What I've Been Reading

I cannot remember the last time I laughed out so loud while reading a book :-) 

This is a master piece with around 10 minutes of reading time. 

The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity by Carlo M. Cipolla.

• Law 1: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation. 

• Law 2: The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person. 

• Law 3: A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. 

• Law 4: Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake. 

• Law 5: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person. A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit.

Benefits of Wandering Mind

Self-awareness, creative incubation, improvisation and evaluation, memory consolidation, autobiographical planning, goal driven thought, future planning, retrieval of deeply personal memories, reflective consideration of the meaning of events and experiences, simulating the perspective of another person, evaluating the implications of self and others’ emotional reactions, moral reasoning, and reflective compassion.

- Psychologist Scott Barry Kaufman via Jonathan Haidt's Babel - On The Death of Daydreaming

Meta Values - 41

In life, the most important traits in everything boils down to three P's. 

Patience, Persistence, and Perseverance. 

The sooner you grasp that, the better your life will be. 

Mine happened at 31 when Max came into my life. 

Wisdom Of Buffet

Very good consolidation of Buffet's wisdom: 

Humans behave the way humans behave, and they’re going to continue to behave that way in the next 50 years.

The proper temperament is far more important in investing than points of intellect. If you’ve got a reasonable intellect and the right temperament you’d get very rich, and if you’ve got the wrong temperament for it, you’ll get done in at some point. 

Human nature has not changed. People will always behave in a manic-depressive way over time. They will offer great values to you.

he better you understand human nature and are able to distinguish between different types of individuals, the better the investor you are going to be.

The veteran banker of Boston, the late Henry L. Higginson, asked one day by an investor what stocks he ought to buy with some idle funds replied, ‘Buy character.’ He meant that if one bought into any industry backed by men of experience and of high character and intelligence, one would at least be subject only to the usual risks of business, and chances of success would be excellent. On the other hand, no one could have faith in securities of any corporation operated by men of doubtful character.

In management you look for ability, trust & character.

We do not wish to join with managers who lack admirable qualities, no matter how attractive the prospects of their business. We've never succeeded in making a good deal with a bad person.

Be fearful when others are greedy and be greedy when others are fearful.

Patience - an indispensable quality. If one were asked to name the quality which as much as any other is essential to success in speculation, the answer would be ‘patience.'

The biggest thing about making money is time. You don’t have to be particularly smart you just have to be patient.

The stock market is designed to transfer money from the active to the patient.

Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks.

Read 500 pages every week ... That's how knowledge works. It builds up, like compound interest. All of you can do it, but I guarantee not many of you will do it.

An ability to detach yourself from the crowd — I don’t know to what extent that’s innate or to what extent that’s learned — but that’s a quality you need.

The financial calculus that Charlie and I employ would never permit our trading a good night’s sleep for a shot at a few extra percentage points of return.

Loss of focus is what worries Charlie and me when we contemplate investing in businesses that in general look outstanding.

Jonathan Safran Foer on Eating Animals

Ever since Jonathan Safran Foer's book Eating Animals came out, while Max was alive, I have been posting Foer's talk every year during Thanksgiving. 

So much irony in this day... billions get slaughtered after their short and miserable life full of pain and suffering.

Did I mention I love Robert Trivers and his "self-deception" hypothesis? 

This day is one of those days where human self-deception reaches a pinnacle. 

I am sorry for my fellow family who lost their lives today. 

10 Misconceptions About Evolution

• Evolution is “only a theory”  - Nope. 

• “Survival of the fittest” means that evolution favors those who are “strongest”  - “Evolutionary fitness” refers to reproductive success; more precisely, it’s a measure of the success of genes in getting themselves projected into the future and is achieved in many ways—including the ability to obtain food, to avoid becoming food for someone else, to overcome diseases, to adjust to local weather and climate, attract mates, and so forth. In a pioneering research report, male European red deer who were smaller and who bore less impressively developed antlers were often more “fit” than the hulking males, because these “sneaky fuckers” (don’t blame me: This descriptive phrase is part of the technical literature) copulated with the females while the more massive bulls were busy fighting antlero-a-antlero with other more physically developed specimens.  

