Monthly Archives: September 2016

Andray Abrahamian on 38 North gives a lesson on understanding reports about North Korea:

But in trying to distinguish truth from fiction about rumored happenings in North Korea, it is worth taking a moment to consider how news about the North is produced in South Korea and picked up by global news organizations. There are three relevant issues: South Korea is in a state of war and competition with North Korea; journalists in South Korea are very comfortable basing stories off of single, anonymous sources; and foreign media organizations are desperate for page views and thus happy to repeat dramatic rumors about the DPRK [North Korea]. In this context, one should be suspicious of rumors from this information supply chain, which encourages sensationalism at every step and offers little reward for ensuring credibility.

I wonder if the pressure in the last case would be eased if there was a substantial switch in funding from the current advertising-based model to a subscription model. His conclusion?

Consequently, as we think about rumors about North Korea, we need to take all these caveats into account and temper our conclusions appropriately. For those trying to parse which rumors are true and which aren’t, it might be best to think of them as analogous to Schrödinger’s cat. They’re probably true. But also probably not.

When scientists speculate about alien civilizations, they occasionally reference Dyson Spheres, constructs which completely encapsulate a star for the purpose of gathering its entire energy output. But to what purpose is the energy to be applied? That’s less often addressed.

But now NewScientist (27 August 2016) may have inadvertently supplied an answer.

The machine-learning boom is another problem. The amount of energy silicon-based computers use is set to soar as they crunch more of the massive data sets that algorithms in this field require. The Semiconductor Industry Association estimates that, on current trends, computing’s energy demands will outstrip the world’s total energy supply by 2040.

OK, so it’s nearly certain that we’ll find a way around to this problem, and that Dyson sphere secretly planned by the NSA? Not necessary. But it’s interesting as a way to illustrate our interest in machine learning and the associated Big Data boom. Whether the processing requirements will remain on this straight line will correlate with whether or not we find machine learning to be useful.

Another thought – if a true Artificial Intelligence (AI) was developed, what would its power requirements be? Would it simply be an assemblage of machine learning algorithms operating on an immense database? That sounds expensive in energy terms, depending on how you define an AI.

But speaking for myself, I wonder if our own constrained personal energy systems, even as profligate as we seem to be at this time (i.e., world-wide obesity rates rising), are the source of our rather odd mental processes. Our memories are hardly ever literal, but rather constructed and often confabulated. Our calculating capabilities are usually quite limited, and -ahem- we create computers to better perfect those abilities. Our reasoning is often flawed, and we’ve made a celebrity out of a fictional character known for his capabilities in the area of logic. Would a mobile AI be similarly constrained? While I’m sure these thoughts have occurred to experts in the field, I have not kept up – which either forces me to do some research, or just speculate irresponsibly.

I think I’ll go with the latter today.

NewScientist (27 August 2016) provides a picture of climate change sure to motivate. I shan’t show it here, due to copyright concerns, but I provide this link.

Yeah.

Not exactly the apocalyptic view I was expecting, either.

protophobic X boson:

They found that, to be consistent with everything we have seen in experiments designed to characterise the known forces of nature, [this hypothetical dark photon] must interact not with protons and electrons, as a conventional photon does, but with the neutrons inside the beryllium nuclei. This is a property beyond the scope of physics as we know it, which might explain how the particle slipped by unseen in previous dark matter searches. Feng’s team call the interloper a “protophobic X boson“. [NewScientist, 27 August 2016, paywall]

Possibly seen while firing protons at a thin sheaf of lithium-7 in order to make unstable beryllium-8, which then decayed with unexpected results. Only neutrons, huh? This will be interesting if it’s confirmed.

Regarding the bees’ affinity for garlic chives, a reader remarks:

Yes, they do. Especially bumble bees. We have a lot of garlic chives. Bees also seem to really like Korean mint, of which we have perhaps but one volunteer.

What might be Korean mint? That is, how does it differ from regular mint?

Button acquired at the Minnesota State Fair

Because, of course, it’s true. No doubt repeated thousands of times over the Web, but it makes me both laugh and cry at the irresponsibility of the GOP.

