tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-126570292024-02-28T05:56:06.865-05:00Amazed at ignoranceJohn D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.comBlogger322125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-54594335508979489062017-06-08T02:14:00.001-04:002017-06-08T02:14:22.993-04:00Karl Marx stole communism from Wall StreetI know this is rather obvious and I apologize if people already know this. Karl Marx stole communism from Wall Street.<br />
<br />
Marx looked at the community, public, ownership of corporations called "stock investing" and he thought, "hey, it would be good if everyone was an equal stock holder in everything."<br />
<br />
That was bad for the communist stock holders in Europe because if everyone owned stock in everything they couldn't exploit anyone, so, they told the proletariat, common people, that communal ownership of property, what they were doing in their small groups, was evil! For everyone except them.<br />
<br />
And some people believed them and even today think the public ownership of resources and the means of production is evil, except when rich people, like Wall Street Robber Barons, do it and then it is okay!<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-75538347167939840732017-03-24T15:56:00.000-04:002017-03-24T15:56:46.469-04:00Remote outlets and hackersHackers are going to hack.<br />
<br />
Hiding behind their masks like the KKK, hackers are going to virtually lynch people who refuse to conform to their arbitrary and variable morality systems. And it isn't like there is a universal morality system for hackers, the only thing anyone can be sure of is that hackers don't care about individual privacy and will happily violate article 12 of the United Nations Human Rights Declaration to enforce their brand of morality. Whatever justification is used the reality is the same, hackers hack people because they are bullies and enjoy hurting people.<br />
<br />
Another thing that you can generalize, and this doesn't apply to all hackers, is that guys like me who call these anonymous lynchers what they are will be attacked by hackers. I've been pissing these guys off for almost 20 years now and for twenty years now these self appointed guardians of arbitrarily determined morality justifications have been hacking me and virtually lynching me, because that's what they do. <br />
<br />
Hackers oppress basic human rights in favor of ??? what? Some arbitrary and anonymous morality that changes as often as the face behind the mask changes. If you are outspoken you are going to piss people off and it doesn't matter what your beliefs are, some scum bag will put on a mask, hide in the virtual night, burn a cross on your lawn and string you up in a tree. Why? Because you are anti-pro abortion, anti-pro gay rights, anti-pro 2nd amendment, anti-pro privacy, etc. Truthfully there is no way to satisfy the virtual blood lust of these scumbags. They don't really have any agenda except virtual violence, trying to hurt people because hurting others is the only way they can alleviate their own feelings of worthlessness and despair.<br />
<br />
Now, not all hackers are like that. Some hackers have real agendas and they target corporations, governments, they make money from these entities, reveal their secrets and basically do a lot of good. We aren't talking about these guys, they aren't going to hack people. People are easy compared to organizations, low hanging fruit for script kiddies. Real hackers hack organizations.<br />
<br />
Anonymous released a list of supporters of oppression and had some people on that list who were very vocally and politically against oppression. That is because they, very stupidly, targeted people instead of the real evil, corporations.<br />
<br />
Sometimes hackers falsify data the way they falsified AOL messages to destroy the career of a Florida politician and that is just as wrong as corporations stripping resources from poor nations. There is more than enough real evil that hackers with laudable agendas can address without faking crap, violating human rights and adding to the oppression of humanity. Corporations are not people regardless of the legal fictions used to oppress the majority.<br />
<br />
That is the 1% though, most hackers out there are just looking for reasons to hurt people because they think they can. <br />
<br />
One of the first things some hackers do, because they live on GDT, is
to change your time to GDT. It is just a stupid way of saying, look at
me, I need attention because I have deep seated feelings of
worthlessness and insecurity! Pretty lame, but, what do you expect from
a card carrying KKK member.<br />
<br />
In the comic books good guys wear
masks. In real life, bad guys wear masks. Look at the people who have
worn masks in reality and what they have done and look at the people who have stood up for something.<br />
<br />
There is an iconic picture of Che Guerra wearing a mask, oh wait, no there isn't.<br />
<br />
So, what does that rant have to do with remote outlets? (<a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Etekcity-Wireless-Electrical-Household-Appliances/dp/B00DQ2KGNK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1490381295&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=remote+outlet&psc=1">https://smile.amazon.com/Etekcity-Wireless-Electrical-Household-Appliances/dp/B00DQ2KGNK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1490381295&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=remote+outlet&psc=1</a>) as an example. Feel free to buy it somewhere else, I'm not shilling for amazon.<br />
