Saturday, December 30, 2023

Meta Values - 13

Max helped live these wise words from Pascal long before I read it. 

All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.

- Blaise Pascal, Pensées

Of course, Fluffy and Garph teach me everyday by showing the pleasures of sitting quietly and have a splendid life. In John Gray's words

We are at one with all other creatures. Humans do not rank above other animals, or below them. There is no cosmic scale of value, no great chain of being; no external standard by which the worth of a life can be judged. Humans are humans, cats are cats. The difference is that, while cats have nothing to learn from us, we can learn from them how to lighten the load that comes with being human. 

One burden we can give up is the idea that there could be a perfect life. It is not that our lives are inevitably imperfect. They are richer than any idea of perfection. The good life is not a life you might have led or may yet lead, but the life you already have. Here, cats can be our teachers, for they do not miss the lives they have not lived. 

What else can there be to ask from life when I have more than I ever dreamed of?



Friday, December 29, 2023

Meta Values - 12

Minimize to avoid outsourcing the care for your dogs, cats and anyone else you care for, food you eat, cleaning your home, tending your garden, finance, thinking, and zillion little things we do everyday.  

Self sufficiency and redundancy goes together.  

It's worth the time and effort to the learn to do above things and imbibe them into simple pleasures of te day. 

If we are spending most of life outsourcing the above, we are missing life. 

Read legislations, proposed government bills, rules and regulations etc. Most political polarizations spark because of not reading the fine lines and outsourcing to folks who's paycheck depends on misreading it. 

My rule is if I am doing something very rarely then outsourcing is the best option. 


Monday, December 25, 2023

Max Holiday Card 2024

 



The work is yours, but not the fruits thereof.

- Bhagavad Gita 


If we keep repeating the same stories, then we will keep doing the same things, which do not work. But we are addicted to this repetition! We need to get fed up with these same stories. We need new stories.

Myths give us courage. If it is already true in the story, then, paradoxically, we can make it happen. As we tell and live new stories, we change what can happen in the world around us.


















Sunday, December 24, 2023

Meta Values - 11

Sometimes a simple one-liner quote can have a profound impact on how we live. 

Thanks to Tim Ferris for popularizing this quote by Jerzy Gregorek:

Hard choices, easy life, easy choices, hard life.

Honestly, I don't meditate on this line everyday but yet when complacency sets in, this rescues me and puts me back on track. 

In other words, it helps me NOT to outsource what is in my control.


Saturday, December 23, 2023

Plant Trees & Not Cut Tress For X'mas

Amidst global warming, this mindless culture and tradition of chopping trees is insanity. 

Virtue signaling of driving Tesla to nationalism of self is far from being rare.  But yet, these folks  irrespective of their ideologies don't even reflect for a minute chopping trees which takes decades to grow. 

When Max was a puppy, he and I planted a tree next to the AC unit where it was close to impossible for the tree to grow. It was filled with hard rocks plus there was this huge AC unit. I was talking to Max all along for an hour or so as I was digging the hole and at one point after planting the tree I told him: 

Max, this tree will outlive both of us. Of the living beings in the world, this tree will remember us when we both are gone. 

Close to fifteen years later, that tree indeed is flourishing because of anti-fragility. A tree grows in Max's home and will remember those simple moments decades or centuries later when a dog and a human planted him when he was a baby. 

There is immense beauty in it. 

What is beautiful about cutting a baby tree to keep it inside the house for 2 weeks and throwing it in the dumpster?

I haven't met Jesus but I see him as a kind man. Maybe one of the kindest men ever. I bet he would love the idea of planting trees for Christmas instead of cutting them. 

Thankfully, some humans in France have started questioning this insanity:

"I have nothing against Christmas trees. I have my own fond memories of decorating them as a girl," Ms André says.

"But times have changed. We are living through an ecological transition. Everything that pollutes has got to stop.

"People in cities are fooled by the marketing which tells them that Christmas trees are 'natural' - as if they're all from some magic forest. The reality is that it's a form of intensive agriculture."

It is not just environmental campaigners who are questioning the ethics of Christmas trees.

French consumers are also increasingly curious about the provenance of their Nordmanns and Epiceas.

Is it responsible, they are asking, to fast-track millions of baby trees only for them to be cut down and kept in living rooms for perhaps a fortnight?

Friday, December 22, 2023

Chicken For Dinner - Cruelty At A Genetic Level...

Broiler chicken is a prime example of science unleashing evil.

Remember, ideologies such religion, politics, nationality etc., are not the only "privileged" ones to unleash evil. Everything under the sun and touching human minds have the potential to become evil. 

If your plate is filled with misery, you are indeed feasting on misery (when there zillion misery free alternatives). Diet of misery can never be a healthy diet from your body. 

There is an unending quest to find a better chicken because humans simply cannot control their taste buds even when billions live a miserable life. 

When Peterson was a child, a typical chicken would take around four months to reach its slaughter weight of 2.5 pounds. Growth rates began to crank upwards in the 1950s, and by the 1970s, as Peterson rose to the heights of his reputation, the chicken was well on its way to becoming a new beast — one featuring a “distinctive new morphotype,” according to scientists. Today, chickens reach 5 pounds in two months, while consuming less food.

Consistently fast-growing and fat chickens became the foundation of a small empire. Before Peterson passed away in 2007, his company was cranking out more than a million broilers each week and bringing in $180 million in annual sales. That made Peterson one of the country’s top 25 poultry operators — and one of the biggest businesses in Arkansas.

The domesticated chicken — Gallus gallus domesticus — had meanwhile been turned into one of the planet’s most important animals: our most-consumed meat. With a global standing population of at least 25 billion, these birds outnumber every other vertebrate species. The total standing biomass of domesticated poultry is around three times higher than the biomass of all wild birds combined.

Understanding the human relationship with our fellow animals — and considering the future of how we might or might not eat those animals — requires reckoning with this unlikely bird.

[---]

But the rise of poultry, and of poultry science, has not been great for the chickens themselves. They are now less functional animals than meat-growing machines. So much of a chicken’s energy gets devoted to growing as big as possible as fast as possible that the parts less useful to us humans — lungs and hearts, say — are neglected and wither. Due to underdeveloped immune systems, the birds are dosed with antibiotics. Many full-grown broilers are unable to stand under their weight. Activists and critics have called them “prisoners in their own bodies.”

They’re also more literally prisoners: Most broilers spend their brief lives locked inside massive sheds alongside tens of thousands of their genetic cousins. Each bird gets around a square foot of space, so many that are still young enough to walk have no choice but to step over their immobilized relatives. This is an ethical nightmare, clearly, but also an existential threat: So many identical chickens packed so close together is a breeding ground for disease. The latest strains of avian influenza have grown so severe that endangered wild birds have to be immunized to prevent their extinction. That several humans have tested positive for bird flu over the past few years is also worrying; the worst pandemic in the past century, with a death toll perhaps 30 times worse than Covid, came after bird flu jumped through poultry farms into human populations in 1918.

The specter of chickens killing us through disease is what first led me into the annals of the industry, and eventually to Peterson. What hope is left, I wanted to know, for those of us who enjoy eating meat?

[---]

In the 1940s, the U.S. Department of Agriculture helped sponsor several “chicken of tomorrow” contests, competitions meant to see who could develop the fastest-growing birds. Many of the entrants attempted to tweak and perfect one of the classic, long-known chicken breeds. But the initial winner took a more daring approach: He crossed a popular East Coast meat bird with a different breed developed in California, creating an entirely new hybrid chicken. Three years later, the same breeder won a second national contest, again with a crossbred bird. A revolution had begun.

