Friday, February 28, 2014

Big Brother Is Watching You

Ordinarily I would avoid a post title quite so melodramatic on the grounds that it exaggerates what is really going on. Not this time.

From Jon Queally at Common Dreams, we learn that GCHQ, with the knowledge and/or assistance of the NSA, is hacking into the webcam chats of "millions" of unknowing users... without a warrant, without even reasonable suspicion that those people are involved in crime, let alone terrorism or other national security issues.

From Queally:
...

The latest documents leaked to journalists by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and published Thursday in the Guardian newspaper reveal that the British GCHQ spy agency—with possible assistance from its U.S. counterpart—built and maintained a program that allowed it to tap the live webcam chats of millions of internet users with no connection to criminal or national security investigations.

With a program codenamed "Optic Nerve," the documents reveal how the agency hacked into the camera feeds of those using Yahoo! webchats, capturing both snapshots of conversations and metadata associated with the communication. As its name indicates, at least part of the program was aimed at improving the government's ability to use digital eye-recognition technology to detect and catalog online users that may or may be not be part of a criminal investigation.

...

And yes, of course, many of the images (stills, snapped from webcams used in Yahoo! chats, saved to a GCHQ database) are sexually explicit. You expected otherwise?

Based on what is known, and what the program is called, I'd say they've got a lot of damned Optic Nerve...

Thursday, February 27, 2014

ROTFLMFAO!

Ted Cruz Refuses To Endorse Fellow Republican Senator From Texas. That's right: RWNJ Cruz won't endorse RWNJ Cornyn as Cornyn is "primaried" by RWNJ Steve Stockman.
Cruz
Stockman
Cornyn
I wonder whose side the Koch brothers will take.

Alabama May Ban Abortion Before Woman Knows She Is Pregnant

If this proposal doesn't either inflict "[t]he detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice [abortion] altogether" (Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), wiki, text) or trigger the viability provision of Roe, or both, I don't know what would.

From Lauren Rankin at TPM:
...

Alabama isn’t exactly known for its pro-choice credentials. The same legislature banned abortion at 20 weeks just two years ago and faces pending litigation over current state restrictions on abortion. Now, Alabama lawmakers have gone even further with the proposed HB490 bill, or the “Fetal Heartbeat Act,” which would “make it unlawful for a physician to perform an abortion on a pregnant woman after a heartbeat has been detected.”

In addition to the Fetal Heartbeat Act, Alabama lawmakers are also considering three more measures: a bill that would expand the current waiting period for an abortion from 24 hours to 48 hours; a bill that would make it significantly more difficult for a minor to obtain an abortion; and a bill that would prohibit abortions based on [fetal] anomalies unless the pregnant person “is made aware of the option of perinatal hospice services.”

Simply put, HB490 would ban abortions as early as six weeks, a point at which many women don’t even know they’re pregnant. Of the bill’s 27 cosponsors, 22 are men.

...
(Bolds mine. - SB)

Let's see. If you don't know you're pregnant, you don't know you need an abortion. But if you know you're pregnant, it's too late to obtain a legal abortion. Yeah, right; I'm sure that's what the Supreme Court intended in Roe. [/irony]

Put aside for the moment the fact that the Alabama Legislature is a scrotum... isn't that the word for a bag of male nuts?... and consider what they are trying to do. There is no explanation for this provision other than that it is an attempt to ban abortion altogether. If state legislatures can do that, it's a GOP right‑wing nut‑job's wet dream. I just hope there is no fertile woman nearby when he dreams it...

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

All That Garbage: What Will Houston Do To Itself?

I'm going to let the Texas Campaign for the Environment (TCE) tell the story from its beginning (H/T Frank Blake of Houston Sierra Club for pointing me to this source):
What is “One Bin for All?”

In 2012 the City of Houston applied for a Bloomberg Mayors Challenge grant for what it calls “One Bin for All,” a program the City claims will provide recycling to everyone in the City. The proposal is to build a facility which would allow City of Houston residents to throw all of their discards—trash, recycling, yard waste, food waste, etc.—into a single bin for sorting later. This type of facility is what is known as a “dirty MRF.”
In other words, we go back to what we used to do with trash in the pre-recycling days. Why am I not surprised this idea emerged from something with Bloomberg's name on it. Anyway...
What is a dirty MRF?

