Category Archives: Uncategorized

What did the President know, and when did he Know it?

Spread the love

Below is a nice video from Move On Dot Org, as well as a link to a petition of theirs.

I would like to take this opportunity to caution everyone who is trying to figure out what is going on in the White House to avoid being misled by confusion, ignorance, or intentional misdirection. I have five points.

1) Be prepared to hold multiple competing hypothesis in mind at once. I promise you this: Whatever you think now, or come to realize over the coming months, is not a good historical description of what happened (or is happening). We can look back to Watergate to understand this. For Watergate, many, perhaps most, of the relevant conversations among the co conspirators were actually recorded and we can listen to them today. Many years after the event, a detailed description of actions, motivations, effects, etc. could be put down by historians. At the time the scandal was breaking, and the government was crumbling under the weight of the Nixon administration’s nefarious activities, no two people had the same theory of what was happening, and no one individual was as correct in their thinking as someone today who carefully studies the issue could be.

2) Eschew Occam’s razor, or at least, understand it and do not misuse it. It is almost never the case that in the affairs of humans the simplest explanation is the most likely to be correct. Given two incorrect explanations, the one that is simpler will have the smallest number of things wrong with it, but that is of little consolation if they are both wrong. (The real use of occam’s razor is to develop a testable hypothesis, not to find truth. So, you don’t have to give up the precious Occam’s razor. You just have to not use it to find truth, because that is not what it does.)

3) Recognize the fact that multiple different explanations may be based on very different premises that might not be compatible. For example, consider these two alternatives:

a) Flynn was on the phone with the Russians in order to convey information from Trump to Putin about sanctions.

vs.

b) Flynn was on the phone with the Russians in order to get orders from Putin, to convey those orders to Trump.

Both are extreme examples of Treason. Either could be true. Both may be wrong. But they are not likely both true, and in fact represent extemely different models of what is happening. So, pairs of explanations or descriptions of what is going on in the White House may not be compatible with each other if they each fall into a different presumptive model.

4) Ignore this meme, which is spreading: “The coverup is worse than the crime.”

Prosecutors will follow the Al Capone model every time. They will try to get the bad guy using any method that works (in the case of the murdering crime boss Capone, it was tax evasion), and they will avoid using methods that have even a modest chance of failure. This is one of the most under-appreciated yet critically and centrally important aspects of our criminal justice system. Think about it for a moment. You will understand so much more of what happens if you grok this, and to grok this you must ignore the mainstream media because they do not grok it even though they see it every day.

The press is fond of saying “the cover up is greater than the crime.” Sometimes that is true, but we really are more concerned with cases where the crime is more important than the normal human reaction to pretend you didn’t do it.

For example, if Flynn really was conspiring with the Russians, on behalf of Trump, to determine executive action that would benefit a foreign power because the foreign power is paying for that benefit, or has blackmail material to force it, than the worst possible form of treason occurred short of a treasonous event that kills Americans. A prosecutor may never be able to prove that in court sufficiently to get a conviction, or even make an indictment along these lines. But a prosecutor might very well be able to prove that evidence was tampered with or a federal investigator, or Congress, was lied to.

Let me underscore a key point too easily lost: Even if a prosecutor feels there is an 80% chance of getting a conviction on a higher level crime, they won’t go to court over it. They’ll settle for less or focus on the nearly 100% winnable lesser crime. So, even if all reasonable observers can walk away concluding, fairly, that the higher level crime happened, it may not ever be charged because of this self regulation by prosectors.

In the Watergate scandal, the cover up was extensive, bizarre, illegal, and winnable in court and ultimately led to jail time and fines. The Attorney General served 19 months for perjury, obstruction, and conspiracy. The President’s Chief of Staff served 19 months for conspiracy and obstruction of justice. A Chief political council pleaded nolo contendre to obstruction.

So, they lied and stood in the way of the investigation. That was the cover up, that’s what they got nailed for. But, is that what they did?

No, of course not. It is what they did after they did what they did. The big cheeses were never convicted for what they did.

What they did was to hack the election in order to win the presidency. Just like what happened this year, but instead of computer hacking and propaganda, they did it with a break-in and wire taps. And, apparently, the Russians were not involved with Watergate.

