Category Archives: Web Article Review

if a tree falls in the woods, and a microphone picks it up and is reviewed by an AI, who emails a human but the human doesn’t check their email, did it make a sound?

I’ve read the first couple chapters of This is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession. I don’t know if I’ll finish it, because I don’t seem to be in the mood for long non-fiction books at the moment. But there are some really interesting things. First, there is a definitive answer to the “if a tree falls in the woods…” question. The tree causes air and soil molecules to vibrate for sure. But for that to qualify as “sound”, it has to be detected by ears and transmitted to a brain, where it becomes sound. Squirrel ears can qualify, so the brain doesn’t happen to be human. In fact, scientists have put electrodes in animal brains and confirmed that they react to sound exactly as our brains do. So it’s interesting me to that we are born wired to understand music at a neural level – this is an instinct actually much more fundamental than language.

There’s some more interesting stuff. The reason a violin sounds different from a flute or a human voice has mostly to do with overtones – a note is not just a single pitch but many mathematically related pitches where the strength varies between pitches. (Some people say the violin is the most beautiful instrument because it is most like the human voice. I say this is an insult to violins.) There is also the “attack”, which is the percussive noise made when sound first starts on a given instrument, which is chaotic for a short period of time before stabilizing. Then there is reverberation or echo of the space the instrument happens to be in (as I was musing about pipe organs recently, you could think of the space as part of the instrument since it is so fundamental to the sound). Pipe organs are particularly interesting because they give the organist control over which overtones are sounded at various strengths. Digital synthesizers are intended to do exactly this, but I think anyone with well-functioning ears can still detect the difference between a synthetic sound and one produced by physical instruments. Then again, as most of the music we hear these days is recorded and played back, we are probably losing a lot of nuance of what the instruments sound like at the same time the synthesizing technology is continuing to improve.

Charlie Stross on renewable energy

I always enjoy Charlie Stross‘s take on things. He’s a fiction writer, sure, but he seems to have his finger on the pulse of politics and technology, and from an international perspective. He says he is writing more escape fiction now because his past near-future dystopian writings have come true, and that is too depressing to write any more. I still love the Laundry Files and Merchant Princes series though. Anyway, his ideas below are consistent with some recent thoughts I’ve expressed that market incentives have actually shifted to favor renewable energy and electrification, but in the U.S. at least a massive onslaught of oil and gas industry propaganda is successfully keeping us from realizing what we are missing…

Renewables have definitively won: last year it became cheaper to buy and add new photovoltaic panels to the grid in India than it was to mine coal from existing mines to burn in existing power stations. China, with its pivot to electric vehicles, is decarbonizing fast enough to have already passed its net zero goals for 2030: we have probably already passed peak demand for oil. PV panels are not only dirt cheap by the recent standards of 2015: they’re still getting cheaper and they can be rolled out everywhere…

The oil and coal industries have tens of trillions of dollars of assets stranded underground, in the shape of fossil fuel deposits that are slightly too expensive to exploit commercially at this time. The historic bet was that these assets could be dug up and burned later, given that demand appeared to be a permanent feature of our industrial landscape. But demand is now falling, and sooner or late their owners are going to have to write off those assets because they’ve been overtaken by renewables.

Politics and propaganda can’t buck economic forces forever (because economic forces are ultimately, eventually constrained by our real physical universe). The question is how long these trends can take to play out. Charlie says he doesn’t expect to see it, and this is sad to me. I am one decade younger, and that makes my odds only a little bit better. Unlike Charlie, I am not an extremely talented writer making a gift of the contents of my brain to the entire world. Lately it has been making me sad when I learn that the author of a book or series I have enjoyed is dead. I find myself looking up what age they died and what they died from, and wondering what is going to come for me and when. Sad, I know. Such is the existential dread of late middle age.

how to be a traitor to the United States of America

I happen to like my country, but I would like to offer some suggestions on policy options for the aspiring traitor:

