Politics

You are currently browsing the archive for the Politics category.

Donald Trump, an airborne pathogen lodged in America’s small intestine continually forcing the country to violently go No. 2 in its pants, is apparently popular in the bellwether Vigo County of Indiana, at least based on research conducted by Adam Wren of Politico. The Terre Haute community is a place with eerily prescient abilities for selecting American Presidents Republican or Democrat, Dubya or Obama. According to the article, the county’s unbridled passion for the fascist fathead is based almost entirely on false assumptions about the GOP candidate. Trump as a good business person? Trump the self-made man? Holy fuck. 

If the people in Vigo really think the country is a disaster, which they seem to, it might behoove them to realize that since they’ve almost always picked the winning candidate, they’re as much to blame as anyone.

An excerpt:

The people gathered at Grand Traverse weren’t the political neophytes and gadflies often chalked up as Trump voters. They were the kind of people who scuttled their Thursday night plans to come to a two-hour event organized by a low-key Republican county chairman. And if the Republican primary were held on this evening, and limited to Politics and Pies attendees, Trump would win, and handily.

Take Dick and Jane Ames, both 72, for example. The retired air traffic controller and insurance agent who met when they were in high school here are sold on Trump. “He said what I want to hear, and I believe him,” Jane said. “He’s such a good business person, and we need that.” (She did admit, though, that Rubio has a “a cute smile.”)

Dick said he’s not afraid to vote for a Democrat. He voted for Kennedy, after all.

“He voted for Jackie,” Jane said.

“I did,” Dick said.

But for Dick, 2016 is different. “Democrats don’t have anybody. One’s a communist, and Clinton should be in jail.”

And then there was 17-year-old Jared Potts, who wore gray contacts that turned his pupils into pinholes, who will turn 18 next September, and plans to vote for Trump in his first election in November. “He speaks his mind, and I think that might be what the country needs,” he said. “A lot of the presidents don’t really enforce what needs to happen, they just do whatever the country feels like. Other countries just say, ‘do this, do that.’ Trump is just like, ‘no, I want this.’ He doesn’t owe anybody anything. Marco Rubio is paid for. Donald Trump is a self-made person.”•

Tags: ,

dronedelivery7

The problem of widespread technological unemployment is, economically speaking, one of distribution, not scarcity, but a Universal Basic Income is far from a sure thing in America (to be implemented or to work), and not every last person can teach Zumba. What way forward then if the jobs run out? In a Pacific•Standard piece, a slate of technologists, academics and journalists assess the challenge of income by the year 2035. The opening:

DEAN BAKER
“The corruption of United States politics may be so great that corporations will be able to use new technologies to undermine labor laws on an ever-larger scale as the government pursues macroeconomic policies that are intended to leave much of the labor force unemployed and most of the employed with little bargaining power. This is indeed a very bleak scenario for the future, but it is silly to blame the robots.”
—Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research

ANDREW SCHRANK
“When I think about the ‘jobless future’ predicted by so many observers, I’m reminded of the late Cambridge economist Joan Robinson, who famously quipped that ‘the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all.’ … One can thus envision a more auspicious future in which an increasingly educated and empowered global workforce confronts a somewhat chastened corporate elite on democratic terrain that is more favorable to the former.”
—Andrew Schrank is a professor of sociology at Brown University•

Tags: ,

vintage-gas-masks22-e1332369998143

Midway through COP21 in Paris, it might be instructive to look back 41 years to Scottish landscape architect and planner Ian McHarg sounding all sorts of alarms about the environment to Joan Oliver in a 1974 People magazine piece. McHarg, who died in 2001, didn’t at all appreciate the greening effects of cities, but he certainly understood the fragility of our species and the desperate straits we were putting ourselves in.

An excerpt:

Question:

What’s happening to the environment these days?

Ian McHarg:

We are still screwing it up at a helluva rate. But we’re also diminishing our own lives, which is much the most important thing. I don’t think we have to worry about nature. The worst we could do—have an atomic cataclysm and wipe out mankind—would not wipe out all bacteria, viruses, plants. They would start again. But man is a different story. Man is ephemeral, unlikely and precarious.

Question:

Suppose we used intelligence in dealing with this business of energy. Far too much to hope for, but let’s operate on this assumption. What we ought to do is maximize energy sources which neither stress the environment nor stress human beings.

Ian McHarg:

Say we’ll get as much energy as we can by using solar power alone. It involves no new technology. The simplest scheme would be a bloody great water tank and glass on the roof. You could get all the heat you want in almost any part of the United States from direct sunlight, shining through glass panels into water which is circulated through the house. But besides heat we also would like to have television and other amenities which use electric power. So we simply cheapen NASA’s photovoltaic cells which transform sunlight into direct current. They’ve developed them for space, where you can’t send up an electrician to change a fitting. Why can’t we have a version that everybody can put on their roof?

Question:

Could this technique be put into production right away?

Ian McHarg:

Absolutely. If we could only get a lobby. You see our problem is that we have lobbies for oil, for coal, for gas and for the Atomic Energy Commission. We don’t have a lobby for solar energy. We need one. Also, where is our lobby for methane? For chicken dung?

Question:

What is your “grand plan”—your “National Ecological Inventory”?

Ian McHarg:

We’d like to find for every person, every institution, every industry the best environment. There should be a national environmental center with a group of scientists who represent all the sciences necessary to understand the total environment of the United States. They’d be required to make a model of that system so they could predict: if you put an atomic reactor here, if you do offshore drilling there, then these are the consequences. I would like to be part of such a dream.

Question:

Do you think America is ready for such visionary proposals?

Ian McHarg:

This sense of man apart from nature—this sense that he’s got to exercise dominion, subjugate—is a deep, deep sickness that’s got to be eradicated somehow. I am horrified by the assumption that the greatness of America is measured by commodity—by automobiles, or the amount of electricity consumed, or whether people jet all over the world. As far as I’m concerned, greatness is measured by compassion, by courage, by gentleness.•

 

Tags: ,

japanrobotface (1)

A lot of things that could happen don’t, not if the economics don’t makes sense. Since the 1960s, we’ve known how to automate fast-casual meals, but the cost has been prohibitive (though that seems to be changing now). So when I read that Japan could have half its jobs performed by robots in 20 years, that means it’s theoretically possible, not much more. Of course, with a graying and homogenous population desperately in need of labor replacement, Japan is a culture strongly incentivized to make the transition. 

