This is why "connected" appliances are a bad idea

I've spoken out before against the so-called "Internet of things" in our homes.  They hold hidden dangers.

• Frankly, I don't see any need for a "smart thermostat" that can be adjusted from my smartphone, when that means someone else can hack into it and potentially invade my privacy.
• I think "smart security cameras" that I can operate from my smartphone, anywhere in the country, are an ideal tool for would-be burglars or home invaders, who can monitor them to select the best time to commit their crimes.
• "Smart door locks" are an invitation to hackers to open my doors for themselves - or just leave them open for their amusement.

Now comes the news that "smart appliances" have resulted in at least two hacks of commercial establishments.

Nicole Eagan, the CEO of Darktrace, told the WSJ CEO Council Conference in London on Thursday: "There's a lot of internet-of-things devices, everything from thermostats, refrigeration systems, HVAC systems, to people who bring in their Alexa devices into the offices. There's just a lot of IoT. It expands the attack surface, and most of this isn't covered by traditional defenses."

Eagan gave one memorable anecdote about a case Darktrace worked on in which a casino was hacked via a thermometer in an aquarium in the lobby.

"The attackers used that to get a foothold in the network," she said. "They then found the high-roller database and then pulled that back across the network, out the thermostat, and up to the cloud."

Robert Hannigan, who ran the British government's digital-spying agency, Government Communications Headquarters, from 2014 to 2017, appeared alongside Eagan on the panel and agreed that hackers' targeting of internet-of-things devices was a growing problem for companies.

"With the internet of things producing thousands of new devices shoved onto the internet over the next few years, that's going to be an increasing problem," Hannigan said. "I saw a bank that had been hacked through its CCTV cameras, because these devices are bought purely on cost."

There's more at the link.

Greater convenience versus poorer security.  Guess what's more important, at least to anyone with common sense?

Peter

Dental and wallet OUCH!

Poor Miss D.  I mentioned last week that she was having dental trouble sufficiently nasty to require a visit to an endodontist.  Well, she saw him this morning.  Turns out that she needs two root canal treatments, on adjacent teeth.  That is not going to be fun . . . and neither is paying for it. The endodontist doesn't do crowns - he only cleans out the roots - so we're going to have to go back to a regular dentist to have two crowns fitted, over and above the specialist charges.  As I said earlier, thank heavens we have an emergency "rainy day fund".  It's going to see heavy use, this month and next!

Please keep Miss D. in your prayers.  The pain is sufficiently bad that she's not sleeping well, and she has to go on antibiotics until the procedure so as to prevent infection from a previous attempt at a root canal (which didn't work, and resulted in the endodontist's services being required).  I really feel for her, having had a few too many root canal treatments in my time.

Those of you who have good teeth, count your blessings!

Peter

Teaser III

Here's an excerpt from the third volume of the military science fiction trilogy I'm getting ready to publish.  I put up a teaser from the first book a few months ago, followed by a teaser from the second book.  Here's an earlier version of the cover for the first volume, which will be further modified before publication.

I've been hard at work on the series for five months now.  God willing, the first volume will be published in less than a month from today, and the next two volumes will appear at approximately 30-day intervals.  To keep your interest, here's a teaser excerpt from the third volume.

