Unsightly Mental Blemishes

Chris Meserole discusses the prongs of counter-terrorism on Lawfare, and why he’s worried that the incoming Trump Administration may snap one off:

The counterterrorism approach has met with many successes. The original leadership of al-Qaeda is now almost entirely dismantled, and Osama bin Laden himself enjoys no more than the small solace of thalassic repose. But in the past few years, the limitations of counterterrorism have come into plain view. In focusing on the tactical level alone, counterterrorism assumes that to defeat Salafi-jihadism overall we need only destroy each and every extant Salafi-jihadist organization. The emergence of successor groups like Boko Haram and the Islamic State put the lie to that assumption. If we are to rely on counterterrorism alone, we are destined to play an endless game of global whack-a-mole.

In a bid to avoid that fate, policy analysts and practitioners have recently shifted their focus to “countering violent extremism,” or CVE. The goal is not so much to supplant counterterrorism as to supplement it. Whereas the counterterrorism frames the policy response to Salafi-jihadist violence in terms of tactics, CVE does so in terms of ideology and grievance. We cannot hope to defeat Salafi-jihadism, the thinking goes, unless and until we discredit the ideas and concerns that lend it animus. For instance, consider the Aarhus program in Denmark, or the Center for the Prevention of Radicalization Leading to Violence in Montreal, Canada. The former seeks to de-radicalize and re-integrate violent extremists; the latter intervenes with at-risk individuals before extremism fully takes root. Or consider USAID’s project to bolster community resilience in places like Niger and Somalia. These programs share an effort to engage Salafi-jihadism through ideas and civic engagement rather than through force alone.

And the signals from the incoming Trump Administration?

As a candidate, Trump espoused famously few policies, but one of them was his now notorious “Muslim ban,” which has since, allegedly, morphed into a “Muslim registry.” The precise contours of that policy remain unclear; they may be dropped altogether. But in one sense the details don’t matter nearly as much as the rhetoric, and in that Trump has been crystal clear: he aims to speak openly and forcefully of “radical Islam” — and to take little care, as he utters that turgid phrase, to distinguish qualifier from subject. In that regard, a well-known tweet from Trump’s former campaign adviser, Lt. Gen. (ret.) Michael Flynn, could not have been more in keeping with Trump’s main foreign policy message: “fear of Muslims is RATIONAL.” Couched in that tweet isn’t just the assumption that all Muslims are the same; it’s that because all Muslims are the same, we must engage them through the security lens of fear, rather than the more diplomatic lens of ideology. If all Muslims are the same, then they must be identified, banned, and fought. What good is a war of ideas if ideas cannot change?

And so, with Flynn now tapped to be National Security Advisor — and with Mike Pompeo, who by all accounts holds quite similar views, set to be ensconced at Langely — the only war left is a war of might.

Having a bigot as an advisor is a mistake, because the implied mistaken view of reality means decisions made regarding that reality are doomed to be flawed. Trump should be getting the best people, not those who say what he wants to hear – or those who supported him best during the campaign. It would be interesting to know how he selected his advisors back when he was this “successful” businessman.

For the conservative reader, I might point out that the CVE approach is classic Cold War tactics in which we took the very ideas on which Communism was built upon and analyzed them, revealing their hidden flaws and biases, followed with publication of these results, along with a modicum of propaganda, much as did the Soviets. A rejection of these tactics, as may or may not occur under Trump, would be a rejection of the very tactics we used fifty years ago against the Soviets.

As an addendum from my own point of view, there is a key difference between the Cold War and the current war with the terrorists. The former was a clash of economic models, which may be thought of as a clash of interpretations of how the human mind works, at its most basic, and then building up to how to properly manage the business of a country. In contrast, this latest conflict concerns theology. I am well aware that most folks the world over think of theology as something concrete, the teachings of one or more Gods, but to me it’s simply the various imaginations of (mostly) men throughout the ages, guessing at what some unknowable supernatural creature might think concerning how we should behave.

It’s too much to attempt to discuss the socio-evolutionary forces that have shaped the major religions in a blog post, and in any case such a post would only be informed by my casual observations, not by a trained mind. It’s safe to say that religions that do not contribute to the survival potential of a group will either be discarded or transformed until they will contribute. How that can be used, however, as a lever on those who are attracted to violent groups is not at all clear. Economics at least searches for a rational basis; theology may have pretensions, but at its base it’s just imagination, perhaps cobbled together with an interior consistency, but the connection to reality probably lies only in the previously alluded to socio-evolutionary forces. Allegiance to any theology will mostly be based on upbringing, a recursive process; a few individuals may decide to change theological allegiances, but they are rare examples.