Putting this another way, the Watergate conspirators attempted, and perhaps succeed, in circumventing the Democratic process and putting their own guy in power. Then they tried to cover that up. Prosecutors were in the main only able to indict and convict over the cover up. That does not mean that these men’s attempt to overthrow the government was not worse than was the crime of pretending they didn’t.

5) Perhaps a pedantic point, but when you hear the phrase “What did he know and when did he know it” don’t assume this was a brilliant rhetorical device designed to take down Richard Nixon. It was exactly the opposite. It was a little like they were going for Occam’s Razor and ended up with a two-edged sword!

For those who don’t recognize the phrase I use in the title of this post, and that is used in the video below: Republican Senator Howard Baker of Tennessee said it first. He asked the question of Nixon’s knowledge of the Watergate break in during the Congressional investigation.

Ironically, Baker had assumed (based in a private conversation with Nixon, most likely) that Nixon either didn’t know about the break in and cover up, or could credibly claim he didn’t know. Baker was trying to protect the president. This is what he was thinking:

Baker: What did President Nixon know, and when did he know it?

Everybody else and the evidence: He knew nothing, and when he knew something, it was way later, after, like, now, or even never.

Baker: Well, OK, then, Nixon is innocent, let’s toss these other guys under the bus and move on with our Republican War to Gain Total Power, OK?

What really happened:

Baker: What did President Nixon know, and when did he know it?

Everybody else and the evidence: He knew all along and helped develop plans for the cover up itself. He was as deep in this as shit in an outhouse.

Baker: Ooops, I can’t believe I asked that.

Here is the petition.


Spread the love

Stand Up for Science Gathering in Boston

Spread the love

This is not the April 22 March for Science, but something more local and timed to occur with the American Association for the Advancement of Science meetings in Boston.

From the press release:

Scientists Take to the Streets to “Stand up for Science”

Scientists and impacted communities respond to attacks by anti-science forces and climate deniers in government

BOSTON – On Sunday, February 19, scientists, science advocates, community members, and frontline communities will rally at Boston’s Copley Square to call for increased vigilance to defend science against the barrage of attacks mounted by the Trump administration and Congress. The rally coincides with thousands of scientists gathering in Boston for the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting, one of the first major convenings of scientists since anti-science forces and climate deniers gained unprecedented power in government.

The rally builds on the growing and historic movement of scientists fighting back against the Trump administration’s efforts to discredit science and climate research and dismantle key scientific institutions within the government. Since the election, hundreds of climate scientists rallied in San Francisco, thousands of scientists have signed open letters, rogue Twitter accounts have sprung up on behalf of governmental agencies, and some scientists may run for elected office. Sunday’s rally is the precursor to the March for Science taking place in DC and in cities around the world this April 22.

WHAT: Rally to Stand up for Science

WHO: AAAS members and community supporters (full speaker list to be announced):

<li> Jacquelyn Gill, Ph.D. Asst. Prof. of Paleoecology, Univ. of Maine, Candidate for US Congress (ME-2), 2018; Host, Warm Regards Podcast</li>

    <li>Kelly L. Fleming, Ph.D. AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellow hosted at the US Dept. of Energy, 500 Women Scientists Leadership Board</li>

    <li>Geoffrey Supran, Ph.D. Science History Post Doctoral Fellow, Harvard University</li>

    <li>Astrid Caldas, Ph.D. Climate Scientist, Union of Concerned Scientists</li>

WHERE:

Copley Square
560 Boylston St
Boston, MA 02116


WHEN:

Sunday, February 19, 2017
12:00 pm – 1:30 pm ET

WEAR YOUR LAB COAT IF YOU’VE GOT ONE!


Spread the love

Huxley’s Brave New World

Spread the love

No, not that Huxley, the other Huxley. No, not that one either, the OTHER Huxley. OK, yeah, this one:

Brave New World

Aldous Huxley’s profoundly important classic of world literature, Brave New World is a searching vision of an unequal, technologically-advanced future where humans are genetically bred, socially indoctrinated, and pharmaceutically anesthetized to passively uphold an authoritarian ruling order–all at the cost of our freedom, full humanity, and perhaps also our souls. “A genius [who] who spent his life decrying the onward march of the Machine” (The New Yorker), Huxley was a man of incomparable talents: equally an artist, a spiritual seeker, and one of history’s keenest observers of human nature and civilization. Brave New World, his masterpiece, has enthralled and terrified millions of readers, and retains its urgent relevance to this day as both a warning to be heeded as we head into tomorrow and as thought-provoking, satisfying work of literature. Written in the shadow of the rise of fascism during the 1930s, Brave New World likewise speaks to a 21st-century world dominated by mass-entertainment, technology, medicine and pharmaceuticals, the arts of persuasion, and the hidden influence of elites.


