Monthly Archives: December 2023

Heronry:

A heronry, sometimes called a heron rookery, is a breeding ground for herons. [Wikipedia]

Noted in this video by Animalogic.

Kevin Frazier on Lawfare talks about a new right – the right to reality:

New technologies pose new risks that require new rights. The right to privacy emerged when the camera made private affairs public. The right to be forgotten took root when data shared online for a specific purpose for a finite time became a permanent part of social history. Now, with the spread and evolution of artificial intelligence (AI), there is a need for a right to reality—broadly, a right to unaltered or “organic” content.

He sees social media content as categorizable, from

Class 1: Content would have no or negligible risks of having been created, altered, or informed (that is, based on AI-led research) by AI tools. This class would constitute “organic” content, which is written by humans based on research conducted by humans.

to

Class 4: Content would have a high risk of having been created or altered by AI tools. Both classes 3 and 4 would qualify as “artificial” content.

and that social media platforms should clearly label all entries using one of these categories.

Social media platforms and certain publishers will protest against this proposal if it gains traction, but it’s worthwhile because we’re not likely to ever see an article with a byline of AI Content Generator. That is, bylines, or authors, are a part of the message of any article: It provides context to the attentive reader concerning biases, stated and unstated, assumptions, ideologies, and several other factors.

It’ll be interesting to see if this is recognized over the next five years.

Vernacular architecture:

Vernacular architecture can be defined as a type of local or regional construction, using traditional materials and resources from the area where the building is located. Consequently, this architecture is closely related to its context and is aware of the specific geographic features and cultural aspects of its surroundings, being strongly influenced by them. For this reason, they are unique to different places in the world, becoming even a means of reaffirming an identity.

Given such unique features, the definition of vernacular architecture may become somewhat unclear. Driven by this dilemma, Paul Oliver writes about the need for a more refined definition of the term in his bookBuilt to Meet Needs: Cultural Issues in Vernacular Architecture (2006), part of a project entitled Encyclopedia of Vernacular Architecture of the World. His research has led to the definition of vernacular architecture as an architecture that encompasses the peoples’ dwellings and other constructions, relating to their respective environments and resources, usually built by the owners or the community, using traditional techniques. It is built to meet specific needs, accommodate the values, economy, and lifestyles of a specific culture. [ArchDaily]

Noted in “ANCIENT ELEMENTS OF COOL,” Philip Kennicott and Sima Diab, WaPo:

Meanwhile, in Cairo, millions of air conditioners churn in the midday sun, people hang sheets and table clothes to shade their concrete balconies, and take the stairs to avoid being caught in elevators during a blackout. The old technologies embedded in vernacular architecture are apparently of little interest in Egypt, where Dubai often seems to be the architectural and lifestyle fantasy of the privileged and cosmopolitan. Architecture students who want to make buildings sensitive to climate change tend to look to modern, westernized green building technologies rather than their own traditions, which is frustrating to architects and teachers like Khaled Tarabieh.

It’s really a fascinating article, inspiring fugitive thoughts of building a new home not requiring an air-conditioner nor, if possible, a furnace. But would I want to live in a mud walled structure? I dunno.

Former Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ):

NBC News reports on a noteworthy maneuver:

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., announced Wednesday that she’ll be seeking the GOP nomination next year in a neighboring congressional district that’s solidly Republican, instead of her district where she eked out a win against a Democratic opponent during the 2022 midterms.

Boebert said she would be running in Colorado’s 4th Congressional District, where fellow Republican Rep. Ken Buck previously announced he would not seek re-election. Last year, Boebert won a second term representing the 3rd Congressional District, beating her Democratic opponent by less than 600 votes. [NBC News]

I think it’s clear that Boebert has made herself unelectable in her current District, which is Colorado District 3, with her pronouncements, her antics, and attempts to cover up and otherwise justify said antics, and so she’s moving to District 4, which has an open seat, although the primary will be crowded and includes at least one former member of the Colorado legislature.