I suspect an effective CVE will need to provide attention to both the economic and social justice vectors for all individuals concerned. A way forward, and the apprehension that one lives in a just society, are likely two of the tools necessary to persuade individuals that shooting down a Blackhawk merely pisses off the Americans.

The previous owners of this domicile planted some glorious ornamental grass. Here’s a pic of it from last summer:

And here’s a couple of pics of it today.

Not looking so chipper, eh wot?

Ever wonder how the solar system got its start? (I’m getting some odd visceral reactions as I look out at some snow coming down; it just doesn’t seem real to be thinking about the beginning of the solar system while snow is making our freeways slippery.) University of Minnesota researcher Yong-Zhong Qian has been doing some work on the subject, as reported by the College of Science and Engineering at the University of Minnesota:

About 4.6 billion years ago, a cloud of gas and dust that eventually formed our solar system was disturbed. The ensuing gravitational collapse formed the proto-Sun with a surrounding disc where the planets were born. A supernova—a star exploding at the end of its life-cycle—would have enough energy to compress such a gas cloud. Yet there was no conclusive evidence to support this theory. In addition, the nature of the triggering supernova remained elusive.

Qian and his collaborators decided to focus on short-lived nuclei present in the early solar system. Due to their short lifetimes, these nuclei could only have come from the triggering supernova. Their abundances in the early solar system have been inferred from their decay products in meteorites. As the debris from the formation of the solar system, meteorites are comparable to the leftover bricks and mortar in a construction site. They tell us what the solar system is made of and in particular, what short-lived nuclei the triggering supernova provided.

“This is the forensic evidence we need to help us explain how the solar system was formed,” Qian said. “It points to a low-mass supernova as the trigger.”

Qian is an expert on the formation of nuclei in supernovae. His previous research has focused on the various mechanisms by which this occurs in supernovae of different masses. His team includes the lead author of the paper, Projjwal Banerjee, who is a former Ph.D. student and postdoctoral research associate, and longtime collaborators Alexander Heger of Monash University, Australia, and Wick Haxton of the University of California, Berkeley. Qian and Banerjee realized that previous efforts in studying the formation of the solar system were focused on a high-mass supernova trigger, which would have left behind a set of nuclear fingerprints that are not present in the meteoric record.

excipient:

Drug companies add substances, called excipients, to help medicines dissolve in the stomach and intestinal fluid, but there have been few improvements in recent years to this decades-old technology. The process outlined in the study is a major breakthrough that revolutionizes the process of making drug structures more soluble in the body so that they are better absorbed. [“University partnership with Dow results in major discovery to improve oral medications“, College of Science & Engineering, University of Minnesota]

… can be something mere mortals bounce off of. Shlomi Eldar reports in AL Monitor on the reaction of the ultra-Orthodox of Israel when their own choose to enlist in the Israeli Army:

“Ronnie” started officers training in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Dec. 4. If he makes it through the rigorous course, in four months he will be commissioned as an officer. For him, it will be a victory over the ultra-Orthodox community that ostracized him and the family that threw him out of his home.

The young man, who asked that Al-Monitor not divulge his real name, is an ultra-Orthodox soldier. He is coping with a society that objects to military conscription and encourages its members to study the Torah and remain within the boundaries of the community. I called him late in the evening after his first day of training. “Yes,” he answered in a somewhat bashful tone, “I am the ultra-Orthodox yeshiva student who led to the establishment of the nonprofit organization helping soldiers like me who were thrown out of their homes for wanting to serve in the military.”

Ronnie told Al-Monitor, “Six weeks before my draft date, my mother informed me that if I do indeed go into the army, I would have to leave the house. When she understood that I was determined, she said, ‘Take your things and don’t ever come back.’ That’s what I did. I left with nothing and not knowing where I was going.”