Spread the love

Editing Out Diseases with the Help of Bioengineering

Spread the love

I get a lot of “infographics” and many are quite good. But this medium has become a vehicle for commercial advertising. So, some company comes up with an info graphics, maybe makes a good one, sends it around to the bloggers and such, and thier name, somewhere down there near the bottom, gets around. I don’t mind the commercial aspect too much, but unless I’m able to vet the graphic, I can’t post it, I don’t generally have time or resources to do that, so I therefore ignore them.

But this one I’ll post because it looks interesting and is produced by a university. Also, we often discuss GMOs around here, and this is a handy dandy look at how that community sees itself, from an important perspective, at the moment.

So .. (click on it to see it in all its bigness)

Throughout history, humans have continuously made efforts to heal and eradicate diseases. In early, less modern times, this process was considered both difficult and strenuous, but with the advancement of technology and bioengineering, humans are developing faster, more effective measures for treating and eradicating diseases. To learn more, checkout this infographic sponsored by the University of California, Riverside’s

Editing-Out-Diseases-Infographic_Final


Spread the love

Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451

Spread the love

Paper burns at 451 degrees Fahrenheit.

So does civilization.

Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury’s internationally acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451 is a masterwork of twentieth-century literature set in a bleak, dystopian future.

Guy Montag is a fireman. In his world, where television rules and literature is on the brink of extinction, firemen start fires rather than put them out. His job is to destroy the most illegal of commodities, the printed book, along with the houses in which they are hidden.

Montag never questions the destruction and ruin his actions produce, returning each day to his bland life and wife, Mildred, who spends all day with her television “family.” But then he meets an eccentric young neighbor, Clarisse, who introduces him to a past where people didn’t live in fear and to a present where one sees the world through the ideas in books instead of the mindless chatter of television.

When Mildred attempts suicide and Clarisse suddenly disappears, Montag begins to question everything he has ever known. He starts hiding books in his home, and when his pilfering is discovered, the fireman has to run for his life.


Spread the love

The Meaning of Antebellum Politics in America vis-a-vis the Current Collapse of The Republic.

Spread the love

I am reading Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin, whom you may know from her occasional and always informative appearances on various TV news shows as a ranking Presidential Historian.

I started reading it because I wanted to see in some detail what was going on in American politics during the decade or so prior to the start of the Civil War. What I did know about it indicated that there would be interesting parallels, and important differences, between then and right now. It turns out that this suspicion was well founded, and I am probably learning quite a bit. Will it be applicable and how? Not sure yet, but I want EVERYBODY to read this book so we could have a conversation about it!

Here’s the blurb:

Acclaimed historian Doris Kearns Goodwin illuminates Lincoln’s political genius in this highly original work, as the one-term congressman and prairie lawyer rises from obscurity to prevail over three gifted rivals of national reputation to become president.

On May 18, 1860, William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, Edward Bates, and Abraham Lincoln waited in their hometowns for the results from the Republican National Convention in Chicago. When Lincoln emerged as the victor, his rivals were dismayed and angry.

Throughout the turbulent 1850s, each had energetically sought the presidency as the conflict over slavery was leading inexorably to secession and civil war. That Lincoln succeeded, Goodwin demonstrates, was the result of a character that had been forged by experiences that raised him above his more privileged and accomplished rivals. He won because he possessed an extraordinary ability to put himself in the place of other men, to experience what they were feeling, to understand their motives and desires.

It was this capacity that enabled Lincoln as president to bring his disgruntled opponents together, create the most unusual cabinet in history, and marshal their talents to the task of preserving the Union and winning the war.

We view the long, horrifying struggle from the vantage of the White House as Lincoln copes with incompetent generals, hostile congressmen, and his raucous cabinet. He overcomes these obstacles by winning the respect of his former competitors, and in the case of Seward, finds a loyal and crucial friend to see him through.

