Slovenia, in Europe, has made access to potable water a basic right. the guardian reports:

Source: Slovenia Holidays

Slovenia has amended its constitution to make access to drinkable water a fundamental right for all citizens and stop it being commercialised. …

“Water resources represent a public good that is managed by the state. Water resources are primary and durably used to supply citizens with potable water and households with water and, in this sense, are not a market commodity,” the article reads.

The centre-left prime minister, Miro Cerar, had urged lawmakers to pass the bill saying the country of two million people should “protect water – the 21st century’s liquid gold – at the highest legal level”.

“Slovenian water has very good quality and, because of its value, in the future it will certainly be the target of foreign countries and international corporations’ appetites.

“As it will gradually become a more valuable commodity in the future, pressure over it will increase and we must not give in,” Cerar said.

A right wing party abstained from the vote, calling it politically motivated. While the left parties celebrate, I wonder if it’s a good thing to place control of such a valuable resource in the hands of government. After all, all political parties think you’re as clean as the driven snow. If they ever reach the point of water rationing, how will they approach it?

Of course, a commercial controlling interest would also raise the hairs on my neck.

University of Bristol scientists have achieved one of those commercial holy grails – converting waste into something useful:

New technology has been developed that uses nuclear waste to generate electricity in a nuclear-powered battery. A team of physicists and chemists from the University of Bristol have grown a man-made diamond that, when placed in a radioactive field, is able to generate a small electrical current.

No doubt many readers have already heard of Hugleikur Dagsson, but I just ran across him and like it.

Here’s more.

On Lawfare April Doss offers an affirmation of an audit of the results in the Presidential election:

[The computer and election experts’] evidence and arguments are well-documented elsewhere, so I won’t rehash them here. But it is important to note that none of these experts’ opinions are tied to the political fortunes of Republicans or Democrats. These are merely computer and election security experts offering their view that there’s some evidence of a problem. While Nate Silver and other statisticians have posited other counter-explanations for the evidence, it is to be expected that different disciplines focus on different dimensions of a problem and offer different explanation. Silver’s theory that demographics and not hacking or computer error is responsible for the deviation is number is certainly plausible, perhaps even likely. But the presence or absence of other possible explanations are not a reason to not perform an audit. When faced with a potential cybersecurity problem, the purpose of the audit is to confirm or eliminate that possibility, not because it is the definitive explanation. The voices suggesting that we don’t need an audit because the results are probably correct are missing the point.

It’s not that the probability of corruption of the election systems is high, it’s that there is a chance of corruption, and that the cost of being wrong, in this particular case, of even leaving the suspicion that our computer systems were manipulated, is too high. We need to retain confidence in our election systems, or throw them out (as I’ve more or less advocated) for either better qualified computer systems, or return to old-fashioned human systems. Speaking of Nate Silver’s (well, actually Carl Bialik and Rob Arthur) reaction on FiveThirtyEight:

Without a recount, all we can do for now is look for any meaningful difference in the three states named in the New York article between votes in counties that used paper ballots and votes in ones that used machines. That quickly crossed Michigan off the list: The entire state uses paper ballots, which are read by optical scanners. So we couldn’t compare results by type of voting in that state. Instead, we checked the six other states with a margin between Clinton and Trump of less than 10 percentage points that use a mix of paper and machine voting: Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Virginia.

For each county in those states, we looked at Clinton’s vote share and whether it was associated with the type of voting system the county used, based on voting-system data compiled by a nonprofit electoral-reform group called Verified Voting and 2016 vote data from Dave Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas and ABC News. It doesn’t make much sense, though, to just look at raw vote counts and how they differed, because we know there are many factors that affect how a county voted, both in those states and everywhere else around the country. So we separated out two of the main factors that we know drove differences in voting results: the share of each county’s population age 25 and older with a college degree, and the share of the county that is non-white.