In case you didn’t yet read Elena Chachko’s article on Lawfare (“Gaza Aid Workers, Hamas, and the Immunity of UN Officials“) yet (I’ve referenced it here and here), I note she also quickly references a problem NGOs face when hiring local personnel – diversion of funds:

On August 4, Israel announced that it had indicted Mohammed al-Halabi, the head of the Gaza branch of the international NGO World Vision, for diverting tens of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid funds to support Hamas’ military activities (see also here). According to the indictment and the statement of the Israeli Security Agency (ISA), al-Halabi is a longtime Hamas operative, who infiltrated World Vision in 2005 with the aim of exploiting the organization’s resources to assist Hamas.

During his interrogation, al-Halabi admitted that 60% of the annual budget allocated by World Vision to the Gaza branch for humanitarian work was re-routed to Hamas’ military organs. In addition, al-Halabi has transferred a variety of goods ordered for World Vision directly to Hamas, including materials and equipment used in the construction of Hamas strongholds and underground “terror tunnels.” The indictment makes clear that al-Halabi was well aware of the fact that he was cooperating with Hamas, and mentions incidents in which he had trained with Hamas and provided information about the Israeli side of the border. According to the ISA statement, as a result of al-Halabi’s actions, the vast majority of World Vision humanitarian aid in Gaza was allocated to Hamas operatives and their families, while the rest of Gaza’s population hardly received any aid at all. Al-Halabi’s trial began on Tuesday, and it is not open to the public.

AL-Monitor  adds some concrete numbers:

This equated to $7.2 million per year, including about $1.5 million given in cash to Hamas combat un its [sic].

World Vision, which employs tens of thousands of people globally, said its programmes were subject to “regular internal and independent audits, independent evaluations” to avoid aid misuse.

According to The Days of Palestine (amongst others), World Vision disputes Israel’s story:

Funny, how could Hamas penetrate into this American organisation and plant its members deep inside and they become managers?

Believing this Israeli heresy will lead us to discover in the very near future that the UN Secretary General Ban ki-Moon is a Hamas operative and he funnelled all the UN funds to this Palestinian group.

Anyway, World Vision condemned the Israeli detention of its manager in Gaza and called for all people to pray for him and his family.

It also called on the Israeli authorities to release him or allow him access to legal support. “We also call on authorities to respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and proceed fairly and objectively on the presumption of innocence,” World Vision said in a statement.

World Vision described Al-Halabi as “widely respected and well regarded humanitarian, field manager and trusted colleague of over a decade.”

It also said: “He has displayed compassionate leadership on behalf of the children and communities of Gaza through difficult and challenging times, and has always worked diligently and professionally in fulfilling his duties.”

Interestingly, I was unable to find any mention of this incident on the World Vision web site.

Fast forwarding my way through Alienator (1989) was my only hope for surviving this amateurish piece of garbage. From mostly wretched amateur acting (with exceptions for Jan-Michael Vincent and well-respected character actor Leo Gordon), to a story more told than shown, through an illogical plot convoluted for no reason, characters who suddenly sprout powers when it’s convenient, and terminating at special effects that are buffoonish at best (including a rip-off of a Star Wars light saber, which ends in quite the gory climax for an obscure character that, just to make it a triple-play, has a more than passing resemblance to James Doohan of Star Trek fame), the attentive viewer is left aghast at what might have been an interesting movie. Juvenile, stereotypical characters, bad segues, lapses in story logic, the best I can make of it is that someone promised a movie vehicle to Jan-Michael Vincent, and they delivered some film with some shadows on it.

And then, just for fun, the channel on which it was broadcast, Comet, found it not only necessary to cut out the nastier language, but also to blur out the hips of the female assassin sent to kill the escaped prisoner. Whatever for? She may be skimpily clad, but clad she is. And then they’d blink it on and off as she moved through shadow, which just evoked some choked laughter.

Folks, don’t bother with this one unless you’re a Jan-Michael Vincent completist. Or possibly a Fox Harris completist, who apparently appears in this film, although I have no idea which role he plays. I ran out of interest.

Looks painful.

From Elena Chachko’s article published on Lawfare:

“[t]here was no diversion of rubble from its designated location to Hamas”.