This brilliant multiple biography is centered on Lincoln’s mastery of men and how it shaped the most significant presidency in the nation’s history.


Spread the love

It Can’t Happen Here

Spread the love

It Can’t Happen Here is the only one of Sinclair Lewis’s later novels to match the power of Main Street, Babbitt, and Arrowsmith. A cautionary tale about the fragility of democracy, it is an alarming, eerily timeless look at how fascism could take hold in America.

Written during the Great Depression, when the country was largely oblivious to Hitler’s aggression, it juxtaposes sharp political satire with the chillingly realistic rise of a president who becomes a dictator to save the nation from welfare cheats, sex, crime, and a liberal press.

Called “a message to thinking Americans” by the Springfield Republican when it was published in 1935, It Can’t Happen Here is a shockingly prescient novel that remains as fresh and contemporary as today’s news.

Here is the beginning of the book:

The handsome dining room of the Hotel Wessex, with its gilded plaster shields and the mural depicting the Green Mountains, had been reserved for the Ladies’ Night Dinner of the Fort Beulah Rotary Club.

Here in Vermont the affair was not so picturesque as it might have been on the Western prairies. Oh, it had its points: there was a skit in which Medary Cole (grist mill & feed store) and Louis Rotenstern (custom tailoring—pressing & cleaning) announced that they were those historic Vermonters, Brigham Young and Joseph Smith, and with their jokes about imaginary plural wives they got in ever so many funny digs at the ladies present. But the occasion was essentially serious. All of America was serious now, after the seven years of depression since 1929. It was just long enough after the Great War of 1914-18 for the young people who had been born in 1917 to be ready to go to college . . . or to another war, almost any old war that might be handy.

The features of this night among the Rotarians were nothing funny, at least not obviously funny, for they were the patriotic addresses of Brigadier General Herbert Y. Edgeways, U.S.A. (ret.), who dealt angrily with the topic “Peace through Defense—Millions for Arms but Not One Cent for Tribute,” and of Mrs. Adelaide Tarr Gimmitch—she who was no more renowned for her gallant anti-suffrage campaigning way back in 1919 than she was for having, during the Great War, kept the American soldiers entirely out of French cafés by the clever trick of sending them ten thousand sets of dominoes.

Nor could any social-minded patriot sneeze at her recent somewhat unappreciated effort to maintain the purity of the American Home by barring from the motion-picture industry all persons, actors or directors or cameramen, who had: (a) ever been divorced; (b) been born in any foreign country—except Great Britain, since Mrs. Gimmitch thought very highly of Queen Mary, or (c) declined to take an oath to revere the Flag, the Constitution, the Bible, and all other peculiarly American institutions.

The Annual Ladies’ Dinner was a most respectable gathering—the flower of Fort Beulah. Most of the ladies and more than half of the gentlemen wore evening clothes, and it was rumored that before the feast the inner circle had had cocktails, privily served in Room 289 of the hotel. The tables, arranged on three sides of a hollow square, were bright with candles, cut-glass dishes of candy and slightly tough almonds, figurines of Mickey Mouse, brass Rotary wheels, and small silk American flags stuck in gilded hard-boiled eggs. On the wall was a banner lettered “Service Before Self,” and the menu—the celery, cream of tomato soup, broiled haddock, chicken croquettes, peas, and tutti-frutti ice-cream—was up to the highest standards of the Hotel Wessex.

They were all listening, agape. General Edgeways was completing his manly yet mystical rhapsody on nationalism:

“. . . for these U-nited States, a-lone among the great powers, have no desire for foreign conquest. Our highest ambition is to be darned well let alone! Our only gen-uine relationship to Europe is in our arduous task of having to try and educate the crass and ignorant masses that Europe has wished onto us up to something like a semblance of American culture and good manners. But, as I explained to you, we must be prepared to defend our shores against all the alien gangs of international racketeers that call themselves ‘governments,’ and that with such feverish envy are always eyeing our inexhaustible mines, our towering forests, our titanic and luxurious cities, our fair and far-flung fields.

“For the first time in all history, a great nation must go on arming itself more and more, not for conquest—not for jealousy—not for war—but for peace! Pray God it may never be necessary, but if foreign nations don’t sharply heed our warning, there will, as when the proverbial dragon’s teeth were sowed, spring up an armed and fearless warrior upon every square foot of these United States, so arduously cultivated and defended by our pioneer fathers, whose sword-girded images we must be . . . or we shall perish!”