MRF stands for materials recovery facility, and all recycling centers are MRFs. This is a place where recyclable materials are sorted into their various types so they can be sold on the market—plastics of various types, metals of different types, paper, cardboard, glass, etc. A dirty MRF also sorts out trash. All discards—trash, recycling and organics—come in mixed through the front door, and separate categories of materials come out sorted through the back door.
Except... they don't. The process produces a wet, dirty mess which, unlike single-stream recyclables (i.e., all recyclables in one bin, all wet or nonrecyclable trash in another), has no commercial value as-is.
...

Why are dirty MRFs a bad idea?

Wet plus dry equals wet. If you take dry, clean materials and throw them in the same bin as wet, messy trash, all of the materials get wet and dirty. Most recyclables are only valuable on the market if they are clean and dry. This means that much of the paper and cardboard you throw in this “One Bin” cannot be sold, and will not be recycled. ... Even plastics collected from real recycling are sometimes considered too dirty. Dirty MRF plastic may not be able to be recycled at all.
Will China take this?
That's because China, our biggest customer for recyclables (they need the plastics to mix into food and sell back to us [/irony]), insists on ultra‑clean plastics for recycling. So...
How much material in a dirty MRF is really recycled?

Estimates from the Royal Society of Chemistry are that 10-30% of dirty MRF materials can be recycled. ...
So we go from recycling, say, a good majority of our recyclable wastes to recycling 10-30%, right? Wrong, based on the experience of the city of Toronto; they managed at best 5-10%. Don't believe everything you're told, and don't believe a damned thing you heard from Bloomberg & Co.

But that's not the last implausible claim:
How can the City of Houston promise 75% diversion in two years?

Dirty MRFs in the past have used trash incineration to claim big “diversion.” The City of Houston has called for the new dirty MRF to use “gasification” and “catalytic conversion” technologies, both of which are defined as incineration by the EPA.
INCINERATION. Finally, the truth comes out. They're gonna burn the dirty MotheRF... I mean, the dirty MRF. Just like the old days. And also just like the old days, incineration of trash is one of the single most polluting processes in the world. Period. Through the "good" offices of some Bloomberg foundation, Houston is proposing to do with trash what our parents and grandparents did with trash.

What an improvement, eh? Eh?

Monday, February 24, 2014

Sid Caesar (1922 — 2014)

Sid Caesar (d. 2/12/2014)
Sorry to be so late, but the NYT's Mervyn Rothstein and Peter Keepnews tell the story better than I ever could anyway.

R.I.P., Mr. Caesar. You made us laugh!

Australian Organic Farmer Loses Livelihood Over GMO‑Contaminated Crops

(Subject changed; it's not clear the farmer is suing. FDN could be clearer on the actual facts on the ground. - SB)

Details are taken from a Food Democracy Now petition:
Organic garden
Right now an important case is being heard halfway around the world in Western Australia about organic farmer Steve Marsh, whose organic field was contaminated by his neighbor’s genetically engineered canola. As a result, Steve lost his organic certification and as much as 70% of his Steve’s farm has been contaminated with Monsanto’s patented genes.

With clever fine print in their seed contracts, Monsanto is not legally liable for their patented genes contaminating an organic farmer’s field due to their "no liability" agreement farmers are forced to sign when they plant Monsanto's GMO seeds.

As a result, Steve’s family’s livelihood has been put at risk. He could literally lose everything.

,,,
Bolds original... after all, it is a promo for a petition and optional contribution. But the problem is agonizingly real for organic farmers everywhere. If Monsanto proceeds as it has to this point, we could literally end up with genetic contamination of every formerly organic crop everywhere.

It is hard to find any absolutes in the world of GMOs. The subject is scientifically complex, the determinations of safety rarely uninfluenced by commercial interest, and the dangers, if any, quite possibly very slow to appear in the food chain. The cases in which published papers opposing GMOs have been outright faked do not help matters. And there's no denying the substance of what Richard Schiffman says in the same article: whatever the problems in GMOs themselves, the worst thing about them is what they enable in the way of pesticide‑heavy agriculture using repeated dousing of crops to keep them bug-free.

