Update no.849

Update from the Sunland

No.849

2.4.18 – 8.4.18

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            Thefollow-up news items:

-- After numerous indictments stemming from the Special Counsel Investigation [804], the first sentencing has come.  Lawyer Alex van der Zwaan [843] pleaded guilty to making false statements to federal investigators and received a 30-day prison sentence.  More to come, I am certain.

-- The trade war initiated by the BIC [839] continues to relentlessly escalate as would be expected in such circumstances.  The PRC inevitably responded to the BIC’s threats.  At the close of this week, both countries are at an estimated US$100B in comparable tariff valuation with no sign of stopping.  I understand and agree with the BIC that the U.S. has tolerated the PRC’s monetary and trade abuses for far too many years.  I certainly laud his willingness to confront the PRC on those trade abuses.  Where I split with the BIC comes in the use of tariffs to effectuate that confrontation.  The BIC is simply and flatly wrong; trade wars are not easy to win.  In fact, there are rarely winners—just lots of losers and mostly We, the People.  The BIC’s minions were quick and consistent to illuminate that the threats are not yet activated.  Conversely, threats without substance are just hot air.

-- The BIC signed a proclamation ordering the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon to coordinate with states to dispatch National Guard troops to border regions. This appears to be the latest move in the BIC’s quest for the “great wall” he first articulated in his presidential campaign announcement on 16.June.2015 [705].  I must confess: I did not take him seriously as a candidate and did not acknowledge his persistent insistence on the border wall until quite late in the campaign [765].  I still do not believe the BIC’s “great wall” is worthy of this Grand Republic, and is far more negative than any positive benefit.  Like so many issues, the BIC is far more interested in the image of things than the substance.  Only a defense in depth with provide the border security we all seek. That’s my opinion and I’m stickin’ to it.

-- The BIC of course denied knowing about a US$130,000 payment his lawyer made to Stephanie Clifford, AKA Stormy Daniels [837], in the month before the 2016 election.  His denials are not legally binding, yet; they only reflect upon his integrity, as did Bill Clinton’s denial (26.January.1998 [before the Update]).  The Stormy Daniels affair has nothing (or should have nothing) to do with the BIC’s poor choices, infidelity, adultery, or even his denials (after all, they are well within his long-established character traits); however, his response to the affair represents a major risk exposure based on the potential violation of campaign finance laws, which in turn brings the episode within the authority and purview of the Special Counsel’s investigation. His public denials are not yet of consequence (after all he long ago abandoned any sense of integrity); however, his denials under oath would become an impeachable offense as they did with Bill Clinton.

-- Federal law-enforcement agencies led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Postal Inspection Service and Internal Revenue Service, and included participation from state authorities, have seized and shutdown Backpage.com, a controversial classified-ads website known for its numerous sex-related postings.  I predicted such actions after the Florida pornography = public health law [843] and a recent couple of federal anti-sex laws [847].  This is wrong on multiple levels—using a thermonuclear weapon to swat a fly. I understand and accept that a significant portion of our population, and perhaps even a majority, resent and condemn any form of non-procreative sex, but suppressing freedom of speech and freedom of choice for all citizens to deal with a few bad hombres is NOT the way forward.  I instinctively knew these actions would happen with social repressive laws from the get-go, and most assuredly they are.  These laws were wrong when they were passed and they remain wrong. The seizure of Backpage.com rather than appropriately modifying behavior is the worst application of bad law.

-- We should not get our hopes up after unnamed administration officials publicly disclosed that the DPRK is prepared to discuss the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, in advance of the summit agreed to by the BIC [845].  The DPRK are notorious for dangling such carrots.  However, the BIC had ignored decades of government and presidential precedent, so perhaps we can as well.  I, for one, will wish him Godspeed and following winds for the summit meeting still tentatively scheduled for next month.  There is always hope.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.848:

Comment to the Blog:

“There's an underlying reason the Russia issue blew up so easily: storytelling.  People's minds respond more easily to a good story, whether fact or fiction.  I learned from studying fiction writing that any story requires conflict.  That is, an ‘us’ versus a ‘them.’   Putin and Russia make a better ‘them’ than vaguely-defined ‘terrorists’ who cannot attack us with a military or the small-scale villains of the 1990s.  Any oppressor needs an outside villain all the more because that makes him (in the eyes of the believers at home) a hero.  Putin and Trump are made for each other in that sense.