<br />
Rant over, this blog is about basic protection against hacking, and it is weak protection indeed. Depth. Multiple firewalls between a hacker and you. Those firewalls have to be reset often. I use a series of routers and firewalls and networks that are all plugged into two different remote outlets.<br />
<br />
One of my systems is a computer without a hard drive that actually sits on the network and sniffs traffic. It is a live CD linux distro that doesn't do anything except log data, traceroute and identify ip addresses. Long story, the distro is out there, or it used to be, and I didn't build it. That is hidden and I have it plugged into its own remote outlet.<br />
<br />
Then, I have multiple routers. I have a modem with a cheesy firewall that is plugged into o a router that I have three other routers plugged into. I have an insecure wifi, a "secure" wifi (no such thing) and then a hard wired network router. All plugged into a power strip that is plugged into a single remote outlet. The whole thing draws less than five amps at 110.<br />
<br />
No, I'm not telling you where my sniffer is. Actually, I move it around and I have been thinking about putting in a second one. I just need to put together another ITX. Time and money.<br />
<br />
All fairly cheesy stuff that hackers can bypass and gain access to my systems. The complicated nature of the network makes it more difficult though and then, when I shut it down a hacker has to start all over.<br />
<br />
I shut my network down quite regularly. Turn off the power so it can't be powered on over the network. If I'm not using my computer, or watching the output from my sniffer, I probably have my network shut down.<br />
<br />
Most people leave their networks on all the time and only reset it if there is a problem. I don't. If I shut down my sniffer it boots right back up when I turn on the power because it runs off of a Live CD. Everything else is EEPROM so, just push the button and it all resets. I generally wait ten seconds to several days to turn my network back on.<br />
<br />
Turn off your network when you aren't using it. Just push the button, shut it down and then bring it back up when you want it. If you have different sections of network you can control them using different remotes, leave your server up, shut your personal network down, your guest network, etc. There are all kinds of different things you can do, except, prevent getting hacked.<br />
<br />
If you are into electronics there are some bits and pieces you can buy on the web to do all kinds of things with relays and remotes.<br />
<br />
Some of you are probably thinking that there are people out there who can't get hacked. That is B.S., anyone and everyone can get hacked. This is just a simple way to make it more difficult to hack a network, but, leave still leave it open enough for people to worm their way in. Fewer people, but, there are those who will.<br />
<br />
There will always be guys in masks, burning crosses and lynching people because that is what losers do, beat up on others. They will always have their justifications and it really doesn't matter what they are, the point isn't really their justification it is that they get to hurt people. Always has been, always will be.<br />
<br />
In the mean time, there are a few simple things we can do without going very far out of our way to make things harder for them. I don't suggest you build a sniffer, that is essentially a "script kiddie" way of identifying KKK members. I don't even suggest that you run multiple routers/firewalls.<br />
<br />
I do suggest plugging your network hardware into a remote outlet so it is easily shut down. This reduces energy consumption and it makes it easier to reset all the bits and pieces on your network. It also shuts off access when you don't need it.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-90356200681420634082017-03-23T23:32:00.001-04:002017-03-23T23:32:14.203-04:00Revenge based criminal justice is a waste of time.I want to point something out. I was just considering marketing strategy
regarding purchasing motivation. I don't have a good reference, I
learned this stuff in a variety of seminars when I was involved in
technical sales support at a software company.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
People
have a binary motivational personality trait, similar to the binary
personality trait of extroversion/introversion. Psychology is kind of
weird in that binary thinking patterns are considered a mental disorder
and then they break down psychological traits into binaries "the big
five" and then classify people as either/or as opposed to accurately
positioning them within a continuum between the two traits, or better
yet, somewhere in a ten point circle where all traits influence each
other to create an individuals unique personality matrix. Okay, off
topic there a bit.<br />
<br />
So, binary motivational personality trait. Some people are motivated more by desire and some people are motivated by avoidance.<br />
If
I'm trying to someone with a focus on desire why they should buy
something and all I talk about is the problems they will avoid they will
kick me to the door pretty quick. On the other hand, if I talk to them
about all the problems they will solve they will buy.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
It
isn't quite that easy, actually you have to pitch both avoidance and