The applause was cyclonic. “Professor” Emil Staubmeyer, the superintendent of schools, popped up to scream, “Three cheers for the General—hip, hip, hooray!”

All the audience made their faces to shine upon the General and Mr. Staubmeyer—all save a couple of crank pacifist women, and one Doremus Jessup, editor of the Fort Beulah Daily Informer, locally considered “a pretty smart fella but kind of a cynic,” who whispered to his friend the Reverend Mr. Falck, “Our pioneer fathers did rather of a skimpy job in arduously cultivating some of the square feet in Arizona!”


Spread the love

El Nino Season Two?

Spread the love

It is like that stabby lady in the bath tub in that movie.

Here, I’ll give you a more readable version of the graphic from NOAA:

Screen Shot 2017-02-07 at 3.10.43 PM

The chance of an the Pacific ENSO system being neutral, meaning, not adding extra heat to the atmosphere and not removing extra heat form the atmosphere, is about 50% from now through mid 2017.

But, the chance of a la Nina is pretty darn low, and the chance of an El Nino, which would add more heat to the atmosphere than the average year, is not only approaching 40% but it has been growing.

A second El Nino this close on the last one, which was a very severe El Nino, will not be as strong because there is that much heat stored up in the Pacific. A lot of it came out last time. But there is a fair amount left in there, so we could have a real, if not major, El Nino event this summer or fall.

Or not. This is really up in the air, as it were. But it is a little unusual to see a second El Nino this close in time, so I thought you might find this interesting.


Spread the love

The Lady in the Statue Has Died: RIP Mary

Spread the love

Mary Tyler Moore has always had a certain amount of grace, and just now, she had the grace to wait until a reasonable time after the spate of celebrity deaths that captivated the Internet for weeks to pass on to the great Newsroom In The Sky.

Screen Shot 2017-01-25 at 3.10.56 PMShe played Laura Petrie on the Dick Van Dyke Show, but we all know she was REALLY playing Jackie Kennedy if Jackie Kennedy was married to a Comedian in New Rochelle, NY, instead of a President.

Later, she played Mary Richards in the Mary Tyler Moore show, at a time when a lot of people were acting in TV shows named after the actor, not the character. Or did I dream that?

She was in a bunch of other stuff too.

Anyway, Mary died at the age of 80.

Here in Minnesota, she is known as “The Lady in the Statue” by all the Millennials who know the statue but not her work.


Spread the love

Judith Curry Is In With The Koch Brothers

Spread the love

I’m only just digesting this, but it appears that Judith Curry, climate scientist turned anti-climate change activist (more or less) has joined the Koch Brothers front group “Cause of Action“.

How do we know this? Because she has filed an Amicus Brief (2017.01.25 Mot. for Leave to File, Nos. 14-cv-101 14-cv-126 (D.C.))( on behalf of the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute in the case of Mann vs. Those Guys, with council at Cause of Action Institute.

Go read the brief. It is pretty nasty.

Also related, this: 2017.01.25 Br. of Amicus Dr. Judith A. Curry Nos. 14-cv-101 14-cv-126 (D.C.).

Have at it.


Spread the love

The Orderly Transition of Twitter

Spread the love

I’m not sure this has happened before, and most people are unaware, so I thought a quick note was in order.

If you were previously following the President of the United States on Twitter, when it was Barack Obama, you followed @POTUS.

Twitter has created an account called @POTUS44, which is for President Obama. You are now automatically following that handle.

Twitter redesignated @POTUS to apply to President Trump, and left all of the President Obama followers on that account as well. So, you are now following President Trump at @POTUS.

The same applies, in parallel, to the First Lady and the Vice President.

Meanwhile, these folks have their own civilian twitter handles. President Obama is simply using his old handle (and, by the way, he follows me, just sayin’).

So, you may or may not want to update your Twitter accounts accordingly.