From Andrew Tarantola at Endgadget:

Data analysts Nomura Research Institute (NRI), led by researcher Yumi Wakao, figure that within the next 20 years, nearly half of all jobs in Japan could be accomplished by robots. Working with Professor Michael Osborne from Oxford University, who had previously investigated the same matter in both the US and UK, the NRI team examined more than 600 jobs and found that “up to 49 percent of jobs could be replaced by computer systems,” according to Wakao.

The team looked at how likely each position could be automated, based on the degree of creativity required.•

Tags: ,

gasstationline4

Fossil fuels work great, except for that one thing, the one where they might cause the extinction of our species. Peter Thiel and others agitate for nukes as a replacement, but clearly renewables would be a far safer alternative if they could be produced on a massive scale. Even if renewables are just a significant piece of the solution for the foreseeable future, they need to reach their tipping point soon. Will the Paris summit be that moment? One attendee, Prof. John Schellnhuber, tells Damian Carrington of the Guardian that an “induced implosion” of the fossil fuel industry must happen now, explaining how it can be provoked. An excerpt:

If a critical mass of big countries implement their pledges, he said in an interview with the Guardian, the move towards a global low-carbon economy would gain unstoppable momentum.

“If some countries really honour their pledges, including China, Brazil, South Africa, US and Europe, I think we will get a dynamic that will transform the development of the century. This is not sheer optimism – it is based on analysis of how incumbent systems implode.”

In July, Schellnhuber told a science conference in Paris that the world needed “an induced implosion of the carbon economy over the next 20-30 years. Otherwise we have no chance of avoiding dangerous, perhaps disastrous, climate change.”

“The avalanche will start because ultimately nothing can compete with renewables,” he told the Guardian. “If you invest at [large] scale, inevitably we will end up with much cheaper, much more reliable, much safer technologies in the energy system: wind, solar, biomass, tidal, hydropower. It is really a no-brainer, if you take away all the ideological debris and lobbying.”

India, for example, aims to deliver 350GW of renewable energy in the next 10 years, the equivalent to 300 nuclear power stations, he said. “That is mind boggling and would be the final nail in the coffin of coal-fired power stations,” Schellnhuber said. “If India delivers on that pledge, it will be a tipping point for that country.”•

Tags: ,

medicine

Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan, members of the 1% club no matter how you work out the door policy, have pledged to give away 99% of their Facebook stock. It’s a wonderfully generous thing, but not an easy one to pull off well, and of course the process will be heavily influenced by the worldview of the Facebook founder.

In the announcement of his intentions, Zuckerberg asked this question: “Can you learn and experience 100 times more than we do today?” Listen, I want the world to be 100 times smarter (or even 2 times smarter), but that sounds like he’s investing money in brain chips and VR gear, which is fascinating, sure, but not quite the Gates-ian antimalarial efforts some might have anticipated. In all fairness, the technologist also mentions disease prevention and eradication, but there’s an awful lot of sci-fi-esque wording about radical life extension and the like. A lot of progress may ultimately come from future-forward neuro- and bioengineering, or maybe it will be money spent poorly. Good intentions and good execution are not the same thing.

In a similar vein, a Daily Beast piece by Charlotte Lytton notes that 2015 was the year that Silicon Valley became something of an Immortality Industrial Complex, with the well-compensated wanting to live forever, or at least until their stock options run out. An excerpt:

Might it be more charitable, then, to use the billions being funneled through avoidance schemes into abiding by the law and helping to reverse the problems created by a deficit-laden economy you’ve willfully avoided paying money to for an extended period of time?

“It’s incredibly exciting and wonderful to be part of a species that dreams in a big way,” explained bioethicist Laurie Zoloth. “But I also want to be part of a species that takes care of the poor and the dying, and I’m worried that our attention is being drawn away to a glittery future world that is fantasy and not the world we live in.” 

Her sentiments were echoed by Bill Gates, the world’s second greatest philanthropist (after Warren Buffet), who expressed that “it seems pretty egocentric while we still have malaria and TB for rich people to fund things so they can live longer” in a Reddit AMA earlier this year.

In any case, whether significant progress of the ilk [Peter] Thiel and co. are searching for will ever be made remains a big “if.” But should one of these projects yield a major discovery, who will benefit? As we’ve gleaned from the plethora of “free” services made flesh (or screen) by these businessmen, there’s no such thing as something for nothing—and that something has largely been handing over our personal data.•

Tags: , , , , , ,

NEW_JERSEY_TURNPIKE_AT_LINDEN,_WITH_EXXON_OIL_REFINERY_IN_BACKGROUND_-_NARA_-_552002

Last week, Jeb Bush, the willing strangler of Baby Hitler, said this: “Perhaps the most ludicrous comment I’ve ever heard is that climate change is a bigger threat to our country than radical Islamic terrorism.” You would think such utter wrong-mindedness would catapult him to the top of the GOP polls in this clown car of an election season, but apparently even ludicrousness can’t save Jeb from himself. 

In a smart Conversation piece, Christopher Grainger calls for a Space Race initiative to combat climate change. He’s not the first to do so, but it clearly needs repeating. While a carbon tax is a very necessary measure, the writer doesn’t think it will necessarily birth solutions as much as contain badness. I think it might do some of both, the tax perhaps leading corporations and inventors to innovate to preclude paying the tax. Either way, it would be great to find out.

From Grainger:

Many influential economists such as Yale’s William Nordhaus or Harvard’s Gregory Mankiw, want to fight climate change with a carbon tax. The problem is taxes do a better job of preventing bad things than encouraging better replacements.

Standard economics simply considers greenhouse gas emissions as an “externality” – an economic consequence experienced by a party who did not choose to incur it. Negative side effects such as pollution can be addressed by putting a price on them and forcing those responsible to pay – if your factory produces emissions, it’ll cost you. This is the idea behind carbon taxes. It is assumed that, by making polluting technologies relatively more expensive, the market will adjust, generating low-carbon innovations.

But innovation isn’t as simple as this. In particular, the development and spread of new technologies depends on what has gone before and you can’t simply expect a jump into renewable energy, for instance, when everything is geared towards fossil fuels. This idea ofpath dependenceis fundamental to understanding technological change.•

Tags:

robot-congo (2)

Transhumanist Party Presidential candidate Zoltan Istvan’s embrace of techno-fascism might be jarring in another election season, one without talk of Muslim databases and refugees being compared to “rabid dogs,” but it’s almost the least of many evils in 2015.