desire, just focus a little more on one based on an estimate of a
person's location in the continuum between the two extremes of the
motivational trait. If someone is 70% desire and 30% avoidance and I
explain seven problems they will solve and three problems they will
avoid I've kind of hit the sweet spot in their motivational trait.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
Now, other personality traits influence all this stuff, so it isn't really black and white.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
Considering
that knowledge I considered the motivation of criminals. Are they
primarily avoidance, dissuaded by considerations of problems? Are they
primarily desire, encouraged by thoughts of success? Especially those
with poor impulse control.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
I think the vast
majority of criminals don't give a rats ass about potential
punishment. I think they are motivated more by potential reward. This
means that no matter how severe punishment is it will not motivate the
criminal to avoid because most criminals behavior is not motivated by
avoidance.<br />
I think a criminal justice
system focused on helping people define what they want and how they can
legally achieve it will work better when applied to a Pavlovian
punishment/reward behavioral modification system such as the current
criminal justice system.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
But, the criminal
justice system isn't focused on behavior modification, it is focused on
revenge or retribution so no one really cares about behavior
modification, reducing crime, and so our prison population is increasing
as we become more and more focused on punishing people, getting
retribution, revenge, for mala prohibitum offenses like prostitution,
recreational drug offenses, gambling, and non-violent mala in se
offenses like various forms of theft.<br />
<br />
Which ends up costing us a ton in court costs and imprisonment costs and lost labor, etc.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
Think
about that, we get revenge on a guy for getting busted multiple times
for possession of too much weed and argue about how much damage stoners
do our community, a revenge that lasts sixty years and costs us a crap
load in prison costs.<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
Is revenge that is
specifically designed not to address behavior modification and costs us
an incredible amount of money really worth it? Does it do anything to
solve the problems of society or is it just creating more?<br />
<br data-mce-bogus="1" />
Statistically,
I would say revenge is creating more problems than it solves and I
think the data on increasing ratios of incarcerated people in the States and increasing crime rates proves it.<br />
<br />
Pew Report: One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008<br />
<br />
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/latest-crime-statistics-released<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-56787077441636231912017-03-09T14:51:00.001-05:002017-03-09T14:51:22.132-05:00Modern Justice System, literally driving people crazy!Our modern justice system is designed around two foundational concepts, innocent until proved guilty and assigning punishment which is "equal" to inappropriate behavior. <br />
<br />
This is why we have judges and trials, so judges can determine guilt and assign an appropriate punishment which should be "equal" to the crime. Essentially, "an eye for an eye".<br />
<br />
An "eye for an eye" is an interesting concept and it depends on values assigned to behaviors.<br /><br />Suppose an individual breaks a window and steals a watch that the retailer values at $500 (but, I can get it on Amazon for $250). The thief is immediately caught and the watch is recovered. It costs $1,000.00 to repair the window.<br /><br />The thief is fined and incarcerated. Fines are ??? Incarceration ??? Probably a misdemeanor, a year in jail and a fine of as much as $1000.00. http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Burglarly.htm<br /><br />How do we value time? Minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. Do we charge people for "room and board"? How much? 24*7.25=174 8*7.25=58 We incarcerate people for 24 hours a day. Is a criminals time worth $174 a day?<br /><br />How do we place a value on trauma? Many people are traumatized in jails. Prisons in the United States typically violate International laws against torture. We legalize torture of convicted criminals and protest torture of terrorists, unless they are convicted and incarcerated and then we can torture them! https://www.afsc.org/document/torture-us-prisons<br /><br />How do we value trauma to the victim? Do we value trauma to victims more than criminals? Suppose the only job a person can get is dealing drugs. Unemployment is interesting. Unemployment only counts people receiving unemployment. Real unemployment, the difference between employable people and employed people (Labor Force Participation) among blacks is 40%. That means real unemployment is 60%. Census claims the number is 61%, but, in 2013 (the latest date I can get numbers) out of 32 million people over 16 only 13 million are employed.<br /><br />https://beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/find?st=0&r=20&q=Employed+black+over+16&fq=survey:[ln]&more=0<br /><br />https://www.census.gov/population/race/data/ppl-bc13.html<br /><br />Okay, so the only job an individual in a 60% unemployment bracket can get is dealing drugs and that person is tossed in prison for 20 years where they are tortured based on international laws. I'll let you equate the values in the system for that one because they have nothing to do with "an eye for an eye", in my opinion.