Faith over family. I suppose we see this in the United States, but I have not on a personal level. One more paragraph:

“It’s an incredible story,” the founder of the organization told Al-Monitor, asking to be identified as “A.” About a year ago, he said, he came across a poster (a means of expression common in ultra-Orthodox communities) that had been making the rounds in the ultra-Orthodox community, condemning Ronnie. A., a religious man himself, asked around and found out that Ronnie was a young student at a yeshiva of the Lithuanian faction of ultra-Orthodox Jews that is the most extreme in its rejection of compulsory service in the IDF. “I found out that during his basic training in the Givati Brigade, the guy studied Gemara [a part of the Talmud] and had finished an entire treatise by the time he was inducted into the IDF,” A. recalled. “I thought this was a fellow who should be saluted, not ostracized.” The fact that Ronnie studied Gemara in the army made his community even angrier, A. said.

In another AL Monitor article, Mordechai Goldman, himself ultra-Orthodox, discusses their attitude toward the Israel Defense Forces (IDF):

… the attitude of the ultra-Orthodox sector toward the military is fascinating and contradictory. But before we approach this subject, it is important to distinguish between the various sectors within the ultra-Orthodox world with regard to the IDF. On one side are the factions associated with the anti-Zionist Neturei Karta court and Eidah Hareidis (an inner fringe group within the ultra-Orthodox sector). These groups strongly oppose IDF recruitment under any condition. On the other side are the Chabad Chassidic group and Shas circles, who have a more liberal, forgiving view of those who choose to serve in the army.

Between these two sides reside the majority of ultra-Orthodox Jews, who do not oppose the IDF for anti-Zionist motives. Instead, they do not enlist because they hold that while enlistment is very important, Torah study is even more so. Many ultra-Orthodox leaders argue that the yeshiva world is, in effect, a spiritual-religious front that is no less important than the military front. Thus, while there is ultra-Orthodox opposition to IDF conscription at any age, the greatest opposition is reserved for the recruiting of yeshiva students, generally aged 18-22. The ultra-Orthodox leadership operates under the axiom that the ultra-Orthodox public would cease to exist if not for the continued existence of the yeshiva world.

“But this argument is not the reason that the ultra-Orthodox sector as a whole does not enlist in the IDF,” ultra-Orthodox activist and attorney Rabbi Dov Halbertal tells Al-Monitor. “The real reason is the fear of the army’s secular influences on ultra-Orthodox youth. The army is a place that endangers the ultra-Orthodox way of life, and that is the reason that ultra-Orthodox Jews do not enlist.”

According to Halbertal, “The army is a social melting pot. An ultra-Orthodox Jew who enters the army will not remain the same person when he leaves. He will be more Israeli and less ultra-Orthodox. The ultra-Orthodox public guards its ethnicity and its identity. All ethnic groups would act this way in the face of such an existential threat.”

And thus they believe they have a reason to avoid required military service – because it would destroy their community. I could see that as a possible, if illiberal excuse, for simple preservation of the community, but I suspect that, much like the Amish, they think God has ordained their society as the most preferred, and at that point my sense of humor just leaves me.

Whether this attitude damages them politically is beyond me; nor do I know if they even care. Such communities tend to be insular and static, and while others are willing to protect them, they’ll survive – but if their protection goes away, what then?

Turkey, already a secular democracy in danger under the thumb of President Erdoğan, is now reported to have suffered terror attacks. From CNN:

Ever hear an oud? Here’s master Rahim Al-Haj making a recording for the Smithsonian:

Yeah, don’t ask.
Source: Hubbs Movie Reviews

1962’s Jack The Giant Killer has good sets, mediocre special effects, and a bad story. This is a story from medieval England, as a sorceror attempts to steal away the Princess from the King of Cornwall. His giant gains the princess, but falls to a lowly farmer; knighted, he now must pursue the again-abducted princess, this time over the seas. His first ship stripped from him, he falls in with a lone Viking on his boat, who gives him an imp, imprisoned for, ummm, I forget how many years, who matches magic with the sorceror. The good guys are good guys, the bad guys are, for no ready reason, really really bad, and the hurdle this movie attempts to bound over the is that low one labeled “Light Entertainment,” for there is nothing really to contemplate and think about it, no moral questions, no ambiguous characters, nothing really; Jack gets the girl in the end.

A witch, a witch!

Monsters abound, in classic stop-action style, and also in the traditional mode, they appear to be lackwitted, even if one of the giants has two heads – for no discernible reasons. I did think the witches were inventively done, however.

The editing and special effects was mostly average for the era, but in one combat scene the fighting was just wrong – one moment the good guy has a whip, next he has a sword, and, maybe as one might expect from a farmer, he’s just awful with his weapon.

