Author Archives: Hue White

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.

Our garden 8/31/2016.

Big, bad new houses get more big, bad raps on the knuckles:

McMansion (starter castles) and similarly styled though smaller houses are Ugly and Horrible, in my humble estimation. Have you seen James Howard Kunstler’s TED talk review of suburbs and this style of architecture? If not, you should: https://www.ted.com/…/james_howard_kunstler_dissects…

Most houses these days are built using one style which can be called neo-eclectic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-eclectic_architecture), but which is really just a bunch of stupid ideas thrown together to fake “impressiveness”, “style” and “taste” — and at the same time be cheap, cheap, cheap for builders to build. And if you live someplace like Minnesota where ice dams are a real problem, all those stupid, fake extra gables are just water leak problems waiting to happen.

I can’t say enough bad things about typical suburban-style building.

Take a deep breath … I’ll have to find some time to see that TED talk.

A reader expresses skepticism about returning prisons to public sector management:

The mega-prison corp’s. are big enough that I expect major lobbying to stop this, so basically I won’t believe there’ll be any change until I see significant numbers of federal prisons being “nationalized”.

If Trump or Johnson wins, I agree, but if Hillary wins then I expect trend back to public sector management to continue, as she’s taken a pledge to do so. However, via The Intercept_, it appears the CEO of the Correction Corps of America agrees with my reader:

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE of the largest private prison company in America reassured investors earlier this month that with either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton in the White House, his firm will be “just fine.” Damon Hininger, the chief executive of Corrections Corporation of America, was speaking at the REITWeek investor forum.

Private prisons have received a great deal of criticism this election cycle, first with Bernie Sanders campaigning to end for-profit incarceration, followed by Clinton taking up a similar pledge.

After The Interceptrevealed that the Clinton campaign had received campaign donations from private prison lobbyists, a number of activist groups confronted Clinton, leading her to announce that she would no longer accept the money and later declaring that “we should end private prisons and private detention centers.”

But Corrections Corporation is apparently not concerned. Asked about prospects under Trump or Clinton, Hininger argued that his company has prospered through political turnover by taking advantage of the government’s quest for lower costs.

“I would say that being around 30 years and being in operation in many, many states, and also doing work with the federal government going back to the 1980s, where you had Clinton White House, you had a Bush White House, you had Obama White House, we’ve done very, very well,” Hininger said.

“If we continue to do a good job on the quality, and with that, we can demonstrate savings both on capital voids, but also cost savings in our services, then I think we’ll be just fine,” he said.

The report goes on to note CCA was founded by the former head of the Tennessee Republican Party.

A reader finds a better phrase for counterfactual regret minimisation.

There’s already a term for this in finance and economics: it’s called lost opportunity cost.

Ah! Well, depend on software geeks to come up with new words for old concepts. The one I loathe the most: prepend. Y’all could use prefix, ya know.

The 38 North blog attempts to cover and analyze incidents and trends in North Korea. Recently they covered an activity out of the Cold War – the recurrence of a Numbers Station. Numbers Stations are shortwave radio stations which send coded messages, presumably to agents operating in other countries, and have fallen out of use with the advent of the Internet and digitally secure communications. 38 North’s Martyn Williams explores why North Korea may have resumed use of a Numbers Station:

Some are worried it signals that North Korean might be planning some type of operation, alerting its spies by sending the coded broadcast. But for that to be true, North Korean agents would have had to have been listening at the right time to take down the message, and how would they have known it was coming? Numbers haven’t been broadcast for 16 years, so have agents really spent the last decade and a half listening just in case something came across? It is possible they could have been alerted that such a message was about to be broadcast, but then when why not send the message contents over whatever communications channel was used for such an alert?

Had this been a real broadcast, interpreting the message would have relied on code books that are probably years out of date, making the whole thing all the more unlikely.

There is also a possibility the broadcast really was some sort of remote mathematics course, but that seems equally unlikely given its sudden and unexplained start.