But the question is whether Boebert has poisoned the District 3 well? That is, has exposure to her antics made District 3 general voters aware of the extremism and amateurism of the Republicans? I think we can expect that the GOP nominee in District 3 will be far-right, since they previously nominated Boebert. Will the general voter in District 3 become more refined in their voting habits and end up not voting, or voting for the Democratic candidate, whoever that might be? Or will they revert to their historical pattern of favoring the Republican candidate by seven or so points in Colorado District 3?

That potential shift is, I’m sure, of great interest to political strategists and demographers.

Ophanim:

The ophanim (Hebrew: אוֹפַנִּים ʼōp̄annīm, ‘wheels‘; singular: אוֹפָן ʼōp̄ān), alternatively spelled auphanim or ofanim, and also called galgalim (Hebrew: גַּלְגַּלִּים galgallīm, ‘spheres, wheels, whirlwinds‘; singular: גַּלְגַּל galgal), refer to the wheels seen in Ezekiel‘s vision of the chariot (Hebrew merkabah) in Ezekiel 1:15–21. One of the Dead Sea scrolls (4Q405) construes them as angels; late sections of the Book of Enoch (61:10, 71:7) portray them as a class of celestial beings who (along with the Cherubim and Seraphim) never sleep, but guard the throne of God. In Christian angelology, they are one of the choirs (classes) of angels, and are also called Thrones. [Wikipedia]

Never sleep? I’d expect them to be insane. Noted in this video.

It’s quite one thing to use publicly published material for personal purposes. It’s quite another to use it to make money:

The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft on Wednesday over the tech companies’ use of its copyright articles to train their artificial intelligence technology, joining a growing wave of opposition to the tech industry’s using creative work without paying for it or getting permission. [WaPo]

And that material is critical to OpenAI’s product. The defense?

Costs are not always monetary, but hurt nearly as much. From NewScientist (9 December 2023) comes the story of another valuable resource being used:

Buying or selling bitcoin uses 16,000 litres of clean water for every single transaction, which could exacerbate existing droughts around the world. While the energy consumption and carbon emissions produced by bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have been well studied, this is the first assessment of its water use and wider environmental impact.

Of course, the water doesn’t disappear; it’s generally used to cool computers or the power plants generating the electricity used by the computers. But still, Alex de Vries, the author of the article, makes a bold statement:

While bitcoin’s water consumption is a huge environmental problem, it pales in comparison with its energy demands, says de Vries. “The mining devices are effectively just generating random numbers all day long, and they just throw them all away and nothing – nothing – useful comes out,” he says.

I’ll guess the cryptocurrency fans will be unhappy to see such a statement.

Argos, builder of Jason’s ship, had to take his wife, Hildegard, with him everywhere, mostly because she hadn’t any arms. She loved to watch over his shoulder as he worked.

Jason and the Argonauts (1963) tells part of the story of Jason of the Heroic Age, heir to the throne of Thessaly, a kingdom invaded by King Pelias of Iolcus. It is Pelias who kills Jason’s father and sister in an invasion following a divine prophecy. But the avarice in Pelias’ heart finds a competitor in fear, fear instilled by another of these damn prophecies, which states that the one-sandaled man shall, in turn, kill Pelias.

Naturally, it’s Jason behind the legend, rescuing Pelias from divine skullduggery while losing a sandal in the process.

But Pelias is clever, giving to Jason both honor and encouragement in finding the legendary Golden Fleece. Jason, in turn, cleverly proclaims an athletic competition to select who shall accompany him; this is all quite satisfying from a storytelling point of view, as at least one competitor is quite clever; too bad he is wasted later. Once Jason and his crew are under way, they face various challenges, both from the divine and from monsters, generally resulting from various morality tests set by the Gods.

Which is all very interesting, as the central quest of the story concerns, to be bald, theft, the theft of a golden, magical fleece that is currently the property of the king of Colchis; nor is there an inevitable and indisputable penalty for this thievery.

Have at it, boys!

For the interested observer of our relations with the Divine, this can be complex. The King of Colchis, besides employing a six-headed dragon, uses its teeth, once it’s been slain, to call up the animated skeletons of those the dragon has slain to chase after Jason; thus, the king has a positive relationship with the Divine. Then there’s Pelias, and, by implication and by tradition, the other kings of this and following Ages who sit their thrones through Divine grace. Even Jason has a relationship, perhaps a bit mixed, with the Divine.