[---]

Many of the companies that advertise “free-range” or “pastured” chicken raise these Cornish Cross hens. Andrew deCoriolis, the executive director of Farm Forward, a nonprofit that advocates for safer, healthier and more humane agricultural practices, argued that it hardly matters where such a chicken spends its life. Cornish Cross hens need so much help from humans that they may lead better lives if kept indoors, he said. Studies have found that the greatest factor impacting a chicken’s welfare is its breed. The cruelty, in other words, is inscribed at the genetic level.

[---]

Even if you do not care about animal welfare, there are reasons to despair over industrial chicken. You might worry about human welfare, for example: Modern chicken production is a labor nightmare, sometimes conducted by underaged and undocumented immigrants. And if you don’t care about laborers, there’s a more self-serving reason to worry: Chickens are a major public health risk. The use of antibiotics could drive the evolution of drug-resistant super-bacteria that could infect humans, too.  

Perhaps scarier, though, is that chicken CAFOs are breeding grounds for influenza. Population density helps increase pathogen transmission, while genetic homogeneity helps drive pathogen evolution, so sometimes mild viruses become far more deadly. Even early animal agriculture practices created what anthropologist James C. Scott called “a perfect epidemiological storm.” Since then, the scale and density of agriculture has increased enormously.

[---]

Decades of advertising have told the world that to eat meat is to be powerful and virile, an ideal of maleness in a world where men dominate. (Studies show that meat eaters tend to hold more authoritarian political viewpoints.) As a man myself, perhaps my desire to eat meat is the result of brainwashing. 


Saturday, December 16, 2023

Meta Values - 10

In any worthwhile and "what matters" discussions (outside of self centered and family) as a sequence of why, what and how questions crop up. 

These conversations are precious. 

But there comes a point where most become nihilist (if polite) or unleash ad hominem. Both of these traits are roots of hindrance to moral progress. 

My answers would start from "I don't know" how to change everything and "I do know" how to change myself and will change myself to pave a path towards marginal macro impact in my lifetime. 

I am at peace at the thought of dying without seeing a positive impact and not anyone "remembering" me. 

The work is yours, but not the fruits thereof.

- Bhagavad Gita

 

 

Sunday, December 10, 2023

On Charisma

Most of us will have experienced the allure of a charismatic individual in our lives. Few have experienced the feeling of being charismatic, where your desires, beliefs and actions are having a disproportionately powerful influence on those around you. But when people try to break down how it feels to experience it, they veer into cryptic comparisons. “When she [Elizabeth Holmes] speaks to you, she makes you feel like you are the most important person in her world in that moment,” Tyler Shultz, a whistleblower who worked at Theranos, told CBS News. “She almost has this reality distortion field around her that people can just get sucked into.” 

About a meeting with Leo Tolstoy, Maxim Gorky wrote: “I can not express in words what I felt rather than thought at that moment; in my soul there was joy and fear, and then everything blended in one happy thought: ‘I am not an orphan on the earth, so long as this man lives on it.’” 

Reflecting on her rare experiences of charisma across 25 years of interviewing notable figures, the newspaper columnist Maggie Alderson wrote: “I still don’t understand what creates the effect. … If not fame, beauty, power, wealth and glory then what? It must be innate. I find that quite thrilling.”

“Something magical and dangerous, something unfathomable, is afoot when charisma is present.”

[---]

As Mazzarella reminded me, people also use charisma to talk about the most admired and inspiring figures in their lives and the charismatic teachers they’ve had. “There the implication is that this person helped me to become myself or transcend myself in a way that I wouldn’t otherwise have been able to do,” he said. “That’s what’s interesting about charisma: It touches the darkest fundamentals of human impulses while having the capacity to point to our highest potentials. Charisma has these two faces, and it’s the fact that we seem to not be able to have one without the other that is so uncanny and disturbing. Inspiring charismatic figures can become exploitative, manipulative or violent. Violence gives way to liberation, or liberation gives way to violence. The problem is not just that we have a hard time telling the good charisma from the bad charisma, but that one has a way of flipping into the other.”

[---]

For over a decade, Antonakis has been experimenting with ways to break charisma down into its composite parts, therefore making it measurable and teachable. He believes it can be the great leveler in a world obsessed with physical appearance. His resulting definition is that charisma is “values-based, symbolic and emotion-laden leader signaling.” 

Along with a team of researchers, he boiled it all down to 12 “charismatic leadership tactics,” or CLTs for short. The CLTs include nine verbal techniques — like the use of metaphors, anecdotes, contrasts and rhetorical questions — as well as three nonverbal ones like facial expressions and gestures. Anyone trained in these CLTs, he said, can become more “influential, trustworthy and leaderlike in the eyes of others.” He and his team developed an artificial intelligence algorithm, which they trained on almost 100 TED talks, that can identify the charismatic quality of speeches. The algorithm is called “Deep Charisma” but Antonakis calls it his “charismometer.” 

The Secret History And Strange Future Of Charisma


Friday, December 8, 2023

Define Your Values (Not In Your Work & Affiliations)

Don't try to find "impactful" or "meaningful" work, initiatives and affiliations. We live in a complex system and above all, we are part of a complex system. 

Define your values first and live by it in your personal life. Everything else will follow it. 

I love animals but I will find meaning if my job was cleaning toilets. Worse, if I worked in a slaughterhouse for some time, I would learn the economics of the meat industry better and might learn a thing or two to eradicate meat and animal suffering. 

We are indeed astronomers on warships, we are biologists on an imperial voyage, and we can make marginal changes in the world if we work as part of the world we want to make an impact. 

Avoid living in an idealistic world where only signaling works. 

This is such a beautiful (and insightful for many) piece -  We're All Astronomers on Warships:

Stop holding yourself to an impossible standard of ethical associations, and do the most good you can in the organizations that will empower you to do it best — even if those organizations are imperfect. News flash: all organizations are imperfect. Of course they are. They’re run by people.

Our businesses, our employers, our communities, our churches — we can’t mold them all to our perfect moral standards. We can’t even mold ourselves to our standards most of the time. But neither can we sever ourselves from all of these associations.

Why? Because in all their imperfection, they can still help facilitate our best intentions.

My marketing work helps provide for my family, and provides a work life that lets me be extremely present in my two sons’ lives.

My teaching gives me the opportunity to (hopefully) positively touch the lives of young people on their path into adulthood and the lifelong pursuit of personal fulfillment.

My church affiliation provides me a mechanism for service and volunteer work, as well as the inspiration that comes from regularly sitting down in a room with a bunch of people who are actively trying to become better human beings.

Your affiliations don’t have to define your values. They just have to help you define your own values.

We’d all prefer not to be on the warship in the first place. We would love for it to be a Peaceful Vessel for the Advancement of Astronomy and Common Good. But don’t jump ship just yet. The world needs to know what you see through your telescope.


The Mushroom at the End of the World - Anna Tsing

Review of the new book The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins by Anna Tsing.

Why should a mushroom make it possible to understand capitalism — better than the Internet, for example, or the arms trade, or the sale of grain? The reason defines both the method and the object of this investigation: a problem of scale. It is not possible to cultivate this mushroom because it has a capricious life cycle and depends heavily on other factors; it is not a scalable object.