Spread the love

Reading Around Trump Induced Depression

Spread the love

This is not a time to be distracted, to turn away from politics, to eschew activism. In fact, if you are an American Citizen, you have to look back at your life and recognize that you screwed up, in two ways. First, whatever time you spent agitating and activating and acting out, turns out, was not enough. You needed to spend something like 10% more time on that. Second, whatever decisions you made as to exactly what sort of activism you would do on a given day were likely flawed. Instead of yammering about Bernie after the primary you should have been going after Trump. At the beginning of the primary process, you should have gone with the insurgent, Bernie, instead of the tried and true, Hillary. Whatever. I’m not here to tell you what you did wrong exactly, because I’ll be damned if I know. But I know, and you know, that you did something wrong.

How do I know that? Because of this:

Donald Trump Inauguration

Schedule of Inaugural Events (Eastern Time)

January 20th, 2017

8:30 a.m. ET: Trumps attend service at St. John’s Church
9:40 a.m. ET: President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama welcome Trumps to White House
9:45 a.m. ET: Obamas host a coffee and tea reception for the Trumps.
10:30 a.m. ET: Trumps, Obamas leave White House for U.S. Capitol
11:30 a.m. ET: Swearing-in ceremony
12:30 p.m. ET: The Obamas depart by helicopter
12:54 p.m. ET: President’s Room signing ceremony
1:08 p.m. ET: Luncheon
2:35 p.m. ET: Review of the troops
3 p.m. ET: Inaugural Parade
7 p.m. ET and thereafter for four years: Inaugural Bawl

See? If this election had been a landslide, then our collective yammering, protesting, messaging, teaching, communication, etc. would be part of an insurgency, a hopeful revolution, a determined evolution, or something. But what actually happened is this: We were making progress, we were turning many things around, changing things for the better, then suddenly along came this big log tied to a rope suspended from on high and it plowed right through us. An enormous, ugly, political pendulum that we thought was going in one direction had turned, and plowed through us like a bowling ball through nine pins.

But only just barely.

A while back I had been conversing for weeks with a bunch of activists, serious activists, people with their hands on the activism levers of power, serious serious people. They had been so thrown off by the outcome of the Democratic Primary that they spent huge amounts of effort making sure that a totally insignificant document, the DNC Platform, included their pet projects, and thereafter following through on that, that they simply put nearly zero effort into working against Trump. Had these remarkable and important individuals not walked away from the process at he crucial moment, they would have been the deciding factor in this election and Trump would not have been elected president. That’s my story, and it is one of dozens around the country, many of you will identify them in your own lives if you look. People were distracted, misled, or simply wrong, about this or that aspect of the election. Collectively, all of this added up to a slim victory. But it matters not how slim that victory was, because the Republican Party is 100% in charge in the White House, in both houses of Congress, and in many state chambers and state houses around the country.

Climate scientists model future climate change using a number of different model configurations, but the initial input to those models are based on various scenarios of how quickly we change our energy policies and related behaviors. With a Trump presidency and a GOP Congress, that process just got easier, because the two or three more optimistic staring assumptions can be ignored for several years. Think of the computing time that will save!

That was a very long way of saying that you can not distract yourself from the task of saving civilization over the next few years.

How to survive a Trump presidency starting now

But, during that time, you can spend a bit of time doing something that will make you feel better, maybe energized, maybe even self educated in an area that gives perspective or some other help to your psyche.

I’ve been asking around, to see what people are doing, and here, I’ll put some of the book suggestions and other ideas people have made. I expect more suggestions to come in soon, and I’ll add them to the lists.

Watch the West Wing


One idea, often mentioned, is to watch The West Wing, as an example of a better time and place. If you do that (and I suspect for many this would be a re-watch) I suggest you consider listening to The West Wing Weekly Podcast, co-hosed by Joshua Malina ahd Hrishikesh Hirway. Josh is Will Bailey from the West Wing (he currently stars in Scandal, another excellently distracting White House related show!). The podcast tracks the West Wing episode by episode, with occasional variations in that pattern. One of the best things about it are the interviews with various individuals involved with the show. Also, over time, Malina and Hirway develop a working methodology of the West Wing, including terminology, morphological and categorial functions, etc. This gives the weekly review and discussion an interesting and evolving texture. Since they are currently well into Season Two, you can start now and listen to the podcasts on your own schedule. If you catch up to them, you’ll have to start waiting for Wednesdays, when the podcast is released.