But it’s Jason who gives a foreshortened rant about the positive aspects of expelling the Divine from human affairs, even as he benefits from the attentions of Hera and Poseidon, even, arguably, Zeus himself. Importantly, Hera may help Jason only five times, and after that she may only watch, but Jason’s adventure, aka thievery, is successful even after interventions from the Gods cease, as Jason slays the dragon without assistance, and, at the loss of a couple of men, escapes the clutches of the animated skeletons.

It subtly suggests humanity is ready to move out from underneath the shielding umbrella of the Gods, or their annoying meddling, depending on your viewpoint.

The story itself is hardly authentic to old Greek mythology, so don’t use it as an authoritative source. That said, it has satisfying aspects to it: Defeating Talos has fascinating hints as to earlier mythologies; the rescue of Phineas is clever enough; and Jason’s solution to the attack of the animated skeletons is inspired. The special effects are from the legendary Harryhausen, the cinematography is beautiful, and audio more than adequate.

It has a certain cheesy flavor to it, though, and it ends before Jason returns to Thessaly to avenge his father with no sequel evident, so I shan’t recommend it, but some critics might. If you’re a Patrick Troughton completist, then have fun trying to pick him out without cheating; my Arts Editor was flabbergasted.

The punditry has been all atwitter, if you will, about former President Trump talking about immigrants poisoning the national blood. Here’s Steve Benen:

The former president spoke a few hours ago with Hugh Hewitt, a prominent conservative host, who noted the “critics” are drawing parallels between Trump’s rhetoric about immigrants “poisoning the blood” of the United States, and Hitler using comparable language about Germany. “Do you have anything like that in mind when you say ‘poisoning our blood’?” Hewitt asked.

“No, and I never knew that Hitler said it, either, by the way,” Trump replied, before quickly adding that he never read “Mein Kampf.”

It may be true that Hitler said something similar – but it ignores a simple genetic truth:

Inbreeding is bad for the health, physically or metaphorically, of both families and societies. Just consider the lessons of the Western monarchies, which, at their worst, indulged in intra-family marriages and breeding in order to “conserve” the blood. Did this work? No. The Habsburgs are a prime example, with their hold on power extinguished by intellectually incompetent family members inheriting their royal privilege and power, and fumbling it away – or, at best, dying without issue. The failings of “pure blood” are well-known; indeed, farmers will put their hands up and talk about it.

I suspect a competent historian could make a similar argument about the internal social dynamics of monarchical families afflicted with blood paranoia.

So these pundits are missing a real opportunity to bang Trump’s head into the traditional wall on this issue; indeed, they’re following his lead, as Hitler is often a losing issue.

But put up a picture of a Habsburg and the terrible performance of the later generations, and then ask Trump why he wants to condemn the United States to that.

Or is it really just about farcical eroticism?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022), the sensation of 2022, is an attempt to incorporate the concept of the multiverse into a movie. The multiverse is the set of all Universes, generated by points in time where things can go one way or the other. Each Universe represents one tine of the fork. Even confined to conscious decisions by thinking creatures, the energy consumption is mind-boggling, unaddressed in this story, which tends to get in the way of enjoying it.

However, on the plus side it allows ineffectual characters to have alter-egos, as it were, who are far more skilled or adventurous or even just darn-all lucky; exploring where those characters could go is part of the fun, even as their brains metaphorically explode.

But in this meta-universe of a multi-verse, minds begin sensing what they never evolved to understand, as if an entirely new sensory apparatus was suddenly not only tacked on to one’s body, but its output routed into a brain which can barely even understand that there is a new input, much less make sense of it. For some brains, this is madness. But for one, its omniscience leads to super powers that leads to boredom and even, possibly, questions of whether morality can exist in such a situation.

In the end, this movie is a lot of fun, but if you demand coherence and plausibility from your stories, this might be a stretch. Don’t mistake: it’s well made, good acting, fascinating story, good special effects, and a sense of humor. But your cup of tea may have one of Cthulhu’s tentacles reaching about after this.