Perhaps the most credible theory says that North Korea is trying to cause a bit of panic and confusion in Seoul. If that’s true, then mission accomplished—at least for a day or two.

But the fuss in Seoul about the return of North Korean numbers on the airwave misses an important point: South Korea itself resumed its own numbers broadcasts back in February, although the National Intelligence Service isn’t as keen to talk about those.

South Korea has a much richer recent history of using numbers stations than its northern neighbor. After all, while the Internet and digital communications have made the radio stations obsolete in the rest of the world, North Korea stands alone in the almost complete absence of technological progress. So radio remains the best and safest way for South Korea to contact its agents in the north.

Beyond what I read in Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader, I know very little about North Korea, so this is fascinating. No doubt reflective of the convoluted machinations of current Leader Kim Jong-un, does this suggest espionage activity is increasing? I’m not so incredulous concerning the use of the station for exactly what it was used by in years past – getting agents out of North Korea and into South Korea may not be as difficult as Martyn believes.

The really sad part is we may never know the truth.

Measurements of language diversity and what I’ll call communications efficiency are a slippery goal, but useful in that it’s good to understand how well we, as an amalgamated whole, can communicate. Hari Balasubramanian reviews the fascinating issues and the work of Joseph Greenberg in connection with this problem on 3 Quarks Daily:

The most basic measure Greenberg proposed is the now widely used linguistic diversity index. The index is a value between 0 and 1. The closer the value is to 1, the greater the diversity. The index is based in a simple idea. If I randomly sample two individuals from a population, what is the probability that they do not share the same mother tongue? If the population consisted of 2000 individuals and each individual spoke a different language as their mother tongue, then the linguistic diversity index would be 1. If they all shared the same mother tongue, then the index would be 0. If 1800 of them spoke language M and 200 of them spoke N, then index would be:

The anomalous signal from HD 164595 has attracted some comments and a bit more research. First the readers:

But was it just one blip?

Another: [picture not available, darn it]

On the SETI @ Home forums Eric Korpela, who saw the raw report and is listed as a project scientist for SETI @ Home, opines:

We believe a signal when

• It is persistent. It appears at the same spot in the sky in multiple observations.
• It only comes from one spot in the sky.
• If we reobserve the target, the signal is still there.

Things that add to believability

• Its frequency/period/delay does not correspond to known interference.
• Its Doppler Drift rate indicates that it is exactly frequency stable in the frame of the center of mass of the solar system
• Its properties (bandwidth, chirp rate, encoding) indicate intelligent origin.

Unfortunately the observing method used by the Russian team does not permit many of these things to be determine. 1. The signal was not persistent. 2. The signal was gone when the target was reobserved. 3. The signal frequency/period/delay cannot be determined. 4. The signal Doppler drift rate is unknown. 5. Many sources of interference, including satellites, are present in the observing band.

So it appears the initial answer for the reader is Yes, just one blip so far, and perhaps this is a lot of fuss over nothing.

Christine Lepisto @ Treehugger.com reports on research on the hominid skeleton we’ve named Lucy, 3.18 million years old, and how she may have died from a fall from a tree:

The “smoking gun” consists of a proximal humerus fracture of Lucy’s left shoulder, consistent with the type of broken bones that occur when a conscious person stretches out their arm to break a hard fall. The fractures were sharp, and splintered, not consistent with the usual fractures seen in ancient fossils. Dozens of other compressive fractures, including at the ankle, knee, and pelvis, even a broken rib, all point to a fall from a great height. Because there is no evidence that these fractures started healing, the scientists conclude that the fall occurred shortly before Lucy’s death.

I don’t get too excited about hominid discoveries and research, but this is really interesting:

What’s more: you can make up your own mind. For the first time ever, the Ethiopian National Museum provides a set of 3-D files of Lucy’s shoulder and knee for the public to download and print.

