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.
Saturday, March 31, 2018
Friday, March 30, 2018
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.
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.
Thursday, March 29, 2018
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
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.
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.
Monday, March 26, 2018
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.
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.
California Pot Growers
Saturday's Wall St Journal had an editorial headlined "Marijuana Supply-Siders". They stated that there are 68150 pot growers in California. They say the number comes from the California Growers Association. I wonder how many growers decided not to register with the Growers Association for fear that the narcs or the DEA or the cops would get on their case. I know if I was growing weed in California I'd try to keep it secret.
And, that's a lot of pot farmers. About one pot farmer for every 587 citizens of California. Take a guess that only 10% of Californians smoke weed. That's one pot farmer for every 58 smokers. The article did mention that a lot of California pot is exported from California.
And, that's a lot of pot farmers. About one pot farmer for every 587 citizens of California. Take a guess that only 10% of Californians smoke weed. That's one pot farmer for every 58 smokers. The article did mention that a lot of California pot is exported from California.
Sunday, March 25, 2018
Beat the Press
They were on, Channel 10, just this morning. For the week's Trump bashing they talked about hiring and firing at the White House, presumably the lawyer who quit, the firing of the secretary of state, and his replacement with John Bolton. All the talking heads agreed that this was termoil at the White House and all sorts of bad.
They did not talk about Trump's tax bill, his proposed and nearly in effect tariffs, foreign policy vs the NORKS, 3% GNP growth, 4% unemployment, squeezing ISIS, cutting federal regulations, DACA, that omnibus budget blowout bill, in short anything of substance. Must mean that the MSM (democrats all) see nothing in all Trump's actions to bash him with. Must mean they like what Trump does, but despise him personally. Good mature attitude there.
They did not talk about Trump's tax bill, his proposed and nearly in effect tariffs, foreign policy vs the NORKS, 3% GNP growth, 4% unemployment, squeezing ISIS, cutting federal regulations, DACA, that omnibus budget blowout bill, in short anything of substance. Must mean that the MSM (democrats all) see nothing in all Trump's actions to bash him with. Must mean they like what Trump does, but despise him personally. Good mature attitude there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)