Read interesting history

One thing I’ve decided to do is to read some interesting history. It turns out that a lot of other people are doing something similar. Here is a list of what people have suggested so far:

  • History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2008, Fourth Edition, 3-Volume Set (Facts on File Library of American History). This link is to a fairly expensive product, but note that it is several books. I’ll bet you can get the various volumes cheap and used, if you get them one at a time, or just go to the library.
  • The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill: Defender of the Realm, 1940-1965
  • Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
  • What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848 (Oxford History of the United States)
  • Lincoln at Cooper Union: The Speech That Made Abraham Lincoln President
  • How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven Steps to Genius Every Day
  • America in the King Years (3 Book Series)
  • Read interesting fiction

  • The Complete Wreck (A Series of Unfortunate Events, Books 1-13)
  • People of the Book: A Novel
  • Watch or listen to something interesting

  • Hamilton
  • Black Mirror – Series 1-2 and Special [DVD]
  • Roots
  • Hardcore History Podcast
  • Read current non fiction about how messed up everything is

  • Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right
  • Insane Clown President: Dispatches from the 2016 Circus
  • The War on Science: Who’s Waging It, Why It Matters, What We Can Do About It
  • Sherlock: Series Four
  • The Plot to Hack America: How Putin’s Cyberspies and WikiLeaks Tried to Steal the 2016 Election
  • Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power
  • Invisible Armies: An Epic History of Guerrilla Warfare from Ancient Times to the Present
  • Drinking suggestions

  • Talisker Storm

  • Spread the love
  • Should I get a Google Pixel?

    Spread the love

    My current phone, a Google Nexus made by Motorola, is still working fine. I’m much more worried about Amanda’s Samsung, which is a nightmare. The storage on that phone is used up by Samsung proprietary gunk that can’t be removed, and she can’t insert a microSD card because the phone will not operate as an actual phone (reliably) when there is a microSD card in it. Her “deal” at Verizon is running out soon, and I’m personally hoping she goes with the Pixel. And, eventually, I’ll be in the market for an upgrade as well.

    One must make proper comparisons. So I did.

    The bottom line: Objectively, given the specs, the iPhone is the least cool, the Samsung Galaxy S7 is the most cool, and the Pixel is in the middle, but closer to the Galaxy than to the iPhone. But, if you look at the features that separate these phones, there really isn’t much difference, and your choice should probably be made on the basis of something other than these details, such as price, operating system, and your comfort with the various companies that make the phones (i.e., which company most recently did you the most emotional or physical harm!).

    The Pixels (look around for the proper storage amount and color for you):

  • Google Pixel
  • Google Pixel XL
  • The Google Pixel vs. the iPhone: there is only one important difference

    The Google Pixels (regular and XP) have somewhat better specs than the current and corresponding iPhones. The Pixel has an equivalent or better screen, a better camera, does video mostly at the same level at the lower end, but is probably overall better (except for the iPhone’s optical image stabilization, which is better to have than electronic stabilization). As far as I know, neither phone has a hand that comes out of it to slap the user and say “Turn your phone sideways, you idiot,” but I assume there is an app for that.

    The iPhones:

  • Apple iPhone 7
  • Apple iPhone 7 Plus
  • They both read fingerprints, they both have similar sensors, including the all important barometer. The Pixel has a headphone jack, and the new iPhones, sadly, do not have that. You can hook a headphone to the iPhone, but Apple has invented a new kind of plug you need to use, so you either need to buy special headphones or an adaptor.

    The iPhone has stereo, but how can it really be so small and have meaningful stereo? The iPhone may be more water resistant than the Pixel. The Pixel battery life is significantly better.

    The Pixel has more RAM. Depending on which model you get, they have similar amounts of storage, but the iPhones can be gotten with 256GB, while the max for the Pixel is 128GB . The Google free cloud storage deal is way better than the Apple deal (Apple wants you to pay for storage beyond 5GB).

    They are very close to the same price, depending on where you buy it. Other details are comparable.

    While the Pixel is probably better feature for feature in most areas, the two phones are high end and in the same major league ball park. It is not like one sucks and one is wonderful.

    So, the bottom line for this comparison is: Which operating system do you like? If you like Android, get the Pixel. If you like iOS, get the Apple. Neither one is going to disappoint you, and if your current phone is a couple/few years old, either one will be a palpable, and even exciting, upgrade.

    There is one small difference I should mention as well, which may not apply by the time you read this: You can’t easily get a Pixel because they are selling like hot cakes. It will be easer to find a hot cake, because no one is quite sure what that is.

