2022-07-02
Readings
A major advance in cell biology, if the result holds (and if the cells actually are totipotent, which the paper does not quite claim): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04967-9
Interesting to hear a demonstration of the unusual sounds in Zulu, particularly from someone with an incredible voice:
Some worms were found that can consume styrofoam ; good news for the concern of waste management. It’s unclear whether we’ll want to simply release the worms as-is into landfills (maybe easiest) or use their gut enzymes in some other form. It’s probably also worth paying attention to what the products from those enzymes are. https://phys.org/news/2022-06-superworms-capable-munching-plastic.html
We need more policing (of some kind, probably not actual police) to catch orgs that manipulate the scientific publication process; this story about companies that sell authorship on paper is chilling: https://retractionwatch.com/2022/05/16/journal-retracts-paper-listed-on-authorship-for-sale-site-following-retraction-watch-report/
Attempts at using gene expression patterns to investigate the evolution of placentae; I’m unsure of the reliability of the method (it feels a little softer than finding remnants; more like linguistics) but the results are interesting. https://phys.org/news/2022-07-placentas-evolved-mammals.html
I supported Sea Shepherd in their vigilante green activism. It’s interesting to see them pivot somewhat to supporting essential science on the topic; it might be the right move in that one org can’t prevent all the damage on this topic and securing better regulation might be more effective. https://www.science.org/content/article/can-former-conservation-pirates-help-scientists-study-oceans
Thoughts
The casualness of death threats and Poe’s Law - I’ve been thinking about reported death threats to Kelsey Hightower over his signing an open letter in opposition to crypto, and how people do death threats over any old thing. What should such a threat mean? Which are serious? How do we weigh them? It is, unfortunately, as easy to issue a threat if one is completely nonserious and just registering annoyiance, versus as a serious thing. There’s no way to tell as the recipient. I’ve received my share at various points in the past, many of them because I was once prominent on wikipedia and some people are very touchy. I think it makes sense to consider them outside the boundaries of free speech, both in our laws and in private platform governance. What should the impact of them be in debates? Ideally none - receiving a threat doesn’t make one’s cause any more just or validate telling others to back off and let one have one’s way. But we should also condemn them when they turn up, especially when they’re from “our side” of an issue; if we can’t even do that, we’re definitely not doing our job in countering extremism on our side.
Polling right - For sites that do polls, I’m often frustrated with inadequate options, with none expressing my views on a thing. But even when that’s well-handled, degree of certainty rarely is, and it might be nice to offer some scale of how far off the presented options are from accurately depicting one’s stance (feedback for the pollwriter). We sometimes see more variance in other kinds of polls, e.g. when would you like to hold a dinner, where some providers offer “yes”, “not ideal but yes”, and “no”; that’s nice. But more broadly, polling needs more sensitivity, at the obvious cost of making summarising accurately more difficult.
The recent SC prayer ruling is more surprising from a “bad law” perspective than Roe v Wade; there are many people who liked the legality of abortion that Roe v Wade and later cases established, while finding the legal justification it sat on shaky (could honour killings be done with a privacy argument? Infanticide? What are the natural limits of that line of argument?). The prayer ruling feels like a more dramatic step, where the Supreme Court gave a thumbs up to state actors, working in their role, incorporating religious practices into that role. I find this more worrying from a legal/political perspective than the abortion shift, because while the effects on the ground are far smaller, the loss of the clear lines between church and state promises a lot of further bad rulings in this vein.
It is evidence of the degree of divergence in fields, particularly absent data on subjective matters, that brilliant people can so strongly disagree
There are many shortcuts to end an argument that are often invalid. Demands for evidence that are one-sided. Demands that anyone who wants a protection take part in enforcing it.
I sometimes daydream about what societies today might look like if paganism had survived-thrived into the modern day, without monotheism strangling it. But there are faults in paganism as well, and I try to remember that; even the transition between Judaism (in its modern monotheistic form) and the other Abrahamic faiths involved a universalising of morality that in many ways was an advance. But also part of the problem. If we are to value tolerance, a belief that we should not be just for our tribe and treat those outside as being below our concern is a win, but it also means we’re going to be looking over those tribal boundaries and looking to right wrongs there. I see no good principles that would avoid this, just (maybe) good judgement. Maybe a clear idea of what principles we’re willing to fight for everywhere, which we’ll only fight for within our society, and which we’ll just advocate for. Which is the beginnings, alas, of the intuitions that lead into my particular metavalue analysis rather than a broadly-sought arrangement.
Trump and the commission - The problem with Trump is not just that he tried to overturn the peaceful transfer of power, but the broader problem of performative stupidity and rebellion against all checks and balances in our governmental system. Some of the norms pushed by progressives, and some of the norms pushed by technocrats, can feel a heavy burden at times. Fighting the ones that are actually a problem takes good judgement, selectivity, and more importantly a clear vision of where those norms should be. Pure rebellion is easy but is far too destructive to be worth it.