One of the major contributions of this book is that it redefines capitalism by its capacity to create local conditions that may be scaled up, and plantations are the precursor and the prototype. Gathering matsutake eludes all forms of scalability, as do those gathering it in Oregon or China, whose perilous economy Tsing tracks closely. Criticizing the disputed notion of the Anthropocene, Tsing could in fact put forward a serious candidate, as Donna Haraway suggests: the “Plantationocene.”

But the truly ingenious thing about this book is that resistance to scalability also applies to its method of investigation. Tsing effectively rehabilitates what could be called “pure and simple” description — though there is nothing pure or simple about it. Describing is inventing a science of the concrete, which does not seek to generalize but to penetrate ever more deeply into the specificity of places and history. This specificity is so difficult to describe that “all terrain” sciences, which, like development projects, are obsessed by scalability, systematically fail to understand the ever so particular situation of overlapping species, thus multiplying the fields of ruins.

And becoming accustomed to living in the ruins, and knowing how to do so, is what this book is about. The reason is rooted in its object of investigation: this occluded mushroom that likes ruins, particularly pine forests laid waste by loggers. Its mode of life is devoid of the harmony and equilibrium of nature. Everything about it is artificial; everything in its development is counterintuitive. It resists all stable and lasting definition, all changes of scale. Additionally, like other members of its genus, it refuses to be defined as a species. The matsutake prospers amid disruption, a term to which Tsing imparts a positive meaning, against all hope of return to a “natural” situation.


Tuesday, December 5, 2023

Meta Values - 9

On Courage. 

I learnt from Max during 2 years of his cancer and it came naturally to him. 

For sapiens, Nelson Mandela said it eloquently:

Pretend to be brave and you not only become brave, you are brave.


Charles Darwin & Alfred Russel Wallace - Humanity Raises Its Head From Its Collective Abyss Of Ignorance

Darwin is not ready for this blow. His infant son, Charles Waring Darwin, born with Down syndrome, is not doing well: the boy is infected with the bacterium that causes scarlet fever, the same disease that killed his older sister seven years ago.

After this girl, Anne, had finally succumbed to the disease, Darwin wrote that his wife Emma and he had buried “the joy of the household,” and he settled into a long sadness.

And now it is happening again.

These catastrophes transpire while Darwin is laboring on a huge book about a simple idea he calls natural selection. For over twenty years he has solicited specimens from collectors scattered all over the world; selectively bred pigeons and orchids; sat for hours observing the behaviors of ants; boiled the flesh from rabbit carcasses and compared their bones. In the process he has accumulated thousands of pages of manuscript.

This is all done to propose a mechanism for an old idea–“the transmutation of species,” what Darwin prefers to call “descent with modification”–an idea that has not gone away in spite of scorn heaped on it by natural philosopher and clergyman alike.

The essay in Darwin’s possession has come from the hand of one of those collectors from whom he has solicited evidence. Alfred Russel Wallace is no stranger to suffering and loss. Like Darwin, he once spent four years in South America collecting massive numbers of specimens. During that time, he nearly shot off his own hand; lost his brother, Herbert, to the mosquito-borne virus that causes yellow fever; became shipwrecked in the middle of the Atlantic, losing everything he had accumulated except his diary and some sketches.

The essay he sent Darwin was written under extreme duress: Wallace had contracted malaria, another mosquito-borne plague, this time a parasitic protozoan instead of a virus. While feverish in bed, he envisioned the same mechanism for species change that Darwin had been documenting for decades.

[---]

Convinced his life’s work has been “forestalled,” he gives the paper to his friends Charles Lyell, author of Principles of Geology, and Joseph Hooker, Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, as Wallace has requested him to do. They come up with a plan to simultaneously credit Wallace’s originality while preserving Darwin’s precedence: They solicit from Darwin a book extract, “On the Variation of Organic Beings in a state of Nature; etc.”, and they present these men’s ideas jointly at an upcoming meeting of the Linnean Society of London and publish them side-by-side in the Society’s journal.

As these revolutionary works are being read aloud to an audience of thirty listeners, one author recovers from illness in faraway Borneo; the other attends his baby son’s burial in Downe.

Thus, on two sturdy limbs, humanity raises its head from its collective abyss of ignorance. Through them, we are permitted to gaze back, back, back upon our original selves and discover that we are not what we once thought we were.

- More Here


Sunday, December 3, 2023

Derek Parfit's Philosophy

If you look carefully at Parfit’s reasoning in Reasons and Persons, a common theme emerges: The general approach to moral life that has been taken for granted by most in the West (and, really, the world) is profoundly mistaken. Put simply, the mistake is that this approach has been too personal—too concerned with duties to those who are close to us, too preoccupied with the distinctness of individual people, too hung up on people having souls that unite our experiences, too concerned with who deserves what. Instead, as Parfit sums up at the end of the book, “Our reasons for acting should become more impersonal.”

And that, I believe, is the clue to understanding Parfit’s life.

More Here


Saturday, December 2, 2023

Meta Values - 8

It's almost an impossible mission to change people minds. Changing the system is much more optimal and works. As a matter of fact, that's the only thing that worked to change the madness of the mass without them noticing. 


Friday, December 1, 2023

The Naturalist and the Wonderful, Lovable, So Good, Very Bold Jay

We humans define ourselves by our extraordinary mental powers—feats of memory among them. The Latin name we gave our species, Homo sapiens, translates as “wise man.” And yet, in our hyperdistracted modern lives, we fall victim to what is popularly known as refrigerator blindness, a common affliction defined in a (tongue-in-cheek) paper in the Canadian Medical Association Journal as the “selective loss of visual acuity in association with a common foraging behavior.” Many of us have faced the seemingly impossible task of finding the peanut butter hidden behind the pickles. But it actually wasn’t hidden at all—we just overlooked it. For us, it’s a forgivable lapse, and easily rectified. Not so for Canada jays, who use boreal and subalpine forests like a massive refrigerator-freezer.

Canada jays don’t store their food at a single location, like the average 0.5-cubic-meter North American fridge. They cache it in the innumerable trees covering a territory of 26 to 130 hectares, or 36 to 180 soccer fields. To see themselves through the winter, they will store just about anything, including spiders, berries, seeds, and carrion, plus bits of bread, nuts, and cheese procured from passing humans. Their survival, and that of their brood, depends on their formidable memory—and their capacity to understand thievery.

Corvids are aware that other birds may be watching where they cache their food. To avoid getting robbed, scrub jays, for example, employ highly elaborate tactics similar to a magician’s use of misdirection. They discreetly hide food in one location while pretending to hide it in numerous other places to draw the observer’s attention away from the real thing. That kind of awareness requires a high level of perception, says psychologist Nicola Clayton, who founded the Comparative Cognition Laboratory at the University of Cambridge in England. She shares Strickland’s fascination with corvids. One of the big ideas her team explores is mental time travel, the ability to recall the past or plan for the future, an ability we have long assumed is unique to humans. What this reveals, Clayton concludes, is that these jays can put themselves in the place of another individual and alter their behavior based on what might happen in the future.

Our prodigious brains can store vast amounts of information. London cab drivers, for example, must memorize the Knowledge, a set of famously grueling exams covering the location of 25,000 city streets. Not bad, but a Canada jay can cache up to 1,000 food items per day—then remember and retrieve upward of 100,000 of them over the course of a season.