The acting was OK. The actor playing the sorceror reveled in his role; the other actors are adequate, but clearly everyone’s there to collect a paycheck; this isn’t Art by any stretch of the imagination.

Maybe when you have the season’s head cold and can’t stand to sleep any longer, this will serve the need of something to distract you from angry virus; otherwise, don’t waste your time unless you’re a devotee of the lead, Kerwin Mathews.

precuneus:

Location of Precuneus in red.
Source: Wikipedia

Further clues on how to tackle itch come from brain imaging studies. Many brain areas activated by pain are also active during itch, but one area that seems distinctively responsive to itch is the precuneus. This brain region is involved in visual processing and memory, says Gil Yosipovitch at the University of Miami, Florida. “We can’t pinpoint what the precuneus does in itch, but it’s uniquely activated with itch and not pain,” he says. [“Itch: When pain feels good“, Stephani Sutherland, NewScientist (26 November 2016, paywall)]

Regarding Minneapolis’ inquiry into changing their bank from Wells Fargo, a reader writes:

Good luck with that, I say. Wells Fargo will then turn around and move out of Minneapolis, where they’re a major tenant in a number of buildings.

Which is, in itself, an expensive proposition. I suspect moving is something they’d prefer not to do without good reason – especially if it involves more bad publicity, on top of their problem with sham accounts. And that’s not going well – The New York Times reports Wells Fargo is attempting to use arbitration rather than litigate a class action suit, much to the detriment of their customers:

In congressional hearing rooms and on national television, Wells Fargo has vowed to make things right for the thousands of customers who were given sham accounts.

The bank’s new chief executive, Timothy J. Sloan, in his first week on the job, said his “immediate and highest priority is to restore trust in Wells Fargo.”

But in federal and state courtrooms across the country, Wells Fargo is taking a different tack.

The bank has sought to kill lawsuits that its customers have filed over the creation of as many as two million sham accounts by moving the cases into private arbitration — a secretive legal process that often favors corporations.

Lawyers for the bank’s customers say the legal motions are an attempt to limit the bank’s accountability for the widespread fraud and deny its customers their day in open court.

Source: Scheldt.us

Perhaps Wells Fargo doesn’t consider the common citizen a worthy customer. It’s thoroughly possible they’d prefer to go the corporate customer route. But you’d think corporate customers would take a look at this rather bad behavior and maybe just take their business elsewhere.

Because, at the moment, it appears money is in charge at Wells Fargo, and this is a very bad thing for an entity dependent on good relations with the community. If I were a Wells Fargo customer … I wouldn’t be.

Returning to this dormant thread, I recently learned that three local for-profit educational institutions are in trouble. First up is ITT Tech, shutting down last September, according to NPR, because…

… ITT shut down all of its 137 locations. The federal government cut off student aid because the school’s accreditor found it had lied about its graduation and job-placement figures.

This leaves the students with debt and credits which may be worthless, the story says. MPR News more detail on recruiting tactics:

When he first moved to Miami, Waltter Teruel says, working as a recruiter for ITT Technical Institute was a welcome change from his life in New York where he had been selling antiques and life insurance.

As a recruiter, Teruel says, ITT Tech took care of the pitch to potential students for you. Recruiters used scripts set out in detailed PowerPoint presentations and got long lists of prospective students to call. But soon the welcome change faded. “Most of these students, they were looking for a job,” not more school, says Teruel.

When ITT Technical Institute closed, employees began to share tightly designed sales tools, like those PowerPoints, that offered a glimpse into the strategy that helped the company grow to more than 130 campuses across the country.

But those same tactics ultimately contributed to the company’s downfall, when the Department of Education ruled, in part because of its aggressive recruiting, ITT could no longer enroll new students using federal loans.

Those tactics?

[Tereul] says if you filled in your information, you’d get a call from one, or maybe 10, recruiters. The rule set out in the ITT training materials instructs recruiters to call “a minimum of three times a day for the first three days.” This was known as the 3×3 rule.

The goal was to reach people as soon as possible after a lead was generated, and then get them to come in for a meeting. Teruel says recruiters were supposed to frame the meeting in person as a “coming attraction” and avoid answering too many questions on the phone. “Maybe if you give them too much information, they won’t want to come in.”

He says recruiters would try to appear as if they were swamped with meetings, “How about today at 2 o’clock, or tomorrow at 11 o’clock in the morning?”