We found no apparent correlation between voting method and outcome in six of the eight states, and a thin possible link between voting method and results in Wisconsin and Texas. However, the two states showed opposite results: The use of any machine voting in a county was associated with a 5.6-percentage-point reduction in Democratic two-party vote share in Wisconsin but a 2.7-point increase in Texas, both of which were statistically significant. Even if we focus only on Wisconsin, the effect disappears when we weight our results by population. More than 75 percent of Wisconsin’s population lives in the 23 most populous counties, which don’t appear to show any evidence for an effect driven by voting systems. To have effectively manipulated the statewide vote total, hackers probably would have needed to target some of these larger counties. When we included all counties but weighted the regression by the number of people living in each county, the statistical significance of the opposite effects in Wisconsin and Texas both evaporated.

Sami Grover on Treehugger.com gives an encouraging overview on coal consumption, ending with an opinion on China:

There is one big question mark around the future of coal, and that’s China. Analysts and activists alike have been astounded by how fast coal use has plateaued in China, years ahead of schedule—driven in part by domestic concerns over air quality, and in part by a slow down in the economy. The country’s climate leadership may also step up further if the US cedes its position on the global stage. That said, China is still building a huge amount of new coal capacity. What’s interesting, however, is how much of the world’s attention on these additions is not on the pollution they will cause, but the fact that they may become rapidly obsolete. In fact, according to this report over at Fortune, the country may be throwing away as much as $500 billion on unnecessary power plants which will never recoup their value.

He didn’t address new coal power plants, however. Here’s the latest predictions on coal consumption from the U.S. Energy Information Administration:

Throughout the projection, the top three coal-consuming countries are China, the United States, and India, which together account for more than 70% of world coal use. China accounted for 50% of world coal consumption in 2012, and its coal use continues to grow through 2025 in the Reference case before beginning a decline along with slower overall growth in energy consumption and the implementation of policies addressing air pollution and climate change. In 2040, China’s share of world coal consumption falls to 46%. As a result of the slower growth and decline in China’s coal use, the world coal share of total primary energy consumption declines steadily, from 28% in 2012 to 22% in 2040—in contrast to its sustained growth from 24% in 2001 to 29% in 2009, primarily as a result of increasing coal use in China. Total U.S. coal consumption per year, which peaked in 2007, remains largely unchanged from 2012 to 2040 without the CPP but declines significantly with the CPP. Although coal consumption in China does not change much from 2012 to 2040, coal use in India and the other countries of non-OECD Asia continues to rise. India’s coal use surpasses the United States total around 2030, and its share of world coal consumption grows from 8% in 2012 to 14% in 2040.

The Sunday night, post-fencing tournament, “I cannot but drool now” movie is Godzilla vs. Destoroyah (1995), another in this long-lived franchise. Once again, we have Godzilla, this time literally steaming himself to death because his nuclear reactor heart is slowly going critical; add to that a positively spectacular case of shingles, and it’s fairly understandable why he’s extra crabby in this episode. His home of Bass Island is gone, his son, Junior, has transformed into the final stage of the Godzilla species (possibly a species of Megalosaur) and is running around on his own, and micro-oxygen has created Destoroyah, a monster capable of turning into a little army of small monsters or assembling into the big monster. He also gets to have some lightning effects.

Yeah.

The special effects run the gamut. On the low end, Destoroyah, especially in component form, is positively awful. In assembled form, it’s not much of an improvement. In some of the Tokyo scenes we observed a marked lack of panic in a city that was supposedly under evacuation order, leading to the supposition that Tokyo residents have become remarkably blasé concerning kaiju running loose in the city. In our own metropolitan area, we imagined such traffic reports as “kaiju backup on I-94 west bound at Snelling,” but we’re not certain that Midwestern stolidness would sustain the moment in an adequate manner.

On the other end, Godzilla with shingles was remarkably effective; Junior caught in the clutches of Destoroyah lingered on the line between awesome and silly. In one shot I appreciated the allusion to Goya’s The Colossus, and it was rather well done.

Story? “Where’s Godzilla? Where’s Godzilla now? There’s trouble in the industrial section! Where’s Junior? Oh, what’s that? Where’s Junior? Where’s Godzilla? Godzilla’s been frozen with lasers! Oh, poor Tokyo! Junior’s dead! Godzilla’s melting! Oh, no! NUCLEAR POWER IS BAD!”

The last one was explicitly stated, no doubt for the defective members of the audience.

Yeah. It was good for a drooly night. If you’re functional, though, don’t waste your time on this drip of a movie.