    Captain Pernaska sat on the hard, narrow bunk in his cell, closed his eyes, and prepared himself for death.
    Remember our Patriarch, he thought forcefully to himself. He dared not speak aloud, because the enemy would overhear him through the microphones they were sure to have hidden in this confined space. Even in his dotage, afflicted with disease, he went on a combat operation, to prove to our people that he would never ask them to risk anything he was not prepared to risk himself. What an example he set! He died in action, and inspired all of us to avenge his loss in the blood of our enemies. Today is my chance to do that. It is not a tragedy – it is an honor! May I prove worthy of it, and may my death be worthy of his!
    He had to act before his captors could transfer him to an interrogation facility. He knew all the Brotherhood’s plans for the next few years, and all about their ships. Most important of all, he knew the coordinates in space of their secret base, information entrusted only to the Commanding Officers, Executive Officers and navigators of their vessels. Hawkwood absolutely could not, under any circumstances, be allowed to learn that secret… so he had to die. It was as simple as that.
    His kidnappers had been almost unbelievably, even criminally inept in giving him access to the ship’s entertainment library, via the screen on the bulkhead beyond the bars. He was still puzzled by that. Hawkwood had proved to be a formidable opponent in space combat, worthy of the Brotherhood’s steel. Why had they made such an elementary error? Perhaps this ship was the exception that proved the rule of their efficiency and effectiveness, the weakest link in their chain. Please God, its crew was not alone in being so sloppy! He had taken advantage of the screen and its voice-activated controls – which his oh-so-stupid captors had obligingly demonstrated to him – to access the courier vessel’s layout, provided as part of the entertainment library so that passengers could find their way around if necessary. He knew where the brig was in relation to the rest of the ship, and where the airtight bulkheads and doors were. They would separate the vessel into pressure-tight compartments in an emergency.
    In Galactic Standard English, he called, “Display orbital approach.” The screen obediently flickered, then resolved into a radar-like display of the planet ahead. Several spaceships’ orbits were outlined in yellow, while this ship’s approach to its own assigned trajectory was shown in red. The vessel looked to be no more than a few minutes away from entering orbit. He took a deep breath. It was almost time.
    He’d asked for a couple of pairs of utility overalls, to wear instead of his Captain’s uniform. He’d sent that to the ship’s laundry, to be restored to pristine freshness in readiness for this day. Now he took off the overalls, folded them, laid them on his freshly-made bed, and put on his uniform. He tied the old-fashioned laces, critically observing his reflection in the shoes that he’d polished to mirror brightness, just like when he’d been a cadet officer all those years ago. He settled the jacket over his shoulders, and buttoned it. He had no mirror in which to examine his appearance, but knew it would be as close to perfect as possible under the circumstances.
    He heard approaching footsteps, and smothered a savage grin with his hand. He’d been on his best behavior with the spacers who brought him meals twice a day, and escorted him to and from the shower twice a week. He’d tried very hard to give the impression of a man resigned to captivity, wanting no trouble, willing even to grovel before his guards in order to avoid conflict. He knew some of them regarded him with scornful contempt as a result… which was exactly how he had hoped they would react. Soon, very soon now, they would learn their error.
    He reached beneath the mattress on the unused top bunk, and withdrew the pen that one of the spacers had indulgently lent him ‘to write a letter to my wife’. When he’d handed over the letter – addressed to a non-existent woman, and filled with meaningless platitudes – it had been to a different spacer, who hadn’t asked for the pen to be returned. He had taken full advantage of that mistake. It had given him a weapon. Now he palmed it, with the point up his sleeve, as two spacers entered the brig compartment. Both were armed with pulsers, but only one had his weapon in his hand. The other’s was in the flap holster at his waist, which was unfastened, allowing the butt to peep out from beneath the synthleather cover.
    “All right,” the armed spacer said in Galactic Standard English, using what he presumably intended to be a commanding tone of voice. “Stand back from the door while we unlock it, then we’ll cuff your hands and take you to the docking bay.”
    “Yes, of course,” the captain answered subserviently, stepping back, half-turning away, hunching his shoulders as if to avoid a blow. The two spacers exchanged contemptuous glances, then the second, empty-handed man unlocked the barred door and swung it open.
    “Turn around and put your hands behind your back,” he ordered as he stepped inside.
    The captain made as if to obey, but instead of stopping with his back to the spacer, he continued turning, all the way around, moving suddenly faster. Before the startled man could react, he reached out with his left hand, grabbed his collar, and pulled him powerfully forward as he thrust with the pen in his right hand. Its point speared deep into the spacer’s left eye. He screamed in agony.
    “WHAT TH–” the second spacer began to yell, eyes bulging in surprise – but Pernaska did not stop. His left hand, still grasping the injured man’s collar, twisted him half-around while his now-empty right hand snaked out and grasped the butt of the holstered weapon, drawing it and releasing its safety catch. He violently shoved his writhing victim back towards the bars as the other spacer raised his pulser, blocking his line of sight, forcing him to step to one side to aim at their erstwhile captive. By the time he’d done so, the captain had acquired a rock-steady two-handed firing grip on his own pulser. He fired first, three rapid rounds, two into the spacer’s chest, the third at the center of his face as he yelled in pain and shock and began to fold forward over himself. The man dropped his pulser and slumped bonelessly to the deck. Pernaska turned back to the wailing spacer inside his cell and fired one more round into his head, killing him instantly.
    He shook his head in a vain attempt to clear his head of the sudden deafness caused by the hypersonic discharge of the pulser’s electromagnetic mechanism. Faintly, through the ringing in his ears, he heard the sudden whooping of the ship’s alarm, followed by the impact of airtight doors slamming shut, reverberating through the vessel’s structure. He grinned savagely. Thank you, you fools! You think you’ve locked me safely away from the bridge. Instead, you’ve locked me in the same section of the hull as all your off-duty watchstanders. They’re my meat now! You may kill me in the end, but not before I make you pay for my life in the blood of your spacers!
    He swiftly searched both bodies. Neither carried spare ammunition for their pulsers, but that was of minor importance. He’d used four of the twenty rounds in the first weapon, and there were twenty more in the other – more than enough for what he’d need. He tucked the second weapon into a pocket of his jacket, then called up the vessel’s schematic on the screen again. There were six four-person berthing units for the crew in the forward section of the hull, plus three two-berth units for supervisors and four single cabins for officers. Many of the crew were on duty, but according to the duty schedule he’d carefully memorized earlier, about a third should be in their berthing units. By now they’d have locked their doors, of course, in the vain hope that would protect them from him. He spat contemptuously. They would soon learn otherwise… the last lesson of their lives.
    He walked out of the brig, moving slowly and carefully, peering around the corner to make sure than no braver-than-usual spacer had decided to wait in ambush for him. The passage was clear. Grinning almost cheerfully, he moved up to the first sliding door on the port side. It was locked, as he expected. He reached for the keypad set in the bulkhead next to it, and entered the standard merchant vessel emergency access code. It was used on all commercial ships, in accordance with United Planets regulations, so that search-and-rescue teams could enter locked compartments if necessary. Sure enough, the keypad beeped, and the door slid back.
    Two spacers inside the compartment screamed in fear as they stared at the black-uniformed figure in the open doorway. Their cries turned to gurgles of agony as he pumped one round into each of their chests. They crumpled to the deck. He walked over, aimed carefully, and put a second round through the head of each man. That’s four, he thought with grim, bitter, vengeful satisfaction.
    A voice began yelling over the ship’s speakers, begging, pleading with him to stop. He ignored it as he turned to the door on the starboard side of the passage, and entered the emergency access code once more.