And it got personal. On-campus visits began with a questionnaire, the WITY, or “what’s important to you.” Teruel says that served as a backbone for the interview. If an applicant said “I’m tired of making minimum wage,” or “I want to better support my family,” recruiters would remind them what brought them there in the first place.

Next up, Globe University and the Minnesota School of Business, having common ownership, as noted in this press release by the US Department of Education:

The U.S. Department of Education announced today that participation in the federal student aid programs will end this month for Globe University (Globe) and Minnesota School of Business (MSB), two for-profit colleges under common ownership. This enforcement action is in keeping with the Department’s ongoing efforts to protect students, safeguard taxpayer dollars and increase accountability among postsecondary institutions.

The Program Compliance and Enforcement Units within Federal Student Aid determined that Globe and MSB are ineligible to participate in federal student aid programs because Globe and MSB have been judicially determined to have committed fraud involving Title IV program funds. Additionally, both institutions knowingly misrepresented the nature of their criminal justice programs and the transferability of credits earned to other institutions. These callous acts of misrepresentation left many students without the credentials necessary for their chosen careers and no options to continue their studies at other postsecondary institutions. Many graduates incurred thousands of dollars of debt but had limited options for successful job placement in their chosen fields.

“Globe and MSB preyed upon potential public servants – targeting those with a sincere desire to help their communities.” said U.S. Under Secretary of Education Ted Mitchell. “These institutions misrepresented their programs, potentially misleading students, and abused taxpayer funds, and so violated federal law, which is why we removed them from the federal student aid program. This is a sober reminder that not all institutions deliver on their advertised promises.”

Local NBC affiliate KARE11 notes Globe’s reaction:

We continue to fight hard for and alongside our nursing students, and those in every other program who are working so diligently to earn a degree to better their lives and the lives of their families. We believe the Office of Higher Education’s Order reaches far beyond what was necessary, penalizing students in every program for findings related to a single program that is no longer offered. Our nursing students routinely have a high first-time pass rate on the NCLEX, are successful in their careers, are passionate about their profession and are in great demand in their industry. It is imperative they be allowed to complete their program. Not allowing those students to complete not only has a devastating impact on them, it threatens the quality of health care for all Minnesotans. We appreciate how strongly and passionately many of our students have advocated for our Schools and we will continue to do the same for them.

Source: Piero Amadeo Infante

Notice how Globe University has become critical for the very survival of the healthcare industry of Minnesota – at least in their minds. To the mature citizen, it’s a mindset that says, We can say anything we want because honesty is not our paramount value. I wouldn’t trust that company with taking care of a cinder block, much less my education.

STUDENT, student, customer. This is true for traditional schools as well – I recall an interesting story out of Iowa some 35 – 40 years ago, where private Drake University was facing falling enrollment. They had been reducing tuition, to no avail. A new president came in and boosted tuition – and enrollment began growing. It appears students were using tuition as a proxy for education quality. [I have no idea if that story is online anywhere.]

So it’s not only a for-profit problem, but the real problem is that a private-sector originated school will, in all probability, bring private-sector methods to bear on the problem – and education is a fundamentally different sector, so the methodology can be glaringly wrong, not only resulting in the failure of the venture, but in people getting hurt as well.

Which is just as true within authentic private-sector transactions.

But the takeaway is to realize that the age-old educational institutions have developed appropriate methodologies for student recruitment, not to mention the rest of the student life cycle, from housing to the actual incidence of education. The message that education must change, must be replaced by private entities, is becoming an increasingly dubious message as we see these crash and burn amidst charges of fraud. Perhaps this is a case where the societal knowledge of previous generations is superior to today’s assertions – the realization that different sectors of society have different methods for good reason.

For all the complaints concerning the Iran nuclear deal, the whining of the Iranian hardliners is far more telling about the deal – they hate that they danced with the Great Satan, and looks like they lost. So now they’re looking to take out their frustrations on the Iranian Finance Minister, according to Changiz Varzi in AL Monitor in an article tellingly entitled “Iranian hard-liner alleges FM Zarif is American spy“:

On Dec. 3, Hossein Allahkaram, the head of the coordination council of Ansar-e Hezbollah, a semi-official paramilitary organization, alluded to Iran’s foreign minister being a US spy. On his official Instagram page, Allahkaram wrote, “Some believe that [Zarif’s] exceptional ties with American intelligence entities are undeniable. … Reuters had reported that the phone numbers of American politicians and intelligence officials, such as [Vice President] Joe Biden and [former Secretary of Defense] Chuck Hagel, are saved in Zarif’s cellphone, which [Zarif] hurriedly denied.” Allahkaram’s post continued, “Interestingly, [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, in a secret meeting with a high-ranking [Iranian] official, said that ‘according to our information, Zarif is an American agent.’”