Arabesque:

The arabesque is a form of artistic decoration consisting of “surface decorations based on rhythmic linear patterns of scrolling and interlacing foliage, tendrils” or plain lines, often combined with other elements. [Wikipedia]

There are other definitions, relating to ballet & music. Seen in Seven Brief Lessons on Physics, by Carlo Rovelli, pp 67-68:

Within the immense ocean of galaxies and stars we are in a remote corner; amid the infinite arabesques of forms that constitute reality, we are merely a flourish among innumerably many such flourishes.

Three remarks.

1. Arabesque is an immensely difficult word for a touch typist.
2. It is unclear whether this definition is applicable or not.
3. I didn’t finish reading the chapter containing the quote. No doubt this is reflective of a personal failing, and not of a defect in the author.

CNN Headline:

He’s back to rigging

Referring to Trump’s claim that he lost the popular vote because of voter fraud, despite there being no evidence of same.

Are we going to have the spectacle of a President disrespected by the mainstream media, while only loved by the “alt-right”? Is it really appropriate to disrespect a President this openly?

Your Presidential Ball-peen Hammer from MSC Industrial

I think it is. It may take a ball-peen hammer to get it through his head that many of his proposed candidates for various positions are not quality people, and, in fact, some exhibit un-American qualities inappropriate to their proposed positions. But I do worry about our society further fragmenting, rather than coming together as we should if we’re going to even have quality candidates to consider – rather than power-seekers with nothing more than a mouth to run and an ache to be in charge.

Hillary Clinton may turn out to be the last truly qualified candidate this country will ever see at this rate.

Fugacity:

In chemical thermodynamics, the fugacity of a real gas is an effective partial pressure which replaces the mechanical partial pressure in an accurate computation of the chemical equilibrium constant. It is equal to the pressure of an ideal gas which has the same chemical potential as the real gas. For example, nitrogen gas (N₂) at 0 °C and a pressure of P = 100 atm has a fugacity of f = 97.03 atm.^[1] This means that the chemical potential of real nitrogen at a pressure of 100 atm is less than if nitrogen were an ideal gas; the value of the chemical potential is that which nitrogen as an ideal gas would have at a pressure of 97.03 atm.

Fugacities are determined experimentally or estimated from various models such as a Van der Waals gas that are closer to reality than an ideal gas. The ideal gas pressure and fugacity are related through the dimensionless fugacity coefficient φ. [Wikipedia]

Sighted in Jack Vance’s The Palace of Love:

Some of my guests have complained of a gentle melancholy which hangs in the air; I agree that the mood exists. The explanation, I believe, arises from the fugacity of beauty, the tragic pavanne to which all of us step.

More cross-cultural references.

And that’s enough of Irish people indulging culinary impulses.

From the flow of mail coming through the Internet is thunderstorm asthma. What is it? From Wikipedia:

Thunderstorm asthma is the triggering of an asthma attack by environmental conditions directly caused by a local thunderstorm. It has been proposed that during a thunderstorm, pollen grains can absorb moisture and then burst into much smaller fragments with these fragments being easily dispersed by wind. However, there is no experimental evidence for the proof of this theory.^[1] While larger pollen grains are usually filtered by hairs in the nose, the smaller pollen fragments are able to pass through and enter the lungs, triggering the asthma attack.^[2][3][4][5] A pollen grain is a single cell.

And what caused this mail? The fate of some unfortunates in Melbourne, Australia:

A fifth person has died and six people remain in intensive care — four of them critical — following Melbourne’s thunderstorm asthma outbreak on Monday.

Victoria’s Department of Health and Human Services confirmed the latest victim had died in the past 24 hours, but did not release details on their age or sex.

The department said hospitals were continuing to treat 20 people for a number of related conditions aside from those in intensive care.

More than 8,500 people have received hospital treatment since Monday’s outbreak.

That is quite a few people to add to the normal load of folks seeking hospital care.