- More Here


Wednesday, November 29, 2023

Saturday, November 25, 2023

Malice - Gasoline Leaf Blower

Regarding nitrogen oxide, the California Air Resources Board figures that using a gas-powered leaf blower for an hour emits as much as driving a Toyota Camry from Los Angeles to Denver. Of course, gas-powered leaf blowers also spew climate-wrecking CO2, but their nitrogen oxide emissions have an outsized climate impact: the EPA estimates that one pound of nitrous oxide has almost 300 times as much global warming effect as a pound of carbon dioxide.

[---]

People use leaf blowers, blasting air at up to 280 miles an hour, to remove tree leaves, with the ultimate goal of keeping their lawns looking neat. But leaf litter is habitat for worms and insect larvae. Leaf blowers are just one reason the total biomass of insects on the planet is declining by about 2 percent per year. Leaf litter also protects and builds topsoil, of which we’re losing tens of billions of tons per year globally. So, we’re using noisy, polluting machines to do things that, in many cases, we really shouldn’t be doing in the first place.

[---]

Then there’s the problem of economic inequality. Who actually uses leaf-blowers? In most cases, it’s low-income landscape workers, who are exposed to the air pollution and noise from leaf blowers at close range over sustained periods of time. Gas-powered lawn care has been linked to debilitating health issues like cancer, asthma, heart disease, and hearing loss; so, unsurprisingly, it’s the less-well-off who face the brunt of those health insults.

Stepping back, we see this general pattern reflected in the rest of industrial society: just as leaf-blower noise and air pollution gets shunted mostly toward low-paid landscape workers, resource extraction and polluting industries tend to be located near marginalized communities, nationally and globally. Therefore, the leaf blower just binds us more strongly to already unfair and dangerous social trends.

[---]

The only way to avoid those ill effects would be simply to use less energy—which means doing less with machines, and more with human hands and feet. This is why electric cars are not as much of a solution to climate change as the simple overall reduction of powered transport.

[---]

But, back to the leaf blower. Why make such a big deal over so small a problem? Compared to the existential predicaments we humans face (including climate change, hyper-partisan politics fueled by spiraling economic inequality and social media algorithms, nuclear weapons, and “forever chemicals” disrupting human and animal reproduction), the gasoline-powered leaf blower is just an annoyance. Why not just use the electric blower and leave it at that? After all, it’s better than the gas version.

Sorry, I can’t stop there. Call it the curse of knowing too much. Yes, Janet and I will keep using our electric blower where raking is impractical. But every time I pick up the machine, I’m reminded that our society’s overall socio-economic model is unsustainable and anti-life. We need far, far more than a green energy retrofit. We need an entirely different way of existing on this unique, imperiled planet—a way that many Indigenous people are still familiar with.

Buying an electric leaf blower was an interesting experiment that we may not repeat. I’m glad we kept our rake. It gets a lot more use.

- More Here



Thursday, November 23, 2023

Eating Animals

Just how destructive does a culinary preference have to be before we decide to eat something else? If contributing to the suffering of billions of animals that live miserable lives and (quite often) die in horrific ways isn't motivating, what would be? If being the number one contributor to the most serious threat facing the planet (global warming) isn't enough, what is? And if you are tempted to put off these questions of conscience, to say not now, then when?

― Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals 

 

Another day, another "traditional" day. Another free pass for humans to feast on poor animals' dead bodies. 

Another day, where most couldn't find a moment to look at the realities of billions suffering every microsecond.

Another day, complex systems are slowly in its unique ways working on eliminating sufferings. 

Another day, impermanence of life flourishes. 

Another day, I salute the few good men and women who worked and work tirelessly to reduce pain and suffering. 


Jonathan Foer's book was made into a documentary: 




While it is always possible to wake a person who's sleeping, no amount of noise will wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.


 

Sunday, November 19, 2023

The Past And Future Of Genomics

But more interesting than the exponential growth in data are the surprising things we have inferred from the data. In the heady early days of the publication of the draft of the human genome over twenty years ago, co-author Francis Collins asserted that the combination of molecular biology and genomics would “make a significant impact” on our attempt to understand and cure cancer. Despite some early instances where genomic sequencing was performed on cancer patients, like Steve Jobs in 2009, the overall impact of the new science on healthcare has been modest at best. Instead, paleoanthropology, prehistory, and history were transformed as genetics surveyed the pedigrees of the human past with a power and precision that would have been unimaginable a generation ago.

[---]

This shocking result only came out through ancient DNA. Not only do modern humans have Neanderthal ancestry, but some of us have Denisovan ancestry. It comprises 5% of the heritage of Papuans and lower fractions of Denisovan ancestry are found throughout Asia. There is an open question in anthropology as to whether humans are naturally promiscuous. The data from DNA shows that our forebears were sexually open to liaisons with populations and people quite different from them, and definitely forces us to lean in one direction in the debate.

Using a genomic clock, ‌Neanderthals and modern humans became separated 600,000 years ago. The most distinct lineage in modern populations, between South African Khoisan and all other humans, clocks in at 200,000 years. Our ancestors’ sexual preferences were evidently very broad. In a cave in Russia, Researchers have even discovered a young girl whose mother was a Neanderthal and whose father was a Denisovan. Statistically, the probability of catching a first-generation hybrid is low; the fact that it was discovered shows that this behavior was common.

[---]

The Roman recollection of the rape of the Sabine women likely reflects cultural memory of events in prehistory, where victorious males obtained mates from the lands they conquered after killing the fathers and brothers of the women they would make wives. Prehistoric human males behaved like lions taking over a pack, killing everyone among the conquered except for nubile females. Genetics shows that since the end of the last Ice Age, paternal lineages are characterized by periodic explosions, where one clan seems to have replaced all the others through a process of competition and polygyny.

Call it the “Genghis Khan effect,” but the Mongolian world emperor was simply the last in a long line of “super-males” that have defined much of the last 12,000 years. They say to believe them when they tell you who they are, and the legends of the Indo-Europeans reflect a patriarchal and warlike culture, destroyers of cities like the god Indra and near-immortal warriors like Achilles, and this is exactly what genetics tell us about them. In prehistoric Sweden, the Neolithic Megalith builders who dominated the region for more than 1000 years seem to have been totally exterminated by the invading “Battle-Axe” culture. The development of agriculture was a new technology that allowed for the expansion of human societies and the emergence of social stratification, but combined with our innate instincts, genetics make it clear that the drive to extermination manifested itself in most places and most times.

We cannot avoid what human nature was for tens of thousands of years in the past. It was bloody, it was brutal, and it was typified by genocide. This is the legacy we inherit, but it is not the legacy we need to replicate. The average life expectancy in the past was also much shorter than in the present, but the application of technology and social institutions has ameliorated the toll that disease takes on the human body. Human societies are also organisms and their rise and fall are measured in the waves of change in the genes of our own species. To the victors go the spoils and the seeds of the future. But institutions like monogamy and a modicum of wealth redistribution can be thought of as social technologies that dampen the volatility inherent in human relationships, a volatility that can manifest in chaos and warfare. Not a war of all against all, but a war where winners took all.