• Evolution explains the origin of life (or it’s supposed to) - Nope. That is primarily a job for biophysics, biochemistry, and geology. 

• Evolution acts for the good of the species - It is estimated that something like 99 percent of species that have existed are now extinct, so if evolution is working for the good of species, it has done a terrible job! What really argues against “good of the species,” however, is the actual way natural selection operates. Although it is possible that species sometimes compete, and, as a result, better adapted ones replace their poorly adapted alternatives, evolutionary competition takes place almost entirely within species, not between them. 

• Evolutionary theory says that living things are the result of chance - No, it doesn’t. There’s a half-truth hidden here; actually, less than half. Natural selection’s power comes from differential reproduction, the logical, unavoidable process whereby some genetic variants are more successful—more fit—than others. As such, its raw material comes from genetic diversity, which is produced by mutations and, in the case of sexually reproducing species, the reshuffling of genes via meiosis and sexual recombination. These processes are essentially random. But that’s just the source of the building blocks employed by natural selection. Natural selection definitely isn’t random—it does the heavy lifting and fitting together, by picking and choosing among various options, with some genes being projected into the future more than their alternatives—i.e., our old friend differential reproduction once again. Then the process happens over and over, repeatedly retaining those that are more fit and abandoning those that are less so. 

• Because we rely more and more on brain power and less and less on our muscles, human beings in the future will have big heads and small bodies - It is similarly easy to get hung up on the Lamarckian assumption that insects, crustaceans, fish, and amphibians that inhabit pitch dark caves are often blind because they stopped using their eyes, which therefore disappeared. Not so. These evolutionary changes, which are entirely compatible with Darwinian natural selection, occur because eyes are useless in the dark—hence, they lose the selective advantage that they convey in lighted environments—and, moreover, they take energy to produce while also being vulnerable to injury and infection. So, go ahead and exercise, use your brains, and hang out in dark places if you wish … but your offspring won’t have larger biceps, bigger heads, or smaller eyes as a result. 

• Gaps in the fossil record argue against evolution - Of course there are gaps in the fossil record! It’s remarkable that we have any such records at all, given how unlikely it is that any given dead critter will be fossilized and preserved, to which we must add an additional low probability that these remains will be discovered and recognized as such, perhaps hundreds of millions of years later. As for “missing links,” picture a line between two taxonomic groups, with as yet unidentified species connecting them; now, identify something between (linking) them: Now you have two new missing links! So, any time we find intermediate forms, there will necessarily be “missing links,” because every time a linking specimen is found (such as the discovery of Australopithecines linking nonhuman primates and Homo sapiens), new missing links are produced. In short, the more fossils, the more “missing links.” 

• Human beings aren’t evolving any more - We are. It’s just that evolution is typically a very slow process, limited by selective pressures (differences in the reproductive success of different traits and the genes that underlie them), along with generation times. It is possible that human beings in the future will have evolved the ability to function and reproduce readily with microplastics and “forever chemicals” in their blood, not to mention Strontium-90 in their bones and DDT in their fat, or maybe enhanced ability to manipulate computer screens, if such individuals have more kids. Each person’s genotype is fixed, so as individuals, we don’t evolve biologically. But Homo sapiens does, and will continue to do so, unless all people and their genes reproduce identically. 

• Because of evolution, living things are always getting “better” - Not necessarily. Early in the Earth’s history, a few billion years ago, life was very simple. Since then, it has evolved increasing complexity and enhanced ability to flourish in a variety of environments. In that sense, living things have gotten “better.” But any notion of improvement is subject to human-centered bias.  

• Evolutionary biology isn’t a science because it’s a historical phenomenon and can’t be tested - Many sciences, notably astronomy and geology, engage uniquely with historical phenomena (we can’t experimentally manipulate stars or continents), and yet they generate impressive empirical testing, often based on detailed observational regimes along with falsifiable predictions. And there is no question of their status as bona fide sciences. Evolutionary biology is no different.  