Well, I certainly don’t want to totalitarianism of any type, carbon or silicon, but Istvan hopes for a day when (kindly) machine overlords are an option. He discusses that possibility, increasing robotization, universal basic income and more in a smart article by Tim Maughan of BBC Future. An excerpt that begins with reference to alt-politician’s sci-fi novel:

The Transhumanist Wager tells the story of Jethro Knights, a philosopher who rails against democratic politics and becomes a revolutionary that seizes control of the world in order to enforce a global authoritarian transhuman regime. It sounds a little like the neoreactionary movement, I suggest, the far-right philosophical movement that believes democracy has failed, and that nations should once again be run by hereditary monarchies. Isn’t that perhaps a worrying storyline from someone running as president?

“I’m distancing myself, I have been, from the book now for a whole year,” he says. “I know the neoreactionary movement really well. I really dislike some of their policies, especially on women… But that said, I do subscribe to some of their strong monarchy ideas where if you actually have a benevolent dictator that could be great for the country.”

I’m a little surprised to hear a presidential candidate openly suggesting this. But that, as it turns out, is very typical for Istvan; he’s not finished. There’s always another angle, some other philosophical surprise up his sleeve.

“In fact it’s one of the reasons why I’ve advocated for an artificial intelligence to become president one day. If we had a truly altruistic entity that was after the best interests of society maybe giving up at least some freedoms would be beneficial if that was truly in our best interests. What’s happened in the past is we’ve had dictators who are selfish, and they’ve done an absolutely terrible job of running countries. But what if you actually had somebody who really was after your best interests, wouldn’t you want him on your team?”•

Tags: ,

sleep22 (2)

In a Guardian piece, Killian Fox and Joanne O’Connor look at the future of employment, that increasingly shaky thing, from a variety of angles: robotics, workplace surveillance, the end of retirement, etc. One segment focuses on the “human cloud,” which outsources tasks into the ether, perhaps flattening the world a little but definitely flattening wages. An excerpt:

In the past decade cloud computing has radically altered the way we work, but it’s the growth of the “human cloud” – a vast global pool of freelancers who are available to work on demand from remote locations on a mind-boggling array of digital tasks – which is really set to shake up the world of work.

The past five years have seen a proliferation of online platforms that match employers (known in cloud-speak as “requesters”) with freelancers (often referred to as “taskers”), inviting them to bid for each task. Two of the biggest sites are Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, which lays claim to 500,000 “turkers” from 190 countries at any given time, and Upwork, which estimates that it has 10 million freelancers from 180 countries on its database. They compete for approximately 3m tasks or projects each year, which can range from tagging photos to writing code. The market is evolving so quickly that it’s hard to pin down exactly how many people are using these sites worldwide, but management consultants McKinsey estimate that by 2025 some 540 million workers will have used one of these platforms to find work.

The benefits for companies using these sites are obvious: instant access to a pool of cheap, willing talent, without having to go through lengthy recruitment processes. And no need to pay overheads and holiday or sick pay. For the “taskers” the benefits are less clear cut. Champions of the crowdsourcing model claim that it’s a powerful force for the redistribution of wealth, bringing a fresh stream of income and flexible work into emerging economies such as India and the Philippines (two of the biggest markets for these platforms). But herein lies the problem, as far as critics are concerned. By inviting people to bid for work, sites such as Upwork inevitably trigger a “race to the bottom”, with workers in Mumbai or Manila able to undercut their peers in Geneva or London thanks to their lower living costs.

“It’s a factor in driving down real wages and increasing inequality,” says Guy Standing, professor of economics at SOAS, University of London. He has written two books on the “precariat”, which he defines as an emerging global class with no financial security, job stability or prospect of career progression. He argues that falling wages in this sector, with workers often willing to complete tasks for as little as $1 an hour, will eventually have a knock-on effect on the wages of traditional employees and contribute to the growth of the precariat. “And it’s not just unskilled labour that’s being done online,” says Standing. “It goes all the way up: legal services, medical diagnosis, architectural services, accounting – it’s affecting the whole spectrum.”

Love it or loathe it, the human cloud is here to stay.•

Tags: ,

321nuke

Anyone who watches Silkwood at a formative age, seeing Meryl Streep furiously scrubbed and showered, might think nuclear power plants are the devil. And there certainly is the devil in their details: An accident or purposeful act of destruction can not only kill swaths of people but also “salt the earth.” Even in the best-case, calamity-free scenario, the waste will be on our hands for an awful long time.

In a NYT op-ed, Peter Thiel argues in favor of going nuclear to combat climate change, pointing out that it was only human error that brought about horrors like Chernobyl. Sure, but human error (and the machine kind) aren’t going away. Neither are earthquakes or other natural disasters which can overwhelm fail-safe measures. It’s not a flawless solution that won’t make us pay in some painful way. The best argument in its favor is that its costs are far more easily absorbed than are those of rising sea levels.

Knowing that a species-wide catastrophe will certainly result from continued carbon emissions does make it clear that our previous weighing of coal and atomic energy were off-kilter.

An excerpt:

The need for energy alternatives was already clear to investors a decade ago, which is why they poured funding into clean technology during the early 2000s. But while the money was there, the technology wasn’t: The result was a series of bankruptcies and the scandal of Solyndra, the solar panel manufacturer in California that went bankrupt in 2011 after receiving a federal guarantee of hundreds of millions of dollars. Wind and solar together provide less than 2 percent of the world’s energy, and they aren’t growing anywhere near fast enough to replace fossil fuels.

What’s especially strange about the failed push for renewables is that we already had a practical plan back in the 1960s to become fully carbon-free without any need of wind or solar: nuclear power. But after years of cost overruns, technical challenges and the bizarre coincidence of an accident at Three Mile Island and the 1979 release of the Hollywood horror movie The China Syndrome, about a hundred proposed reactors were canceled. If we had kept building, our power grid could have been carbon-free years ago.

Instead, we went in reverse.•

 

Tags:

Neil deGrasse Tyson readily admits he’s bad at predicting the future, but as one of the leading public faces of science, he gets those kinds of questions. He certainly doesn’t restrain himself, however, when making prognostications about private space companies and the future of exploration, believing venture capital will never be the leader of such ventures. 