- Read the whole piece by Razib Khan


Friday, November 17, 2023

18 Organizations, 246 Scientists And Scholars Send Letter To New Director Of NIH, Urging Shift Away From Animal Use In Medical Research

A group of scientists, physicians, ethicists, and advocates sent a letter this Wednesday to the newly confirmed director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Monica Bertagnolli, urging her to reduce the agency’s use of animals in medical research. Led by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and co-signed by 246 individuals and 18 organizations, including biotechnology companies, think tanks, and animal protection groups, the letter requests that Dr. Bertagnolli prioritizes funding for developing, validating, and using nonanimal human disease models. It also requests divestment from animal use in research areas where poorly predicted human outcomes have been demonstrated, such as vaccine development and liver toxicity.

The NIH is the largest funder of biomedical research in the world, overseeing a budget of nearly $50 billion   this fiscal year. Despite evidence that animal experiments are unreliable predictors of human physiology and disease states, they remain the presumed “gold standard” in basic and preclinical research by the NIH and others within the research community. This reliance on animals contributes to failures and wasteful spending in the drug development pipeline and puts clinical trial participants at risk by failing to capture unsafe or ineffective products. It also requires that untold numbers of dogs, cats, monkeys, mice, rats, and other animals be bred and used in painful and deadly procedures—estimated to be greater than 100 million per year in the U.S.

The multistakeholder letter urges Dr. Bertagnolli to provide a clear vision that prioritizes the development and use of nonanimal, human-specific research approaches. These models can account for complex and diverse human risk factors in ways that cannot be done with animals, which could contribute to the advancement of personalized medicine and the reduction of health disparities. Rapidly advancing 3D in vitro technologies, like organoids and tissue chips, can reliably mimic human biology and clinical responses in many applications, often within shorter time frames and with lower resource and ethical burdens. The existing barriers to the broader development and use of these nonanimal technologies can be overcome with high-level strategies at the NIH.

Before serving as NIH director, Dr. Bertagnolli served as director of the NIH’s National Cancer Institute since October 2022. A physician-scientist by training, as well as a cancer survivor, Bertagnolli is an advocate for patient-centered research and a champion for addressing health disparities and improving clinical trial diversity.

“The NIH has a huge opportunity here that it can’t let go to waste. We are hopeful that under Dr. Bertagnolli’s leadership, the agency will steer away from the animal use that’s holding us back and toward a human-focused research portfolio,” says Catharine E. Krebs, PhD, medical research specialist with the Physicians Committee. “Scientists, doctors, industry innovators, and the public are here to support her in this goal, to benefit both patients and animals alike.”

- More Here

Monday, November 13, 2023

Meta Values - 6

I have no beliefs, opinions, culture, tradition, fads nor ideology. There is so much reality that I will die without knowing. I spend life seeking reality. 


Sunday, November 12, 2023

A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and Have We Really Thought This Through?

An Earth with climate change and nuclear war and, like, zombies and werewolves is still a way better place than Mars.

I have been saying this for 2 plus decades and finally, there is a book exposing this fantasy and pure bullshit. 

Max and I came from earth and will go back to earth. Not because we "lived" on earth but we are part of earth and -- "we are earth".   

Review of the new book, A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and Have We Really Thought This Through? by Kelly and Zach Weinersmith.

Living on Mars, which has no birds or rain, gets less than half the sunlight per area that Earth does, and is often plagued by dust storms that further blot out the sun, could be a soul-deadening experience.

The book spends several chapters covering space law and governance, which, in the Weinersmiths’ hands, is more interesting than it sounds. They explore the philosophical question of “who owns the universe?” and shoot down a common argument “that all law is pointless because if Elon Musk has a Mars settlement, who’s going to stop him?” (“One of your authors has a brother who makes this argument. His name is Marty and he is wrong.”)

In fact, there are already frameworks that could guide space law, and the book covers them, and their alternatives, in detail. They use Earth-bound examples, like the breakup of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the governance of Antarctica to explore how various governance scenarios might play out on other planets.

[---]

They also run through a list of “Bad Arguments for Space Settlement,” which include “Space Will Save Humanity from Near-Term Calamity by Providing a New Home,” and “Space Exploration Is a Natural Human Urge.” These detailed examinations of the stark realities regarding space travel and habitation serve as a foil to the breathlessly optimistic accounts that are so ubiquitous in popular media.

Despite often sounding like a couple of Debbie Downers, they somehow succeed at keeping the narrative upbeat and interesting. They do this with humor, frankness, and Zach’s fun sketches. Even as they shoot down a long list of space fantasies, they explore a lot of really interesting research and anecdotes (“Did you know the Colombian constitution asserts a claim to a specific region of space?”), so there’s rarely a dull moment.

The Weinersmiths view themselves not as “barriers on the road to progress” but as “guardrails” who want us to go to Mars as much as anybody. The trouble is that these self-professed science geeks (who watch late-night rocket launches with their kids) “just cannot convince ourselves that the usual arguments for space settlements are good.”

But they also assert, rather earnestly, that “If you hate our conclusions here, we have excellent news: we are not powerful people.”

And listen to the excellent interview with Zach on Russ's EconTalk.

I saw people "troubled" for wearing masks and staying home during Covid and these are people "excited" to depart to Mars - prepared to live (and poop) with 100 a pound suit in an underground bunker! 

Please depart and leave us alone. Adios!



Wednesday, November 8, 2023

Meta Values - 5

There are innumerable activities which are end in itself and bring immense joy. Playing with a dog to purring cat by your chest to a lazy walk to a good cry. Don't optimize nor try to "understand" them. Let magic prevail with surprise. 


Saturday, November 4, 2023

Happy Birthday Neo!

Naughty, hard headed and refuse to grow up baby Neo is four today! 

Buddha's impermanence doesn't apply to him. 

Ironically, these traits of his rescued me. Thank you Neo !

Happy birthday my baby 










 

Friday, November 3, 2023

Meta Values - 4

Talk Less. Listen More. Smell. Feel. Emote. Observe, Observe, Observe Perpetually. 




Saturday, October 28, 2023

Wisdom Of Roger Payne

I find myself at 88 years of age, very close to the end of a long life, coming to terms with the fact that I will not be around to find out what we learn. But what I can tell you is why this monumental journey of discovery matters.

The way I see it, the most consequential scientific discovery of the past 100 years isn’t E = mc2 or plate tectonics or translating the human genome. These are all quite monumental, to be sure, but there’s one discovery so consequential that unless we respond to it, it may kill us all, graveyard dead. It is this: every species, including humans, depends on a suite of other species to keep the world habitable for it, and each of those species depends in turn on an overlapping but somewhat different suite of species to keep their niche livable for them.

But there’s a problem here. No one can even name all the essential supporting species, let alone describe their full roles. We do know that some of the most essential species are microscopic plants and animals that we kill, unintentionally, by the trillions. But we know so little about them, they don’t even have common names, just Latin names. And many are unknown, unnamed, and undescribed species.

[---]

The challenge now is figuring out how to motivate ourselves and our fellow humans to make species preservation our highest calling—something we will never cut corners on, delay, postpone, diminish, or defund.

How can we get this idea across to the whole world? Inspiration is the key. Antoine de Saint-Exupery, the author of The Little Prince, understood this and how to use it positively when he wrote: ”If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up the men to gather wood, divide up the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.”

I believe that awe-inspiring life-forms like whales can focus human minds on the urgency of ceasing our destruction of the wild world. Many of humanity’s most intractable problems are caused by disregarding the voices of the Other—including non-humans.

