"If you want me again look for me under your boot soles."

Walt Whitman's line from Leaves of Grass tells us what awaits all living things.  Ivan the Terrier - the Borepatch family dog for over 14 years - has taken a sudden decline.  We're talking over how long we can keep him in relative comfort.  There's a cruel responsibility that comes with owning a pet.

Sigh.

Here is a post from a couple years ago, before he started his decline.

-------------------------------------------------

During that summer which may never have been at all

I took Ivan the Terrier for a walk to the old Mill dam this morning.

Photo copyright Borepatch.  Click to enbiggify.

Afternoon would be too hot.  Most of June was delightfully not-at-all-like-June-in-Georgia, but now we're back to, well, about what you'd expect.  He's not a young dog, and a black dog in the hot Georgia sun is just not right.

This park, at the Roswell Mill didn't exist when we lived here the first time.  The town dropped some serious money into the trails, making this one of the nicest places to walk in the area.  The trails go up and down Vickery Creek, down almost all the way to the Chattahooche where there are more great trails along the river.

Photo copyright Borepatch

I've always liked to walk, and a dog is a good reason to get out.  In Maine Jack and I saw otters; there were beavers in a pond in Massachusetts.  We had a heron hang out in our back yard here in our first house, a decade ago (as we like to joke, at our "house in Georgia").  I'd terraced the backyard hill with dry stacked stone, and put in a waterfall and a pond.  The heron was helping himself to our fish.

#1 Son would get mad at this, and let Ivan the Terrier out to chase the heron off.  Ivan didn't chase this one - he's twelve years old now, and the bird was on the other side of the river.  Besides, he wasn't after our fish.

A quiet morning walk doesn't just carry you across the local landscape, it takes you across the landscape of memory, to places long past which we can only visit in our dreams.  Jack has been gone these twenty years now, but I still hear his deep throated bark, outraged at the swimming otter's insolence.  #1 Son hasn't been eight years old for ever and ever, but I still hear his child's voice rising with outrage that the bird is back at the pond.  I hear the frustration in the voice of young #2 Son, asking where the beaver is, knowing he is about to be delighted when he finally catches a glimpse of it.

Ivan the Terrier loves these walks.  The chance to sniff around, to catch new smells and sights from a place that's not his yard keeps him mentally sharp.  The walk through old but cherished memories is good for me, too.  Even if the path is crowded with Jack and some small children.

Photo copyright Borepatch

The past is never dead. It's not even past.

- William Faulkner

Rifle display stand bleg

I'm looking for a display stand that would be suitable for displaying Great Grandfather's rifle on the mantel over the fireplace here at Camp Borepatch.

I'd like something free standing, and be able to display the powder horn as well.  Any recommendations?

If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine

As someone who worked in the intelligence community a couple decades back (i.e. before it went feral), it's been quite dismaying to see the government's attacks on the privacy of regular citizens.  In particular, the repeated attempts to discourage the use of encryption is something that as a Security Guy I can only say is a Very Bad Thing.

I'm not the only one.  This announcement seems really, really important:

ital personal and business information flows over the Internet more frequently than ever, and we don’t always know when it’s happening. It’s clear at this point that encrypting is something all of us should be doing. Then why don’t we use TLS (the successor to SSL) everywhere? Every browser in every device supports it. Every server in every data center supports it. Why don’t we just flip the switch?


The challenge is server certificates. The anchor for any TLS-protected communication is a public-key certificate which demonstrates that the server you’re actually talking to is the server you intended to talk to. For many server operators, getting even a basic server certificate is just too much of a hassle. The application process can be confusing. It usually costs money. It’s tricky to install correctly. It’s a pain to update.

Let’s Encrypt is a new free certificate authority, built on a foundation of cooperation and openness, that lets everyone be up and running with basic server certificates for their domains through a simple one-click process.

Who are the subversive Black Hat traitors behind this?

Mozilla Corporation, Cisco Systems, Inc., Akamai Technologies, Electronic Frontier Foundation, IdenTrust, Inc., and researchers at the University of Michigan are working through the Internet Security Research Group (“ISRG”), a California public benefit corporation, to deliver this much-needed infrastructure in Q2 2015. The ISRG welcomes other organizations dedicated to the same ideal of ubiquitous, open Internet security.