  1. Remove funding for basic scientific research other than in weapons. This investment will take a while to pay off, but long term it will remove the basis for economic growth as an advanced economy, until one day we can no longer be an advanced economy.
  2. Make sure only the rich can afford adequate child care. This will ensure that single parents and adults in single-income households (usually mothers) will not be able to work or study. This removes a good chunk of the potential work force, and makes sure those women will not gain new skills or knowledge that might allow them to contribute to our economy. You can also remove access to birth control to help reinforce this cycle, and you have also retarded any progress on new or better birth control technology.
  3. Undermine education at all levels. This is also a slow burner because it will take a generation for today’s toddlers to become tomorrow’s ignorant incompetent adults (he who knows not and knows not he knows not, he is a child, be careful not to teach him anything). There are some immediate things you can do though. A big one is stop issuing visas for full-pay international students. This immediately subtracts hard currency from the nation’s economy, and also has an additional payoff tomorrow of making sure they can’t stay in the country and add value to the economy.
  4. Identify industries where the United States has a comparative advantage, and sabotage them. Also reduce the pool of skilled workers they have access to. If you’re lucky, they will throw up their hands and leave the country for a techno-libertarian island dystopia.
  5. Invest heavily in industries with no comparative advantage for an advanced economy. Textiles and footwear come to mind. But then you can also undermine free trade in general so that nobody will be interested in buying inferior, high-cost products anyway. By undermining research and development, you have also made sure that potential high-value-added industries like robotics and autonomous electric vehicles can never keep up with higher-tech, more productive foreign economies.
  6. Let the transportation, water, electric, and food infrastructure decay. You don’t have to actually do anything here. Just don’t talk about it and nobody will know or care or do anything.
  7. Here’s where it gets wonky, but you want to put incompetent people in charge of monetary policy and generally all things to do with money and finance. Do this, then get out of the way while the financial industry captures and manipulates your idiots to its short-term advantage while creating an unstable house of cards that will come crashing down in the not-too-distant future. Crypto-currency is not the core of this strategy but just a little extra grease on the wheels of chaos.
  8. Undermine the nation’s ability to prepare for, respond, and recover from natural disasters, such as fires, coastal and inland flooding, hurricanes and other severe storms, and earthquakes. There’s a certain element of chance here. You could get a major volcanic eruption if you are lucky, but you can’t control that. Drought and generally poor water management are some of those slow-burn policies that could take a long time to pay off, but climate change is on your side here. As they say, the end of civilization as we know it is two meals away.
  9. This is somewhat of a tricky play, but through a combination of foreign aid removal, lack of action on climate change, and poor diplomacy with nearby countries, you can ramp up flows of desperate migrants. This gives local people somebody to blame for all their problems other than your policies.
  10. Apply propaganda judiciously to make sure Americans don’t know Chinese factories are building autonomous vehicles for $10,000 and investing in ultra-modern high speed rail and automated ports. Also use anti-tax, anti-immigrant, anti-city, and anti-poor people propaganda (the last two go together pretty well) so that nobody will be willing to fund the government or expect it to do anything.

You might be surprised that I have left certain seemingly obvious policies off this list. But I actually would not send an angry mob to attack the legislative building or set it on fire. It’s better to have the empty symbols of democracy sitting there for people to look at. I would not cancel elections, but rather limit the choices to a few very bad ones. I would not blatantly limit speech but rather do the opposite, encouraging a huge amount of meaningless talky-talk so that everyone’s jaws are flapping at the same time and there is no way anyone can be listening let alone thinking.

Good luck, modern day Benedict Arnold, in your quest. And may God Bless the United States of America.

bacteriophages

This article is about “AI designed viruses”, but what seems more important to me is progress on the idea of genetically engineered bacteriophages, or viruses that can infect and potentially kill bacteria. Antibiotics seem to have entered a state of diminishing returns (i.e., technological progress is falling short of evolution in some really scary bacteria). Bacteriophages seem promising as the next phase, where you can inject someone with a virus that will infect the specific bacterium causing a problem while not damaging any other healthy cells or beneficial bacteria.

fossil fuel demand scenarios

This Bloomberg article called “The Myth of Peak Fossil-Fuel Demand Is Crumbling” looks like a good example of a journalist writing a fair and balanced data-driven article, and an editor then giving it an idiotic headline. So let’s ignore the headline. The article summarizes the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook. I couldn’t find the 2025 edition online, so Bloomberg must have an advance copy.

Anyway, I found the scenarios interesting. They have a Current Policy Scenario, which assumes countries will continue their current policies (behaviors? these aren’t the exact same thing are they?) indefinitely into the future, a Stated Policies Scenario, which includes “policy proposals”, and an Announced Pledges Scenario which includes “political aspirations”. Under “Current Policies”, fossil fuel demand continues to rise through 2050, while in the other two it turns a corner right about now. I’m not sure I buy the graph though, because it shows a notable acceleration over the past few years, then a sharp corner today where a decline begins. That is generally not how trends work, unless we are expecting some catastrophic external event to happen today. Let’s hope not.

Am I hopeful? Not really, because this is only saying that the trend of too high emissions may get more too high or less too high over the next couple of decades. It is too high, and this is pushing our world toward or possibly already past a point of no return which we will never be able to fully recover from. Regardless, it is never too late to make things less bad than they could have been if no action was taken. The fact that our past actions have closed off some good outcomes forever is not an excuse not to take action that can avoid some really bad outcomes.

The real question to me is whether economic forces are pushing policy in the right direction, because if they are, politics can’t buck economics forever. So the most hopeful thing I can say is that economics may be creating some headwinds for bad policy. Trying to go full bore on renewables like parts of Europe have may be overreach in terms of near-term policy, but being ready to make a push on electrifying the transportation system when political winds shift may be a practical strategy. Let’s have those policies ready.