I'm over 50,000 words into the third book, more than half way.  The first and second books are complete, and I'm incorporating edits and changes suggested by alpha and beta readers.  I'm getting excited about the forthcoming launch.  I hope you enjoy the trilogy.

Peter

Sunday morning music

Some songs have become famous as much for the inclusion of a particular instrument as for the quality of the composition, vocals, performers, etc.  The addition of an out-of-the-ordinary instrument for the genre can (but doesn't always) help to transform the song into something transcending its peers, making it stand out from the pack.  When it works, it can become iconic, as it did with the four examples I'd like to offer this morning.

The first is "Norwegian Wood (This Bird has Flown)" from The Beatles, featuring the sitar.  George Harrison first encountered the instrument in April 1965, while filming the Beatles' second move "Help!"  He bought a cheap sitar, and the band used it when recording the song (on their album "Rubber Soul") later that year.  It required several attempts to get the recording to work with the new instrument, as the sitar's sound was hard to capture accurately using then-current technology.

Next, from 1978, we have Gerry Rafferty's song "Baker Street" from his album "City to City".  It's famous for its inclusion of a saxophone riff.  According to the saxophonist, the inclusion of his instrument was almost accidental.  The Telegraph reported:

... the solo was played by Scottish musician Raphael Ravenscroft, who was in the studio to record a brief soprano saxophone part and, when he heard that the guitarist would not be available to play the solo, suggested that Rafferty record it using the alto saxophone he had in his car...

Rafferty later said that he composed the saxophone melody but Ravenscroft - the author of The Complete Saxophone Player and a former tutor of music at York College – claimed he was presented with a song that contained "several gaps".

Ravenscroft said: "In fact, most of what I played was an old blues riff. If you're asking me: 'Did Gerry hand me a piece of music to play?' then no, he didn't."

Ravenscroft's fee was, reportedly, a cheque for £27, which he said bounced anyway and was framed and hung on his solicitor's wall. He received no further payment for his session-playing, adding: "If I had received pots of money, I wouldn't have known what to do. It might have destroyed me."

However, Ravenscroft still did very well out of the song.  Demand for him and his saxophone as a session musician skyrocketed, enabling him to increase his fees very considerably, and he went on to record with big names like Pink Floyd, Robert Plant, Mike Oldfield and many others.

In 1988, Steve Earle released his album "Copperhead Road".  The eponymous title song used bagpipes played through an electronic keyboard to create its curious droning background sound.

Finally, also from 1988, here's Tanita Tikaram's song "Twist in My Sobriety", from her debut album "Ancient Heart".  Its use of the oboe broke new ground in pop music, and was one of the talking points most discussed by reviewers.

The song remains Ms. Tikaram's biggest hit, and has been covered by many other performers.  I think it reflects her eclectic mixture of genetic and cultural heritage, which has endowed her with a secular sort of mysticism that's sometimes impenetrable, but definitely appealing.

Peter

Antidepressants: is the cure worse than the disease?

Two recent articles have raised questions over the safety of long-term antidepressant use.

First, the New York Post reports on a lady who claims that antidepressants both saved her life, and destroyed it.

By the time Lauren Slater was 24, she had been hospitalized five times for attempted suicide. She was deeply depressed, she cut herself and she obsessive-compulsively tapped objects to calm her overtaxed nervous system. So when Prozac came on the market in 1988, her psychiatrist recommended she try it.

. . .

She filled her prescription, and the result was “the most miraculous thing that ever happened to me,” she says. Within three days, her obsessive-compulsive symptoms began to recede, and within five days, they were gone. By day 10, she was actually feeling good.

. . .

Now, 30 years and a dozen different psychotropic medicines later, Slater has learned that the pills she took presented something of a Sophie’s choice — her body or her mind.

In her new book, “Blue Dreams: The Science and the Story of the Drugs That Changed Our Minds,” Slater, who is both a science writer and psychologist, describes how the medicines that allowed her to lead a relatively normal life for many years — marriage, babies, books — robbed her of her physical health.

At 54, she finds herself with the body of an “octogenarian with issues,” she writes. She has failing kidneys, diabetes, is overweight and is losing her memory.

“My lifetime now seems seriously foreshortened, not because of a psychiatric illness but because of the drugs I have taken to treat it.”

There's more at the link.

Next, the New York Times notes that "Many People Taking Antidepressants Discover They Cannot Quit".

Nearly 25 million adults ... have been on antidepressants for at least two years, a 60 percent increase since 2010.