“Thanks for explaining the technical side of the Uber and Tesla autonomous car incidents.  What stood out in my mind is that the Tesla vehicle produced warnings and a driver alert before the crash, but we have no indication the Uber machine did so.  In my mind, that means the Tesla system's primary need is to take more autonomous action.  It detected the issue, whatever it was, but could not act on its own.  Whatever the mechanism of action, I believe that will be the concept to be addressed.  The Uber unit has a detection issue, the one you discussed.  I would hold the drivers accountable in this instance, but let's remember that these corporations are developing ‘autonomous’ cars.  The goal is to end the need for a human operator, which separates these inventions from automated aircraft.  The aircraft still require trained, responsible pilots.  Autonomous cars, as envisioned, will not.

“I didn't address your controversial respondent for the simple reason that I don't engage in battles of wits with unarmed opponents.  To phrase that more kindly, she engages her personality in a discussion meant to be based on principles.  However, I noted that you have others here who are not only more reasonable than her but are also more elegant than either she is or I am.  I compliment them on that.  I regret that you have negative and aggressive people in your life.  I have improved my life by reducing my tolerance of them in person.  I have also left other online groups or lists over far less abrasive personalities, but I'm not leaving this one because (a) she's not the guiding spirit here, and (b) this particular blog is intended for discussion of controversial issues.  (You'll have that.)”

My response to the Blog:

            Well now, there is certainly that aspect, especially as entertainment or pabulum for mass propaganda.  The ephemeral aside, there is substance to Putin’s actions.  As I read history, I am saddened by the lost opportunities after the death of Stalin to bridge the divide.  I wonder again whether we have the leaders to recognize the opportunities for peace.  The Russian people I have known are good, decent, peace-loving folks; no different from any of us.  Our problem here is not with the Russian people; it is with the current government . . . the leaders who are pushing their agenda of conflict.  Your concluding sentence sure seems quite appropriate.

            As a contributory note: I was involved in the development of autonomous flight algorithms in the 1980’s, ostensibly to safely recover a wounded or incapacitated pilot in the single seat aircraft.  The physics are common to both aircraft and automobiles.  They can be thought of as variable spheres with radii defined by intercept physics.  The outer sphere alerts the operator to a threat, and the inner sphere directs the system to take action(s) to avoid the conflict.

            While I do not know the specific algorithms involved with either the Uber or Tesla vehicles, physics is physics, and the programming undoubtedly have similar algorithms.  Something failed in both instances.  We do not know what failed, but I believe they will clearly be identified and appropriate improvements made.  Such systems also must have sophisticated monitors to identify faulty sensors and adapt the algorithms to any altered or diminished state.  I will argue any automation-assisted vehicle—aircraft, automobile or lawnmower—requires a properly trained operator.  To that end, the government may well have to regulate such operators through proper licensing procedures, e.g., motorcycle operators or an 18-wheel truck.

            Thank you for comments on our controversial respondent.  She is not alone and further she represents a sizable portion of our citizenry.  We cannot and must not ignore her. Thank you for sticking with this forum and me.  Your reasons to remain are sound.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“I think you underestimate psychology as ‘entertainment or pabulum.’  The importance of storytelling psychology on the masses and on the leaders is that it makes understanding possible.  Clearly, Putin, Trump, and their minions have no interest in peace.  Therefore, they have no reason to recognize opportunities for peace.  Their stories require them to conquer, not to make peace.  In the absence of an external threat, people might not be distracted from their own problems and the sources of those problems.  The leaders have those same stories in their minds, too, that justify their behaviors and self-enrichment.  No amount of external logic and rational thinking explains actual results or predicts future events as well as psychology, and storytelling is a sound way of understanding the psychology involved.