Elena Chachko considers the problem of immunity for United Nations workers in Lawfare (which is celebrating its 6th anniversary today!):

Perhaps in light of the diverging factual accounts, the UN Office of Legal Affairs intervened late last week in an attempt to block the proceedings against al-Bursh. The OLA said in a letter to Israel’s mission to the UN that al-Bursh is entitled to immunity as a UN official. According to the letter, al-Bursh “enjoys immunity from personal arrest or detention, as well as immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written and acts done in performance of his mission.”  The OLA therefore requested that al-Bursh be released and that all legal proceedings be suspended, to allow the UN secretary General to determine whether al-Bursh should be granted immunity. The letter also called on Israel to allow UN officials to investigate, and to provide access to al-Bursh while he remains in prison.

The UN’s demand was not well received by Israel, to say the least (see also here and here). Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said that lawyers have examined the claim that al-Bursh should be granted immunity, and concluded that it was unsubstantiated. He stressed that “it is outrageous that a man assisting a terror organization could benefit from U.N. immunity”.

What are the accusations against al-Bursh?

… on August 9 Israel announced that Wahid al-Bursh, a United Nations Development Program (UNDP) worker, had been indicted for using his position at the UNDP to provide material assistance to Hamas. According to the ISA, al-Bursh was approached in 2014 by a senior Hamas operative, who directed him to carry out his responsibilities in a manner that would benefit Hamas. Subsequently, al-Bursh used his influence over the UNDP rubble removal project, which was established in the aftermath of the 2014 Gaza hostilities, to divert construction materials that helped build a military naval port for Hamas in northern Gaza. He is accused of diverting construction materials from rehabilitation projects in Gaza to Hamas sites in other cases as well.

Given the deadly enmity of Hamas for Israel, it’s easy to understand why Israel wishes to continue to press charges. At the same time, however, it’s incumbent on the United Nations to ensure proper process is followed; if it does not, the morale of its staff plummets and it risks ineffectivity – thus the letter. As less than an amateur, my guess is that Israel should agree to delay the trial, but since al-Bursh can be considered a flight risk, to leave him imprisoned, and to encourage the United Nations to expedite its investigation. So long as Israel controls al-Bursh, it may or may not pay attention to United Nations directives as it sees fit.

al-Bursh would seem to be worthy of United Nations protection in inverse correlation to the extent that he was corrupted by the alleged Hamas operative; so much is clear. Thus, if the United Nations decides to direct that immunity be stripped from al-Bursh, they are making an admission of probable guilt for al-Bursh. Can the United Nations investigation be considered authoritative? If so, can Israel use it in its subsequent prosecution?

U. N. Flag

And the larger issue is that of loyalties. How much can the United Nations, a higher level synthetic entity, count on loyalty to itself from its staff, and how much can it expect itself to be used by its staff for the ends of other entities, either at the state level or even lower? Indeed, is it even corruption when a member of the staff is attempting to benefit some other entity which has far more legitimate history behind it than the United Nations, which has only existed since shortly before the end of World War II?

As one might expect, there are more minor parties running candidates than the media talk about, so this election patter from Zoltan Istvan, found in NewScientist (27 August 2016), is new to me (although it occurs to me that I don’t get out enough):

SOME scientists question the value of mixing politics with science. Not so at the US Transhumanist Party. We’re sick and tired of seeing career politicians – nearly half of them lawyers – control national science agendas and budgets.

We want passionate pro-science politicians to determine scientific policy, spending and research ethics in our nation. So we decided to get involved ourselves.

I formed the US party, the first of its kind, in October 2014. There are now others around the globe. Our motto is: “Putting science, medicine, and technology at the forefront of US politics.” I am the party’s 2016 presidential candidate.

My campaign’s main job is to set out science and technology policy from a pro-innovation point of view – not one shaped by religion, ethnicity, culture or history. I think the world’s problems can be best solved by scientific or technological solutions. Our top pledge is to reduce the size of the US military and spend the money on science and medical research.

We are also trying to spread awareness of the increasing pace at which science and technology are changing our world – from gene editing to robots taking jobs.

Unfortunately for him, I suspect too many otherwise sympathetic voters see that it’s their duty to vote for Hillary in order to save America from Trump. Here’s the Transhumanist Party website. From its Platform page:

5) Implement policy for the phasing out of all individual taxes based on robots taking most jobs in the next 25 years. Advocate for a flat tax until we reach that point.

6) Advocate for morphological freedom (the right to do anything to your body so long as it doesn’t harm others). Defend genetic editing and other radical science that can transform healthcare.

7) Advocate for partial direct digital democracy using available new technologies.