The drugs have helped millions of people ease depression and anxiety, and are widely regarded as milestones in psychiatric treatment. Many, perhaps most, people stop the medications without significant trouble. But the rise in longtime use is also the result of an unanticipated and growing problem: Many who try to quit say they cannot because of withdrawal symptoms they were never warned about.

. . .

The drugs initially were approved for short-term use, following studies typically lasting about two months. Even today, there is little data about their effects on people taking them for years, although there are now millions of such users.

. . .

In New Zealand, where prescriptions are also at historic highs, a survey of long-term users found that withdrawal was the most common complaint, cited by three-quarters of long-term users.

Yet the medical profession has no good answer for people struggling to stop taking the drugs — no scientifically backed guidelines, no means to determine who’s at highest risk, no way to tailor appropriate strategies to individuals.

“Some people are essentially being parked on these drugs for convenience’s sake because it’s difficult to tackle the issue of taking them off,” said Dr. Anthony Kendrick, a professor of primary care at the University of Southampton in Britain.

Again, more at the link.

I have very limited experience with antidepressants.  Some years ago, following a period of intense job-related stress, magnified by the tragic sudden death of a very close friend, I felt overwhelmed.  My physician suggested I try a common antidepressant, but I soon found that it made me feel as if a sort of fuzzy blanket was spread over my ability to think.  I was more comfortable, but also not myself, and not able to respond to things (and people) around me as I usually did.  (Some, of course, might have considered that an improvement, but we won't go there . . .)  I stopped taking them, deciding it would be better to deal with the problems out of my own resources and not rely on a chemical crutch.  I've never used them since then.

On the other hand, I can understand their utility for people with serious chemical imbalances in their brain, as Ms. Slater appears to be afflicted.  Unfortunately, while they seem to solve that problem, no-one appears to have thought about the other side of the coin - their side effects, particularly long-term, and their addictive nature.

Where to now?  I suppose it'll be impractical to simply cut off antidepressant prescriptions, for fear of sparking a massive health crisis and social backlash.  It's a problem we've made for ourselves.  How do we get out of it?  Your guess is as good as mine.

Peter

Neat idea, but I doubt the powers that be will listen

One consumer's protest in England is making news - but I'm not sure it'll make a difference.

A man put off by the cost of a train fare bought a car and drove from London to Bristol for less than the price of the rail fare.

Bargain-hunter Tom Church bought a Honda Civic to make a 120-mile drive to see a friend in Bristol because it was cheaper than a train ticket.

The second hand car cost just £80 [currently about US $114]. Road tax was £81.38 [$116], insurance for one day £20.43 [$29] and petrol £25 [$36]. A total of £206.81 [$295].

Meanwhile, peak-time return train tickets between London and Bristol cost between £210 - £218.10 [$299 - $311].

. . .

[Mr. Church said] “At the end of the trip, I still have a car. I'll probably sell it again. After some TLC, I think I can get £200 [$285]. You get your unused road tax refunded so I might even be in profit! That’s real bargain hunting for you.”

There's more at the link.

It's a great idea, and good for some anti-rail-greed publicity;  but will the rail company listen?  I doubt it.  There are too many others who won't take a stand, and they know it.  They're relying on consumers being sheep to be fleeced.  Airline companies in the USA do the same.  They treat us like cattle, to be stuffed into their overcrowded aluminum tubes and all too frequently treated like dirt, because they know most consumers either don't have any choice but to put up with it, or won't stand up for decent treatment.  Those of us who choose to drive almost everywhere within range, rather than be treated like that, they can afford to disregard, because not enough of us will take such a stand.

(I couldn't help but note that the road tax formed no less than 39.35% of Mr. Church's outlay, and more than that if one considers the tax included in his purchase of fuel.  Big Brother gets its whack, one way or another!)

Peter

No. Just . . . NO!!!

Arachnophobics, don't read this report any further.

Hungry customers began calling Bull City Burger and Brewery in Durham, North Carolina, last month asking for its famous tarantula burgers.

. . .

The exclusive beef burger is topped with gruyere cheese, oven-roasted tarantula and spicy chili sauce. The tarantulas are "free-ranged" and certified edible, Cindrich explained.

Everyone has a unique way of consuming the large burger.

"One person took the tarantula off the burger, dipped it in ketchup and just popped it in there," Cindrich said.

The tarantula burger tastes like a crustacean, Cindrich described. It's crablike — salty but bitter, though the chili sauce adds a bit of heat to it.

There's more at the link. Here's a brief video report with a picture.

A tarantula burger???  I'm definitely not lovin' it!!!




Peter

The joys of dentistry - NOT!

Way back when, as the result of an old injury and some not-very-well-made repairs, I ended up getting all my upper teeth removed, and was fitted with a full upper denture.  The first one (made in South Africa) lasted quite a while, and the second one (made in Louisiana) did OK.  Of course, one's jaw shape changes over time, particularly as one gets older, and one needs to have new dentures made. I had that done for the third time in Nashville, the year before Miss D. and I moved to Texas. The denture was never very satisfactory compared to the first two.  It didn't seem to fit as well, and moved more as I chewed.  Not a comfortable feeling, but money was tight at the time, so I lived with it as long as I could.