I Spent My Life Saving the Whales. Now They Might Save Us


Monday, October 23, 2023

The Ends of Knowledge - Outcomes and Endpoints Across the Arts and Sciences

The greatest error of all is the mistaking or misplacing of the last or furthest end of knowledge. Its ‘true ends’ were not professional reputation, financial gain, or even love of learning but rather ‘the uses and benefits of life, to improve and conduct it in charity’.

- Francis Bacon, The Advancement of Learning (1605)

I think this ends of knowledge piece is a good follow up to Hanno Sauer's paper End Of Philosophical Historiography

This is a much needed call to stop spinning the wheels on endless abstractions and start working towards consilience; E.O Wilson's famous call for unity of knowledge.  For people in love with "abstract" philosophy this is a call to not read them but incorporate them into other disciplines so that we can act on insights in everyday life. 

I mean, what makes me a little less dumb everyday is whatever way possible I try to bring all the little knowledge I have together. Say, how can the moral philosophy of Buddha to Stoics to Montaigne can help AI become ethically little better aware in the future? or something even simpler such as learning to experience a little discomfort by getting rid of plastics.

In this way, the Enlightenment offers a model of how the end of one view of knowledge production can be a launchpad for new ideas, methods and paradigms. The fracturing and decline of Aristotelian scholasticism during the Renaissance gave rise to a host of philosophies devised to replace it. The conflicts of the Thomists and Scotists, the inadequacies of revived Hellenistic doctrines, the discomforting mysticism of Rosicrucianism and Kabbalah, and even the failed promise of Platonism to provide a modern, comprehensive alternative to Aristotle led thinkers like Bacon to seek answers in other fields.

Bacon’s terms – exitus, finis, terminus – suggest a focus on endpoints as well as outcomes. Knowledge, in his philosophy, had ends (ie, purposes) as well as an end (a point at which the project would be complete). The new science, he believed, would lead to ‘the proper end and termination of infinite error’ and was worth undertaking precisely because an end was possible: ‘For it is better to make a beginning of a thing which has a chance of an end, than to get caught up in things which have no end, in perpetual struggle and exertion.’ Bacon believed scientists could achieve their ends.

[---]

The first two definitions relate most directly to the work of a discipline or an individual scholar: what is the knowledge project being undertaken, and what would it mean for it to be complete? Most scholars are relatively comfortable asking the former question – even if they do not have clear answers to it – but have either never considered the latter or would consider the process of knowledge production to be always infinite, because answering one question necessarily leads to new ones. We argue that even if this were true, and a particular project could never be completed within an individual’s lifetime, there is value in having an identifiable endpoint. The third meaning – termination – refers to the institutional pressures that many disciplines are facing: the closure of centres, departments and even whole schools, alongside political pressure and public hostility.

How can we get anywhere if we cannot even say where we want to go?

Over all this looms the fourth meaning, primarily in the context of the approaching climate apocalypse, which puts the first three ends into perspective: what is the point of all this in the face of wildfires, superstorms and megadrought? For us, this is not a rhetorical question. What is the point of literary studies, physics, history, the liberal arts, activism, biology, AI and, of course, environmental studies in the present moment? The answers even for the latter field are not obvious: as Myanna Lahsen shows in her contribution to our volume, although the scientific case is closed as far as proving humans’ effect on the climate, governments have nevertheless not taken the action needed to avoid climate catastrophe. Should scientists then throw up their hands at their inability to influence political trends – indeed, some have called for a moratorium on further research – or must they instead engage with social scientists to pursue research on social and political solutions? What role do disciplinary norms separating the sciences, social sciences and humanities play in maintaining the apocalyptic status quo?

To some extent, then, particular ends are less important than the possibility of discovering a shared sense of purpose. Ultimately, we hope to show what the benefits would be of knowledge projects starting with their end(s) in mind. How can we get anywhere if we cannot even say where we want to go? And even if we think we have goals, are we actually working toward them? Ideally, a firm sense of both purpose and outcome could help scholars demonstrate how they are advancing knowledge rather than continuing to spin their wheels

[---]

At the same time, these ends are necessarily interconnected, and individual research projects would likely fit into several at once. As Hong Qu argues in his contribution to our book, for example, individual researchers and teams working towards autonomously learning AI systems, or artificial general intelligence (AGI), will need more deliberate exposure to moral philosophy, political science and sociology to ensure that ethical concerns and unintended consequences are not addressed on an ad hoc basis or after the fact but are anticipated and made integral to the technology’s development. Educators, activists and policymakers will concordantly need more practical knowledge about how AI works and what it can or cannot do. Achieving the immediate end of AGI entails the pursuit of a new and more abstract end greater than the sum of its disciplinary parts: ‘a governance framework delineating rules and expectations for configuring artificial intelligence with moral reasoning in alignment with universal human rights and international laws as well as local customs, ideologies, and social norms.’ Qu explores potential dystopian scenarios as he argues that, if the end of creating ethical AGI is not achieved, humanity may face a technological end. In this way, current disciplinary divides are driving a society-wide sense of potential doom.

 

Sunday, October 22, 2023

Meta Values - 2

Pain and suffering are inevitable and fundamental objective reality on this planet. Don't propagate nor amplify it. Spend life marginally reducing pain and suffering of every living being. Everything else is mostly signaling. 


Monday, October 16, 2023

How Misreading Adam Smith Helped Spawn Deaths of Despair

Let’s go back to one of Smith’s most disliked institutions, the East India Company, and two Scotsmen, James Matheson and William Jardine, both graduates of Edinburgh University, one of whom (Jardine) was a physician. In 1817 Jardine left the East India Company and partnered with Matheson and Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy, a Parsi merchant in Bombay in Western India to pursue the export of opium to China—which, by that date, had become the main source of Company profits. China, whose empire was in a state of some decay, tried to stop the importation of opium and, on the orders of the Daoguang Emperor, Viceroy Lin Zexu—who today is represented by a statue in Chinatown in New York with the inscription “Pioneer in the War against Drugs”—destroyed several years’ supply of the drug in Humen, near Canton, today’s Guangzhou. In China today, Lin is a national hero.

[---]

Smith’s notion of the “invisible hand,” the idea that self-interest and competition will often work to the general good, is what economists today call the first welfare theorem. Exactly what this general good is and exactly how it gets promoted have been central topics in economics ever since. The work of Gerard Debreu and Kenneth Arrow in the 1950s eventually provided a comprehensive analysis of Smith’s insight, including precise definitions of what sort of general good gets promoted, what, if any, are the limitations to that goodness, and what conditions must hold for the process to work.

I want to discuss two issues. First, there is the question of whose good we are talking about. The butcher, at least qua butcher, cares not at all about social justice; to her, money is money, and it doesn’t matter whose it is. The good that markets promote is the goodness of efficiency—the elimination of waste, in the sense that it is impossible to make anyone better off without hurting at least one other person. Certainly that is a good thing, but it is not the same thing as the goodness of justice. The theorem says nothing about poverty nor about the distribution of income. It is possible that the poor gain through markets—possibly by more than the rich, as was argued by Mises, Hayek, and others—but that is a different matter, requiring separate theoretical or empirical demonstration.