I like this proposal by Derek Bambauer and Melanie Teplinsky for imposing responsibility on software development:

As part of the National Cybersecurity Strategy, the Biden administration seeks to “develop legislation establishing liability for software products and services,” which would include “an adaptable safe harbor framework to shield from liability companies that securely develop and maintain their software products and services.” We propose that this software liability regime incorporate one safe harbor and one “inverse safe harbor.”  The first would shield software creators and vendors from liability if they follow enumerated best practices in design, development, and implementation. The second—the inverse safe harbor, or sword—would automatically impose liability on developers who engage in defined worst practices. The safe and inverse safe harbors will provide certainty to regulated entities, reduce administrative costs, and create incentives for improving security. This article describes the twin safe harbors, their policy goals, and the key design criteria for their success. [Lawfare]

OK, so I don’t much care for the terminology. Positive ‘safe harbor,’ sure. ‘Inverse safe harbor’? No. How about ‘poison pill,’ ‘irresponsible,’ or ‘your greed blinds you to everything’?

I’ll think on it, yeah.

Cosmogram:

A cosmogram depicts a cosmology in a flat geometric form.^[1] They are used for various purposes: meditational, inspirational and to depict structure — real or imagined — of the earth or universe. [Wikipedia]

Not quite what I expected, but that’s OK. Noted in “Magical Mesoamerican Relics,” Ilana Herzig, Archaeology (January/February 2024):

These types of figurines were typically produced from around 500 B.C. to A.D. 680 by the Mezcala people, who were based in an area that is now in the southwestern Mexican state of Guerrero. In their most sacred space, the Aztecs made the objects their own by embellishing them with paint and placing them in the chest as offerings to their rain god Tlaloc. “Tenochtitlan was the center of the Mesoamerican world,” says López Luján. Objects were brought from all of the provinces of the empire, and even beyond its borders. “The Mezcala figurines were considered by the Aztecs magical relics from the past,” he says. “Many of these offerings are cosmograms, or representations in miniature of the universe as conceived by the Aztecs. The chest and its contents symbolized a mythic realm known as Tlalocan which was re-created by Templo Mayor, where the rain god kept water and sustenance.”

Dr. Phillips at Spaceweather.com keeps looking up and seeing … polar stratospheric clouds:

Normally, polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) are confined inside the Arctic Circle. Only above the poles can the stratosphere become cold enough to create these rare clouds. However, during this week’s outbreak of PSCs, the clouds have spilled out of the Arctic to places they are seldom seen. This morning, Ian Carstairs photographed them over Harleston, Norfolk, UK:

[picture omitted, go follow the link, above]

“The display has spread south all the way to +52N,” says Nock. That’s more than 14 degrees below the Arctic Circle.

Widely considered to be the most beautiful clouds on Earth, polar stratospheric clouds are a sign of extreme cold. PSCs form when the temperature in the Arctic stratosphere drops to a staggeringly-low -85 C. Then, and only then, can widely-spaced water molecules in the dry stratosphere coalesce into tiny ice crystals. High-altitude sunlight shining through the crystals creates intense iridescent colors that rival auroras.

A later update reports sightings as far south as Liverpool in the UK. Recalling that latitude’s definition is …

In geography, latitude is a coordinate that specifies the north–south position of a point on the surface of the Earth or another celestial body. Latitude is given as an angle that ranges from –90° at the south pole to 90° at the north pole, with 0° at the Equator. Lines of constant latitude, or parallels, run east–west as circles parallel to the equator. Latitude and longitude are used together as a coordinate pair to specify a location on the surface of the Earth.

Liverpool’s latitude is 53°. For comparison and future cloud observations, Minneapolis’s latitude is 45°, or rather to the south of Liverpool. Still, I’ll try to keep an eye on the sky^[1], and maybe get lucky. They look … almost clownish. A reminder that unusual conditions sometimes lead to unusual results.

¹ Which incidentally was a tagline of the local WCCO weather service at one time.

For those who like to contemplate what should have happened vs what has happened in the last year, WaPo has a nice article telling us why we’re not in a wallowing scow caught in a rip-roaring typhoon in the Dismal Sea:

Et tu, Colorado?