Last year the denture cracked.  I had it repaired by the local laboratory, and asked them to put in a piece of reinforcing mesh while they were at it.  I wasn't impressed by their workmanship, and the denture ended up going back and forth three times until they got it sort-of-right.  Oh, well . . . one learns to live with it.  However, last Friday, eating (of all things!) a piece of soft bread with butter, there came a loud CRACK from my mouth.  You guessed it.  Busted denture again - and not even biting into something worthwhile, like steak!

I went in to the dentist on Monday, and asked about repairing it, only to be told that it's been fixed too often.  No dice.  Oh, well . . . time to invest in a new denture again (and at denture prices today, they really are an investment).  This time I've specified a steel liner, rather than a plastic or polymer one, in the hope that it'll last longer and hold its shape better.  However, that also makes them more expensive, and delays completion by a couple of weeks longer than usual.  (I could always specify a gold or platinum liner, of course.  Why not?  It couldn't make them that much more costly!)

Meanwhile, Miss D. has been having fun (NOT!) for several months with a nagging ache in her cheek.  Over time, it resolved to the upper jaw, and she went in to the same dentist for a root canal and crown.  (They price that procedure as if they were implanting one of the Crown Jewels, for heaven's sake!)  The root canal did not go well.  She continued to have severe pain, and after a week, went back to check on that.  Further X-rays revealed that there's a probable extra nerve root, well hidden and hard to locate.  The dentist has therefore referred her to an endodontist, and refunded what he charged for the root canal procedure so far.  That helps, but even so, we'll have to find a couple of thousand for her root canal re-treatment, endodontic costs being what they are.

So, we're both eating soft foods for an extended period, and Miss D. is popping pain-killers to boot.  (Fortunately, I like soup, and can make a good one when required.)  At times like these I'm grateful that we've forced ourselves to live a financially disciplined life, and build up an emergency cash reserve.  It's about to take a hammering!

Peter

Heh

Several readers have referred me to this pseudo-advertisement for the Amazon Alexa/Echo - southern edition.

I wonder if it could be programmed to use my favorite southern expression:  "Well, butter my butt and call me a biscuit!"




Peter

What goes around, comes around

Many were outraged by the formation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in 2011.  I wrote about it at the time, as did many others.  It was Big Brother writ large, bypassing constitutional limitations and congressional oversight.  Sure enough, it became a means to funnel large sums to left-wing, progressive causes with no way to monitor or control the flow.

However, by appointing (not without opposition) a new director for the CFPB, President Trump has stripped away its veil of self-created secrecy, and the light is beginning to dawn.  Schadenfreude was the order of the day on Capitol Hill yesterday.  Hot Air reports:

When Mick Mulvaney served in the House, he tried to warn colleagues that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was too independent of Congress. Now that he’s running the CFPB, Mulvaney wants to demonstrate just how correct he was. For the second straight day, the acting director has told a congressional panel that he can just sit in front of them all day and ignore their questions, and there’s nothing they can do about it.

. . .

Mulvaney delivered the same message to the House yesterday. In testimony before the Financial Services committee, Mulvaney pointed out that the enabling statute for the CFPB only required him to show up when asked. Otherwise, he could just as well twiddle his thumbs or answer e-mails rather than answering any questions from Congress.

. . .

This attempt to force Congress to reckon with its own bad ideas didn’t just start yesterday. Mulvaney threw the first punch last week in correspondence with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who helped create the agency — and its independence from Congress ... Mulvaney flat-out refused to answer Warren’s written questions.

There's more at the link.

Mr. Mulvaney is, of course, cooperating with both House and Senate committees.  He merely made the point that by setting up the CFPB to be independent of congressional oversight, Senator Warren and the Obama administration were now "hoist with their own petard" - to the Senator's obvious anger and discomfort.  I'm sure Mr. Mulvaney enjoyed the exchange!

I thoroughly enjoyed Ace of Spades' take on the proceedings.

Best part: Elizabeth Warren demands answers, and Mulvaney tells her to **** off -- he invites her to experience some of the same frustration he felt when trying to get answers from a rogue agency entirely insulated from oversight by the people's representatives.

Flashback: Because the CFPB skims money from the companies it bullies, it is largely self-funding in the same way an armed street gang is self-funding. Yet they usually demand the government pour even additional taxpayer monies into this shakedown operation anyway.

When Mick Mulvaney had to request budgetary money, he asked for zero. Not for a zero percent increase. He asked for zero dollars, period. He literally zeroed out his own agency's budget.

Don't worry -- they'll keep collecting the vig from the people they shake down.

But at least they won't get any taxpayer money.

I'm not a gay, but looking at Mick Mulvaney's Bad Boy motorcycle-leather appeal, I have to say: I get it, Gay Dudes. I get it.

Again, more at the link.

Seriously, it's high time the CFPB was reformed, and brought under the same congressional oversight as all other executive branch departments and bureaus (something Mr. Mulvaney requested last week).  For that matter, I fail to see any compelling reason at all for its existence.  If President Trump can find a way to abolish it, I (and, doubtless, Mr. Mulvaney) will shed no tears at all.

Peter

A "diverging diamond" interchange?

I'd never heard of them, until Wirecutter posted this video report.

Has anyone driven through them?  Are they as good as they're claimed to be?  Please let us know in Comments.