From a Verge interview conducted by Sean O’Kane:

Question:

The flip side of that is you have a live show coming up in Brooklyn that’s themed “Delusions of Space Enthusiasts.” I can think of at least a couple things that you might talk about during that. Can you give an idea of what that might cover?

Neil deGrasse Tyson:

Well I think the biggest delusion was watching us go to the Moon in the 1960s and saying to yourself, “Wow this is a great frontier we’re breaching, we’ve dreamed about the Moon for centuries, and in just a few more years we’ll be on Mars and then we’ll be all over space.” That was missing some important parts of that equation. You’re missing the fact that we only declared we’re going to the Moon because we were at war with the Soviet Union, we were in a cold war, so this is a war of technologies. The fact that Sputnik was launched in a hollowed out intercontinental ballistic missile shell — no one thought about the space over the atmosphere. We knew that you could control your own airspace, but how about your “space” space?

So there was our sworn enemy’s spacecraft flying over our head, and we knew it because they would send out radio signals and you could detect it. And so that’s why we went to the Moon. We didn’t go to the Moon because we’re explorers or discoverers, or we’re Americans. There’s a whole delusional front story that we tell ourselves about that era. And then, when we don’t go end up going to Mars, people cry foul. It was war that got us there, so let’s just be honest about that.

Once you know what the actual drivers are, if you want to continue to achieve that goal, then you can at least base it on the reality of people’s decisions rather than what you wish they were.

Question:

It seems really easy to delude ourselves about the state of space now, right? We look at a company like Mars One and say, “Oh yeah, totally, that seems possible. A reality show would definitely fund a mission to Mars.” Or even SpaceX, we’ve looked at that company with wide eyes and only now question them after a very public failure.

Neil deGrasse Tyson:

The delusion that relates to private spaceflight isn’t really what you’re describing. They’re big dreams, and I don’t have any problems with people dreaming. Mars One, let them dream. That’s not the delusion. The delusion is thinking that SpaceX is going to lead the space frontier. That’s just not going to happen, and it’s not going to happen for three really good reasons: One, it is very expensive. Two, it is very dangerous to do it first. Three, there is essentially no return on that investment that you’ve put in for having done it first.•

Tags: ,

botlr-in-hallway-lr (1)

Paul Mason’s new book, Postcapitalism, is set to be published in the U.S. in early 2016, so some related work has been preceding it in North America, including a desultory London lecture published on Medium and an interview with Paul Kennedy of the CBC. I’m looking forward to reading the book, and I certainly think capitalism is in for a serious reconfiguration, but Mason is attempting to predict the product of an equation not yet completely written. Not an easy thing to do. Predict turbulence and you will almost always be right; foresee complete collapse and you’ll be wrong nearly every time.

An excerpt from the Kennedy interview:

Paul Kennedy:

Haven’t we heard this message before, that capitalism is failing?

Paul Mason:

Well, for 250 years we have had economists predicting the end of capitalism. Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and Karl Marx all discussed the problem of capitalism’s self reproduction. How much longer can it go on reproducing itself?

Now, my idea is that it can go on reproducing itself for a long time, as long as it can adapt. So every time there is a downturn or any time a societal business model falls apart, what you usually get is a mixture of technological innovation and some changes in the structure of the economy and we’re off again.

Paul Kennedy:

So when did you get the idea that we had come to the end of the line?

Paul Mason: 

If you study the old uprisings — the 1840s in Britain, the 1890s, after the Second World War — what you always see is a synthesis of high-value work and high-value production.

The problem is that information technology makes that very difficult, I argue almost impossible, to do. Because information technology strips away value. Information technology allows us to produce things that could be and should be cheap or free.

And so we are not making, as the Victor record company did in 1910 or so, shellac records. We are making mp3 files, and it is very hard to make money out of them.

Paul Kennedy:

What I have been led to believe is that this new information revolution is going to free me up.

Paul Mason:

What has happened is that information allows work and wages to become delinked. It allows work and life to become blurred. We will answer emails from our boss at midnight.•

Tags: ,

Donald-Trump-imitating-Times-reporter-Serge-Kovaleski-who-is-disabled

Donald Trump possesses the realpolitik of Mayor McCheese and the big-picture vision of David Duke.

You certainly don’t want to believe that the majority of Americans would vote for a vicious bigot who’s smeared POWs, women, disabled people, Mexicans, African-Americans and Muslims. But Trump certainly has found a base: Voters who feel like their sense of privilege is under siege. It is, of course, but not the way they think it is, not from terrorists from the Middle East or laborers from south of the border. Globalization, automation and tax codes that favor the wealthy have devastated the American middle class, largely white and now red in the face. The postwar redistribution of wealth through taxes is long gone, given way to loopholes that favor the inheritors, the land grabbers, the Trumps.

“They seem so nice, your friends and neighbors. Your fellow Americans,” writes Molly Ball in a smart and lucid Atlantic piece about the fear of falling and the rise of bigotry, even fascism, in U.S. Presidential politics. An excerpt:

Four months into his crazed foray into presidential politics, Trump is still winning this thing. And what could once be dismissed as a larkish piece of political performance art has seemingly turned into something darker. Pundits, even conservative ones, say that Trump resembles a fascist. The recent terrorist attacks in Paris, which some hoped would expose Trump’s shallowness, have instead strengthened him by intensifying people’s anger and fear. Trump has falsely claimed that thousands of Muslims cheered the 9/11 attacks from rooftops in New Jersey; he has declined to rule out a national database of Muslims. The other day, a reporter asked Trump if the things he was proposing weren’t just like what the Nazis did to the Jews. Trump replied, “You tell me.”

Some observers still think Trump’s support might be soft. Trump has dipped in the polls a couple of times, after a listless debate performance, for example. Perhaps the people who first glommed on to his celebrity got bored and drifted away. But if so, they didn’t find anybody else they liked. And they came back. And now, they are not leaving.

“I have got my mind made up, pretty much so,” says Michael Barnhill, a 67-year-old factory supervisor with a leathery complexion and yellow teeth. “The fact is, politicians have not done anything for our country in a lot of years.”