Though the reasons for what happened next remain unclear — with some speculating that the Office of the Supreme Leader directly chastised Allahkaram — he subsequently did a U-turn and edited the Instagram post to remove the espionage allegation against Zarif and apologized for “any misunderstanding [he] might have caused.” Yet a screenshot of his original post was widely shared by Iranian social media users, especially on Twitter. One user tweeted, “Is it not a crime to [falsely] accuse [the] FM? Mr. Prosecutor, you have again showed favoritism.” …

A well recognized problem with public companies is their distraction with the short-term at the expense of the long-term. The clamor of shareholders, and even executive staff who have “aligned their interests with shareholders”, to meet quarterly goals can leave companies sensitive to such criticisms vulnerable to problems which may require long-term, resource-heavy solutions. This can range from products becoming obsolete to global environmental problems.

Recognizing this, several companies have come together to create FCLT Global:

FCLT Global is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to developing practical tools and approaches that encourage long-term behaviors in business and investment decision-making.

We take an active and practical approach to achieving our goals by conducting research, convening business leaders, developing educational resources and actionable recommendations, and generating broad awareness of ways in which a longer-term focus can increase innovation, economic growth and future savings.

FCLT began in 2013 as an initiative of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and McKinsey & Company, which, together with BlackRock, The Dow Chemical Company and Tata Sons, founded FCLT Global in July 2016. In addition to our Founding Members, we involve other Member organizations from across the investment value chain, including asset owners, asset managers and corporations, that are committed to achieving long-term tangible actions that benefit businesses, markets and society more broadly.

Will they get traction? Their introductory presentation lays out the problem… but doesn’t seem to have solutions in mind.

Ever wonder about the responsibilities of the youngest Cabinet slot, the Department of Homeland Security? Paul Rosenzweig posts a review of the job responsibilities on Lawfare:

The ideal Secretary would have a comprehensive knowledge of a variety of topics and a wide-range of personal and managerial characteristics.  To be clear, this mythical person does not exists, but as we measure Gen. Kelly (or anyone else) for the job consider this.  Among the substantive areas of expertise a Secretary needs are:

• Border security — More than 400 million people cross our borders every year.  Most are people we wish to welcome; a few are not.  Understanding that problem is likely the principal goal of DHS.  Likewise DHS screened roughly 2.5 million containers of goods annually (these are rough numbers, of course).

• Trade — At the same time the border is being secured, the Secretary has to manage a system that permits trade goods and visitors to enter our country for lawful purposes.  A world without imports and exports would be nearly impossible to imagine, and every 30 seconds added to screening procedures translates, almost directly, into hundreds of millions of dollars in costs.

And etc etc etc. Paul neglects to measure Trump’s appointee, General Kelly, against the responsibilities.

The scandals continue in a veritable flood, and the latest report comes courtesy Ron Klain:

Donald Trump gave his Foundation’s largest donor a CABINET spot yesterday. Did you see blaring headlines? Imagine if HRC had done that??

Yes, indeedy, the appointment of Linda McMahon – another inexperienced millionaire whose sole qualification appears to be that she gave a lot of money to the Trump Foundation. Is it fair to suggest that the possession of wealth is a fair proxy for ability in a Cabinet post? This appears to be the bet.

But this is certainly a scandal. Will the GOP step up to the plate and reprimand their President? The current hierarchical structure strongly suggests not.

Concerning the proposed last gasp measures, a reader writes:

The Democratic propaganda machine has historically not been effective enough to do something like this. There should be continuing “outrage” that the Republicans have refused for 9 months to consider Obama’s appointment.

Absolutely. And whoever is selected and approved should always be known as the illegitimate justice. The absolute refusal to even participate in the formal process is a shame and a good reason for the Democrats to throw rocks into the gears at this juncture, and is a measure of the immaturity of the members of the GOP who participated in this.

The City of Minneapolis is looking to the future – and putting the squeeze on monster bank Wells Fargo. Local news station WCCO has a report:

The city of Minneapolis is calling out Wells Fargo, saying they are looking into taking their business elsewhere.

The city council voted unanimously to explore ways they can stop doing business with banks that invest in the fossil fuel industry.

