the scenery, the weather, my model railroad, and my cat.  I expect that only my Facebook friends can see my posts, but it doesn't bother me much that anybody can see them.  They are all fairly good photos, they are lovable children, and its a very nice cat.