“fastest growing suburbs” vs. climate havens

A research group at University of Illinois makes population projections for US cities (suburbs? municipalities? this is a little unclear from the article) through 2100, and the top 40 hits are in the metro areas outside Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Oklahoma City, Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Riverside (greater greater Los Angeles), Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Denver, Boise, Fargo. These would seem to be heat, drought, flood, and fire prone areas, so this does not square with the idea that disaster-driven insurance rate increases will force mass population movements out of these areas.

Part of the answer to the insurance paradox is that political pressure causes states to set up “high risk pools” initially intended to assist small numbers of highly vulnerable homeowners, and the scope of these tends to creep up over time. This has particularly happened in Florida, although Florida has taken steps to move people out of their program recently. Another piece of the puzzle is that a big factor in private insurance rates is not disasters but credit scores, and this “mutes the market signals”. I tend to think that insurance companies, evil or at least amoral as they are, know what they are doing in terms of the math, and credit scores must be highly correlated with claims and losses. They also probably have no reason to take a long term view because they can drop policies any time they want as conditions worsen. Mortgage companies might have something to say about this, but remember that they are implicitly government subsidized for the most part.

the “military-digital complex”

The first time I heard this term was in this post from Naked Capitalism, but it sounds right. The article focuses on Palantir and an “alliance” between the US government and tech companies (particularly Palantir) and the Israeli government and tech companies. Palantir does indeed seem sinister. The events in Xinjiang were the first time I had heard of the idea of “social credit scores” to track and control large masses of people, and the events in Gaza take this concept to a new level of (I’m just going to say it) abhorrent violence and immorality.

I read a book once, and I can’t remember or find the title, making the point that these systems for ranking and controlling people go back to at least the Roman and Spanish Inquisitions. If you think about it, the religious authorities of the time would have been the only ones (in their society I mean) with access to the technology and skills needed, such as paper, quills, ink, and literacy. Move on to Tsar, Gestapo, Stasi, and J. Edgar Hoover, and similar ends were accomplished with typewriters and file folders. So it was probably inevitable that modern computerized database technology, and now machine learning technology, would take this to a new level.

And these technologies have many peaceful democratic and economic uses, so we would not want to put this genie back in the bottle even if we could. I also think that as cyber- and bio-weapons of mass destruction become increasingly accessible and dispersed in many more hands, this kind of surveillance will become necessary to manage these risks, which are existential. So the only real options here are to have political controls on the misuse of these technology in democratic societies, and to have updated and strengthened international institutions akin to the nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons control regimes of the past. At the moment, of course, it seems we are going down a dark path of increasingly sinister domestic surveillance with weakening democratic controls, along with weakening international controls. And I don’t know that governments focused on misusing these technologies to oppress their own citizens are going to be the ones most effective at also using them to manage the existential risks.

The International Atomic Energy Agency does in fact have a new(ish) AI-powered surveillance system called MOSAIC designed by…Palantir.

The Palantir, of course, was a crystal ball that figures in the Lord of the Rings. Created by the wise elves, who sure were somewhat elitist and mildly racist, but had the best interests of us common humans at heart overall. But the Palantir fell into the wrong hands and was misused by the forces of darkness. Only wizards and hobbits can save us now.

revisiting the Hindenburg

I always assumed that everyone on board the Hindenburg when it exploded over new Jersey in 1937 died. But in fact, there were 97 people on board and 35 of them died. That’s a tragedy, but slightly less tragic in terms of loss of life than I thought.

The U.S. military made its own experiments with airships, and many of them went much, much worse than that. The American versions tended to use helium, so they didn’t explode, but they just couldn’t be controlled well in storms. Weather forecasting and communications were much less far along then than we take for granted now, so people trying to fly these things were often taken by surprise and a lot of them crashed with people dying horrifically from falls, impacts and drowning. This long article from a site called The Atavist goes through this disturbing history.

https://itoldya420.getarchive.net/amp/media/ymca-building-akron-ohio-ad735f

Mullets are back!!!

In truly important fashion news, mullets are making a comeback. While looking at mullets is enjoyable, reading (AI generated?) articles about them is even more enjoyable. Even just reading the headlines is enjoyable. Here are a couple from a site called Fashion Beans.

Subtle Mullets That Master the Art of Tactical Hairstyles

Professional Mullets With Elegant Style for the Modern Office

The professional mullet is a refined take on the classic mullet, tailored for the modern man who desires a balance between edgy and elegant. This hairstyle typically features a medium to long length at the back, gradually tapering towards the sides and top for a polished look. The texture is smooth with a slight wave, achieved through careful layering. This style suits those with oval, square, or diamond face shapes and works well with medium to thick hair. Differing from its wilder 80s cousin, this version combines the mullet’s rebellious spirit with a professional finish, making it suitable for both formal and casual occasions. In recent fashion, it stands out as a bold statement while remaining workplace appropriate.

Country Mullet Inspiration for a Fresh Look