Peter

Blade fade?

I was surprised to read about a British "art" project that's supposed to mobilize social opinion against "knife crime".  You can read about it here, but the video below is probably more enlightening.  (George R. R. Martin or HBO might be justified in suing them for copyright infringement, but clearly the artist(s) think that social progress is more important than mere commercial considerations.)

The real problem, of course, is that, just as with gun control, those agitating against "knife crime" in Britain are completely misguided.  They're focusing on the instrument, not the person(s) wielding it.  This campaign is utterly pointless (you should pardon the expression).  Consider:

• In a case of drunk driving, we charge the driver, not his vehicle.
• In a case of arson, we charge the arsonist, not the fuel and/or ignition source he used.
• In a case of medical malpractice, we charge the doctor(s) and/or nurse(s) concerned, not the medical instruments and/or appliances they used.
• In a burglary, we charge the burglar, not the tools he used to break and enter property.
• In knife crime, we charge the person using the knife, not the knife itself.

In every case, the instrument(s) is/are not at fault, not responsible.  They have no ethical standards or moral volition of their own.  They're simply tools, things.  One might as well blame a hammer if one wields it inexpertly, and hits one's thumb instead of the head of the nail.  Guess what?  Your thumb will still hurt just as much, and you'll add being a dumbass to being a poor handyman.

There's a reason for the old proverb:  "A bad workman always blames his tools".  It's because, from time immemorial, that excuse has been used by those who either can't, or won't, do anything effective to solve a problem.  Whether that problem is to build a piece of furniture, or discourage the use of knives by criminals, the result is all too often the same - adopting an ineffective approach, then when it fails, blaming anything (and/or anyone) except adopting an ineffective approach.  You want to stop knife crime?  Pointless "art" displays of an ethically and morally guiltless instrument won't do it.  Neither will banning the carrying of knives in public.  (Remember how well Prohibition worked [NOT!], and how well the current War On Drugs has worked [NOT!]?)

No.  If you want to stop knife crime, make it so costly to the criminal that others will learn from his/her example, and not emulate it.  This might be one time when an Islamic standard of punishment actually has a meaningful application in a non-Islamic society.  Why not cut off the hand, or the fingers, of anyone using a knife to injure someone during the commission of a crime?  Do it in public, without anesthetic, and let people hear them scream.  I guaran-damn-tee you, it'll have an instant and very chilling effect on other criminals.  It'll certainly be a lot more effective than slapping them on the wrist in court, and giving them a few months or years in a cushy prison where they can learn from their peers to be better criminals!  (A similar approach might be a more effective deterrent to "gun crime".  Use a gun in the commission of a crime?  Get shot with that same gun, or a similar one, in exactly the same body part[s] where you shot your victims.  If that means you won't survive . . . well, you shouldn't have started it, should you?)

Does that shock you?  Do you think it's heartless, even barbaric?  Then make up your mind about your priorities.  Do you really, truly, genuinely want to reduce knife crime?  Then name an alternative that will be as effective as that punishment in achieving that objective.  Go on.  The ball's in your court.  Return it.

Fortunately, I and many of my readers live in a country where we can still respond to a knife-wielding criminal with something more effective than a strong word and a pointless, useless law.

Peter

Hapless Viking seeks suitable afterlife

I posted this cartoon some years ago, but I was reminded of it by the last part of an article over at Larry Lambert's place:  so I decided to post it again.  It's still funny.

Peter

A culture shift against gun owners?

Herschel Smith thinks so.

There is such a proliferation of gun control and ammunition control articles, commentaries, editorials and laws that it would be impossible to mention them all, let along discuss them.  Boulder has just announced a new assault weapons ban.  The LA Times advocates ammunition regulation, Smith & Wesson will soon be under pressure from its parent company, Black Rock Investment is pimping gun free investments, a recent challenge to the Massachusetts assault weapons ban has fallen, bump stocks will soon be illegal, the Las Vegas Sun is publishing letters advocating the confiscation of ammunition, and the News Tribune published a reader who wants to tax ammunition more heavily.

. . .

We could go on for hours and hours over this.  The point is that something has snapped in American culture, and we are being put in a pincer movement.

. . .

Furthermore, when bans happen, we’ll all have to decide where we stand, and some of us will have to turn “gray man” in order to live and work in our communities and continue to have a job.  Not everyone can be a very public figure like Mike Vanderboegh was.

Unless the culture makes a U-turn very quickly – and I don’t think it will – we are in for some hard times ahead and we will all have to make difficult choices.  Put on your thinking caps, stock your supplies, watch your six, consider your options, and make sure of your friends.

There's more at the link.  Recommended reading.

In another article, Mr. Smith provides a warning:

Listen to your enemies.  Learn from them, especially when they publicly inform you of their tactics.  Plan accordingly.  By my calculations, Trump (being I suspect a one-term president) gives us about two more years.

I fear he may be right.  Note, in particular, this LA Times editorial about ammunition control, and Bank of America's decision to stop lending to manufacturers of politically incorrect weapons.  If those aren't the enemy informing us of his intentions and tactics, I don't know what is!