These people are not confused. They are sticking with Trump, the only candidate who gets it, who is man enough to show the enemy who’s boss.•

 

Tags: ,

Apollo-11-Buzz-Aldrin-001 (1)

Buzz Aldrin likes to say things, and one of things he’s currently saying is that JFK really wanted NASA to shoot for Mars, not the moon, in the 1960s. Could be. There were tons of different space plans in post-war America that were weeded out before the moon became the target.

From Cameron Atfield at the Sydney Morning Herald:

President John F Kennedy’s famous moon speech could well have been a Mars speech had he not been talked down from his lofty ambitions, Buzz Aldrin revealed in Brisbane on Wednesday.

And the second human being to ever step on the surface of another world urged the United States to work closely with the Chinese in space to help promote peace on Earth.

Speaking at a superannuation conference in Brisbane, Dr Aldrin said he only recently learnt about President Kennedy’s belief his nation could launch a Mars mission in the 1960s.

“(NASA) told him it would take at least 15 years before we could put a man on the moon,” he said.

“Now, I recently learnt at MIT (the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) at the 100th anniversary of the aero/astro school department, that Kennedy had actually wanted us to go to Mars.

“He asked his engineers to figure it out and, after a weekend of rather intense calculations, they told him that Mars was just a little bit too far to go, but we could shoot for the moon as a more realistic goal.

“Can you imagine having only one weekend to figure that out for the president?”•

Tags: ,

Snowden-Oliver-Stone

Because things aren’t murky enough, Oliver Stone is bringing his paranoid onslaught of fact and fiction to the topic of Edward Snowden, a mixed bag to begin with. Our default mode should be supporting whistleblowers, but this guy doesn’t make it easy. He told us what was fairly obvious in the age of the Patriot Act, and the information won’t really change much (though Snowden can’t be blamed for that). In this time, Americans are more afraid of terrorism than they are of losing liberties, wanting a brother to take care of them even if it’s Big Brother. It never was a lack of knowledge that allowed surveillance to take hold but a lack of will. Beyond that, government spying will likely end up being the least of the problem, with corporations and rogue groups and individuals far more of a threat.

InThe Hacking of Hollywood,” a very wonderful Backchannel piece, David Kushner writes of an ironic twist: The auteur is trying to prevent his film about the leaker from being leaked. The article retreats to the 2004 origin story of interlopers entering the Dream Factory, making its way forward to the Fappening, a dark weekend that was revealing in more ways than one. Kushner stresses that no great technical skills are usually required for such breaches. The opening: 

It’s a cold day in Munich, and Oliver Stone, Hollywood’s most notorious director, is staring down the world’s most notorious hacker, Edward Snowden — or, at least, the actor who’s portraying him, Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Stone’s here filming his controversial biopic of Snowden. The film, which will be released in spring 2016, traces the whistleblower’s rise from lowly army enlistee to the National Security Agency contractor who exposed the U.S. government’s classified surveillance program.

But Stone isn’t just concerned about capturing the saga behind Snowden’s incredible leaks. He wants to make sure that no hacker comes after his film and leaks its secrets before the movie’s release. “It’s a major concern for every filmmaker,” he tells me, during a break from shooting. And it’s one that’s even more pronounced with a movie that promises to reveal more about Snowden than the world yet knows. “If you can hack his story,” Stone says with caution, “it would be a big prize.” In a way, Stone is making a meta-movie that no one has seen before, building a firewall around a film whose subject is an icon of bad infosec.

This explains the stealthy guy with the Fu Manchu beard milling around the set. He’s Ralph Echemendia, Hollywood’s go-to digital bodyguard, a reformed hacker from the dark side who now helps filmmakers, celebrities, and moguls keep their valuable data secure. It’s a challenge that’s only compounding as Hollywood — like the rest of the world — moves more and more of its content and communications online. “The concern is a lack of control,” Echemendia tells me.

Stone says such precautions, while new, are “the wave of the future.”•

Tags: , ,

I’d like to live forever, but mostly out of spite.

Transhumanist Party candidate Zoltan Istvan has made the quest for immortality the central issue of his quixotic Presidential campaign, because that works on both sides of the aisle, apart from the End of Days-ers. The novice politician has been indefatigable in his mission despite only making small ripples in the mainstream waters thus far. I don’t always agree with his reasoning, but I do wish his ideas would get a public hearing.

At Vice Motherboard, Istvan has published “The Drug Lords of Tomorrow Will Be Biohackers,” a piece about the new drug, a non-drug, which is a chip (for the brain), not a pill. The article looks at the topic from all sides: medicinal, drug abuse, hacking, etc. The opening:

Through various sources—mainly transhumanist biohacker friends—I’ve been hearing about how some drug traffickers might be taking an interest in cranial implant technology.

If scientists can get a brain implant to give neural stimuli that affects our perspectives, moods, and behaviors, then the future of drugs could be totally different than what it is now. In fact, in such a future, drug creation would become the domain of engineers and coders. This could become the next major frontier of the so-called drug market.

About half a million people already have chips connected to their brains. Most of these are cochlear implants to aid against deafness, but some are also deep brain stimulation (DBS) types, sometimes used for Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, and epilepsy.

Generally speaking, DBS cranial implants work by firing electrical impulses via electrodes into certain regions of the brain. In the case of epileptic patients, they help control seizures.

But improving forms of brain implants may use more EEG technology—a part of the brain-computer interface field—where they can distribute brain waves over a certain portion of the brain. If this portion is one that affects mood—thought to be determined mostly by the amygdala—maybe they’ll be able to give us a real high.

Thync is already an external device claiming to work something like this.•

Tags:

wernher5 (1)

I recently quoted Henry Miller’s Big Sur and the Oranges of Hieronymous Bosch, which reminded of that 1957 book’s beauty of a passage about the future of America, and the future of the world, which were one and the same to the writer’s mind. He saw the end of scarcity and hunger, though he thought we’d crave all the same, perhaps even in a more profound way. The excerpt:

“If you do not know where you are going, any road will take you there.”
(Out of Confusion, by M.N. Chatterjee (Yellow Springs, Ohio: Antioch Press, 1954).

There are days when it all seems as simple and clear as that to me. What do I mean? I mean with regard to the problem of living on this earth without becoming a slave, a drudge, a hack, a misfit, an alcoholic, a drug addict, a neurotic, a schizophrenic, a glutton for punishment or an artist manqué.