It’s situations like these that entirely blunt my non-existent ambition to be a politician. From Senator Al Franken’s (MN-D) website:

Following efforts from Senators Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, along with Representatives Collin Peterson, Tim Walz and Rick Nolan, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced new plans to help dairy producers and families in need in 2017. Low milk prices have resulted in sharply reduced incomes for U.S. dairy farmers, which is placing our nation’s dairy industry in a vulnerable position. In July, Klobuchar, Franken, Peterson, Walz, and Nolan urged the department to use its authority to take action to protect the nation’s dairy farmers from further crisis and aid the expansion and maintenance of domestic farmers. To build on support given by the USDA in August, today the USDA announced plans to purchase $20 million of cheese for food banks and pantries across the nation to assist families in need through USDA nutrition assistance programs.

I look at this and see the “creative destruction” beloved of libertarians; the free market sending its waves of destruction across a nation. As prices go up, more farmers enter the market; as prices go down, farmers crash and burn. And then the government gets involved, so that a situation that might be described as great for consumers (the obese lot of them) is characterized as a catastrophe for the other side of the pipeline. As much as I do have suspicions when the government gets involved, my sense is that the food supply comes before doctrinaire economic theory; it’s either guaranteed, or there’s rioting in the street. So the dance continues, but it’s never clear to me the next step in this polka.

Back in 2009, NBC News reported on low milk prices in Belgium:

Belgian farmers sprayed 790,000 gallons of fresh milk onto their fields Wednesday, furious over the low milk prices they say are bankrupting farmers.

Milk farmers’ groups said world prices had sunk so much they are having to sell milk at half their production costs, leaving more and more farmers unable to pay their bills.

To highlight their desperation, about 300 tractors dragged milk containers through plowed fields in southern Belgium, dumping a day’s worth of milk production in that region.

“It is a scandal to dump this, but we have to realize what the situation is,” said Belgian farm leader Erwin Schoepges. “We need a farm revolt.”

The crisis has driven many EU farmers into a “milk strike,” with thousands refusing to deliver milk to the industrial dairy conglomerates that produce anything from skimmed milk to processed cheese.

Romuald Schaber, the president of the European Milk Board farmers’ group, said up to half the milk farmers in some areas were refusing to deliver their milk and predicted the first shortages could hit some supermarkets as early as next week.

This would be politically disastrous here in the States.

The New York Times is reporting the closing of the protest campsite at Standing Rock:

Citing public safety concerns, federal officials plan to close access to a campsite where demonstrators have protested the construction of a crude oil pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota and create a “free speech zone.”

The Army Corps of Engineers, in a letter Friday to the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Dave Archambault II, said the decision had been made to “protect the general public from the violent confrontations between protesters and law enforcement officials that have occurred in this area.”

Mr. Archambault said in a statement that the tribe was “deeply disappointed” by the decision.

“It is both unfortunate and disrespectful that this announcement comes the day after this country celebrates Thanksgiving — a historic exchange between Native Americans and the first immigrants from Europe,” he said. “Although the news is saddening, it is not all surprising given the last 500 years of mistreatment of our people.”

The authorities will close the area north of the Cannonball River, including the Oceti Sakowin camp, about 40 miles south of Bismarck, where opponents of the 1,170-mile Dakota Access Pipeline have gathered for months.

It’s always disturbing to discover you share the same side of an issue with someone you generally dislike, but this can be actually an opportunity to learn more about the other side – usually a valuable experience. So when I read in AL Monitor this little bit:

“I don’t think we should be a nation builder,” Trump said in response to a question from columnist Tom Friedman on what he thought should be the US role in the world.

I had to nod and agree. I have no idea what Trump’s reasoning might be, and I don’t really care.

Nation building is defined by Wikipedia as

… constructing or structuring a national identity using the power of the state.

To me, it usually refers to the practice of gifting a country with democracy; that is, imposing a particular governmental type on another country. We’ve seen numerous examples of this, from Afghanistan (both the Soviets and the USA) to Yugoslavia (Marshall Tito’s attempt to unite several disparate societies into a single country). While I’ve made no formal study of the subject, it’s difficult to think of a positive example. Afghanistan continues to be riven by violence and tribal customs, while the countries of Yugoslavia broke away as soon as it was viable for them to do so, and then some fought a war.

The problem lies in the actions behind the word imposition. Societies run on the interactions between their constituents, which is to say the citizens. When they are voluntary, then they reflect and contain the will of those people, and thus are backed – for good or ill – by those people.