A second condition is good information: that people know about the meat, beer, and bread that they are buying, and that they understand what will happen when they consume it. Arrow understood that information is always imperfect, but that the imperfection is more of a problem in some markets than others: not so much in meat, beer, and bread, for example, but a crippling problem in the provision of health care. Patients must rely on physicians to tell them what they need in a way that is not true of the butcher, who does not expect to be obeyed when she tells you that, just to be sure you have enough, you should take home the carcass hanging in her shop. In the light of this fact, Arrow concluded that private markets should not be used to provide health care. “It is the general social consensus, clearly, that the laissez-faire solution for medicine is intolerable,” he wrote. This is (at least one of the) reason(s) why almost all wealthy countries do not rely on pure laissez-faire to provide health care.

[---]

Of course, there have always been mainstream economists who were not libertarians, perhaps even a majority: those who worked for Democratic administrations, for instance, and who did not subscribe to all Chicago doctrines. But there is no doubt that the belief in markets has become more widely accepted on the left as well as on the right. Indeed, it would be a mistake to lay blame on Chicago economics alone and to absolve the rest of an economics profession that was all too eager to adopt its ideas. Economists have become famous (or infamous) for their sometimes-comic focus on efficiency, and on the role of markets in promoting it. And they have come to think of well-being as individualistic, independent of the relationships with others that sustain us all. In 2006, after Friedman’s death, it was Larry Summers who wrote that “any honest Democrat will admit that we are all now Friedmanites.” He went on to praise Friedman’s achievements in persuading the nation to adopt an all-volunteer military and to recognize the benefits of “modern financial markets”—all this less than two years before the 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers. The all-volunteer military is another bad policy whose consequences could end up being even worse. It lowers the costs of war to the decision-making elites whose children rarely serve, and it runs the risk of spreading pro-Trump populism by recruiting enlisted men and women from the areas and educational groups among which such support is already strong.

The beliefs in market efficiency and the idea that well-being can be measured in money have become second nature to much of the economics profession. Yet it does not have to be this way. Economists working in Britain—Amartya Sen, James Mirrlees, and Anthony Atkinson—pursued a broader program, worrying about poverty and inequality and considering health as a key component of well-being. Sen argues that a key misstep was made not by Friedman but by Hayek’s colleague Lionel Robbins, whose definition of economics as the study of allocating scarce resources among competing ends narrowed the subject compared with what philosopher Hilary Putnam calls the “reasoned and humane evaluation of social wellbeing that Adam Smith saw as essential to the task of the economist.” And it was not just Smith, but his successors, too, who were philosophers as well as economists.

Economics should be about understanding the reasons for, and doing away with, the world’s sordidness and joylessness.

Sen contrasts Robbins’s definition with that of Arthur Cecil Pigou, who wrote, “It is not wonder, but rather the social enthusiasm which revolts from the sordidness of mean streets and the joylessness of withered lives, that is the beginning of economic science.” Economics should be about understanding the reasons for, and doing away with, the world’s sordidness and joylessness. It should be about understanding the political, economic, and social failures behind deaths of despair. But that is not how it worked out in the United States.

- More Here


Thursday, October 12, 2023

Ecological Effect Of (Stupid & Ridiculous) Lawns

Abstract

Lawns are ubiquitous in the American urban landscapes. However, little is known about their impact on the carbon and water cycles at the national level. The limited information on the total extent and spatial distribution of these ecosystems and the variability in management practices are the major factors complicating this assessment. 

In this study, relating turf grass area to fractional impervious surface area, it was estimated that potentially 163,812 km2 (± 35,850 km2) of land are cultivated with some form of lawn in the continental United States, an area three times larger than that of any irrigated crop. 

Using the Biome-BGC ecosystem process model, the growth of turf grasses was modelled for 865 sites across the 48 conterminous states under different management scenarios, including either removal or recycling of the grass clippings, different nitrogen fertilization rates and two alternative water irrigation practices. The results indicate that well watered and fertilized turf grasses act as a carbon sink, even assuming removal and bagging of the grass clippings after mowing. The potential soil carbon accumulation that could derive from the total surface under turf (up to 25.7 Tg of C/yr with the simulated scenarios) would require up to 695 to 900 liters of water per person per day, depending on the modeled water irrigation practices, and a cost in carbon emissions due to fertilization and operation of mowing equipment ranging from 15 to 35% of the sequestration.

Conclusion

The analysis indicates that turf grasses, occupying about 2% of the surface of the continental U.S., would be the single largest irrigated crop in the country. The scenarios described in this study also indicate that a well-maintained lawn is a C sequestering system, although the positive C balance discounted for the hidden costs associated with N-fertilizer and the operation of lawn mowers comes at the expense of a very large use of water, N, and, not quantified in this study, pesticides. 

If the entire turf surface was well watered following commonly recommended schedules there would also be an enormous pressure on the U.S. water resources, especially when considering that drinking water is usually sprinkled. At the time of this writing, in most regions outdoor water use already reaches 50-75% of the total residential use. Because of demographic growth and because more and more people are moving towards the warmer regions of the country the potential exists for the amount of water used for turf grasses to increase.

- Full paper here

Sunday, October 8, 2023

Evolution Is So Random - The extraordinary case of the Guevedoces

This means we should treat different sex and sexuality with care, humility and embrace diversity of life on earth.  

Yes, there are few people who take advantage of this but yet there are millions more who need our support who suffered silently for centuries. 

This piece from 2015 blew my mind (via here): 

The discovery of a small community in the Dominican Republic, where some males are born looking like girls and only grow penises at puberty, has led to the development of a blockbuster drug that has helped millions of people

[---]

So why does it happen? Well, one of the first people to study this unusual condition was Dr Julianne Imperato-McGinley, from Cornell Medical College in New York. In the 1970s she made her way to this remote part of the Dominican Republic, drawn by extraordinary reports of girls turning into boys.

When she got there she found the rumours were true. She did lots of studies on the Guevedoces (including what must have been rather painful biopsies of their testicles) before finally unravelling the mystery of what was going on.

When you are conceived you normally have a pair of X chromosomes if you are to become a girl and a set of XY chromosomes if you are destined to be male.

For the first weeks of life in womb you are neither, though in both sexes nipples start to grow.

Then, around eight weeks after conception, the sex hormones kick in. If you're genetically male the Y chromosome instructs your gonads to become testicles and sends testosterone to a structure called the tubercle, where it is converted into a more potent hormone called dihydro-testosterone This in turn transforms the tubercle into a penis. If you're female and you don't make dihydro-testosterone then your tubercle becomes a clitoris.

When Imperato-McGinley investigated the Guevedoces she discovered the reason they don't have male genitalia when they are born is because they are deficient in an enzyme called 5-alpha-reductase, which normally converts testosterone into dihydro-testosterone.

This deficiency seems to be a genetic condition, quite common in this part of the Dominican Republic, but vanishingly rare elsewhere. So the boys, despite having an XY chromosome, appear female when they are born. At puberty, like other boys, they get a second surge of testosterone. This time the body does respond and they sprout muscles, testes and a penis.

[---]

Another thing that Imperato-McGinley discovered, which would have profound implications for many men around the world, was that the Guevedoces tend to have small prostates.

This observation, made in 1974, was picked up by Roy Vagelos, head of research at the multinational pharmaceutical giant, Merck. He thought this was extremely interesting and set in progress research which led to the development of what has become a best-selling drug, finasteride, which blocks the action of 5-alpha-reductase, mimicking the lack of dihydro-testosterone seen in the Guevedoces.