I'm sure most of the readers of this blog are of the same mind as myself.  I think the Founding Fathers knew what they were about when they recognized the (pre-existing) right to keep and bear arms in our Bill of Rights.  However, they wrote in a time and in a culture where this was self-evidently necessary, and no-one in his right mind would have argued that it was not.  Today, many of our people do not have that mindset.  Their only encounters with firearms are in the hands of criminals, law enforcement officers and agencies, and the military.  They have no personal experience with them at all, even for target practice, much less used them as a tool to provide food for their tables or protection against their enemies.  They see guns as scary, threatening and dangerous.

It's all very well to argue that they're wrong, but it won't get us anywhere.  That won't change their beliefs or outlook.  I don't know that there's any way to do so other than expose them to the reality of firearms, by getting them to shoot and experience for themselves that a gun is just a tool like any other.  Unfortunately, opportunities to do so don't exist for most of them, and they wouldn't want them if they did.

Since most of us can't afford to stockpile weapons and ammunition in large quantities, and/or don't have the (safe, secure) storage space in which to do so, I repeat the suggestion for low-cost, effective training that I made several years ago.  Buy one or more BB or Airsoft replicas of your chosen defensive weapons, stock up on pellets and air cylinders, and use them for regular practice (see the earlier article for details of how to train with them).  It's vastly cheaper than using ammunition and your regular firearms, yet exercises the same skills you may one day need when using the latter.  That's an option all of us can afford.  At the same time, stockpile what ammunition you can afford, because it's very likely to become much more expensive (due to taxes and regulation) and harder to obtain (due to registration, restrictions on bulk shipments, and other impositions).

The cultural winds are against firearms owners in large parts of our country - and those parts contain the majority of US voters.  As Mr. Smith points out, we have to face reality.

Peter

The ultimate way to protect your old computer's data from snoopers

Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch offers this helpful (?) suggestion.

Peter

After a weather postponement, the US auto industry's woes deepen

In July last year, I pointed out that the US vehicle manufacturing industry was in serious trouble.  In a second post the same day, I provided pictures of vehicles that could not be sold, stored in hurriedly rented parking lots all over the country.

The hurricanes that struck the US during the second half of last year provided an unexpected breathing space for the auto industry, with over 600,000 vehicles damaged or destroyed.  Many had to be replaced.  This absorbed some of the industry's overproduction stockpile, and staved off short-term problems.  However, the "weather bump" is over, and the problems are returning in full force.  Bloomberg reports:

Growing numbers of small subprime auto lenders are closing or shutting down after loan losses and slim margins spur banks and private equity owners to cut off funding.

. . .

As of the end of September, there were about $280 billion of subprime auto loans outstanding, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York ... There isn’t a standardized definition of subprime borrowers, though it generally encompasses borrowers with FICO credit scores below 600 to 640 on an 850 point scale.

Years of loose lending have resulted in growing numbers of subprime borrowers falling behind on their bills. In the quarter ended September, 9.7 percent of loans that auto-finance companies made to the riskiest borrowers were overdue by 90 days or more, according to a study last year by the New York Fed. That’s the highest percentage since 2010. The weakness is making it more expensive for some subprime auto lenders to package loans into bonds, though none of the companies that recently closed or filed for bankruptcy have issued such securities.

It’s a cycle the subprime auto industry has seen before. From 1997 to 1999, 41 lenders filed for bankruptcy, shut down or were acquired as losses from bad loans piled up, according to Moody’s Investors Service.

For this cycle, easy money may have spurred lenders to be looser in their underwriting or fail to properly vet borrowers’ incomes, said Colonnade’s Gillock.

There's more at the link.

Last year I pointed out:

Put in its simplest terms, most US households currently have significantly less disposable income, in terms of the buying power of their money, than they had in previous decades.  Therefore, while auto prices may have held reasonably steady in inflation-adjusted dollars, the incomes of those who buy them have not.  They're now effectively much lower.

. . .

That's why the duration of auto loans has had to increase.  People no longer have sufficient disposable income to afford both their normal living expenses, and the monthly payments on that auto loan over a more 'conventional' term.  That's also why many US cars are now sold through short-term leases rather than auto loans - because  loan payments are simply too high.

Again, more at the link.

Now it seems that, for many consumers, even the longer-duration consumer loans they took out to buy vehicles are too much for their budgets to bear.  This will have an immediate knock-on effect in the auto industry.  If its products can't be afforded by many consumers, it won't sell as many, meaning a lot of the infrastructure (and staff) built up to support a given market size will now be surplus to requirements.  That can't be a comforting feeling for those working in that field.

Miss D. and I decided long ago that we were going to get off the merry-go-round of taking out loans to "buy stuff".  We're staying as debt-free as possible, and pay for most of our needs in cash.  We're even trying to pay off our home in ten years or less.  If we need another vehicle in future, we might consider financing it, but unless the need is very urgent, we're more likely to save our money and pay cash.  I know several families who've made similar decisions.  That's even more bad news for the finance companies who issue auto loans.

Peter

Comment policy change

A number of readers have complained that verification on comments (at present, Google uses image recognition) has become ridiculously onerous.  That's outside my control, unless I stop using it;  so let's run an experiment.