8) End costly drug war and legalize recreational drugs

9) Create government where all politician’s original professions are represented equally (the government should not be run by 40% lawyers when lawyers represent less than 10% of the country’s jobs)

10) Significantly lessen massive incarcerated population in America by using innovative technologies to monitor criminals outside of prison. Spend saved money on education.

#9 tramples over the citizen’s right to choose, not to mention may lessen the efficiency of the elected officials since this just offers an even easier route for incompetent power-seekers to gain high office. With regard to #10, #8 would reduce the imprisoned population, and perhaps some more reforms would also be of help – not to mention working on reducing poverty and hatred.

Bees working the garlic chives.

Fedscoop takes note of an announcement:

Shawn Turskey [Executive Director for U.S. Cyber Command] told a small audience of predominantly security software vendors and government officials the command unit is looking for tools that can be definitively traced back to the United States military, diverging from the ultra-stealth exploits often used at bureaus like the National Security Agency.

“In the intelligence community you never want to be caught, you want be low and slow, you never really want to be attributed. There’s a different paradigm from where you are at in the intelligence community,” said Turskey, who leads the Department of Defense’s capability and tool development project within Cyber Command.  “But there’s another space over here, where maybe you definitely want to be louder, where attribution is important to you and you actually want the adversary to know.”

The development of “loud” offensive cyber tools, able to possibly deter future intrusions, represent a “different paradigm shift” from what the agency has used to in the past, Turskey said.

Dr. Herb Lin asks some questions, via Lawfare, with this amongst them:

4. Is enabling a national attribution marker required by the laws of war?  Fighter planes and cruise missiles carry a U.S. insignia; soldiers wear U.S. uniforms.  But bullets do not.  Is a cyber weapon more like a platform or soldier, or more like a bullet?

These cyberwarriors¹ of which they speak are soldiers, but the end result, while non-kinetic, non-explosive, is more like a bullet. Which means that branding the final attack instrument is a tactical question, not a legal question, at least in my pragmatic view. I suppose someone can make a law requiring attacks to be branded – but who will pay attention? Laws’ efficacy, particularly in war, lies to some extent in its probability of effective enforcement, and also in your fear that if you use some illegal tactic, so will your enemy. So far, I’d say the probability of enforcing such a law is low, and the fear of attack from an anonymous source, vs a known source, isn’t all that significant.

¹“Cyberwarriors” made me tired even before I read it.

While this isn’t really about tall wood, it is about wood. Treehugger‘s Lloyd Alter covers the 2015 winner of the Canadian Wood Council’s Wood Design Award – which didn’t use fire-resistant cross-laminated timber, but instead nail-laminated timber:

Whenever one builds with wood, the question of fire protection comes up. The floors here are built up out of 2×8 Douglas Fir, engineered to have a sacrificial charring layer. There are also sprinklers throughout.

There is a lot of other interesting stuff going on in this building:

The building is heated and cooled through a series of 20 geothermal wells optimized by a ground-source heat pump system. Geothermal heat pumps are located between two large thermal storage reservoirs, limiting the number of heat pumps required and reducing electrical use. Heat pumps operate during off-peak hours to cool the reservoirs, and during the day, when demand peaks, the extra energy stored in the reservoirs is transferred to the building.

Nail laminated timber is described by the ReThink Wood website:

Nail Laminated Timber (NLT or Nail-lam) is created by fastening individual dimensional lumber, stacked on edge, into one structural element with nails. In addition to being used in floors, decks and roofs, nail-lam panels have been used for timber elevator and stair shafts. NLT offers a consistent and attractive appearance for decorative and exposed to view applications. Sheathing can be added to one top side to provide a structural diaphragm and allows the product to be used as a wall panel element.

Some fun with Hostas.

The Haunted Palace (1963) follows the ambivalent fate of a man, Kerwin (Vincent Price) who has become a necromancer in service to the “elder gods”, who wish to resume their positions of dominance. Much to his dismay, he is caught in flagrante delicto, quite literally, and is set ablaze by the local New Englanders. A great curse is pronounced as he discovers his supernatural patrons cannot protect him.

110 years later his descendant, Charles Dexter Ward, returns to the site of the crime, lured by the inheritance of a deed to the hulking palace. He and his wife encounter the descendants of those who persecuted his ancestor, and they have indeed been suffering from the curse.