“Your focus on the algorithms and physics of autonomous vehicles causes you to miss my point.  The long-stated goal of autonomous cars and trucks, as opposed to aircraft, is that one day they will not need a human operator.  They are meant to develop until they take charge of their own travel.  That changes the entire development focus and brings up the responsibility/liability issue that has already been raised in the Tesla and Uber accident cases.

“Whether there is a point in trying to address your less reasonable correspondents depends on their nature.  My progress in understanding the basic types of people stands at two fundamental underlying approaches: the student versus the believer.  I imagine the person we are discussing is a believer.  That is, she is a person who finds value mainly in persons and chooses to follow individuals' ideas and opinions.  She sees others (and their opinions and feelings) as having more or less value according to opinions about them that have been given to her by the people whose worth and wisdom she does not question.  You and I are students.  We study facts and ideas as best we can.  We understand that people we respect are human and might be wrong in a given opinion.  We ourselves might also have more to learn, even in our specialties.  We cannot reach those who fall far on the believer side of the spectrum, and we waste our energy if we try.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Oh, I did not miss your point.  I chose to focus on a different aspect. Yes, I think that is precisely the objective of Uber.  I am not so sure that is the objective for Tesla and the other companies. If I was to guess, I would say the automobile manufacturers are primarily driven to improve safety for drivers, passengers and others.

            Side note: a central theme in Book III (not yet written) of my Anod series of science fiction novels is the reality that humanity had to adapt—95% of the population does not have to work as long as they abide certain rules.  This is the consequence of machines replacing human manual labor . . . much more to the story, obviously . . . just part of the story.

            Thank you for your perspective on believers & students.  It does give one an interesting metric for assessing personalities, whether in debate or not.

            Thank you in a far broader, general sense for your continuing contributions to this humble forum.

 . . . a follow-up, follow-up comment:

“You need not guess the goals of those seeking self-driving automobiles.  It's a matter of record.”

 . . . my concession:

Touché!

Another contribution:

“Not in direct reference to 848, Cap, except possibly its usual stab at our POTUS, but I just heard an interview with Madelene Albright on PRI in which she touted her latest book, which apparently celebrates the success of the State Dept in international diplomacy during recent Democratic administrations and bemoans what she views as current U. S. failures and disturbing fascist movements worldwide.  In the interview, and presumably in her book, she predictably likened our POTUS's tendencies to historical figures of fascism and enumerated most of the left's criticisms of Trump's performance.  If I am not mistaken, you will enjoy her book, although I do not accuse you of the all the narrow views she so eloquently expressed in the interview.  I shall probably not invests in her book.  I'm too busy with some used books from a local thrift shop, by Ollie North, Chris Mathews, Patrick Buchanan, "Crisis of Character" (Clintons) by Gary Byrne, and an ancient book on Mississippi Divorce Law by Wingo, whose name is penned inside like an autograph.  The last two will be a waste of time, but I like books.  I'll read Albright's if someone gives me a copy.  Keep smiling.”

My reply:

            My opinion about the man is based on too many years of observing men with similar traits.  Unfortunately, I have seen few deviations from observations.

            My opinions of his words and actions are based on the striking and expansive similarities with historic figures and events.  There are very real reasons I am not alone in illuminating those comparisons.  As the famous saying goes, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”  To me, it appears we are destined to repeat previous mistakes.

            I am neither of the left nor the right, or conservative or liberal.  My voice is that of a moderate, independent, non-partisan citizen who cares deeply for this Grand Republic.  I am a novice student of history, who chooses not to ignore history.  I am not particularly surprised Albright sees similarities with history.

            Like you, I have far too many books yet to be read for my remaining, limited, intellectual capacity.  Like you, I doubt I will invest in Albright’s new book.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)