Which is not to imply that Colorado was Trump’s friend until it, shockingly, wasn’t. And Colorado may be the first of many, too, rather than the implied middle of the pack. Still, who could resist?

In a stunning decision, the Colorado Supreme Court on Tuesday removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot, ruling that he isn’t an eligible presidential candidate because of the 14th Amendment’s “insurrectionist ban.” [CNN/Politics]

But yesterday’s news that the Colorado Supreme Court removed GOP candidate for President Donald J. Trump from the GOP primary ballot on the grounds that he had been involved in promoting the insurrectional activities of Jan 6, 2021 may turn out to be the key milestone in breaking not only Trump’s run to return to the White House, but even to be the nominee of the Republican Party.

Naturally, we can look at the simple facts on the ground: Colorado is a medium state in terms of population with ten Electoral College votes, while the largest State in the Union, California, has fifty four, and the smallest States, such as neighboring Wyoming, have three. If Trump cannot be on the ballot nor, if I read the 14th Amendment properly, win the Electoral votes of Colorado via a write-in campaign, an unlikely event as Colorado gave the victory to Democrat Joe Biden by 13+ points in 2020, we can presume that the votes will be voided at worst, and more likely awarded to whoever gets the most votes in Colorado, an unremarkable procedure.

But this is a myopic reading of the results of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling. Within legal circles, even those not properly within the jurisdiction of a superior court, rulings of superior courts are not only of operational importance, but the subject of intellectual curiosity. Particularly a case such as this, which, if not unique, is at least a rare bird. What are the salient features for the majority opinion? Did they convincingly negotiate this and that key objections? Is this grounded on a foundation of convincing constitutional reasoning, or is this a partisan hack-job? Did the dissenters make good points, or do they appear to be merely surly and discontented?

If the collective sentiment of the readers of a professional legal bent inclines towards the opinion that this is a well-reasoned and disinterested opinion, then Trump may anticipate several more judicial knives in the back, as other States’ judicial systems accede to suits asserting the relevance of the 14th Amendment.

Again, removal from ballots is not necessarily cogent to the electoral issue, although if Texas were to remove Trump from their ballot, one might assume it to be the end of Trump’s political career. Such an act by Texas, sensible as it may seem, is not likely.

But this is the sort of judicial result, even if the conservative wing of SCOTUS is willing to give Trump a reprieve from the knives, that will gain the attention of independents and some of the Trump base. It’ll remind them of the ghastly occurrence of January 6th, 2021, connecting the former President to a matter of profound dishonor, as it’ll be trumpeted by news media and candidates alike.

I don’t care if Trump and his allies try to use the persecution spin here, because they, along with Gingrich and Lott and Ryan and all that crew of fourth-raters, began the political war first, trying to drag their brand of crude and brutal politics into our government. The Democrats are out to get Trump? Sure. And he’s given them reason and material with which to do so, which, in other words, means he’s guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. Pundits who sputter But, but, but this will HELP him don’t get it. Sure, his bedrock supporters will be furious. But others will finally pay attention to what’s happening and maybe think. Disrupting the leading nation in the world doesn’t go down well with people who want to lead normal lives where they vote and attend meetings, or not, and have their say and don’t have people try to manipulate them.

I’m not saying it’s time to start waving goodbye. But historians may look at this ruling as the beginning of the end for a wannabe dictator whose only real skills were in propaganda and acting, not in governance.

And in case you don’t have a good feeling for the right’s propaganda machine, this article may be of interest. Just assume the left has the same thing, but on a smaller, and perhaps embarrassed, scale.

Laic:

adjective

1. Also la·i·cal. lay; secular.

noun

1. one of the laity. [Dictionary.com]

Apparently, a verbed noun. Noted in “Paris meet discusses importance of laicity for women’s rights, atheism in Islamic context,” Maryam Namazie, Counterview:

The event brought together more than 40 laic personalities, coming from the four corners of the world. They addressed different themes such as, the importance of laicity for women’s rights, atheism in the Islamic context, contemporary challenges linked to laicity and its role in preserving democracy.