They proceed to the inheritance, and soon the wife sees her husband begin to change, to know things. Servants appear, of some dismaying appearance, even if their words are correct, and soon procedures are back on track to return the elder gods to their places. Vengeance occurs as part of the conversion, and soon affairs become perilous, until the descendants of the villagers arrive. Then the fate of everyone becomes ambiguous.

For all that the plot sounds creepy, the movie is not what it could have been. The musical score is clumsily applied, and the story leaves too many questions: How do the descendants of the villagers recognize Ward as a descendant of Kerwin? No pictures are easily available. What is this monster in the closet, and where did it come from? Sometimes the segues are both abrupt and almost nonsensical. And what about these elder gods? If they were so dominant, what happened to them?

In the end, too many questions crowd the mind during this movie and ruin the fine efforts of the cast. It’s intriguing, but ultimately this Lovecraft-derived movie is unsatisfying.

It appears South Carolina, in a rush to head off Zika, has exacerbated another problem. From Melissa Breyer on Treehugger.com:

Naled is a common insecticide that delivers death to mosquitoes on contact. It has been in use in the United States since 1959. Reportedly the chemical dissipates quickly enough that it is not a hazard to people. (So they say…)

For bees, it’s a different story. The neurotoxin does not discriminate between honey bees and mosquitoes; it is known to be highly toxic to the pollinators. Knowing this, with enough warning beekeepers often cover their hives before aerial spraying; conversely, many counties spray at night when honey bees are safer and not out foraging for pollen.

But without sufficient warning, the results of the recent spraying were disastrous. At Flowertown Bee Farm and Supply in Summerville, the inhabitants of 46 hives died on the spot, totaling some 2.5 million bees, writes Guarino. “Walking through the farm, one Summerville woman wrote on Facebook, was “like visiting a cemetery, pure sadness.”” There were many other losses as well.

The county claimed it gave good warning via newspaper and FB posting, and the beekeepers would have covered the hives if they’d known. It appears they need to work more closely with their agricultural community.

It’d be better if we have a vaccine for Zika, then we could skip the entire spraying activity. Until the next plague arrives.

Back in the early ’90s, I remember the pundits remarking on Bill Clinton’s most salient tactic: taking an issue owned by his opponents and making it his own. Hillary’s ripped that page right out of Bill’s book and taped it to her iPad, judging from Steve Benen’s remarks on MaddowBlog:

In her address, Mrs. Clinton championed the notion of American exceptionalism, a term that has traditionally been embraced by Republicans.

It’s hard to overstate just how eager Clinton was today to drive the point home. When her campaign distributed a transcript of her speech to reporters this afternoon, the headline read, “In Cincinnati, Clinton Touts American Exceptionalism.” A quick review of the transcript found that the Democratic presidential hopeful used the word “exceptional” eight times while speaking to the American Legion.

This was arguably the most striking: “[M]y opponent in the race has said very clearly that he thinks American exceptionalism is insulting to the rest of the world. In fact, when Vladimir Putin, of all people, criticized American exceptionalism, my opponent agreed with him saying, and I quote, ‘If you are in Russia, you don’t want to hear that America is exceptional.’ Well maybe you don’t want to hear it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true.”

Of course, that raises the question of why did Clinton lose to Obama in the primary 8 years ago? While I don’t have any clear memories of the primaries, I suspect this Clinton tactic works best with opponents who view issues as convenient ladders to power, who don’t really have a solid grip on them. Obama has demonstrated his commitment to the issues, from the ACA to ISIL, has thought through the issues to the extent possible, and plays the long, long game – a difficult proposition even for the brightest, and especially for businessmen who think quarter to quarter.

I think we have yet to see Hillary demonstrate that same commitment to the long game, but I don’t think that means she can’t. By all accounts she’s driven, smart, and very experienced. If she is, Obama should serve as one of her most important, if unofficial, advisors.

In some ways, I wonder if the GOP just decided to throw a sacrificial lamb to the wolf this time around. It’s hard to justify that statement in view of those initial 17 candidates, but I can still see it happening.