Which might be seen as another move towards the democratization of science – a dubious suggestion, to my mind. Science is already available to anyone with the intellectual chops to make it happen. But suggesting anyone with a 3D printer and an Internet connection can have a valid opinion on a subject both difficult and political is to let in those who would prefer one conclusion over another for purely ideological reasons.

But it makes me wish I had a 3D printer.

Worried that the Bradley Effect may be skewing polling results? Jon Perr on The Daily Kos covers the topic thoroughly:

If this formula sounds vaguely familiar, it should. That’s because back in the early 1990s political scientists, pundits, and the press proclaimed the existence of the “Bradley Effect” in which some white voters would lie to survey takers (and even themselves) about supporting a black candidate only to mark the ballot for his or her white opponent on Election Day. The Trump campaign, it now appears, is counting on the reverse dynamic to save it in November. …

In September 2008, the legendary Sam Wang of the Princeton Election Consortium weighed in on “The Disappearing Bradley Effect.” As more analysts suggested the polls would contain a hidden bonus for John McCain, Wang cautioned the usual conventional wisdom peddled by the likes of Ron Fournier:

Now comes a large-scale empirical study (in preprint form) by Harvard political scientist Dan Hopkins. He finds that since the mid-1990s, the Bradley effect has disappeared. His paper is a must-read…Until now, the empirical evidence for the Bradley effect rested on individual cases…Now Dan Hopkins has gathered some highly relevant information. In a recent paper he analyzes polling data and election outcomes for 133 gubernatorial and Senate races from 1989 to 2006…

Polls did show a significant Bradley/Wilder effect through the early 1990s, which includes the period when Bradley and Wilder were running for office. However, Hopkins notes that the effect then went away in races from 1996 onward. To quote the study: “Before 1996, the median gap for black candidates was 3.1 percentage points, while for subsequent years it was -0.3 percentage points.”

And there’s lots more.

On this topic Fredrik deBoer, who is taking a break – perhaps a long one – from blogging, has a last, and informed, shot at the replacement of public education with private education:

Here’s the model that the constant “online education will replace physical colleges” types advance: education is about gaining knowledge; knowledge is stored in the heads of teachers; schooling is the transfer of that knowledge from the teacher’s head to the student’s head; physical facilities are expensive, but online equivalents are cheap; therefore someone will build an Amazon that cuts out the overhead of the physical campus and connects students to teachers in the online space or, alternatively, cuts teachers out altogether and just transfers the information straight into the brains of the student.

The basic failure here is the basic model of transfer of information, like teachers are merchants who sell discrete products known as knowledge or skills. In fact education is far more a matter of labor, of teachers working to push that information into the heads of students, or more accurately, to compel students to push it into their own heads. And this work is fundamentally social, and requires human accountability, particularly for those who lack prerequisite skills.

I’ve said this before: if education was really about access to information, then anyone with a library card could have skipped college well before the internet.

Or in other words, education is not a mechanical, deterministic process, but requires processes outside of those which can be implmented by a computer. Teachers must motivate kids who’d rather be outside – or at football practice. Study groups can be exceptionally beneficial – and if it’s not convenient to form them, they may not form. Fredrik has a final thought:

Education is always getting disrupted, in the Silicon Valley mind. And though they dress it up in a million different ways, this disruption always functions the same way: by minimizing the teacher, the actual human being, whose job it is to inspire and direct and cajole and, yes, to drag students into competence. Either the teachers are replaced by an iPad or they’re forced to scale up the number of students they can teach by factors of hundreds or thousands through online technologies. One way or the other, the teacher is the problem the technology is designed to solve.

There is another way, which is to actually put our money where our mouth is, recognize that education is expensive, and that teachers themselves have value, and that mankind has cultivated human relationships of respect and guidance between teacher and student for millennia for good reason. I know a thing or two about a thing or two, and people pay me for that knowledge. But despite a culture of the autodidact, I know almost all of it because of great teaching, because teachers with patience and dedication had the time and resources to guide me to understanding. Teachers are not a problem to be solved; teachers are skilled laborers who should be well-compensated and respected.