Ah.  It's a bunch of techies who feel the same way as I do.  Good.  And the project seems to have the Internet Philosophy embedded in its DNA:

The key principles behind Let’s Encrypt are:

• Free: Anyone who owns a domain can get a certificate validated for that domain at zero cost.
• Automatic: The entire enrollment process for certificates occurs painlessly during the server’s native installation or configuration process, while renewal occurs automatically in the background.
• Secure: Let’s Encrypt will serve as a platform for implementing modern security techniques and best practices.
• Transparent: All records of certificate issuance and revocation will be available to anyone who wishes to inspect them.
• Open: The automated issuance and renewal protocol will be an open standard and as much of the software as possible will be open source.
• Cooperative: Much like the underlying Internet protocols themselves, Let’s Encrypt is a joint effort to benefit the entire community, beyond the control of any one organization.

If you have your own DNS domain, you should check this out.

Karma ran over the Global Warming dogma

Global Warming as a "crisis" really dates to 1998, when the very hot summer convinced many people that "Global Warming is real".  I mean, who are you going to trust, a bunch of "deniers" or your lying eyes?

Well, live by the heat wave, die by the cold snap:

All 50 states have low temperatures BELOW freezing tonight. (Monday night)

Yes, even Hawaii. Tall mountain peaks there regularly get below freezing, and even get snow.

Joe Everyman is reacting to this the way he reacted to the 1998 heat wave: who you going to trust, a bunch of Climate Scientists or his lying eyes?  There's a certain karmic balance in that, a poetic justice that is shadenfreudalistic.

Sure, sure, weather not climate and all that.  But 1998 was a politically useful "weather not climate" exercise, no?  I wonder if Jonathan Gruber is one of the lead authors on the IPCC Assessment Reports ...

Update

I've weaned myself mostly off the meds, which is a Very Good Thing indeed.  Even ibuprofin is needed less and less.  What I'm doing is (slowly) testing my limits, and pain is the feedback mechanism that tells me to stop.

I drove the Jeep to the dog park once (4 on the floor), and that was OK.  I've gone from working in a wingback chair to working at my desk - I'm not sure that that's OK - the desk height is wrong and the chair doesn't support me like the wingback.  It's an exploration.

All in all, though, this Thanksgiving I will have something to be thankful for.  The accident could very well have been much worse.

Renewable energy will mess up the power grid

Great in-depth article that shows that an amp from solar is not at all the same as an amp from coal generation.  And that an amp from coal isn't the same as an amp from gas.

It can be very misleading to compare the energy costs for wind and solar to the energy costs for more conventional generation technology and assume the difference is the cost of providing for “clean” energy.


The power grid requires so much more support than the injection of energy. Unfortunately wind and solar do not provide support “services” as well as many other generation resources do. Accounting and providing for these extra “services” should be part of any comparison of resource types and inform any directives or plans impacting the provision of electric power.     To the degree that wind and solar resources make up a larger portion of the supply mix, significant costs will be incurred to maintain system functionality and reliability. This posting is focuses solely on how various resources impact just one of these “services”, the balancing of system loads and resources.

There are a bunch of comments that are really good, too.

I am Leonardo of Arc

Interesting personality quiz, and one that is a lot more insightful than most.  This isn't at all bad analysis of me, and it was done with only 12 questions.  Pretty impressive.

Hat tip: The Geek In Heels

Brrr

Dang, it's cold, and fixin' to get a lot colder (down in the teens tonight). I moved down here from Yankeeland to get away from this nonsense.  And so here's a change of pace, from a couple days before the motorcycle hit the tarmac.

Punday

Environmentalist discovers science

He apologizes for his past activism:

I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologize for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

...

So I guess you’ll be wondering – what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

It's quite a long and detailed apology.  Nicely done.

I'm not the only one who had a motorcycle accident

Last week the 91-year-old father of a friend of mine was out riding his Harley. (He's a tough old bird to be sure.) Sadly that day turned out to be one of those times where, when taking a curve, something went wrong and down he went on his motorcycle at speed.

There were, as you might imagine, multiple injuries from which he will spend some months recovering. The first thing that happened, however, was that 911 was called and an ambulance pulled up to the scene of the accident where the elderly biker was being held still and comforted by his son who was out riding with him.

Two paramedics jumped out and came up to the injured man and assessed his physical condition. That done they moved onto his mental condition.

"What year is it, sir?"

"It's 2014," he replied faintly.