<br /><br />http://www.csus.edu/indiv/c/chalmersk/sea%20website/vengeancearticle.pdf<br /><br />Suppose we have a Senator who violates the constitution? How should they be punished? Surprise, there are no laws which specifically criminalize Senators who violate Article 6 of the Constitution during confirmation proceedings by asking nominees for civil service about their religious beliefs.<br /><br />Senator Durbin did this during Judge Alito's confirmation hearings and no one even objected. I wasn't surprised because it happens all the time even though it is illegal. I'm just picking this incident out because I documented it in a discussion I had with an attorney friend of mine.<br /><br />https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript<br />https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109shrg25429/pdf/CHRG-109shrg25429.pdf Page 576<br /><br />An "eye for an eye", punishment equal to offense, is a Pavlovian conditioning method. For Pavlovian conditioning to work punishment must be consistent and consistently applied. http://psych.fullerton.edu/rlippa/Psych101/outline2.htm<br /><br />Lets face it, there is no consistency either in the application of punishment or the "value" of punishment. Our current punishment standards are overly harsh, have nothing to do with equating value of behavior/punishment and result in recidivism rather than behavior modification.<br /><br />As we learn studying Pavlovian conditioning the lack of consistency in punishment will literally drive those being conditioned insane.<br /><br />Our justice system is currently designed to drive people crazy. Literally, I'm not being figurative here. I'm pointing out that our current system of punishment is literally driving people crazy.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-1663074059565393202017-02-24T17:16:00.000-05:002017-02-24T17:16:23.875-05:00People ignoring the law, from ancient Judah to Modern U.S. Government
<style type="text/css">p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }</style>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Someone asked me
what I thought about how well the ancient Jews followed their
biblical laws.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
That is an
interesting question. Most of the records which have survived were
those they considered most important, religious records mostly, which
is why the books of the Bible survived but more common records
didn't.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
2 Kings 22 gives us
an interesting look into how well the religious laws were protected.
One of the priests suddenly finds a copy of the law in the Temple.
This suggests that priests were not actually studying the law that
often. What probably happened was that people followed an idea of
"common" law and it is anyone's guess how important gender
laws were, but, from Josiah's reaction, "Great is the Lord’s
anger that burns against us because those who have gone before us
have not obeyed the words of this book; they have not acted in
accordance with all that is written there concerning us.” I would
imagine that most of Judah was breaking laws of the scripture.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
People forget the
law all the time. Who knows what happened several thousand years ago.
I imagine the law and public opinion "ebbed and flowed"
much like it does today. Even those we expect should be most aware
of the law and the Constitution totally ignore it.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
I can remember
watching Senate hearings of Supreme Court Nominees where Senators
actually questioned nominees about their religious beliefs, something
that is specifically forbidden in the Constitution. Hard to imagine
Senators and SCOTUS nominees ignoring the Constitution, but, it
happened during our lifetime.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
United States
Constitution, Article 6: "...no religious Test shall ever be
required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the
United States."</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Therefore, no civil
servant can ever be questioned about their religious beliefs. What I
think is interesting is that reporters constantly violate this law,
the Senate often twists religious belief questions into questions
regarding the first amendment, making religious beliefs an important
political issue in the selection of those serving in public office.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
This creates a
"hierarchy" where Freedom of the Press is prioritized over
the prohibition of religious testing for public office.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
"Senator
DURBIN. Let me ask you a few starting points. The question was asked
of John Roberts about his personal religious and moral belief. And I
would ask you in the most open-ended fashion. We all come to our
roles in life with life experience and with values. When you are
calculating and making a decision, if you were on the Supreme Court,
tell me what role your personal religious or moral beliefs will play
in that decision process.
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Judge ALITO. Well,
my personal religious beliefs are important to me in my private life.