NewScientist’s (24 November 2023, paywall) Matthew Sparkes has the report:

AI [artificial intelligence] models can trick each other into disobeying their creators and providing banned instructions for making methamphetamine, building a bomb or laundering money, suggesting that the problem of preventing such AI “jailbreaks” is more difficult than it seems. …

Now, Arush Tagade at Leap Laboratories and his colleagues have gone one step further by streamlining the process of discovering jailbreaks. They found that they could simply instruct, in plain English, one LLM to convince other models, such as GPT-4 and Anthropic’s Claude 2, to adopt a persona that is able to answer questions the base model has been programmed to refuse. This process, which the team calls “persona modulation”, involves the models conversing back and forth with humans in the loop to analyse these responses.

It would be interesting to see a few transcripts of such attacks, or a summary characterization of such attacks in order to understand the strategy.

Something I’ve not seen mentioned in the popular press, which is all I have to go on, is an analog to the brain exhaustion/regeneration cycle, and how it may play into human intelligence and whether it has application in AI.

Just a thought.

AI and education: was the material learned by the student or not? For those with a strictly mechanical view of education, that’s the question du jour, and should lead to the banning of AI on campus. But for those who recognize AI a la ChatGPT may be inevitable, here’s a more flexible response:

“AI is not meant to avoid opportunities to learn through structured assignments and activities.”

This line comes from the AI policy for Tom Brady’s Ole Miss education class. His students discussed the strengths and weaknesses of the tools (“strong in summarizing, editing and helping to brainstorm ideas”; “poor at creating long segments of text that are both topical and personal”), put those in the context of academic honesty and devised the rules themselves. [WaPo]

Involving the students and treating them as responsible adults means discarding, to some small extent, the hierarchy natural to humans. It’s inspiring.

But will it really work? Or will the officious rigidity inherent in some teachers wreck it?

Now it’s the turn of Rep Bob Good (R-VA), new chairman of the Freedom Caucus, who incidentally and successfully primaried Freedom Caucus Denver Riggleman (R-VA) back in the day, to earn his nomination:

Asked whether he’s [Rep Good] concerned about Trump potentially coming after him in a primary, Good said: “I respect President Trump and I look forward to having a great working relationship with him in whatever capacity,” adding that he would back Trump if he became the nominee and called him “the best president of my lifetime.” [CNN/Politics]

Given that he’s near my age, that means LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama do not measure up to Trump. To suggest the man who failed to pass, or even submit, infrastructure bills and AHCA, along with the failure of the 2017 tax reform, all while practicing daily mendacity and hypocrisy. Not to mention potential betrayal to various national adversaries.

OK, so Nixon doesn’t measure up. LBJ’s involvement in Vietnam makes him questionable. Carter’s bad luck is mitigated by his devotion to nation since. The balance? I don’t care for Bush II at all, but to suggest Trump even came close to the rest is laughable.

A friend has just introduced me to Steve ‘n Seagulls, a “Finnish bluegrass” band:

Great fun!

Dana Milbanks of WaPo is just one of many to find House Committee Chairman and Representative James Comer’s (R-SC) insistence on a closed door deposition by Hunter Biden to be, at best, questionable:

Accession:

noun

1. the act of coming into the possession of a right, title, office, etc.:
   accession to the throne.
2. an increase by something added:
   an accession of territory.

verb (used with object)

1. to make a record of (a book, painting, etc.) in the order of acquisition.
2. to acquire (a book, painting, etc.), especially for a permanent collection. [Dictionary.com]

My idea of its meaning was vague, and a little precision is precious in today’s age of people deserving this ‘n that for no particularly good reason – except that it benefits those making the assertion, perhaps, if the assertion is accepted. Noted in, both title and text, “EU leaders approve Ukraine accession talks, bypassing Orbán,” Nicolas Camut, Barbara Moens, Jacopo Barigazzi and Aitor Hernández-Morales, Politico:

While accession [into NATO membership] talks are likely to continue on for many years, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the news was “a victory of Ukraine … a victory that motivates, inspires and strengthens.” This was a historic moment for Ukraine, which has made its aspirations to join the EU known for many years.

Professor Richardson pronounced this to be devastating. I think a bit more polishing might have helped.

Still, it makes its point.