My wife, who is a GP, routinely prescribes finasteride as it is an effective way to treat benign enlargement of the prostate, a real curse for many men as they get older. Finasteride is also used to treat male pattern baldness.

A final interesting observation that Imperato-McGinley made was that these boys, despite being brought up as girls, almost all showed strong heterosexual preferences. She concluded in her seminal paper that hormones in the womb matter more than rearing when it comes to your sexual orientation.

Friday, October 6, 2023

Animals Fear Human Voices More Than Lions

Human voices cause considerably more fear in wild mammals than the sound of lions, a study in South Africa has found.

Scientists played recordings of people talking normally through speakers hidden at water holes in the Kruger National Park.

About 95% of animals were extremely frightened and quickly ran away.

In contrast, recordings of snarling and growling lions elicited significantly less alarm.

The human speech they chose to play included local languages commonly spoken in the country.

During the experiment they noted that some elephants, in response to the big cat calls, even attempted to confront the source of the sound.

The study's findings suggest that the animals, which included antelopes, elephants, giraffes, leopards and warthogs, have learnt that contact with humans is extremely dangerous, due to hunting, gun use and the use of dogs to catch them.

The fear exhibited goes beyond the Kruger National Park, as a global pattern shows wildlife tend to fear humans more than any other predator, according to the study.

The authors note that this poses a challenge for areas which rely on wildlife tourism, because the human visitors they want to attract are inadvertently scaring off the animals they have come to see.

- More Here

What a shameful trait for humans!

Second, yet another reason to stop the madness of travel and vacation. Stop going to a safari. 

Any economy which depends on travel only is doomed if not today, tomorrow. 



Why Boredom Matters?

This jumping from stimulus to stimulus is directly at odds with what is required to overcome existential boredom. Overcoming it requires deep, sustained thought about life’s purpose. It also demands concentration and perseverance in conceiving and completing long-term projects, because the most rewarding human activities are not quick or easy. They ask that we work through boredom instead of avoiding it.

One might even understand existential boredom as a wake-up call: Why does nothing seem interesting, everything dull and gray? The answer might be not that the world is boring, but that we ourselves are dull, shallow, and malformed. This ignorance and lack of formation is partly due to the usual suspects of modern culture—vacuous television programs, electronic devices in general, the advertising industry—but we have allowed these influences to shape us. It doesn’t have to be this way. Thus do we arrive at Gary’s therapy for boredom: liberal education understood as the practice of leisure.

[---]

Finally, Gary recommends that we “remember our epiphanies,” advice he gives not so much to young people just starting out as to those of us who have been around for a while. Boredom results not only from continuous distraction or youthful ignorance but also from jadedness about the world. Remembering our epiphanies means recollecting the first time we saw something in nature or perceived a philosophical truth. It means recalling our first meaningful musical performance or skillful painting, that long-ago sudden insight into the mind of another person, or our first falling in love. We must keep hold of epiphanies like these if we do not want to turn into boring, disenchanted old people ourselves.

I think Gary ultimately has it right: The cure for existential boredom must be a certain kind of liberal or “freeing” education, which simultaneously liberates us from the compulsive seeking of pleasure and achievement and shows us the beauty of contemplation. In this wondering, almost childlike mindset, the world is anything but boring. All the impressions, ideas, and happenings we see or receive become permanently ours, filtered through our minds or “inwardly digested,” in the words of Thomas Cranmer. In our idle moments, we no longer need to run from ourselves but have stored up provisions for the welcome times of real leisure.

The irony of self-examination, though, is that we may discover that our greatest happiness comes in paying attention to everything that comprises the not-self. This is a curious kind of self-forgetting.

- Review of the new book Why Boredom Matters: Education, Leisure, and the Quest for a Meaningful Life by Kevin Hood Gary


Wednesday, October 4, 2023

The Day Of My Life

October 4th 2019. That day, I got everything I ever wanted in my life.

Max came back home.

My Max came to our little beautiful world we built  for 13 plus years to spend
the rest of the little time left and take his last breath. 
I never felt so much joy in my life. It became the mother of all joys that nothing could top
it off nor I have any wish to ask for more from life. 

I have no idea why it happened to Max and I nor I have any idea how
I will pay back the debt to the world for that day. 

Only thing I do know is whatever bad happens in the world, how many evil
acts people unleash - I will be a force to stand against it.
If needed I will give my life for it which is easy when compared to staying unperturbed
and continue living a moral life as humanly as possible. 

I am trying and will try more. I owe that for this day that happened in our lives. 
My Max came back home.
Just writing this sentence makes me smile and cry at the same time.
My Max came back home.










Monday, October 2, 2023

What I've Been Reading

Complex human societies need elites – rulers, administrators, thought leaders – to function well. We don’t want to get rid of them; the trick is to constrain them to act for the benefit of all.

[---] 

Americans today grossly underestimate the fragility of the complex society in which we live. But an important lesson from history is that people living in pervious pre-crisis eras similarly didn't imagine that their societies could suddenly crumble around them.  

End Times: Elites, Counter-Elites, and the Path of Political Disintegration by Peter Turchin

I have been following Turchin for many years now and his work "predicted" the path that led to the 2020 election madness. And he coined the term Cliodynamics.

The book is based on models built using CrisisDB (work in-progress - global history database) that includes one hundred cases from European, Chinese, Russian and American history (no Indian or other countries yet) 

The core findings behind "End Times" faced by past societies: 

1. Popular Immiseration - The proportion of GDP consumed by the government has not changed much in the last four decades and it has grown for elites. The main loser has been the common American. 

2. Elite Overproduction - What determines whether we have a problem of elite overproduction is the balance of the supply of youth with advanced degrees and the demand for them - the number of jobs that require their skills. By the 2000s, unfortunately, as is well known, the number of degree holders were greatly outnumbering the position for them. 

Surprisingly, Turchin's research doesn't count ideology as the primary factor. 

Well.. humans are convenient creatures and ideology evolves over time. Lot of people today avoid mRNA vaccines but it's a matter of time as they get older they will embrace mRNA treatment with relish for cancer treatment.  On the other hand, "green" and "eco-savvy" people gluttonize a poor cow or worse baby cow using "veal" as a euphemism. 

I admire Turchin's rigor of applying data to find patterns in history. 

Yes, Turchin's models are not even close to perfect but if the same rigor continues for a few more years or decades (and we happen to survive) then Cliodynamics has a potential to become more robust. 

  • Pundits and politicians often invoke "lessons of history". The problem is that the historical record is rich and each pundit an easily find cases in it to support whichever side of a policy debate they favor. Clearly, inference from such "cherry-picked" examples is not the way to go. 
  • A relatively small set of mechanisms can generate exceedingly complex dynamics. This is the essence of complexity science; complex dynamics do not have to have complex causes. 
  • What are the features of conspiracy theories that distinguish them from scientific theories? One, the conspiratorial theory is often vague about the motives of the behind-the-scenes leaders or assigns them implausible motivations. Two, it assumes that they are extremely clever and knowledgeable. Three, it places power in the hands of one strong leader or a tiny cabal. And, finally, it assumes that illegal plans can be kept secret for indefinitely long periods of time. A scientific theory, like the class-domination one, is very different. 
  • First, let's avoid blaming the rich. The economic elites are not evil - or, at least, the proportion of evil people among them is not terribly different from that of the rest of the population. They are motivated by self-interest, but Mother Teresas, if absent among the ruling class, are quite rate in general population as well.