On Lawfare, Robert Chesney points out that we’ve struck the Libyan city of Sirte roughly 100 times in the last month in an effort to dislodge ISIL. In his mind, here’s the remarkable bit:

Why so little attention [in the media]?  Part of it is that Trump coverage is eating up so much media space.  Part of it is that, after fifteen years, stories of this kind just aren’t grabbing the public’s attention as easily. And part of it is that the strikes seem primarily if not exclusively to involve scenarios at or near what is passing for a “front line” between ISIL forces in Sirte and US-backed forces trying to drive them out.  But I wonder if part of the neglect also stems from the fact that we are using manned aircraft and helicopters rather than drones; it’s hard to fit the Libya story into the familiar drone-mania framing, after all.

There are other ways to read it, if you’re a partisan.

By not mentioning Obama taking decisive action against ISIL, the media narrative skews against him.

They’re against the military.

They’re for the military by not scaring off potential recruits.

More crowd my mind, but I think I’ll let them go – they tire me. Honestly, as an Irish software engineer once told me during a visit to the States, “Your country is so big! I can’t blame you for not paying attention to the rest of the world, you can’t even keep up with your own country!”

Add in a dose of inevitable provincialism, a presidential election, and I’m afraid the ugly bits of news that can be hard to understand – international politics – gets squeezed out.

I am not a Roger Corman aficionado, but I’ve seen a few Corman directorial and/or production efforts over the years, with Creature from the Haunted Sea (1961) being the last, which both horrified and made my Arts Editor and I laugh, so recently going into The Tomb of Ligeia (1964) , my main concern was lasting long enough to make an honest effort of writing the review.

Was I ever wrong.

At first, I was willing to give Vincent Price all the credit for the initial willingness to continue on. But as we made it further into the jungle of the plot, we had to admit that this film was hitting on just about all cylinders: an intriguing story (why does the coffin have a glass plate? Wait, why did the corpse open her eyes just then?) about a man and, more importantly, his wife, who considers herself his wife even when she’s dead, and how this can really creep everyone out; excellent acting from the entire cast, including the (uncredited) black cat; filmed quite nicely on location at a gorgeous English ruin, with creative cinematography.  I particularly enjoyed Roger’s work with flames, with the last sequence making me think of the fires of Hell.

However, the special effects that made the black cat into some sort of supernatural demon were horrible, as I think they resorted to getting a stuffed black cat and throwing it at the actors with abandon. And it must be said that this movie does not have an up-tempo ending, as a remake might indulge in today. It’s very measured, building on anticipation, relaxing, then creating the tension again. It’s an older style that might bore a younger, inexperienced audience, but delight those who’ve studied story-telling and appreciate this relative rarity. But then, the film is based on a short work by Edgar Allen Poe, so we would expect a high level of craft from the plot.  And this retelling of the story does not disappoint.

The climax was unforeseen and quite invigorating, as Vincent dances through fire once and again, a puppet to his wife’s needs. Who will live, who will die? Will Vincent once again burn, as in The Fall of the House of Usher (1960)? But what terrible deed did he commit in this one to deserve such a fate?  And isn’t there any legal recourse attached to the vow of  “until death do us part”?

If you like Vincent Price, see this. He does some fine work.

(With Deb White)

If you were wondering about North Korea at the Olympics, Andray Abrahamian on 38 North brings his perspective on why the North Korean athletes seemed to be shunning their free cellphones:

When the North Koreans weren’t marching in the opening ceremony with the Samsung phones given to all athletes by the Olympic partners, the media speculated it was “likely in an attempt to control their access to information. Tight control may be part of an effort to prevent defection.” The former sentence is probably true, the latter probably isn’t. The biggest reason was probably that carrying the symbol of your rival and enemy country’s greatest corporate success is a worse public relations look than not carrying them at all.

Generally, Andray didn’t much care for the coverage of North Korea during the Olympics, which isn’t surprising since it’s a sporting event covered by sports journalists – not political journalists. Still, they should have picked up on this:

The media understandably obsessed over the symbolism of a selfie taken by South Korean gymnast Lee Un-ju and North Korean gymnast Hong Un Jong: it was a heartwarming shot of two athletes from a divided country sweetly and spontaneously smiling together. To the media’s credit, they generally resisted reading too much into the selfie. But there was less reflection on how weak a symbol of unity that was, compared to Sydney in 2000, when North and South marched in the opening ceremony together under a unification flag, to a stadium-wide standing ovation. They did it again in Athens in 2004.

Now we get North Korean missile tests.