But when imposition takes place, now the interactions are forced; the attitudes are fraudulent, leading to the usual human reactions: resentment and contrarianism. The imposition becomes the focus of the society, not the changed state which is the goal. People are independent creatures, from Hong Kong to Croatia, and when they are directed to have such and such an attitude by a faceless state organism, one which may be in some parts corrupt, then it’s natural to distrust the entire exercise.

To my mind, the building of a nation best proceeds when the very citizens who make up the society (possibly plural) involved recognize that certain customs and attitudes are having a negative effect on the general welfare of the citizenry, and resolve to convince their neighbors of the same. Not all the citizens need to realize this, and some may not for generations. For example, while it was written into the US First Amendment that no law would be made with respect to religion, even 200+ years later we still have some citizens who believe their religion should be favored above all others, no matter what history teaches.

But most citizens, even with dark suspicions regarding their co-religionists, accept that part of the general law, and that by voiding all attempts by the theologically driven to gain favor from the government for their particular sect, we are the stronger for it – stronger than any other nation, because we do not dip our toes into that particularly dark, poisonous stream.

But the point is that we realized it, not someone outside entity that imposed the rule; thus, while some resentment existed and exists, it is not crippling.

So when I hear someone call for nation building, I tend to cringe and wonder how badly this will fail. Perhaps we should consult a psychologist next time: how do we convince a citizenry that there is a better way than, say, committing genocide? Perhaps only the best teacher will succeed: experience.

Jane Chong on Lawfare illuminates a less discussed problem with Trump and his assets:

The discussion, then, can’t be limited to whether Trump is, in fact, acting in the best interests of the United States and whether the public can effectively monitor his dealings. Our concern must extend to the dilution of the United States’ power and distortion of its message on the world stage when it come to all manner of issues implicating U.S. diplomatic credibility and moral leadership.

A prosaic example: In Turkey, not long after the Trump Organization inked a deal with the powerful Dogan Group to fix the Trump brand on a tower complex, the chairman of the Dogan Group, Aydin Dogan, was indicted on criminal smuggling—charges that critics say amounted to retaliation for his media outlet’s criticisms of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey is now in the midst of a brutal media crackdown that has triggered global condemnation. If Trump reaffirms the U.S. position on freedom of the press to Istanbul, to what extent will the moral force of the American message be undercut by Trump’s continuing financial connections to Dogan?

In short, Trump’s global business interests present a problem of distributed risk across many foreign policy and national security vectors. By “distributed risk,” I mean that the presidency is as much a seat of vulnerability as it is a seat of power; the many entities and governments that presently have the ability to affect President-elect Trump and his many business affiliates also, by extension, have the ability to affect the wellbeing and authority of the United States.

To put it less delicately, since Trump’s assets exist around the world, a simple threat to, say, nationalize one of his hotels in a faraway land could – and probably would – affect his judgment. Even if he officially places them all in his children’s hands, he’ll know that it happened – if only because those with the threat will let him know about it. I do not recall this factor being brought out during the campaign, as it’s clearly an important part of his potential leadership.

In an otherwise wonderful conclusion to a kidnapping case, CNN reports a statement of misinformation by Sheriff Bosenko of Shasta County, California, in response to reports that the husband was the initial suspect:

“It appears he’s telling us the truth,” Bosenko told the station. “Generally, you can’t trick a polygraph.”

Ah, no. The general quote on polygraphs is they’re correct less than 50% of the time – you can trust them less than a coin flip. Here’s a little more discussion on the damn things, and that’ll lead to a Skeptical Inquirer article.

Just to spread the truth a little further.

Rodomontade:

Rodomontade \rod-uh-muhn-TADE; roh-duh-muhn-TAHD\ is a mass noun meaning boastful talk or behavior. The term is a reference to Rodomonte, a character in Italian Renaissance epic poems Orlando innamorato and its sequel Orlando furioso. [Wikipedia]

Observed in Jack Vance’s The Killing Machine:

Six volumes of rhodomontade [sic] and piffle.

… Academia, London, Earth.

In Canadian news, the Lethbridge Herald is reporting a move against neonicotinoids, thought to be a factor is Colony Collapse Disorder:

Health Canada has announced a 90-day public consultation period on imidacloprid, which is used on everything from cereals, grains, pulses and oilseeds to forestry woodlots and flea infestations on pets.