Personally, I'm not happy with R=====p™ or R=====p‑Ready™ crops. It seems to me that the following is only fair, no matter what Monsanto may wish:
  • Foods made with GMOs should be labeled in all cases. That way, the consumer has a choice if s/he has an opinion.
  • Producers of GMO technology should be strictly liable for contamination of nearby organic crops, as GMO contamination renders formerly organic produce valueless.
  • Research on the safety of GMO technology should continue aggressively in an unbiased setting, which probably means not in a country in which GMOs are already heavily deployed (US, India, etc.).
Will that make a difference? Likely not. My best guess is that this sucker is going forward no matter what anyone does to hold it back. Welcome to your future... just remember, you have no say in it.

(I found quite a bit of background info on the blog Food Politics by Marion Nestle, NYU professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health.)

Sunday, February 23, 2014

'Dog Whistle Politics': F. Michael Higginbotham Hosts Discussion With Author Ian Haney López

The breadth, degree and sometimes subtlety of today's racial dog whistle politics as related to its history back through Nixon's Southern strategy is examined by Prof. Ian Haney López, faculty member of U.C. Berkeley's Boalt School of Law, in his book, Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals Have Reinvented Racism and Wrecked the Middle Class, and in conversation with Prof. Higginbotham, U. Baltimore School of Law, and the usual range of commenters (many undeniably astute) at FDL.

I found this conversation more inspiring of optimism than fear, and I found the subject more complicated than I anticipated. Recommended!

A Fluent Society?

Galbraith
A few weeks ago, browsing one of my favorite used book stores, I happened upon an apparent first edition of John Kenneth Galbraith's The Affluent Society. Having never read it when it was published in 1958 (my excuse: I was 10 years old), and having hardly experienced affluence at any time in my life, I decided to find out what the good Professor Galbraith, truly a towering intellect (6' 8", say the biographies), had to say on the subject. I am about halfway through this fascinating book— fascinating if you like economics— and I am beginning to see why it is one of the also estimable Prof. Robert Reich's favorite books. Not that it's easy reading, oh no... but it is not aimed first and foremost at professional economists, and it is not in the least mathematically challenging. You might give it a look if you can find it.

Thelwell
Since the Deepwater Horizon event, I have wondered if instead we needed a book titled The Effluent Society, but it turns out the British political cartoonist Norman Thelwell beat me to that thought by more than 40 years. Have all the great ideas already been thought of?

Friday, February 21, 2014

Obama Rescinds Offer To Cut Medicare, Social Security As Tea Party Insists On No New Taxes

The great schism in the Republican Party has led to the abandonment of the so-called Grand Bargain. Obama withdrew his offer to cut Social Security and Medicare in response to the Tea Party's refusal to offer $800 billion in new tax revenues.

It should never have come to this: Obama should never have put the laws best loved by nearly all Americans (even Republicans not wearing tea bags) on the table in the first place. But he did, in hopes of getting new tax revenues from the GOP. But the Tea Party wing of the increasingly extreme Republican Party wouldn't hear of it. And so we owe thanks, to Obama for finally figuring out reality, and to the Tea Party for being so goddamned stupid as to think the whole world is going to cave to their political desires with no concessions on their part.

Thursday, February 20, 2014

DHS To Make Track License Plates

Not mine, FBOW
Sorry about the error; I suppose it's wishful thinking on my part that the folks at DHS would end up making license plates. In fact, though, they intend to create a nationwide database of license plates and hook it up to all those cameras you see over streets and freeways and buildings everywhere. Your tax dollars at work!

How Do We Get Out Of This Chicken-S#!t Outfit?

Fair warning... if you enjoy eating chicken (it's not my thing, but people's tastes vary), reading this article will cure you of that fondness for good and all:

USDA takes its bad idea of speeding up chicken inspection lines and makes it worse.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Mar. 4 Texas Primary, Harris County: Uncertain Where You Vote, Or What Candidates Your Ballot Will Contain?

Use this tool to find out. If you want to vote early (already underway!), here is a map of all the early voting locations in Harris County, with dates and times the polls are open.

Here's the first of several public service announcements: be sure to take an accepted photo ID (e.g., your Texas driver's license) with you as well as your voter registration certificate. You won't be able to vote without the photo ID. The voter certificate alone is not enough. This VOM (Voter Obstruction Measure) is brought to you by your Texas Republican Party... Oh, and please note: some Election Day polling places have been moved from their historical locations. Be sure to check yours online before you head for the polls! This VOM is doubtless also bestowed on us by the GOP...