Supposedly we have the highest standard of living of any country in the world. Do we, though? It depends on what one means by high standards. Certainly nowhere does it cost more to live than here in America. The cost is not only in dollars and cents but in sweat and blood, in frustration, ennui, broken homes, smashed ideals, illness and insanity. We have the most wonderful hospitals, the most gorgeous insane asylums, the most fabulous prisons, the best equipped and the highest paid army and navy, the speediest bombers, the largest stockpile of atom bombs, yet never enough of any of these items to satisfy the demand. Our manual workers are the highest paid in the world; our poets the worst. There are more automobiles than one can count. And as for drugstores, where in the world will you find the like?

We have only one enemy we really fear: the microbe. But we are licking him on every front. True, millions still suffer from cancer, heart disease, schizophrenia, multiple-sclerosis, tuberculosis, epilepsy, colitis, cirrhosis of the liver, dermatitis, gall stones, neuritis, Bright’s disease, bursitis, Parkinson’s-disease, diabetes, floating kidneys, cerebral palsy, pernicious anaemia, encephalitis, locomotor ataxia, falling of the womb, muscular distrophy, jaundice, rheumatic fever, polio, sinus and antrum troubles, halitosis, St. Vitus’s Dance, narcolepsy, coryza, leucorrhea, nymphomania, phthisis, carcinoma, migraine, dipsomania, malignant tumors, high blood pressure, duodenal ulcers, prostate troubles, sciatica, goiter, catarrh, asthma, rickets, hepatitis, nephritis, melancholia, amoebic dysentery, bleeding piles, quinsy, hiccoughs, shingles, frigidity and impotency, even dandruff, and of course all the insanities, now legion, but–our of men of science will rectify all this within the next hundred years or so. How? Why, by destroying all the nasty germs which provoke this havoc and disruption! By waging a great preventive warnot a cold war!wherein our poor, frail bodies will become a battleground for all the antibiotics yet to come. A game of hide and seek, so to speak, in which one germ pursues another, tracks it down and slays it, all without the least disturbance to our usual functioning. Until this victory is achieved, however, we may be obliged to continue swallowing twenty or thirty vitamins, all of different strengths and colors, before breakfast, down our tiger’s milk and brewer’s yeast, drink our orange and grapefruit juices, use blackstrap molasses on our oatmeal, smear our bread (made of stone-ground flour) with peanut butter, use raw honey or raw sugar with our coffee, poach our eggs rather than fry them, follow this with an extra glass of superfortified milk, belch and burp a little, give ourselves an injection, weigh ourselves to see if we are under or over, stand on our heads, do our setting-up exercisesif we haven’t done them alreadyyawn, stretch, empty the bowels, brush our teeth (if we have any left), say a prayer or two, then run like hell to catch the bus or the subway which will carry us to work, and think no more about the state of our health until we feel a cold coming on: the incurable coryza. But we are not to despair. Never despair! Just take more vitamins, add an extra dose of calcium and phosphorus pills, drink a hot toddy or two, take a high enema before retiring for the night, say another prayer, if we can remember one, and call it a day.

If the foregoing seems too complicated, here is a simple regimen to follow: Don’t overeat, don’t drink too much, don’t smoke too much, don’t work too much, don’t think too much, don’t fret, don’t worry, don’t complain, above all, don’t get irritable. Don’t use a car if you can walk to your destination; don’t walk if you can run; don’t listen to the radio or watch television; don’t read newspapers, magazines, digests, stock market reports, comics, mysteries or detective stories; don’t take sleeping pills or wakeup pills; don’t vote, don’t buy on the installment plan, don’t play cards either for recreation or to make a haul, don’t invest your money, don’t mortgage your home, don’t get vaccinated or inoculated, don’t violate the fish and game laws, don’t irritate your boss, don’t say yes when you mean no, don’t use bad language, don’t be brutal to your wife or children, don’t get frightened if you are over or under weight, don’t sleep more than ten hours at a stretch, don’t eat store bread if you can bake your own, don’t work at a job you loathe, don’t think the world is coming to an end because the wrong man got elected, don’t believe you are insane because you find yourself in a nut house, don’t do anything more than you’re asked to do but do that well, don’t try to help your neighbor until you’ve learned how to help yourself, and so on…

Simple, what?

In short, don’t create aerial dinosaurs with which to frighten field mice!”

America has only one enemy, as I said before. The microbe. The trouble is, he goes under a million different names. Just when you think you’ve got him licked he pops up again in a new guise. He’s the pest personified.

When we were a young nation life was crude and simple. Our great enemy then was the redskin. (He became our enemy when we took his land away from him.) In those early days there were no chain stores, no delivery lines, no hired purchase plan, no vitamins, no supersonic flying fortresses, no electronic computers; one could identify thugs and bandits easily because they looked different from other citizens. All one needed for protection was a musket in one hand and a Bible in the other. A dollar was a dollar, no more, no less. And a gold dollar, a silver dollar, was just as good as a paper dollar. Better than a check, in fact. Men like Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett were genuine figures, maybe not so romantic as we imagine them today, but they were not screen heroes. The nation was expanding in all directions because there was a genuine need for it–we already had two or three million people and they needed elbow room. The Indians and bison were soon crowded out of the picture, along with a lot of other useless paraphernalia. Factories and mills were being built, and colleges and insane asylums. Things were humming. And then we freed the slaves. That made everybody happy, except the Southerners. It also made us realize that freedom is a precious thing. When we recovered from the loss of blood we began to think about freeing the rest of the world. To do it, we engaged in two world wars, not to mention a little war like the one with Spain, and now we’ve entered upon a cold war which our leaders warn us may last another forty or fifty years. We are almost at the point now where we may be able to exterminate every man, woman and child throughout the globe who is unwilling to accept the kind of freedom we advocate. It should be said, in extenuation, that when we have accomplished our purpose everybody will have enough to eat and drink, properly clothed, housed and entertained. An all-American program and no two ways about it! Our men of science will then be able to give their undivided attention to other problems, such as disease, insanity, excessive longevity, interplanetary voyages and the like. Everyone will be inoculated, not only against real ailments but against imaginary ones too. War will have been eliminated forever, thus making it unnecessary “in times of peace to prepare for war.” America will go on expanding, progressing, providing. We will plant the stars and stripes on the moon, and subsequently on all the planets within our comfy little universe. One world it will be, and American through and through. Strike up the band!