    The Pixel vs. the Samsung S7

    There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who love Samsung to the point that it is kind of disgusting, and those who have been burned by Samsung, and don’t. Of those who have been burned, some of them have actually been burned!

    The Samsung Galaxy S7:

  • Samsung Galaxy S7
  • (Note there has been some confusion here… I do not look at the Edge here. Maybe some other time.)

    But, the top of the line Samsung Phones are still considered to be top products, so comparing the Pixel to the Samsung S7 seems appropriate.

    The S7 and the regular Pixel are about the same size, and are probably similar in overall case mechanics. The S7, like the iPhone, claims to be “waterproof.” People who have played around with the Pixel and the Samsung tend to walk away a bit more impressed by the Pixel.

    The Galaxy S7 has a somewhat larger screen and a noticeably higher resolution, which even with the larger screen translates into a higher density of pixels. Both are “retina” level, as I understand “retina.” The main area where this matters is when you attach the phone directly to your face with special phone goggles so you can experience virtual reality. You’ll like the Samsung better every time you do that. But (see below) the Google phone is going to have better VR abilities in the operating system than the Samsung, at least for a while.

    The cameras are very similar . The Samsung might be a bit better in lower light. Most people will tell you that the Samsung camera is the best one out there. But, the newer version has a lower pixel density than earlier cameras, and that is often the metric people focus on.

    This does not necessarily mean that Samsung downgraded its camera. It is more the case that all the cameras have gotten so good that hardware will plateau for a while. And, in particular, the pixel density metric is no longer as critical since all the main cameras are high in this areas (not true of the front facing selfie cameras, though). In other words, it no longer matters like it did a few years ago that you get THE phone with THE camera. A few years ago there were phones and tablets with truly substandard and awful cameras. Those days are a Kodachrome memory now.

    The Samsung camera does have this fancy “dual pixel” technology which is supposed to make focusing faster. By the way, the front facing camera, the one you use for selfies, is better on the Pixel than the Samsung.

    The Samsung operating system is highly modified from stock Android. To me, this is a deal killer. I tend to dislike Samsung mods, and I tend to like stock Android. But some might like the Samsung enhancements such as an “always on” mode. At the moment, the Samsung phones are only at Android level 6, while the Pixel is at level 7. The Samsung phones will always be behind in this area because they muck with the system so much. By the way, Android 7 is significantly different from 6 in several interesting ways; this is not a trivial difference.

    The internal guts, the computer inside, are similar. The Pixel has more storage, much more storage, internal, and will not have the crazy Samsung space hogging “enhancement” software. However, the Samsung has a microSD slot.

    But, I am no longer impressed with microSD slots. I used to think they were a deal breaker, until I got my current Google phone, which has lots of memory but not microSD slot, and I installed DropSync, which puts my photos and videos onto my main computer and dropbox account in the background. I’m the kind of user that fills up storage space. I’ve not filled up the storage space on this phone, not even close. Add this to the fact that phones don’t use microSD cards like you, if you’ve not used one, might think. Things go wrong with them. Your camera forgets to put the pics there. Apps that use proprietary content may not let you put stuff there. Many apps won’t really run from the microSD card flawlessly, or at all.

    The lesson here: SD card or not, do not rely on that feature. Get the phone with the most storage given the type of phone you are buying.

    It appears that the Pixel kills the Samsung on battery lifespan. However, some Samsungs are known to have had the Exploding Fire Starter Feature in the past. So there’s that!

    Conclusion: In a number of areas, the Samsung is better than the Pixel. However, I feel you should ignore the microSD difference; that is an overrated feature, and that is coming from a person who strongly believed it to be important until I got a phone without it and realized it wasn’t if you get a biggish storage feature to begin with. I don’t see the cameras as being that different, but maybe Samsung is better. The single most annoying thing your phone will do for the first two years of use, assuming it does not catch fire, is running down on battery life. If that is important, the Pixel is the way to go. Also, the operating system will probably always be better on the Pixel than any Samsung phone, unless you really like the Samsung features (which many do) then the opposite is true.

    So, while the comparison between the two is more complicated than with the iPhone (where you get to chose between two vastly different operating systems and ignore everything else) it is probably true when it comes down to it that either one is fine.


    Spread the love