‘Liberal Revolt’?

I suppose it is good to see the word "liberal" in a headline at a Democratic web site, even if the article is a sort of complaint from the O-bots: "Obama Faces Liberal Revolt On Social Security Cuts" isn't much encouragement to liberals that our brand is enjoying a resurgence of influence. I can just imagine Jay Carney shouting, "Sire! Sire! the peasants liberals are revolting!" and O supplying the conventional reply...

Monday, February 17, 2014

J. S. Bach: Cantata 106, Gottes Zeit Ist Die Allerbeste Zeit (In Memoriam Robert B. Lynn)




Follow this link to the YouTube video to view the text of the cantata.

I remember performing this funeral cantata, written early in Bach's career, under the baton of Dr. Lynn; Paul Mott and I played the pair of recorders. Those were the days. I was young (relatively speaking); Paul was younger still; Dr. Lynn was younger then than I am now.

In the 17th and 18th centuries, recorder was frequently used in sacred cantatas to refer to heaven, sometimes to the ascent to heaven. It was either that, or a pastoral reference in secular cantatas, shepherds charming shepherdesses with their "tuneful flute," etc. So we always got the good parts.

Gay NFL Players Too Big A Problem To Tackle? ESPN Survey Shows Most Players Don't Care

I confess I'm getting really tired of football fans who feel it's just too icky for one of their NFL heroes to be gay. A survey shows it's not an issue with a great majority of the players. So why is the players' sexuality even the fans' business?

'That defensive lineman is
flirting with me!' —
NOT on this man's mind!
This is not about whether players are boinking other players. In general, it's considered bad form in America to hit on one's colleagues (for a meaning of "hit on" that doesn't involve one's job as a defensive lineman), whatever your occupation, for women or men, gay or straight. Not that it doesn't happen, but that people who pursue their love lives at the office probably have more serious problems to contend with than whether someone outside the relationship approves of the participants' sexual orientation.

As a musician, I often found myself in situations in which fifty percent or more of my colleagues on a job were openly gay. I'm openly straight. Why it occurs to anyone that s/he should care about his/her teammates' (coworkers') sexuality is beyond me. And no audience member ever asked me questions or expressed concerns about the matter. Why should it be any different in sports?

I realize football involves more physical contact than music. Or maybe it's about locker rooms, but I can't even comprehend that: when I think of the number of times I've changed into concert dress in the men's room of a hall or museum, I find it just isn't an issue... just before and just after a performance, a musician has a whole lot more on his/her mind than that. The same is surely true of professional football players. And the same should be true of fans.

Put bluntly: if it bothers you, just get over it. It's none of your business... and it's damned tiresome to listen to.

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Sherlock Holmes Was One Of These, Though Not American

AFP through Yahoo News:

1 in 4 Americans unaware that Earth circles Sun

AFP – Fri, Feb 14, 2014
Source: Copernicus,
De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, 1543
Via Wikipedia
Chicago (AFP) - Americans are enthusiastic about the promise of science but lack basic knowledge of it, with one in four unaware that the Earth revolves around the Sun, said a poll out Friday.

The survey included more than 2,200 people in the United States and was conducted by the National Science Foundation.

Nine questions about physical and biological science were on the quiz, and the average score -- 6.5 correct -- was barely a passing grade.

Just 74 percent of respondents knew that the Earth revolved around the Sun, according to the results released at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Chicago.

Fewer than half (48 percent) knew that human beings evolved from earlier species of animals.

...
I'm pretty sure that sound I just heard was my late science teacher father's ashes churning in his urn...

Heliocentrism (science-based as opposed to myth-based) goes back at least to Nicolaus Copernicus in 1543. Nonscientific speculation on heliocentrism goes back to 4th century BCE and several of the ancient Greeks. So there's not a lot of excuse for a person living in a science-oriented 21st-century society like ours not knowing what revolves around what. Even Sherlock Holmes dismissed the fact not because it wasn't true but because he had no need of it... and we have only Dr. Watson's word for Holmes's ignorance on the subject; I find it implausible myself.

If you are about my age (within, say, ±15 years of my age 65, you lived in what may come to be thought of as America's golden age of science. I am beginning to think perhaps it was merely gold-plated. I can't say that's a comforting thought.

Update On Robert B. Lynn

Through the kind assistance of Lisa [Lynn] Bailey, I now have a photo of Dr. Lynn. I'll post it here and also with the original obituary below.