Current Events
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues, with new atrocities including missle stirkes on shopping malls, indiscriminate strikes at the capital, and alleged use of white phosphorous on an island that the Russian army had been using as a naval blockpoint until recently. In the meantime, Finland and Sweden have yielded to Turkish objections and appear on a clear path to join NATO. I remain frustrated that western powers have not declared war on Russia and started to strike back at Russia the way it’s been pummeling its neighbour. When a nation is insulated from the harsher costs of its attempts to gain land, there isn’t enough reason for it to stop. Moscow should see an incoming rocket for every rocket it launches at Ukraine
We’re seeing a reminder of how hard it is to build new economic arrangements when the old ones are large-scale and based in countries with a geographic advantage (obviously, useful natural resources are not evenly distributed, at least at the individual resource level, across the world). As some countries are nervous about US history and ambitions (and recently instability), Russia’s recent-ish embrace of fascism and invasions, and China’s domestic politics making their foreign policy iffy, the efforts to prevent such things from being used as poltiical leverage are ramping up. And while I’ll argue without regrets that the US is by far the least regrettable of the choices, I think it’s a good idea that other countries have a plan B for if their relationship with any of the 3 superpowers goes sour (even as Russia fades from the category and a few other countries likely are becoming candidates for emerging into it). A stronger Europe (however that’s arranged; I’m not fond of the EU in practice for various reasons although I like the idea of an EU) may help make the US behave better in some circumstances
Interesting to see China require qualifications to talk about certain topics on social media; like a lot else, I can see both positive and negative aspects to these requirements. The negative being that the qualifications can act as a leash to tout the party line (literally) on topics where the party line doesn’t need to be touted quite so tightly (restrictions are more reasonable in medicine than other topics). The positive being simple harm and misinformation reduction, which are laudible goals, just with a worrying method. https://gerona.ca/china-bans-over-30-live-streaming-behaviors-and-requires-qualifications-to-discuss-law-finance-and-medicine/
Some time back I was bothered by what I think was a Progressive excess - a law that would give noncitizens the right to vote in NYC elections. Largely because part of what citizenship means is the ability to participate in the direction of society; noncitizens are guests, not stakeholders. It was surprising to see it tried because this strikes me as basic civics. Recently a judge overturned this (because it’s not compatible with the State Constitution). I’m still bothered that it was tried. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/27/politics/noncitizen-voting-new-york/index.html
Reviewlets
Forgive me Father (game) - This feels like the answer to what it would be like if the original DOOM had more of a victorian horror style, some plot, and a skill tree. I’m totally down for that; I haven’t played much yet, but what I’ve seen is fantastic.
Star Fraction (book) - I’m rereading this for what’s probably the third time; it’s one of my favourite series, and while in my first read I mostly read for the characters and the environments, this time I’m also paying attention to the politics of the piece. One of the things I like about Ken Macleod’s writing is that while it explores ideas (and probably has opinions), it doesn’t try to push them, it just creates a world with a wide variety of views, real conflicts, and reasonable concerns where people are blind to each others tragedies and lets things roll from there. I dipped briefly into his latest work before deciding to reread this series first, but I’m looking forward to getting back to that latest work when I’m done
Nightengale’s Lament (book) - Another Nightside book, still some nice worldbuilding buried among the comically bad writing. (it’d be cute to be able to run these books through a filter that’d delete all sentences that say some variant of “this is the nightside”, paired with some stupid swagger). I don’t know if I’ll make it through the entire series; I remain repelled and interested in about equal measures
The Art of Raising a Puppy (book) - I was initially curious whether this book, by the Monks of New Skete, was written by the kind of religious people I like and get along with (at a proper distance), or the other kind. I think it’s the former; this is a book about the life cycle of dogs as human companions, written by people who understand life and hold themselves to high standards. It’s topical (I got it in the run-up to picking up my pup)
Amusements
I particularly like this lock puzzle that LockPickingLawyer did; I’ve grown a little bored with his normal videos because they’re a little too formulaic, but I still appreciate him and so when he mixes it up a bit it can be a treat:
I have mixed feelings on Return to Monkey Island; they chose a terrible art style and are sticking with it despite it being clear that most fans of the series dislike it (I’m not inclined to play the finale if it keeps the art style), although I hope the criticism is merely that - strong criticism. The difference between that and abuse can be subtle to someone who feels they’re wrapping up part of their life’s work though. Strange to see a creator defend their work as “making the game I, not they, want to make” (paraphrased). Maybe we need more of that in general, even if this time in particular it’s going to end badly
I’ve been thinking through this, chewing on the proofs, and I think I partly understand it; Benford’s law feels a little bit like the vos Savant solutions to the Monty Hall Problem, where enumeration helps a lot with understanding): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law
Recent Music
Glitter Days - Firewater - This song was cut from one of Firewater’s albums, only available as a small excerpt. I sometimes get obsessed with such songs; loved it when it was finally released
Waking Up Beside You - Stabbing Westward - I wonder what other denizens could live inside the basic timing and backing in this piece, which is interesting
The English Way - Fightstar - A lot of the elements of this song remind me of songs from the 90s, stitched together in a novel way
Make a Beast of Myself - Twin Atlantic - Most notable for some of the softer voices in the song, which sound like rain in parts.
Personal
I now have a new puppy, and it’s a lot of work. Early bathroom training is underway. Coming to realise how much personal time I’m giving up with having a dog; very different from a cat.