Neonicotinoids as a class of pesticides have come under heavy scrutiny in recent years for their potential impact on bee populations.

A study by Health Canada found that measurments of imidacloprid in surface water have been found as high as 11.9 parts per billion, while levels above 0.041 parts per billion are a considered to be of scientific concern.

The government is proposing to phase out all agricultural usage and most other outdoor uses of imidacloprid over a period of three to five years.

Ontario’s provincial government moved to restrict the use of imidacloprid last year, as have some European countries.

“Based on currently available information, the continued high volume use of imidacloprid in agricultural areas is not sustainable,” Health Canada said Wednesday.

The Health Canada study of imidacloprid has also prompted the federal department to begin “special reviews” of two other common neonicotinoids, clothianidin and thiamethoxam.

“Health Canada is taking the findings of the re-evaluation of this pesticide seriously, and is taking action to further protect the environment,” Health Minister Jane Philpott said in a release.

(From Tree Frog News.)

Speaking of bees, ever wonder if bees are restricted to pollen and honey for their diet? It turns out the answer is no – targets of sweet opportunity are more than welcome. NewScientist (12 November 2016) reports:

Sugar-rich honeydew is secreted by sap-sucking scale insects, and may tide hungry bees over until spring flowers bloom.

How wild solitary bees survive before the blooms was largely a mystery, says Joan Meiners at the University of Florida in Gainesville. Unlike colony-building honeybees, solitary bees don’t stockpile honey. “There’s really not much that’s known about what bees do when there aren’t flowers,” says Meiners.

Observation and experiments indicates solitary bees will eat the honeydew while awaiting the return of flower blooms.

Cross-cultural references.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgkIykMfIlw

Now that the election has come and gone, Saudi Arabia’s government is trying to decide whether or not it should be applauding – or vomiting into its collective mouth. Bruce Riedel reports for AL Monitor:

But Trump was a surprise. The royals’ longtime connections to America’s two family dynasties, the Bushes and the Clintons, were on the wrong side of history. Some Saudi America watchers have argued that Trump’s rhetoric on Muslims was crucial to his victory, a source of deep concern for a country that prides itself as the Custodian of the two Holy Cities. The Saudis are nervous about what they see as rising Islamophobia in America.

But the Saudis are pleased with the strong talk from Trump and his appointees on Iran. Articles by key future decision-makers such as retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and Kansas congressman Mike Pompeo‘s articulating the need for tougher American responses to Iran subversion and terrorism have been well-received in Riyadh.

But this wouldn’t be good:

The Arab-Israeli conflict has receded on Saudi priorities for the last two years, but if Trump follows through on promises to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem, the kingdom will react harshly. [Saudi King] Salman is a strong defender of the Islamic identity of Jerusalem. He has been involved in fundraising for supporting the Palestinian cause in Jerusalem since 1967, when then-King Faisal made him responsible for the effort.

Someone else’s chocolate bar always has a few unpleasant nuts in it. The question becomes, are you allergic?

Regardless of whether Jill Stein’s call for a recount in Wisconsin, probably followed by some other close states, is justified or not, the Trump camp is displaying its immaturity WRT the democratic process in its response:

Former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway tweeted on Thanksgiving that their opponents were being sore losers.

“Look who ‘can’t accept the election results’ Hillary Clinton Supporters Call for Vote Recount in Battleground States,” Conway wrote.

They should be applauding and encouraging the effort in the name of the people. A citizenry uncertain that its voice is being properly heard is a citizenry that may be so dissatisfied that it’ll rise up and take out those in power. It’s happened before, after all.

A word to the wise: that would be Trump and the GOP.

It’s been bad special effects night here as we viewed, with considerable nausea, Godzilla vs. Mothra (1992, aka Godzilla and Mothra: The Battle for Earth); in fact, I remarked during the credits that special effects had exactly one name, while Doctor Strange had something like 500 names in the special effects credits.

Just to confuse an already odd plot, a new kaiju, named Battra, makes an appearance, first in one form, apparently larval, and then, in the blink of an eye, into a flying kaiju; similarly, though with far more drama, Mothra transforms from larva to a spectacularly colored moth.

