Paul of Dune by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson

This turned up in hardback, good dust cover, in a second hand shop for a couple of bucks, so I bought it.  And read it.  It is 15th sequel to Frank Herbert's fantastically good 1965 novel Dune.  The sequels have been lesser works, pot boilers some would call them.  This one is no exception.  All though 512 pages long, it isn't really a novel in my view.  It's a bunch of  events, each event having little to tie it to it's sisters.  The book does have a protagonist, or perhaps better explained as a view point character, namely Paul Atriedes (Muad'Dib).  But Paul never does much, he is present in most of the events, but as a passive observer.  Even in the final event, an attempt on his life,  Paul does not even sentence the assassin to death.  This is a far cry from Dune, where Paul escapes Harkonnen assassins, rallies the Fremen. overthrows the Galactic Emperor, and slays a couple of enemies hand to hand in formal duels with knives. 
   In a real novel, the protagonist is faced with some kind of challenge.  He will make several attempts to overcome his challenge, in the last attempt, the climax of the novel, the protagonist will do or die, either triumph over his challenge or die from it.  That doesn't happen here.  There is no challenge to Paul Muad'Dib, he encounters a flock of bitter enemies, but nothing especial, nothing worthy of the attention of the new Galactic Emperor. 
   In short, after slogging thru 512 pages, bupkis. 

The Future of Computing

Title of cover story in the Economist.  They are quoting some Silicon Valley pundits on the end of Moore's Law.  Gordon Moore, one of the founders of Intel, stated that the number of transistors in integrated circuits doubled every year, later revisions said every 2 years.  The observation was based on steady improvements in silicon lithography, which yielded smaller transistors, and hence more salable chips per silicon wafer.  Back when I started in the business, chips were made with 100 micron design rules.  Now we are down to 19 microns.  Sooner or later we will get to a size that cannot be shrunk anymore.  Silicon Valley pundits have been talking about this for twenty years that I can remember, and probably longer.
  The Economist been listening to the doomsayers, and ran a cover story and a special technology section worrying about the end of Moore's law.  They make it sound like computers will stop getting smarter. 
  Not to worry, the microprocessors are plenty smart enough, and if one chip won't do the job, buy five or ten of 'em, they only cost $10 or so, and get on with it. 
   The real effect of the end of Moore's law is that chips will stop getting cheaper every year.  Back when, Analog Devices introduced their nice new ADSP2181 chip.  The first year, they lost money on every chip they sold.  But after the first die shrink reduced the size of the part, and hence it's cost, it became profitable, and after three or four more die shrinks it became really cheap and profitable. 
   And since chips or now so cheap, I think the world will keep on rotating if they stop getting even cheaper. 

Trump comes out against H1B visas

First good idea I have heard out of The Donald.  H1B visa's are a deal where companies find skilled high tech workers overseas and sponsor them for temporary (a couple of years) entry to the US on the condition that they remain employed.  Should there be a falling out between the H1B employee and his employer, employee must find a new sponsor ASAP lest he get deported. 
   Companies like this, 'cause overseas employees will work cheaper than native Americans.  Take an engineer from say India.  A salary that an American engineer would find insulting, looks like more money than he has ever seen in his life. 
  And after a few years we tell this guy his H1B has expired and he needs to return home.
  This seems kinda dumb, and hard on the employee.  I knew a bunch of these guys over the years working in high tech.  Most of 'em are well educated, smart, hard working, decent people who would make excellent US citizens.  And, we need more young smart hardworking people (makers) to keep the US economy running, and produce the stuff that  50% of the population (the takers) is drawing thru our generous welfare programs. 
   We ought to run immigration to build the US with good decent citizens.  Every year we ought to have one big entrance exam.  We admit the best people to the country and tell the others to re apply next year.  Best people are the engineers, the scientists, the doctors, the young, the married, the educated and the intelligent.  Admit the best and offer them permanent citizenship. 

British Industry is against Brexit.

According to Aviation Week, British aerospace and defense companies  are speaking out against Brexit.  Airbus, airlines RyanAir and Easy Jet, and the company operating Heathrow airport  have all decried Brexit.  A report compiled by accountants KPMG suggested that three quarters of British aerospace and defense companies would vote to remain in the EU.
  Too bad companies don't get to vote.
  Good to hear that a few Brits have their heads screwed on nose to the front.

Open and Closed Primaries

States like NH hold open primaries, anyone can vote in either party's primary.  Other states like Massachusetts hold closed primaries, you have to be a registered party member to vote in the party primary. 
   Arguments for closed primaries are thus.  An American political party is more than just a bunch of voters.  The party stands for things and politicians who campaign under the party banner are expected to support their party on all levels.  Elected politicians are expected to vote the way the party leadership calls for, even if they themselves are against the party position.  In which case, it makes sense for the selection of nominees be limited to party members, in order to insure that the nominee thinks the way the party rank and file do.  Allowing independents and opposition party people to vote in party primaries dilutes the party members vote and allows the election of wishywashy or even hostile thinking nominees.
   The strongest argument for open primaries occurs in one party states.  In a solid red or solid blue state, winning the primary is equivalent to winning the general election.  In solid blue Massachusetts, winning the democratic primary means you will take office a few months later.  So members of the opposition party cry out for votes in the only election that really matters, the dominant party primary. 

Newsie's day dream, a "brokered convention"

The TV newsies keep talking about one.  They would just die to cover a "brokered convention".   The good old fashioned smoke filled room where party bosses cut a deal to select the nominee.  Dream on newsies. 
   In real life, the voters expect the party nominee to be chosen in primary elections.  If this doesn't happen, the voters will think something illegal, or immoral, or merely fattening, has happened behind closed doors.  They will refuse to support for any nominee selected by anything except a majority of the primary elections.   If necessary they will vote for a third party candidate who has some legitimacy.  Which will hand the general election to Hilliary. 
   Does the establishment or the voters understand this?   Given the horrible state of American schools, they may not. 

NH legislature off on wild goose chases

Let's see.  First we have the commuter rail project.  Costs $300 million to set up, plus $12 million a year running costs,  Only serves Nashua.  They want all the taxpayers in NH to pay for it.  Nice work if you can get it Nashua.
   Then somebody wanted to pass a new state law on indecent exposure.  We have been doing just fine with existing law going back to the colonial period.  Why do w need to change anything.  Far as I am concerned, if guys or girls want to walk around stark naked, fine by me.  I will enjoy the view.  I don't see any need for a law. 
   Then someone else wanted to pass a new law about bestiality.  I know the Old Testament is again it, but I hadn't heard of any cases in NH in the last fifty years.  Again, we have law on the books, going back to colonial times, that has been perfectly adequate.  
   Why is our gallant legislature wasting time with this sort of stuff?