• 1 Post
  • 38 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: November 25th, 2023

help-circle




  • The world has enough for everyone’s need, just not for everyone’s greed.

    On average we humans use too much, yes. I don’t know if WWF (not the wrestling one) still does their yearly report, but anyway they used to and the only part of the world that in average was over carrying capacity was the West (the first world, the golden billion). And within countries there are also stark differences.

    Placing the blame on the poor billions of the world is at best ignorant and at worst racist (not saying that you are, but placing the blame on poor people with more pigments has been very common). Placing it on the billionaires is more fitting, though really it’s societal structure that upholds the growth obsession and produces billionaires. But at least the billionaires has power, and in general fights every attempt at making things slightly better, which makes it more fitting to blame them.






  • A song of ice and fire, or possibly its adaptation Game of Thrones.

    There is a character named Arya who goes to assassin school where they brain wash students to become " no one". In the books this grant the ability to pretend to be someone else, and with some magic they can also change their looks. In the TV series it’s that plus Kung Fu fighting. The books were better (Hollywood can’t compete with the power of your imagination)


  • I am not an expert, but I did take a couple of semesters of history, and I find him rather annoying.

    Somebody who should have been infuriated was Manuel Eisner, who wrote the paper Long-Term Historical Trends in Violent Crime. It’s a really good paper, and I have seen Pinker misquote it, so he can’t claim ignorance.

    Eisner’s argument, which I find persuasive, is that it was not the state power increase as such that decreased private violence. Because if that was the case, southern Europe wouldn’t have lagged as much as it did. Rather it was the transformation of the nobility from personally very violent knights and lords, to officers and bosses who wields state violence. And that happened at different times, matching the decline in private violence. With the nobility no longer needing personal violence, it goes down. Quite different from Pinker’s take.

    And then there is the question of where that state capacity for violence was wielded. I don’t think Pinker includes Queen Victoria in his rouge gallery, yet the famines in India killed about as many as the ones in the Soviet Union and Communist China, and those are usually counted as state violence.

    On the rise and fall of violent crime in the west during the 70ies and 80ies, there has been many candidates, but most fall away because they can’t explain it both in western Europe and the US. One good candidate is leaded gasoline leading to lead poisoned babies growing up and becoming more violent in the crucial young adult age. It matches, but I haven’t seen any proper attempts to really test it, by for example comparing cities to the countryside.


  • From what I have read, it can be a support as long as:

    • It is trained on local data, from the machine and procedures normally used.
    • The accuracy is regularly tested (because any variation in the indata, whether from equipment or procedures changes the input data).
    • It is understood as a tool that gives suggestions for the radiologist, not a replacement.

    Of course, it cannot be better than the best radiologists around. So the question is if it is worth it, compared with for example hire more staff.


  • The Golem and The Golem at large are two excellent little books about how science and technology actually works. History of science, so heavy on examples (as the historical subjects tend to be) and light on theory. Several examples of what today would be pseudo science but was treated seriously at its time, because they didn’t know what we consider basic knowledge (and you can’t get it from first principle…)

    Good for anyone interested in science or technology, but perhaps particularly useful for the cultists (if they can be persuaded).


  • Philanthropy can’t change the power structures, philanthropy is a band aid that soothe the conscience of the philanthropist.

    Aaron and assorted developers can’t give the villagers power, because they only have power in relation to the villagers, not in relation to the world trade system. If they want to give the villagers power they need to change the system that gives the villagers a fraction of their earnings per hour.

    But then you are back to the usual options. Thirty years of boredom, trying to change the system from within? Protest world leaders and get beaten by police for your troubles (or even sentenced for destruction of police equipment by smashing your face into it)? Join a communist party and play spot the fed?

    I guess it’s better to join a philanthropy cult, where billionaires can pay you to hang out in a castle and discuss the problems with the poor over some overpriced ethanol.



  • I once saw what I think was a BBC show where an Englishman visited cool tribes and lived with them. Tough, outdoorsman.

    The only episode I saw he was in Mongolia and it had what I think was unintentional humour. The local vet - who had been the local party representative during the Communist era and now held some other title - placed him in a family that could need a hand during migration, as their teenage daughter had a disability. So on he went on horseback and he made it there with just a bunch more pauses then the Mongolians would have preferred. But once there, the best his hosts could say about his efforts to help was “Well, he is strong. And he is trying.”

    By the looks of it, the Mongolians could not believe how a big, strong guy could be so utterly useless.