The first battle chases larval Mothra from his or her egg and out of the field of honor, as Godzilla and Battra (larval) have a go at it, and end up sinking together into a trench which begins leaking magma. Mothra then makes for Nagoya, where her singing caretakers are being held, and rescues them while flattening large portions of the city. This is followed by curling up on top of “the Capitol” (a Randian reference?) and transforming into the moth.

Meanwhile, Mt. Fuji begins to blow, and out of it hops Godzilla, who apparently swam through the magma, under the ocean floor, and to the sacred mountain; and then Battra comes swimming in and transforms into a sort of a flying … or perhaps it’s just a monstrous fly. First, it’s an everyone for themselves cage match, all the monsters exhibiting distance weapons guaranteed to turn the US Air Force green with envy. Battra starts by shooting up Mothra something fierce, but then Battra and Mothra join forces against Godzilla, eventually carrying him out to sea. Battra is expended in the effort (he or she is apparently filled to the brim with dijon mustard) and joins Godzilla in a watery grave.

Big Bug Translators

MEANWHILE, the singing twins of Mothra reveal there’s a monster meteor headed for Earth. Battra was going to save the Earth, but now Mothra will do so. Why are we being told this? Oh, that’s right, a meteor started this entire mess by hitting the Earth and awakening Godzilla.

There’s nothing particularly good here. Best to watch this one if you have a severe headache and a requirement to see every single Godzilla movie ever made.

Doctor Strange (2016) is a Marvel Universe movie, and is fairly light – there are themes, of course, of narcissism and patience and, oh, something else should go here, maybe something about maturity is more than chronological age, but there’s nothing new or insightful.

No, the point is the light show. A rare movie that really benefits from the 3-D treatment, Doctor Strange brings a visual touch to every scene of drama, from fighting the bad guys with flowing cities to a simple car crash. If you’re a visually oriented person who found Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow (2004) a fascinating junket, then you may find Doctor Strange another fascinating excursion – although they do not share the same artistic genre, as Doctor Strange is quite a modern piece, while Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is undeniably an art deco-influenced visual delight.

The audio is mostly good, although I missed a couple of words in the climactic battle as they were badly slurred by the entity in question; there’s a sense of humor to the piece, an absolute necessity in superhero movies, as humor is one of the main supports of the suspension bridge of disbelief, and the audience laughed several times; and the dialog is adequate, if not sparkling.

Looking for something light and entertaining? You won’t be thinking about this an hour after you leave – but you may have fun while you’re in the cinema.

Bloomberg Law reports that SCOTUS has changed its mind and won’t hear a case that it had agreed to hear (granted certiorari in legalese):

The U.S. Supreme Court sent a clear signal on Nov. 17: No more bait-and-switch tactics.

The court “dismissed as improvidently granted” — or “DIG”ged — an antitrust case involving billions of dollars and household names like Visa, MasterCard, Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase, Visa Inc. v. Osborn, U.S., No. 15-961, dismissed 11/17/16.

The court infrequently DIGs cases, and even more infrequently explains why.

But there was no mistake why the court tossed the the Visa case.

After having persuaded the court to grant certiorari on one issue, the “petitioner ‘chose to rely on a different argument’ in their merits briefing,” the court said. “The Court, therefore, orders that the writ in this case be dismissed as improvidently granted.”

The explanation suggests that the court is trying to “deter and shape” future practice in the high court, Michael Solimine of the University of Cincinnati College of Law, Cincinnati, told Bloomberg BNA.

Or, as the late-Justice Antonin Scalia put it in a 2015 case, the court was trying “to deter future snookering.”

Billions of dollars possibly lost because those executing the appeal engaged in a dubious legal practice. I’ll bet that doesn’t go down well at the office, unless this was considered a very long shot. Big, big business doesn’t litigate with regard to the conceptst of justice, only with regard to the amount of money involved. When billions are involved, what’s a few million to lawyers who think this’ll work?

A pity entities with little concept of justice are still granted partial rights as persons. I still await Apple’s accession to a seat on SCOTUS. Say, maybe I should write a letter to President-elect Trump suggesting same …