The Final C

This morning on my way to work, I listened to a book on Audible (Guns, Germs and Steel - quite a fascinating book) and did not fire up any other audio or video apps at work during the day, which is why I was duly surprised, as I got in my car at 11pm to drive home, that Jussi Bjorljng's 'Che Gelida Manina' was playing through my Bluetooth audio. I did not try to investigate why or switch back to my book, but, rather, took it as a sign and decided to listen through to its climactic conclusion. If you are familiar with Puccini's 'La Boheme' and you've listened to this particular aria from a variety of tenors, you will instantly recognize how Bjorling completely butchers his Italian and plows through some of the nuances of the aria, but all of that is forgiven with his signature, albeit a bit strident, high C. And that, my friends, is the analogy that I took as a sign. Even after a less than effective day or week or month or year or life, even a haggard wolf can howl in a way that is haunting, so go ahead and slug your way through this life, but leave enough for a high C, in whatever form that is for you, at the very end.

https://youtu.be/K_1Ry44K-MM

The Pattern of the Problem

The pattern of the problem I am noticing in the news and on Facebook seems to have less to do with Republican or Democrat, Right-wing or Left-wing, Conservative or Liberal, or anything in between, and more to do with the oversimplification of stereotypes. I - personally - have not seen anything from my friends that would cause me to love them any less, because I understand that an opinion that I might not agree with is not their defining characteristic. At the end of the day, we are far more alike and not nearly as separate from one another as we think. If we could embrace debates with this kind of understanding, we might get a lot more value out of points and counterpoints than we do today. Given that the world is divided into people who think they are right (wink), we should be open to and investigate differing opinions, with the exception of opinions that are akin to outright hate and discrimination, which I almost never see in my network of friends. How about you?

And Now for Some Real Progress on Climate Change

The reaction and action stemming from Trump's announcement that he is pulling the US out of the Paris Accord leads me to believe that the movement is actually quite antifragile. I am not in agreement with Trump taking the US out of a leadership role on climate change, but I foresee some benefits: (1) other countries will step in to fill the void, and, perhaps, do even more than they might have with the US in the picture, (2) within the US, other entities below the Federal level - states, cities, towns, companies and individuals - also appear to be stepping in to fill the void, as they reaffirm their commitment to countering global climate change. It is altogether possible that we've gone from lower-potential agreement and complacency to higher-potential disagreement and momentum, such that the US, as a collection of smaller entities, will do more to fight climate change than it otherwise might have with the Federal Government in the lead.  In my opinion, this is a foreshadowing of a similar, antifragile 'snap back' that Trump's very election will yield: Whether Democrat or Republican, and irrespective of policy views, voters will see the cost of incompetency, and they will choose more wisely the next time around. Again, irrespective of party or policy, I believe the choice will be better next time. If not, then I will start to worry. At the moment, I think we are just being led around by the Ghost of Christmas Future, who is giving us a clear dose of our choices today, and we'll wake up in time to save Tiny Tim, minus a few appendages, unfortunately, but that is the price of lessons learned. 

Immoral vs Illegal

This distinction between immoral and illegal is getting to be quite troubling, but also, unfortunately, quite pertinent. We've all heard one politician or business leader or another say "I have broken no laws", without necessarily denying whatever immoral atrocity they've been accused of committing. A recent example: On CNN Tonight with Don Lemon, Michael Reagan first postulated that this whole investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged collusion with the Russians was a political witch hunt, and then followed that up with something like "even if the Trump campaign did collude with the Russians, what law did they break?" This left Don Lemon stupefied, as he patently did not know. His best response, when asked again, was something like "people go to jail for collusion all the time", as if to say that the verb itself is illegal, like two 3rd graders colluding to pool their lunch money together to buy one of those big chocolate chip cookies in the cafeteria (god I loved those cookies) could actually go to jail for engaging in the act of an illegal verb. I am disappointed on two fronts: (1) the guest's attempt to mitigate the immorality of the alleged collusion by relying the legality of same, and (2) the fact that the host, who I am taking to be representative of the press at large, has been talking about this topic for months, while not being quite sure as to the legal implications of it. One person is trying to sell us a false equivalence, and the other is trying to sell us the news. Either way, it seems like both of them are lacking some foundation. 

The Darker Side of Analog-Digital Convergence

I performed the ultimate computer science move on my Ford Focus today: My radio stopped working. so, at a Red light, I turned the car off, started it up and, voila, the radio worked again. I don't know why and I venture a guess that Ford would not know why, but there you have it. Coincidentally, as I drove off, there was a story on NPR about how Farmers are now having to jailbreak their tractors to perform repairs that they have otherwise been doing in the past, but are now precluded from doing by John Deere, as only authorized dealers have a USB key loaded up with the right software to unlock the system for repairs and testing. This blending of analog and digital worlds is disconcerted. What if the zipper on my pants encounters a buffer overflow error when I have to pee? Will I suffer a personal buffer overflow? ;-)

Baby Poop

I have been trying to figure how to describe the new brand of poop that Nicholas has been selling over here. When we first brought him home he was producing a winter formulation: diesel. Then, he quickly, if not prematurely, switched over to a summer formulation: gasoline. Now that we are entering the festive months of Primavera, he has switched over to a more appropriate formulation: Pesto (I can just taste that fresh basil, pine nuts and parmesan!) How can I describe this new version of poop? I imagine a closed-circuit video of me strolling along a crowed subway platform in NYC. I pause, look around, and slowly pull out a zip lock bag with what appears to be a dirty diaper in it. I slowly slip on a small gas mask and goggles, then open the bag and let the diaper slip behind a trash can. I walk away calmly but expediently. 5 minutes later, would be passengers start collapsing, with foam coming out of their mouths :-/

Support Not Illumination

​
The other night on NPR's Intelligence Squared, a modern day marvel of civil debate that I highly recommend, someone quoted Andrew Lang (1884-1912), albeit incorrectly attributing the quote to Mark Twain, as a caution against relying too heavily on statistics. Lang stated that we should use "statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts – for support rather than for illumination." This concept can and should be extended to the modern day combination of big data, AI and algorithms, though by the time the virtuous cycle of ingesting, analyzing and automating through algorithms has been created, the analogy has gone way beyond lampposts to the very sidewalk under our feet, which gives us great confidence and comfort as we stroll along said sidewalk, until a 1970 Buick Skylark comes careening off the road and runs us over ;-)