I've switched off verification for comments, but also switched off anonymous comments.  That means, if you want to leave a comment, you'll have to be signed in with a Google account or OpenID.  I hope that will prevent a surge of spam comments (which is why I implemented verification in the first place;  however, a few still got through, even with verification enabled).

Let's try it that way for a few days.  If it works, great.  If not, or if spam comments become too much, then I'll have to think of something else.

Peter

What happens when political correctness trumps criminal reality

Here's a short, but very interesting interview concerning racial classification issues in schools.  I can attest from personal exposure to schools in such environments that the problem is all too real.

One hopes the present Administration will do something to sort out this mess . . . but what?  Its hands are too often tied by state and local officials who won't budge from their politically correct positions.

All I can say is, if your child is trapped in a school like that, get him or her out as soon as possible!  If there are no better alternatives, think about home-schooling.  It may be the only way to save them.

Peter

"What Does It Mean to Die?"

That's the question asked by the New Yorker in a sad, poignant article.  Here's an excerpt.

Two days later, Jahi was declared brain-dead. With the help of a ventilator, she was breathing, but her pupils did not react to light, she did not have a gag reflex, and her eyes remained still when ice water was dripped in each ear. She was briefly disconnected from the ventilator, as a test, but her lungs filled with carbon dioxide. On an EEG test, no brain-wave activity could be seen.

Like all states, California follows a version of the 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act, which says that someone who has sustained the “irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead.” California law requires that hospitals permit “a reasonably brief period of accommodation” before disconnecting a ventilator—long enough to allow family to gather, but not so long that hospitals neglect the “needs of other patients and prospective patients in urgent need of care.”

. . .

Over the next few days, a social worker repeatedly urged Jahi’s family to make a plan for taking her off the ventilator. She also recommended that they consider donating her organs. “We were, like, ‘Nah,’ ” Marvin said. “ ‘First, tell us what happened to her.’ ” The family asked for Jahi’s medical records, but they weren’t allowed to see them while she was still in the hospital. Nailah didn’t understand how Jahi could be dead when her skin was still warm and soft and she occasionally moved her arms, ankles, and hips. The doctors said that the movement was only a spinal reflex, described in the medical literature as “a Lazarus sign.”

. . .

A week after the surgery, Sealey called a personal-injury lawyer, Christopher Dolan, and told him, “They’re going to kill my niece.” Dolan agreed to take on the case pro bono, though he had no experience with legal issues involving the end of life ... He wrote a cease-and-desist order: if doctors unplugged Jahi’s ventilator, he said, they would violate her and her family’s civil rights. Sealey taped the note to Jahi’s bed and oxygen monitor.

In a petition to the Alameda County Superior Court, Dolan requested that a physician unaffiliated with the hospital examine Jahi. He wrote that the hospital had a conflict of interest, because if its doctors were found guilty of malpractice they could “drastically reduce their liability by terminating Jahi’s life.” In cases of wrongful death, California places a cap of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars on damages for pain and suffering. But there is no limit on the amount that can be recovered when a patient is still alive.

. . .

On December 19th, ten days after the surgery, David Durand, the hospital’s senior vice-president and chief medical officer, held a meeting with the family ... When they persisted, Durand asked, “What is it that you don’t understand?” According to Jahi’s mother, stepfather, grandmother, brother, and Dolan, who took notes, Durand pounded his fist on the table, saying, “She’s dead, dead, dead.” (Durand denies pounding his fist or repeating the word.)

There's more at the link.  Highly recommended reading.

As a pastor and chaplain, I've seen enough of this sort of dilemma to understand both sides of the picture.  Families naturally want to keep hope - and the patient - alive as long as possible.  Hospitals want to avoid needless expense, and free up a bed (and, perhaps, specialized life support technology) for patients who desperately need it.  On the other hand, I've been present at meetings where hospital and medical staff undoubtedly pressured families to sign off on the termination of life support, particularly in cases where organ donation was an option.  I got the very strong impression that they were more interested in harvesting the patient's organs than in keeping him/her alive.  I'm not alone in that, either;  other chaplains and pastors with whom I've spoken have told me of hospitals asking them to persuade the family to "let go" and allow the patient to die, so that others may be helped.  They've even gone so far as to invoke Christian charity as a reason for doing so.

This also raised the question of so-called "living wills" or "advance healthcare directives".  In them, one specifies whether one does, or does not, wish to be resuscitated, or provided with life-enhancing or -extending treatment, under various circumstances.  These are supposed to be binding, but I've seen hospitals disregard them almost at will if it suits them to do so.  I've also seen relatives refuse to allow them to be implemented, often due to arguments over inheritances, over which they wish to reach agreement with other relatives before they allow the sick person to die.  It's a messy, mercenary business, and I hate it . . . but it's a reality most of us may one day face.

This is a terribly complex, thorny issue, and there are no easy answers.  There probably never will be.  However, it behooves all of us to be aware of it . . . because one day, we might well be the patient in that hospital bed, and our families may be arguing with the hospital over whether we should live or die.  That's not a comforting thought.

Peter

Heh

From Pearls Before Swine yesterday.  I really enjoy Stephan Pastis' sense of humor.

Peter