Tags:

logansrundriverless

There are going to be driverless cars, though no one knows exactly when. Information about the technology is closely held, of course, and it’s easy to question the irrational exuberance of people who stand to gain vast wealth from the transition’s completion. The U.S. government, which will have to nimbly legislate the new normal, is making noise, however, that sooner rather than later may be the ETA. 

From Justin Pritchard at the Associated Press:

In a written statement Monday, U.S. Department of Transportation spokeswoman Suzanne Emmerling said that with rapid development of the technology, federal policy is being updated.

“Breathtaking progress has been made,” Emmerling wrote. She said Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx ordered his department’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration update its 2013 policy “to reflect today’s technology and his sense of urgency to bring innovation to our roads that will make them safer.” 

It’s unclear what the new policy will be, though the tone of the statement signaled that Foxx is interested in endorsing the technology.

Specific language the traffic safety administration in revisiting holds that states which do permit public access after testing should require that a qualified driver be behind the wheel.

Google has argued that once cars can drive as safely as humans, it would be better to remove the steering wheel and pedals so that people don’t mess up the ride. A Google spokesman had no comment on word of the federal review.•

Tags: , ,

Reince Priebus

Donald Trump, a Nazi Brownshirt who sells condos, once broke the bank at a casino. Unfortunately, it was his own.

At the time of Mitt Romney’s 2012 drubbing, I wrote I that didn’t think the GOP would be chastened by the crushing swing-state trashing. The party wasn’t going to start cooperating in D.C. because there were too many entrenched interests demanding dissent as the default mode. Yes, maybe the Republicans would quickly strike a bargain on an immigration bill for strategic purposes (didn’t happen!), but things weren’t go to improve much.

I couldn’t have imagined, however, the 2016 GOP campaign would turn out to be the ugliest thing imaginable, an unhalting parade of bleeding women, rabid dogs and Muslim databases. The pushing of the line to the extreme right will probably ultimately benefit someone like Ted Cruz, who seems mild compared to Trump and Ben Carson, though he’s truly a radical extremist.

In a Politico piece, Jacob Heilbrunn examines how the GOP not only failed to become more inclusive but actually pulled further inside its dark, cold shell. Oh, they’ve built a well, alright! The opening:

How has the party departed so far from the vision Priebus laid out just two years ago?

There are two factors at work. The first is that as the GOP embraces the theme of America’s precipitous decline under President Barack Obama, it’s jettisoning the crusading and optimistic foreign policy credo of George W. Bush. After over a decade of warfare in the Middle East, the notion that Washington can single-handedly transform Muslim societies in America’s image attracts derisory snorts on the right as well as the left. Ohio Gov. John Kasich, by contrast, is harkening back to the Bush legacy by endorsing a federal agency to disseminate “Judeo-Christian values” to Iran Russia, China and the Middle East—“We need to beam messages around the world” Kasich told NBC News. America “means freedom, it means opportunity, it means respect for women, it means freedom to gather, it means so many things.” But many conservatives—both candidates and their constituents—are adopting a darker view of the Middle East, which is that it is irredeemable and thus poses a dire threat to the very existence of western civilization.

The second reason goes back to the end of the Cold War. During the past century, the GOP focused on the internal subversive threat of communism and often depicted liberals as traitors. Now many on the right have seamlessly moved on to hunt for Muslim traitors as part of a third World War against a foreign enemy. They’ve been identifying domestic traitors and declaring a broader war against Islam for years, but have been, for the most part, speaking to deaf ears. To his credit George W. Bush, as has been widely recalled, refused to demonize Muslims after 9/11 and visited a mosque to declare that America was not at war with Islam itself. Now after Paris, the radical right is grabbing the opportunity to push their case to a wider audience.

 

Tags: ,

rice-engineering-show-1950-centennial-tortoise-x640-e1426536702371

Some neuroscientists disagree, but there doesn’t seem to be anything that’s theoretically impossible about creating intelligent AI, especially if we’re talking about humans being here to tinker 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 or 1,000,000 years from now. Most things will be possible given enough time, if it should pass with us still here. 

In a lively Conversation piece, a raft of experts answers question about AI, from intelligent machines to technological unemployment. The opening:

Question:

How plausible is human-like artificial intelligence?

Toby Walsh, Professor of AI:

It is 100% plausible that we’ll have human-like artificial intelligence.

I say this even though the human brain is the most complex system in the universe that we know of. There’s nothing approaching the complexity of the brain’s billions of neurons and trillions of connections. But there are also no physical laws we know of that would prevent us reproducing or exceeding its capabilities.

Kevin Korb, Reader in Computer Science

Popular AI from Issac Asimov to Steven Spielberg is plausible. What the question doesn’t address is: when will it be plausible?

Most AI researchers (including me) see little or no evidence of it coming anytime soon. Progress on the major AI challenges is slow, if real.

What I find less plausible than the AI in fiction is the emotional and moral lives of robots. They seem to be either unrealistically empty, such as the emotion-less Data in Star Trek, or unrealistically human-identical or superior, such as the AI in Spike Jonze’s Her.

All three – emotion, ethics and intelligence – travel together, and are not genuinely possible in some form without the others, but fiction writers tend to treat them as separate. Plato’s Socrates made a similar mistake.

Tags: ,

ISIS-fighters-2-e1403206919743

I wondered last week what type of “PEDs” terrorists were hopped up on when conducting suicide missions. Despite the oft-dark nature of humans, that’s just not a natural state and fanaticism or brainwashing or pharmaceuticals (or all three) are necessary to induce it.

If CNN is to be believed–and it almost never is–Syrian jihadists are dosing themselves with Captagon

stade

Military historian Gwynne Dyer deems terrorism “the weapon of the weak,” and he’s right. Compared to the threat from traffic accidents–not to mention climate change!–such small-scale evil is a mere drop in the dead pool. We mostly give these acts outsize importance because horrible deaths bother us more than mundane ones, and because of their sheer nastiness and needlessness excites our sense of fairness. 

When it comes to the Islamic State, I think there’s more at play. Ignoring the organization probably won’t work. It’s carved out territories as bases of operation, and a lack of response will probably lead to attempts to acquire more “attention-getting” weapons. That doesn’t mean a ground war is a good idea (wow, it’s not), but attempts to degrade military might and financial holdings probably is needed.