Saturday, February 15, 2014

Kentucky Sinkhole Swallows Vintage Corvettes

This should make Mustang Bobby shed a tear. It's small consolation that similar things sometimes happen to ancient musical instruments. The sinkhole occurred in the middle of the National Corvette Museum:


(Photos: Zora Dunlov. Follow the link to an index of her beautiful photos in hi-res images, many of intact Corvettes... a real pleasure to view.)

According to the National Corvette Museum, the following eight Corvettes were affected:

Two belonging to GM:
  • 1993 ZR-1 Spyder on loan from General Motors
  • 2009 ZR1 “Blue Devil” on loan from General Motors
Six belonging to the Museum:
  • 1962 Black Corvette
  • 1984 PPG Pace Car
  • 1992 White 1 Millionth Corvette
  • 1993 Ruby Red 40th Anniversary Corvette
  • 2001 Mallett Hammer Z06 Corvette
  • 2009 White 1.5 Millionth Corvette
Chevrolet will oversee restoration of the Corvettes in time for some upcoming events later this year.

Friday, February 14, 2014

You Say You Want No Evolution, Well, You Know...

Drawing: Capt. James Cook voyage 1768-1771
(scientific, pre-Darwinian)
... you're too late to change that world. An old friend of mine from middle school through college, a fundamentalist Christian who home-schooled his kids, nonetheless taught them that facts cannot be debated. No doubt he and I differed on what establishes an assertion as a "fact." But a Missouri legislator has decided to test that concept in the most aggressive way possible: he has proposed a law that would
... require the school district or charter school to notify the parent or legal guardian of each student enrolled in the district of:
(1) The basic content of the district's or school's evolution instruction to be provided to the student; and
(2) The parent's right to remove the student from any part of the district's or school's evolution instruction.
The late lamented Stephen Jay Gould once presented a touring lecture appearing (among many other places) at Rice University in Houston. The title of the lecture began "The Fact of Evolution..." and concluded something like "as Explained in Darwin's Theory," or something similar. The distinction is absolutely critical to the understanding of science education: some things are facts established beyond a reasonable doubt by physical evidence and/or experiment, on the one hand, and on the other, some things are theories created by human minds, explanations of facts consistent with all known established facts.

For example, "evolution," in the sense of "descent with modification" is such a fact: the fossil record proves to any observer with an unbiased mind that later life forms derived from earlier ones. By contrast, "Darwin's theory of evolution," a very specific explanation of the mechanisms by which the established physical fact of descent with modification took place, is a theory. Theories are debatable; indeed, in a scientific context, theories can even be replaced with better theories more consistent with known facts, including new facts learned over time. Facts, on the other hand, in general are not subject to wholesale replacement.

Occasionally, as with the onset of quantum physics, facts previously established are found to be in error to a degree or in a manner that requires a re-evaluation of their particulars. But the whole of physics did not collapse with the first evidence for quantum mechanics, nor was Newton's work literally replaced by Einstein's, Bohr's etc. Some ID creationists are quick to shout "A-HA! Newton was never right in the first place! No eternal truths there!" Perhaps not, but Newton's work was good enough for humankind to navigate from the Earth to the Moon and back, to place satellites in geosynchronous orbit, etc., even if it took Einstein's work to insert the relativistic corrections to make your GPS work properly.

Such deliberate misconstructions might be merely silly, and one might legitimately simply mock people who insist on them. But in today's America, some of those people have in mind to establish their "higher [religious] truths" in our system of public education, by statutory law. Such people must be stopped.

In America, people are free to establish their own religions according to their own beliefs, however nutsy those beliefs may be. People may even form their own schools within the context of their religion, and teach their own kids all sorts of unsupported or even contrafactual things. But religion is not science, ever, even in the best of cases, and the First Amendment to our Constitution assures us that our government may not establish a religion, and that is exactly what the introduction of religion-based "science" contrary to best available present-day scientific thinking into government-sponsored schools amounts to.

Enough is enough. If the courts will not put a stop to this willful distortion of our kids' science education, the show is over, and we might as well strike the set and close the theater.

Valentine's Day. Stella. Dimassi's Mediterranean Buffet.

Need I say more?

Static Pages (About, Quotes, etc.)

No Police Like H•lmes



(removed)