"What month is it, sir?"

"It's... it's November."

"How many quarters are there in a dollar," they asked.

"Four," he replied.

"And who is president of the United States?"

"That SON OF A BITCH!"

Prognosis today for a full recovery? Excellent.

(shamelessly stolen from here)

The Vortex

If you visit the ATL, a visit to The Vortex is required. They have rules that include "No Whiners" and "This is an Idiot Free Zone". I recommend Tuaca ...


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

I, Labrat

Instead of a biopsy, I'm trying a new prostate cancer test from the University of Michigan. I'd found it and asked my doctor about it; he looked into it and was impressed. So we're getting our Science® on.

Basically the test looks for DNA markers that are only present when there's a tumor. It's non-invasive and claims to be as accurate (or more) than a biopsy.

We'll see, but I expect I'm feeling much better today than if I'd had a biopsy.

An interesting mapping of political philosophies

Jerry Pournelle came up with a quite interesting replacement for the old political "left" vs. "right", one that is both interesting and different:

The two I chose are "Attitude toward the State," and "Attitude toward planned social progress".

The first is easy to understand: what think you of government? Is it an object of idolatry, a positive good, necessary evil, or unmitigated evil? Obviously that forms a spectrum, with various anarchists at the left end and reactionary monarchists at the right. The American political parties tend to fall toward the middle.

...

"Attitude toward planned social progress" can be translated "rationalism"; it is the belief that society has "problems," and these can be "solved"; we can take arms against a sea of troubles.

Once again we can order the major political philosophies. Fascism is irrationalist; it says so in its theoretical treatises. It appeals to "the greatness of the nation" or to the volk, and also to the fuhrer-prinzip, i.e., hero worship.

It all works out like this:

The whole discussion is very interesting, as you'd expect.  And it dates to 1986 (!).  That's one smart dude.

Wonder what that would be on a triple word score?

Of course, you could use climate science as well.  I'd love to get paleodendrochronology (the use of tree rings to establish old climate temperature series) on a triple word score. 

Global Warming approaches

Snow in 42 of the lower 48 States.

Sure, this is weather not climate.  However, I didn't set the rules, which is any heat wave or drought (weather) is proof of Global Warming (climate).  Rules are rules, and all that.  I really have no choice here.

I gotcher "peer review" right here!

Heh.  From a pretty interesting science blog post that's worth your time:

Journals have a weird objection to publishing “negative” results. We call something a “negative” result when a hypothesis doesn’t turn out to be true. So therefore you have to come up with a positive, strong and exciting story from your research on a regular basis. I would argue that the negative results might be more useful as it would mean other scientists wouldn’t go barking up the wrong tree studying the same thing. But I don’t run the place.

This is probably the single biggest failure in science (as practiced) today.  One of the most important experiments of all time had a negative result.  Could that even be published in the scientific journals today?  This may be the major reason why the pace of scientific discovery is slowing down:

One difference is that all of the earlier discoveries mentioned, 1890-1900, were made in Europe, and 100 years later the honours were shared between Europe, the USA and Japan. That only emphasises the much wider pool of talent that exists, which now includes also many more outstanding women. Yet there is no obvious shortage of available Nobel prizes, 100 years after they were instituted.

Apologists accounting for the relatively poor performance in discoveries per million scientist-years, will tell you that all the easy research has been done. Nowadays, it is said, you need expensive apparatus and large teams of scientists to break new ground. That is the case in some branches of science, but it is offset by the fact that the fancy kit makes life easier, once you have it.

The basic reason why there is no hint of accelerated discovery, despite the explosive growth in the population of researchers, may be that the social system of science has become more skilled at resisting new knowledge and ideas. Indeed, that seems to have become its chief function. Science is no longer a vocation for the dedicated few, as it was in the days of Pasteur and Maxwell, but a career for the many.

It has been said that Religious institutions are a defense mechanisms against religious experiences, which are frequently disruptive to the Religious Establishment.  The analogy to science as practiced by today's Scientific Establishment is sharper than many will likely be comfortable with.  Certainly the Scientific Priesthood does not welcome heretical new ideas any more than the old Religious Priesthood did.