The most hopeful note from Dyer is that he doesn’t believe ISIS has enough in the way of resources to spread much further, the surprise factor they initially exploited now a thing of the past.

From Charlie Smith at the Georgia Straight:

Don’t panic. Terrorism is a very small problem. And any western president or prime minister who thinks they’ll severely damage ISIS by dropping bombs on its fighters is terribly mistaken

That was the message author and historian Gwynne Dyer brought to SFU Woodward’s in a March 25 sold-out lecture at the Goldcorp Centre for the Arts.

“Well, we lost two people in the last year to terrorism and we lost about 250 a month on the roads,” Dyer said. “You know, the Americans lost 3,000 people on 9/11, but they also lost 3,000 people on the roads and another 3,000 to gunshot wounds, mostly delivered by their nearest and dearest. 

“The scale of the terrorism is tiny compared to its presence in the media,” Dyer continued. “Really, we should, as much as possible, ignore it. We certainly don’t need to overreact by sending troops to the Middle East or aircraft to do God knows what in terms of useful activity. It’s just dumb.”

In fact, according to Dyer, if western countries expand their bombing campaigns against ISIS into Syria, it will only make the Islamic State stronger.•

Tags: ,

donald-trump-golfing (1)

Donald Trump, a Fraggle Rock puppet inspired by Mussolini, has won favor in polls for his loose usage of dangerous words and both vague and specific threats, not directing them only at American enemies but also at Americans.

He’s spoken recklessly of oil wars and such, despite draft deferments that kept him personally far from any bunker that wasn’t situated on a golf course. An Economist essay looks at the many uses of the word “war,” including its troubling application in regards to the Islamic State. An excerpt:

War in its canonical form has state armies on a battlefield trying to control territory. Most of today’s shooting wars are not even that clean cut—America has not declared one officially since the second world war. But worse, politicians have been unable to resist the temptation to declare war on things like poverty (Lyndon Johnson), drugs (Ronald Reagan) or terrorism (George Bush).

Declaring such “wars” is a problem because such a war on a concept is unwinnable: poverty and drugs will never show up and sign a surrender document on the battleshipMissouri, as Imperial Japan did in 1945 to end the second world war. Did Johnson defeat poverty? Did Reagan defeat drugs? We certainly know that Mr Bush did not defeat terrorism.

What about declaring war on Islamic State (IS), presumed by all to be behind the Paris massacres?  “War” is exactly the term IS would most eagerly choose. Wars are fought by armies belonging to states—just what the Islamic State fancies itself. In reality, the territory controlled by ISIS—the “caliphate”—has some elements of a state, with everything from fighting  forces to rudimentary social services, but it is unrecognised, claiming territory other states have a legitimate claim to. IS’s claim to state status is dubious. Mr Hollande runs the risk of raising that status when he calls eight men with guns and small bombs capable of “an act of war” against a nuclear power.•

Tags:

Charles Koch

Citizens United v. FEC is still an odious decision, but billionaires have done little more than offer stimulus to the struggling media sector when shoveling elephantine sums of money into national elections, with Jeb Bush being the latest evidence. It’s just very difficult to paper over an undesirable candidate or message. Another reason: Small donors feel a connection to their candidate that will get them to the polls. Well, at least the Tea Party-powering Kochs don’t yet know the winner’s curse on the biggest stage, though state and local elections seem more prone to stupid wealth. 

The opening of “How to Waste a Billion Dollars” by Michael Beckel of Politico:

The political world is discovering an unsettling truth: Money isn’t everything. The latest evidence comes from the just-expired presidential campaign of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican who dropped out on Tuesday, saying, “This is not my time.” Jindal had wallowed in the low single digits in polls and was relegated to the undercard debates even though groups allied with his campaign consistently ranked among the top sponsors of TV ads in Iowa.

Or consider the staggering confession made by conservative billionaire Charles Koch last month. The man who along with his brother David has spent or steered hundreds of millions of dollars into reshaping U.S. politics in recent years said, in effect, that he believes he has been wasting his money. “We looked like we won. [But] as you can see by the performance, we didn’t win much of anything,” Charles Koch told MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski in October. “So far we’re largely failures.”

Koch was only conceding what has become, more and more, an obvious fact. With the advent of Republican Paul Ryan as speaker of the House and a budget deal that will prevent more government shutdowns, the Koch-funded Freedom Caucus has been, for the moment, declawed.•

Tags: , ,

George-Lawnmower-1950 (3)

In her really good Vice interview with Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams, authors of the new manifesto, Inventing the Future: Postcapitalism and a World Without Work, Arielle Pardes perfectly sums up a particular strain of potential techno-utopianism: “It’s basically Marxism dressed up with robotics.”

It’s probably not going to be so neat, the future resistant to being any one thing, but it seems likely the foundations of education and Labor will be radically remade. How do we reimagine economies that have been largely free-market ones if a full-employment society is no longer a reality?

Important to Srnicek and Williams isn’t just basic income but also the end of the fetishization of the work ethic. The opening:

Vice:

Can you explain what you mean by a “high-tech future free from work”?’

Alex Williams:

The idea of the book is to argue for a different kind of left-wing politics to the kind we may be used to in America and in the UK, where traditionally, the role of the Democratic Party or, in the UK, the Labour Party, is one where we’re going to help poorer people by giving them jobs. For a variety of reasons, which we go into in the book, we view that as no longer possible, and possibly no longer desirable in the same way. This is all related, in part, to the increasing role of automation—this new wave of automation that a quiet wide variety of economists, technologists, and sociologists have begun thinking about.

Vice:

Right—the idea that “robots are stealing our jobs.”

Alex Williams:

Right. Our kind of perspective on this is, well, is it possible that robots stealing jobs might be a good thing? What would it require to make it a good thing?

Nick Srnicek:

We have all this amazing technology around us. It seems like we’re in a rapidly changing world and we’ve got new potential sprouting out everywhere. But at the same time, our everyday lives are crushed by debt and work and all of these obsolete social relations. It seems that we could be doing much better with the technologies that we have. Our argument has to do with capitalism. This isn’t fundamentally different from what Marx was saying 150 years ago, but it is a matter of capitalism constraining the potentials available within technology and within humanity.•

Tags: , ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »