January 2014 Archives

Lots of cameos by stars from the 80s.

New research shows that "liberals" don't understand "conservatives" as well as "conservatives" understand "liberals". (I use quotes because the labels aren't my preferred way to characterize the viewpoints.) It's interesting to note how uncharitable the leftists are. These results line up pretty well with my observations of people in the wild.

One other point that I find really interesting and important about Haidt's work is his findings on the ability of different groups to empathize across these ideological divides. So in his book (p. 287) Haidt reports on the following experiment: after determining whether someone is liberal or conservative, he then has each person answer the standard battery of questions as if he were the opposite ideology. So, he would ask a liberal to answer the questions as if he were a "typical conservative" and vice-versa. What he finds is quite striking: "The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who describe themselves as 'very liberal.' The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives." In other words, moderates and conservatives can understand the liberal worldview and liberals are unable to relate to the conservative worldview, especially when it comes to questions of care and fairness.

In short, Haidt's research suggests that many liberals really do believe that conservatives are heartless bastards-or as a friend of mine once remarked, "Conservatives think that liberals are good people with bad ideas, whereas liberals think conservatives are bad people"-and very liberal people think that especially strongly. Haidt suggests that there is some truth to this.

James Taranto adds:

But there's a limitation to Haidt's experiments. Because his methodology is new, it has only been applied in the contemporary political context. Perhaps in a few decades it will be possible to determine the extent to which Haidt's findings reflect timeless truths about human nature as opposed to peculiarities of the present day. As time travel is a logical impossibility, Haidt cannot go back in time and gather data from earlier generations.

Obviously we're all always traveling through time, but we're limited to one direction: into the future.

A time-lapse video of Luca Iaconi-Stewart making an amazing 777-300 ER model out of manilla folders.

(HT: Time and CT.)

So net neutrality is over, at least for now. What is net neutrality anyway? It's simple to explain, but the implications are murky. Short explanation: net neutrality means that your internet service provider has to treat all your internet data the same. ISPs can't throttle some kinds of data, or charge you extra for other data, or block data from competitors.

On the surface net neutrality sounds good, right? However, it also prevents ISPs from experimenting with new business models and pricing structures. For example, at peak times Netflix accounts for something like 30% of internet traffic in America. Netflix makes a ton of money from this, but they don't pay anything for the bandwidth. ISP subscribers pay for all that capacity as a part of their monthly service fees. This is fine if you use Netflix, but if you don't (as I don't) then you're paying for someone else's Netflix bandwidth. Why shouldn't Netflix kick in some money to pay for the bandwidth their subscribers are using?

Ok, so now you're convinced that net neutrality is bad! Those big internet content companies should pay for the bandwidth they use! Right?

Well, what happens when your ISP signs a contract with Netflix? Netflix pays some money to your ISP to get super-fast data to your livingroom during peak TV-watching hours, and maybe your internet bill goes down. However, Amazon doesn't want to pay for access, or maybe they're just outbid by Netflix. So if you prefer Amazon Prime's movie selection to Netflix, you either can't get it at all or your bandwidth is throttled. Lame! (Not to mention start-up companies that won't be able to afford to buy access.)

It's not really clear if net neutrality is all-good, but the internet has managed to thrive with the philosophy in place. I can understand some theoretical advantages to removing net neutrality, but considering how good things have been for the past 20 years I'm not willing to take the risk.

Absolutely amazing to see the confluence of all these technologies more than 45 years ago. The video is quite long, but you can skip around to see early incarnations of technology that is now ubiquitous.

"The Mother of All Demos is a name given retrospectively to Douglas Engelbart's December 9, 1968, demonstration of experimental computer technologies that are now commonplace. The live demonstration featured the introduction of the computer mouse, video conferencing, teleconferencing, hypertext, word processing, hypermedia, object addressing and dynamic file linking, bootstrapping, and a collaborative real-time editor."

Surprise! The FBI probe led by an Obama donor has leaked that there won't be any charges filed related to the Tea Party persecution. If the law really wasn't broken then that's a problem with the law itself. The proper remedy for this abuse by the IRS is institutional capital punishment: the IRS should be completely dissolved and replaced.

From the WSJ:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation doesn't plan to file criminal charges over the Internal Revenue Service's heightened scrutiny of conservative groups, law-enforcement officials said, a move that likely will only intensify debate over the politically charged scandal.

The officials said investigators didn't find the kind of political bias or "enemy hunting" that would amount to a violation of criminal law. Instead, what emerged during the probe was evidence of a mismanaged bureaucracy enforcing rules about tax-exemption applications it didn't understand, according to the law-enforcement officials.

It's interesting to look at how Google spends its money. Does it just have so much cash that it can't find a good way to invest it? Or are these "moon shots" good business? Or are the founders using the company as a piggy bank to play around with? Should this money be paid out to shareholders?

Look at the technology landscape today and what do you see? A few companies -- Facebook, Yahoo, Apple, Twitter and Google -- competing for the same sorts of revenue: advertising, search, location and some mobile hardware.

Now look into the future of the technology landscape and what do you see? I'll answer that for you: Google, Google and Google.

Over the last year alone Google has acquired more than a dozen tech hardware outfits working on projects that might seem crazy today, but could be part of our not-too-distant future.

Let's look at just a small collection of Google's recent acquisitions. There have been several humanoid robot-makers, including Boston Dynamics, which makes two- and four-legged machines that walk and run with an uncanny sense of balance. Then there was Holomni, a small design firm that makes high-tech robotic wheels, presumably for more robots, or even Google's fleet of driverless cars. And the acquisition of Makani Power, which makes airborne wind turbines, for, well, who knows how Google will use those?

Yet many of its competitors seem to be stuck in the present. Look at Facebook, Yahoo and Twitter's acquisitions, all of which have purchased a lot of software, design, advertising and content companies. No robots. No self-driving cars. No wind turbines.

It's unclear where Apple fits into all of this -- the company, is, after all, better at keeping secrets than the National Security Agency. Apple also clearly has the money to compete with Google.

It's interesting to look at how Google spends its money. Does it just have so much cash that it can't find a good way to invest it? Or are these "moon shots" good business? Or are the founders using the company as a piggy bank to play around with? Should this money be paid out to shareholders?

Look at the technology landscape today and what do you see? A few companies -- Facebook, Yahoo, Apple, Twitter and Google -- competing for the same sorts of revenue: advertising, search, location and some mobile hardware.

Now look into the future of the technology landscape and what do you see? I'll answer that for you: Google, Google and Google.

Over the last year alone Google has acquired more than a dozen tech hardware outfits working on projects that might seem crazy today, but could be part of our not-too-distant future.

Let's look at just a small collection of Google's recent acquisitions. There have been several humanoid robot-makers, including Boston Dynamics, which makes two- and four-legged machines that walk and run with an uncanny sense of balance. Then there was Holomni, a small design firm that makes high-tech robotic wheels, presumably for more robots, or even Google's fleet of driverless cars. And the acquisition of Makani Power, which makes airborne wind turbines, for, well, who knows how Google will use those?

Yet many of its competitors seem to be stuck in the present. Look at Facebook, Yahoo and Twitter's acquisitions, all of which have purchased a lot of software, design, advertising and content companies. No robots. No self-driving cars. No wind turbines.

It's unclear where Apple fits into all of this -- the company, is, after all, better at keeping secrets than the National Security Agency. Apple also clearly has the money to compete with Google.

Here's an Orwellian use of the word "demand". Does Sebelius remember that the law requires people to buy this product? The "demand" is entirely on the government side.

"The numbers show that there is a very strong national demand for affordable healthcare made possible by the Affordable Care Act," said U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

79% of Obamacare enrollees are received subsidies from taxpayers. I hope that's not sustainable.

Most of the people who bought coverage on the exchanges this fall got subsidies to help them afford the premiums. That's in contrast to the first month of the program, when less than one-third of buyers were subsidized. People earning up to four times the poverty rate--as much as $96,000 a year for a family of four--can get help buying coverage.

I'm finishing up my Christmas shopping for next year and I was just paging through Amazon's selection of 208 Christmas gift cards. Most of them feature Santa, gifts, reindeer, Frosty, and so forth. But there's got to be at least one that shows Jesus, right? Well, here's the most Jesusy gift card I could find. I think if you squint you can see the top of Jesus' forehead in the manger.

To be fair, there are few things more consumeristic than gift cards, so maybe Jesus doesn't belong on them anyway?

Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie's flunkies conspired to use their official power to punish their political enemies. Did Christie know about their intentional actions before they were in the news? C'mon. I was born at night, but not last night. America deserves better from our public servants.

"Private messages between Governor's Christie's [sic] deputy chief of staff and two of his top executives at the Port Authority reveal a vindictive effort to create 'traffic problems in Fort Lee' by shutting lanes to the George Washington Bridge and apparent pleasure at the resulting gridlock," the Record of Bergen County reports.

As an Instacommenter notes, this level of pettiness matches the efforts by President Obama to close the national parks during last year's government shutdown.

For pettiness, I believe this bridge fiasco is more on a par with the shutdown of federal parks during the government shutdown than the IRS abuses. The IRS abuses appear to be intimidation for election purposes. The park blockades appeared to be pettiness to prove a point. The bridge fiasco also appears to be pettiness to prove a point.

Tar and feathers.

It should be obvious that the proposal to erect a statue of Satan for the Oklahoma Capitol isn't really about Satan.

I'll venture a guess and say that 99% of "Satanists" don't believe in Satan. The purpose here isn't to honor a real set of beliefs but simply to mock Christians. This is pretty pathetic, because American Christians are generally peaceable and tolerant. If the Satanists really want to be edgy they should try this in any other the capitol in any other country in the world and see what happens.

At the risk of inciting mockery from my intellectual superiors, Satan is very real and is actively working to subvert and destroy humanity. The Bible describes him this way:

1 Peter 5:8 "Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour."

I don't believe it's worthwhile to spend a lot of time talking about Satan. He will ultimately be defeated and is God's to deal with.

"The monument has been designed to reflect the views of Satanists in Oklahoma City and beyond," said Lucien Greaves, a spokesman for the group, in a statement reported by the AP. "The statue will also have a functional purpose as a chair where people of all ages may sit on the lap of Satan for inspiration and contemplation."

The group is based in New York, but says it's not fair for Oklahoma lawmakers to let a Ten Commandments statue stand at the building, without also allowing monuments that reflect other spiritual beliefs, The Associated Press reported. The Ten Commandments statue was privately funded. The American Civil Liberties Union sued to have it removed shortly after it was place, AP reported.

And the Satanic Temple isn't the only group seeking equal access to the site.

The AP reported that a Hindu head in Nevada wants to put a monument at the Capitol, along with an animal rights group and the -- satirical -- Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. In response, the Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission has put a moratorium on deciding new requests.

A great sign for liberty: more Illinoisans want guns than want Obamacare. An armed citizen is a free citizen.

Illinois State Police spokeswoman Monique Bond said that number is included in Sunday's total of more than 11,000 people who have signed up because of an early application process that began December 18 and was open to only firearm instructors. Officials told the Sun-Times they expect 350,000 to 400,000 people (about 1,000 per day) will sign up for conceal carry firearm permits this year. ...

In contrast, the number of Illinois residents going to healthcare.gov over a two-month period and enrolling in Obamacare is currently on a slower pace than those looking to become conceal carry permit holders. Only 7,043 Illinoisans were enrolled in Obamacare plans two months after the website's launch, the Chicago Tribune reported in December.
Additionally, reports say that in the same month, Illinois officials told 30,000 residents who applied at healthcare.gov to re-do their applications, as applicants were denied private coverage and the government mistakenly referred them to Medicaid. The issue has yet to be resolved.

What's a BA? (Warning: the content at the link is pretty offensive.)

Imagine a large corporate machine mobilized to get you to buy something you don't need at a tremendously inflated cost, complete with advertising, marketing, and branding that says you're not hip if you don't have one, but when you get one you discover it's of poor quality and obsolete in ten months. That's a BA. ...

"I have a degree." No one assumes you're smart because of it, so what was the point? You were tricked, your parents were tricked, your peers were tricked, your employers were not tricked at all. "There's more to a college education than employability." No there isn't. I am not anti-liberal arts, I am all in on a classical education, I just don't think there's any possibility at all, zero, none, that you will get it at college, and anyway every single college course from MIT and Yale are on Youtube.

Don't forget that the government at all levels is pushing the scam. You, high school graduate: do you really think everyone is looking out for your best interests? Or might the system be urging you onto the lowest rung of a gigantic Ponzi scheme?

Regardless of whether you go to college or not, you've got to find a way to be productive and create value that other people will pay you for. It doesn't matter what some piece of paper says, no matter how much you pay for it.

As 2014 dawns there are fewer people with health insurance thanks to Obamacare. Considering that the goal of Obamacare was to increase coverage even with increased costs, this is a sad state of affairs -- because costs have certainly gone up. Americans are unquestionably worse off as a group thanks to Obamacare, and only two questions remain: how bad will it get? and when will it end?

America deserves better.

The White House used a Sunday morning statement to admit that only 1.1 million people have used the federal Obamacare website to sign up for the president's healthcare network by Christmas Day.

News reports and advocacy websites say roughly 1 million people have enrolled with health-benefit companies via state websites, including 400,000 in California and 157,000 in New York, by the Dec. 24 deadline, which allows coverage starting Jan. 1.

The 2 million federal and state signups are roughly two-thirds the planned goal of 3.3 million enrollments by Dec. 31. They're also only one-third of the 7 million customers sought by March 31.

The total reported signups are at least 3 million fewer than the 5 million people whose health-insurance policies were cancelled prior to Christmas by President Barack Obama's ambitious tax-and-healthcare scheme.

The minus-3-million score is only partially offset by the extension of Medicaid coverage to perhaps 2 million other people, few of whom earn enough to afford commercial insurance.

Of critical note, the administration is using a deceptive definition for the word "enrolled": it is not known how many of the "enrolled" participants have actually paid for their plans.

I hope you and yours are having an awesome 2014 already. Blogging has been light, but has anyone been reading now anyway? It's nice to take some time away from the computer.