The council points to Wells Fargo’s backing of the Dakota Access Pipeline as an example.

“This is about looking at the options that we have as a city to use our taxpayer dollars in a responsible way, in a way that will protect the environment and the people,” said Councilmember Alondra Cano.

She says she proposed looking into how the city could end its relationship with Wells Fargo after her constituents showed concern that the nation’s fourth-largest bank is backing the pipeline project. And it is not just the environment she is concerned about.

Talking to a former Wells Fargo employee, he estimated the Minneapolis account to be significant, and stated that Wells Fargo is hip deep in the fossil fuel industry. While just Minneapolis isn’t going to be shifting Well Fargo out of the fossil fuel industry, a few more hits like this might make them start thinking about it.

Applause for Minneapolis.

If you’ve been hearing that the Democrats may still have a chance to installed Judge Garland into SCOTUS, but don’t really know what’s going on, Aaron Blake describes the two scenarios in WaPo here. The first is to take advantage of the Senate supposedly being out of session while the new members are sworn in. In this scenario, Obama would make a recess appointment, which is good for a year. SCOTUS has had recess appointments before, but it’s rare.

The second basically comes down to taking advantage of the fact that, come January 3rd, for a short while, the Senate doesn’t have 100 members, but only 66 – and the Democrats will have a 36-30 advantage. For those few minutes, Garland could be renominated, considered, and confirmed. Supposedly.

The legal thicket is formidable. The cultural consequences – either way – are deeply confusing. For most, it’s a question of whether the damage of the potential IJ¹ to liberal causes is worth starting a strong Cold War between the Parties. One facet that might not be immediately obvious, though, is the continuing evolution of the GOP. As it continues to head further to the right, will its strength and influence shrink? Will Trump’s swamp, getting deeper and deeper with every billionaire he nominates, ultimately drown the outrage of such a maneuver – successful or not? There’s a lot of calculated risks here, and I suspect the Democrats are just shaking their heads at these proposals.

But, just as a way to fire the imagination, they’re interesting.

¹Illegitimate Justice.

Sure glad these are small.

A synesthete is someone who, upon experiencing an input on one input, may experience an input on another input as well. Some of the best well known are those who associate colors with numbers. One of the rarest? NewScientist (26 November 2016) has the info:

WHEN you think about last April, what do you imagine? If you see a crisp image of a calendar in front of you, you might be a calendar synaesthete. …

Only a few people have calendar synaesthesia. To find out if they are having a real sensory experience, a team led by Vilayanur Ramachandran at the University of California, San Diego, tested two synaesthetes.

One [synaesthete], known as ML, sees her months as occupying an asymmetrical “V” shape. When asked at intervals to draw her calendar on a screen using a laser pointer, the angles and lengths of the V shape were always identical.

ML also appears able to use her calendar to easily navigate backwards through time. When asked to recite every third month backwards, she took 1.88 seconds per month, compared with 4.48 seconds in eight non-synaesthetes (Neurocase, doi.org/bs3j). “During the task we noticed that ML appeared to be inspecting her calendar,” says Ramachandran.

The cross-connections in one’s brain are fascinating. I have to wonder if there are evolutionary implications in synaesthetes. Nothing springs right to mind, but I’d be happy to entertain thoughts on the matter.

Some Egyptian are working on reviving an old martial art, as Menna Farouk reports in AL Monitor:

Players of an ancient Egyptian martial art are striving to revive it and turn it into a sport that aims to foster morals, respect and chivalry. Tahtib was once known as a martial art but has since changed into a stick game or dancing art. Its players now say that they want it to be an internationally recognized martial sport. …

Fourteen Hours (1951) doesn’t mess about getting to the central incident of this drama – a young man, Robert, standing on a ledge on the 15th floor of a skyscraper in New York City. From this incident erupts a number of psychological studies: of Robert, his mother, his father, the traffic cop trying to talk him down, the crowds below, even a divorcing couple. Each is a reaction to this central incident, as Robert battles his daemons, his despair, and his insecurities, while the cop deals as an old-time cop should with the barriers in his way – hard-nosed bulldozer when he can, otherwise talking his way around those who have their own ideas.

In terms of characters, some have that important feel that they have a life once the cameraman stows his instrument, while the rest are more drawn only for their roles; most of the leading cast feels quite lifelike. The story, if you like solid, if unspectacular, tension, is filled with mystery, refusing to reveal everything in the first ten minutes, leaving us to wonder what is driving this man to waver about on the ledge – and this cop to sit there with him.

The cinematography is quietly spectacular, utilizing, without overusing, unusual camera angles that illuminate the scene as various people might see it, from Robert’s view to that of a photojournalist searching for that perfect shot.

This is not a perfect movie. I wasn’t sweating with tension, sitting on the edge of my seat, sucking the enamel off my – nevermind. An occasional aside from the audience is not out of the question. But I enjoyed the exploration of the sick crevices of this man’s mind – and what appears to be motivating this sad behavior.

It’s listed as film noir, but I don’t think it quite qualifies. Regardless, if you like that sort of atmosphere, where a man’s life balances on the edge of a building, you could do worse than Fourteen Hours.

Having now read the Wikipedia entry, I’m a little scared. Too many deaths during production.

Susan Landau and Cathy O’Neil give an example  on Lawfare of how artificial intelligence is not quite as fool-proof as might be hoped:

Consider the recent example of Microsoft’s Tay-bot. This conversation-ready twitter bot was hastily removed sixteen hours after it was first put out. Tay had been carefully trained to avoid discussions of Eric Garner, but within a day the bot was spewing racist and anti-Semitic obscenities. According to Microsoft, this was because it was being trained through a “coordinated attack” by groups of Twitter users. And if you think we can get away with having bots that don’t “learn” from their interaction, we cannot. Without a dynamic interactive component, the bots will be obviously not human. We should learn our lesson from the Tay-bot; AI is simply not very smart yet.

One wonders how much ‘parenting’ the bot received. After all, the only intelligent beings who we respect are ourselves, so I (with my one college course in AI back in the 1980s <- this is known as self-snarking) would expect that our regimen for building an AI should include a ‘parenting’ phase, akin to our own – basically a supervised learning phase during which basic morality / ethics is instilled.

Judging from the reaction of the bot to the Twitter users, no such phase took place, and the bot, with no directives for, let us say, “right thinking”, went off the rails at the prompting of the “bigger boys”.

Regardless of the motivations of the Twitter users, I applaud their activities, as it exposes a flaw in this approach to AI. Fortunately for researchers, once they get the parenting phase right, then it should be a simple matter of copying that moral direction into each subsequent bot.

Unfortunately, parenting can be a hard thing to do. It might take years to finally get it right.

(A forgotten post, a little late.)

The mission to make judges the plaything of the masses continued unabated this election season, as Christie Thompson of The Marshall Project reports:

Outside groups spent more money on campaigns for seats on top state courts nationwide than ever before, an analysis by The Brennan Center for Justice shows. At least one seat was at stake in 27 states on Election Day.

Special interest organizations — most of which don’t have to disclose their donors under campaign finance laws — put a record $19.4 million into TV ads for judicial candidates, over half of all TV spending in these races. The Republican State Leadership Committee spent the most of any group, putting $4 million into eight different races as part of its stated effort to elect more conservative justices.

The spending largely failed to unseat the judges it targeted. In Kansas, Washington and Mississippi, for example, justices held onto their jobs despite costly efforts to remove them.

But spending by outside groups isn’t expected to drop off. As some experts pointed out, many judges were able to win re-election because they had plenty of money in their corner, too. “I think it can be misleading to just look at money going to challengers who lose and then concluding the money had no impact,” said Alicia Bannon, who closely follows judicial elections as senior counsel for the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program. “I fear the lesson is that money is important and may encourage more spending.”

And the idea that judges need money to remain judges is a very poor proxy for quality judicial results. In the Kansas retention battle, previously mentioned on this thread, Christie has some numbers for us:

The four justices targeted by the ads won their retention election with support from roughly 56 percent of voters. But Justice Caleb Stegall, who was not targeted in the ads, won with 71 percent.

Ya know, the whole idea of appointed judges, unaffected by the latest opinion polls, is a profoundly conservative, and I think good, idea – but if we trace the money, we find it’s conservative PACs and individuals who tend to throw money into these elections, and who appear to agitate for elected judges. Of course, the signal outrage are claims of “legislating from the bench”, and, according to Wikipedia, this goes all the way back to Thomas Jefferson, if under different phraseology. But sometimes decisions that go against you are simply decisions that go against you. Continuing to fight a legal battle by changing how the referees are picked, to be honest, smacks of sore losers who are stubborn because that’s how they were brought up, not to respect justice and the law.