- More Here

Moss Might Survive Nearly Two Decades in Space

Fujita and his colleagues first challenged the moss species Physcomitrium patens with space-like conditions in a lab, including extreme temperature swings, extreme UV radiation, and vacuum conditions. By assessing the impacts on three different structures from the moss—juvenile moss, specialized stem cells, and spores contained within reproductive structures called sporangium—they determined that the shielded spores had the best chance of making it among the stars. For example, the spores showed around 1,000 times more tolerance to UV radiation than did the stem cells.

The scientists chalked this up to the sporangium, which protects them from perils including UV exposure and extreme temperatures on Earth—a feature that has perhaps enabled them to ride out multiple mass extinction events.

Then, it was time for the ultimate test: In March 2022, the team handed off hundreds of spores to astronauts headed toward the International Space Station on the Cygnus NG-17 spacecraft. Once the crew made it to the ISS, they secured the spores on the station’s exterior. Spores were divided into groups and exposed to one of three different conditions: exposed to visible light uncovered but protected from UV radiation by a filter, blocked from any light (including UV) in a control group, or exposed to all the visible light and UV radiation hitting the ISS. After 283 days in the extraterrestrial elements, the spores returned to Earth.

“We expected almost zero survival, but the result was the opposite: Most of the spores survived,” Fujita said in the statement. “We were genuinely astonished by the extraordinary durability of these tiny plant cells.”

Testing revealed that more than 80 percent of the spores survived the experiment, and had germination rates of up to 97 percent for those not exposed to UV radiation in space. Meanwhile, the spores that weren’t shielded from UV radiation had a germination rate of 86 percent.The paper noted that a form of chlorophyll showed signs of damage in the spores exposed to space light but not in the spores kept in the dark.

With the data gleaned from the lab and space experiments, the team estimated that these moss spores could survive up to roughly 15 years in space. Now, this moss joins the ranks of other rugged Earthlings who have endured the space elements, including tardigrades and fungi.

The researchers say they hope that moss can aid extended human missions to other planets by providing oxygen and boosting soil fertility for crop growth on long cosmic journeys or on extraterrestrial outposts. 

- More Here

How Do The Pros Get Someone To Leave A Cult?

There are cults like we all "know" as cults. 

Then there is a toxic cocktail cults of ideology, culture, religion, politics, nationalism, socialism, capitalism, free-market, communism, human centrism, binary thinking lens et al., This cocktail cult is not called cult since billions of sapiens fall into this bucket. Somehow, this has been rebranded as something else - tribes. 

Then there are very very few people who are open minded to see these two cults and they make the wheels of civilization, kindness, decency, progress over time. These human had an ability to change their minds with time and grow as a living being. 

Thanks to those unknown humans for what they did so that I am able to live a very comfortable life. 

I hope I am doing a little of the same for the future when I am gone. 

We should have a lot more Ryan's and Kelly's in our worlds to help the cocktail cults:

What Ryan and Kelly do is unusual: they help people leave cults. Over the past 40 years, they have handled hundreds of cases – some simple and local, others stretching across borders and decades. They have been hired by families of both modest and considerable means. They say they have even been hired by government agencies, and that some cults they have investigated have left them genuinely afraid for their lives.

Although many people are involved in cultic studies and education, fewer than 10 people in the US do anything like what Ryan and Kelly do. And among those, only Kelly and Ryan practice their strange and unique method: embedding themselves in families’ lives, pulling on threads like marionettists, sometimes for years.

Their method goes something like this. A family reaches out about their daughter, husband, nephew or grandchild. Ryan and Kelly conduct an assessment that can take anywhere from a day to a week (they would not say exactly). They charge $2,500 for the assessment, then $250 an hour after that, interviewing the family until they understand the dynamics well enough to devise a strategy. Then, over months or sometimes years, they work to create the conditions in which a person might begin to question the beliefs their life has been built on.

Normally, Kelly and Ryan work by strengthening the existing relationships in a person’s life. It can be a long game. They will educate the family about the cultic group, and give advice about what to say (or not to say). They will bring in experts: psychiatrists, lawyers, priests that can provide perspective and counsel. The goal is to untangle the family dynamics that might have made someone vulnerable to a cult in the first place.