That's some righteous "Peer Review", right there

Not sure how this made it through proofreading, peer review, and copyediting. Via http://t.co/sWaswaM2X4 #addedvalue pic.twitter.com/8krLlvthAr
— Dave Harris (@davidjayharris) November 10, 2014

We're told that peer review is the quality control mechanism for scientific papers - Global Warming will be THERMAGEDDON because of Peer Review®.  Well, nazzo fast:

By now we all know, or ought to know, that just because something is published in a peer-reviewed academic journal doesn’t mean it’s true. But we can at least assume it's been proofread, right?

Apparently not. A priceless gaffe, which has been making the rounds of academic Twitter this week, is Exhibit A.

Click through the link for another equally funny peer reviewed slip up.

The answer, of course, is not better peer review.  The answer is experimental confirmation of results.  Without confirmation you might get weird results, like the climate models all missing out on a near 20 year lack of warming. 

But hey, they're Peer Reviewed®!

The public failure of the Intellectual Class

Jonathan Gruber was probably as close to the "Obamacare Architect" as you can find.  This was no accident - he was also the architect of the 2006 Massachusetts RomneyCare bill that was the blueprint for the National Monstrosity.  His resume punches all the boxes of the Intellectual Elite's view of a policy making technocrat: MIT undergrad, Harvard PhD, currently teaching economics at MIT.  While MIT isn't technically an Ivy League school, it's as close as America gets to L'Ecole Polytechnique: you don't get more geeky techno-cred than from there.

Dr. Gruber has been in the news lately for a moment of candor.  It was so, well, candoriffic that even La Wik can't ignore it:

In a panel discussion about the ACA at the University of Pennsylvania in October 2013, Gruber stated that the bill was deliberately written "in a tortured way" to disguise the fact that it created a system in which "healthy people pay in and sick people get money". He stated that this obfuscation was necessary, due to "the stupidity of the American voter or whatever", in order to get the bill passed and that a "lack of transparency is a huge political advantage."^[16] His comments caused controversy after a video of them was placed on YouTube in November 2014.

"Controversy"?  Boy, howdy. [video of Gruber's comment at the link]

This is the view of the Intellectual Elite - they have proven by their Ivy League credentials that they are smarter than you or me - and in the Elite's world, smart is everything.  And so they repeatedly push unpopular laws and mandates: Obamacare, Immigration "reform", the centralization of power in Washington D.C. and the Brussels that sees itself as the capitol city of an EU Superstate.  And if the plebs vote the wrong way on the treaty, make 'em vote again, and again, until they get it right.

Because Smart uber alles.  The Intellectual Elite is fit to rule as Philosopher Kings because they are ever so clever.  That's precisely how they think.

The problem is that they're really not all that smart.  David Brooks is a member of that class, and is certainly very clever - New York Times columnist, and all that.  Brooks has been (quite appropriately) mocked for his admiration of then Senator Obama's "perfectly creased trousers".  In truth, the mockery misses the mark, because the entire quote (from an interview of Brooks in 2006 after he met the junior Senator from Illinois) is much more damning:

But, as they chewed over the finer points of Edmund Burke, it didn’t take long for the two men to click. “I don’t want to sound like I’m bragging,” Brooks recently told me, “but usually when I talk to senators, while they may know a policy area better than me, they generally don’t know political philosophy better than me. I got the sense he knew both better than me.”

That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of--we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.”

Why would Brooks have thought that Obama would have been a very good president?  Because Obama passed himself off as being a card carrying member of Brooks' Intellectual Elite class.  He was able to talk about Burke, so clearly he would be an effective leader.  Or something.

This is the problem with the Intellectual Elite: they have far too high an opinion of their brains ("... they generally don’t know political philosophy better than me.").  They have no idea just how many things they have no idea about - things that millions of Americans do every day: start, run, and grow a business; lead soldiers in combat; accomplish something.

Instead, it's all symposia and friendly hail fellow well met back slapping with the other members of their club (which is not to say there isn't vicious office politics between them, just saying that we didn't win World War II with superior office politics skills).

And so the misplaced sense of superiority leads to Gruber's bald faced lies.  No wonder the Intellectual Class is held in such contempt by the population.  And the punch line?  Gruber and his pals don't get that.  They can't imagine that it would make a difference, and so they dance off to lie to the "stupid American voters" again.

Because they can't see a negative consequence from holding this sort of world view.  Smart, right there.

It's a fair, err, cop

I guess this makes sense to an Objectivist Anarchist Total-Isolationist Nationalist Moderate ...