[---]

One of their cases in the 90s involved a cult leader who was systematically sexually assaulting the group’s members. “I can’t get into all the details,” Ryan said. “He was horrible, a horrible man.” Ryan and Kelly had been flying regularly to Australia to work on the case. The client’s niece, a girl in the group, was beginning to fall out with the cult. The leader had been arrested and was on trial for crimes related to the cult’s activities.

In their process, Ryan and Kelly require what they call 50 things: “You have to find 50 things that you could agree with the person on.” Ryan gestured to a painting on the wall in their living room. It was a strange, surrealist-looking canvas with a big Tesla coil in the center and lightning shooting out at some pigeons. Ryan said, “If you look at this piece of art and say, ‘That’s really ugly,’ then we’re going to start off … not on the right page, right?”

But if I could appreciate what he found appealing, then, he said: “I think you have the right to criticize it.” The number may seem arbitrary, but their goal is to find 50 things a family can appreciate about a cult before discussing what they do not agree with.

I put this number to Lalich and she said the notion of having to find 50 things seemed a bit extreme. “ I certainly could never find 50 things about my cult that I thought were good.” The spirit of it seemed right to her though, at least: that the family needs to tone down their rhetoric, or they will just push the cult-involved member away.

Hydromechanics Of Defecation - Most Mammals Need Only 12 Seconds To Poop

 or that mammal will be dinner to a predator. 

Its freaking common sense. 

I wrote about this few years ago: 

If someone breaks this rule daily then their health and/or diet is not good. There is something fundamentally wrong with their microbiome which in turn also affects their thought process, outlook of life and god knows what else we don't know. 

Hence, we could cautiously come up with a heuristic that not only eyes but "time to poop" is also a window to someone's character (I am not sure what soul means so let's stick to observable, known and simple words here). 

It should take 12 seconds. But that technical word "hydrodynamics of defection" is something new I learned today. 

AI Will Never Be A Shortcut To Wisdom

After nearly forty years teaching graduate students and advising some of the most inventive companies on the planet, I’ve earned the right to sigh a bit. But this isn’t about “kids these days.” In fact, it’s not about youth at all. The shift I’m seeing — this collapse of intellectual agility — is striking all generations. All cultures. All walks of life.

Studies on cognitive flexibility, coupled with anecdotal observations about the death of long-form journalism and the slow drift of reader attention, suggest something dire: We are growing unable to sit still with ambiguity. We no longer walk through the fog of a complex question — we skip across it, like stones. Our thoughts sprint, but the world is a marathon. And so, we are left with answers to the wrong questions.

What happens when we can no longer think through contradiction, paradox, tension? When climate change, homelessness, political division, and regional conflict are seen as disconnected problems with easy answers — when, in truth, they are tangled systems that resist simplicity?

The answer is only simple if you don’t understand the question.

This is the danger of living in a world where thinking is outsourced. Where cognition becomes project management. Where uncertainty is eliminated, not explored. Where truth is boxed and shelved, not wrestled with. If the world is a box of nails — individual facts, sharp and ready — then our minds become hammers. Tools of force and certainty. Banging out conclusions. Flattening nuance. And who builds a cathedral with a hammer? Who composes a symphony with a hammer?

This is no way to live. Because if you see the world as nails, you’ll mistake noise for knowledge. You’ll assume volume means validity. And when you no longer know how to recognize true expertise — because you yourself have never gained any — you will fall for the confident fool. The YouTube doctor. The Instagram monk. The LinkedIn philosopher.

[---]

If you want to reclaim your mind — not as a hammer, but as a compass, or a loom, or a garden — start here:

• Ask better questions.
• Be suspicious of certainty.
• Practice long-form attention.
• Sit with something confusing until it teaches you something.

We are not meant to be hammerheads in a world of nails. We are meant to wonder, to wander, to build. The true mind does not pound — it inquires, connects, reshapes. It listens to contradiction without collapsing. It plays. And most of all, it remembers that the world was never simple. It was just, for a while, flattened by search engines. 

- More Here