They are an important part of the way I was raised and they have been
important to Martha and me in raising our children. But my obligation
as a judge is to interpret and apply the Constitution and the laws of
the United States, and not my personal religious beliefs or any
personal moral beliefs that I have, and there is nothing about my
religious beliefs that interferes with my doing that."</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-109shrg25429/pdf/CHRG-109shrg25429.pdf</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Page 576</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Not everyone can or
should trust my statements to be facts unless I am willing to provide
the resources to back them up.</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-57338999439253094162017-02-21T04:32:00.000-05:002017-02-24T17:41:15.298-05:00Stupid Medical Professionals, Weight Loss and CaloriesYou ever hear some moron say, "calories in, calories out"? Meaning people are lazy and don't do enough to burn the calories they take in.<br />
<br />
Anyone who says this, meaning people need to burn calories, is a moron.<br />
<br />
Anyone with a basic understanding of eating disorders, bulimia (binge and purge) specifically, knows darn well that many people purge using laxatives and therefore metabolism is an important part of the equation.<br />
<br />
The proper fricking equation is, "calories in, metabolism, calories out" and metabolism is influenced by a variety of things including Over The Counter laxatives. Apples are a useful way to, very slightly, increase the pace at which food flows through a person's digestive tract.<br />
<br />
Lots of stuff influences metabolism. This isn't new stuff, but, I just read another dumb post about "Calories in, Calories out." In this day and age when information on things like bulimia and metabolism are so available it is disgraceful that people spread bullshit like, "People are fat because they are lazy."<br />
<br />
Now, there is some truth to that. Almost anyone can lose weight by reducing their calorie intake to about 1,000 calories a day, but, that isn't about being lazy, that is about being disciplined enough to keep from eating.<br />
<br />
Increasing activity is a great way to increase metabolism. That doesn't work as well as people think.<br />
<br />
One of the problems people have when they begin an exercise plan is that they usually lose some weight quickly and then the weight loss drops off and they plateau. This is because people generally don't change their eating habits and their metabolism quickly adapts to the extra activity. People often suggest switching things up often so that an individuals metabolism is less likely to adapt, but, that doesn't work great.<br />
<br />
When it comes down to it, what matters is heart rate. When someone starts exercising their heart rate increases and stays increased for a longer time. As someone adapts to physical activity their heart rate slows during activity and it recovers faster. It takes more work to achieve the same metabolism effect.<br />
<br />
So, why 1,000 calories? Because 1,000 counted calories is probably closer to 1,250 calories. Calories of foods are "accurate" within plus or minus 25% and, generally, packaged foods are on the high side. You wouldn't believe how stupid the FDA testing is. I wrote a blog about it a while back that described how bad it is, no one read it of course. The post was techno babble for geeks discussing a left skewed distribution with an n of 10. Sometimes they actually combine 10 samples, do one test and then divide the total to determine the average.<br />
<br />
So people suggesting a diet of 2,000 calories is really suggesting a diet of closer to 2,500 calories. This is why calorie counting generally sucks for losing weight. Believe me though, anyone can lose weight if they eat few enough calories.<br />
<br />
If you want to lose weight, figure out how many calories you should eat, multiply that number by 0.75 and set your calories at that number. It is wicked hard and most people aren't going to do it, but, that will generally work. <br />
<br />
Stress screws metabolism up too. I'm not going to mess with that in this.<br />
<br />
Ever see kernels of corn in your shit? That's because people don't digest corn very well. That means a chunk of calories in corn are not digested. All foods are like this. If you bothered to really inspect your shit you might find bits of masticated and undigested foods. How much depends on the speed of your metabolism. Take some OTC laxitives and those chunks will be pretty big.<br />
<br />
This is how weight loss surgery works, by messing with the metabolism. Shrinking the stomach, removing intestines, even lap bands. They all force changes to metabolism.<br />
<br />
Speed, meth, influences metabolism. Lots of stuff influences metabolism and reduces calorie absorption.<br />
<br />
Think of how your body works and quit listening to morons.<br />
<br />
So why are they morons? Because anyone who says this shit isn't thinking. Anyone in the medical or nutritional profession should have a basic awareness of bulimia so claiming "calories in, calories out" means they aren't using their knowledge to understand. And if they are too stupid to make the connection between bulimia, metabolism and weight loss they are too stupid to make simple connections with other knowledge they have. This is why there is so much medical malpractice.<br />
<br />
I see this failure to connect information to arrive at an accurate decision a lot, hell, I've done it myself occasionally. Less and less as I learned how to think. Schools typically teach deference to authority so people regurgitate crap "authorities" tell them without actually thinking about it. That sucks, research "deference to authority in education". There are actually programs at some universities that are trying to "deprogram" students that have been brainwashed by Western education.<br />
<br />
That is why so many "educated" people are stupid, they can't actually think. They can only regurgitate crap their "authorities" spout. We are seeing a lot of this in politics. One authority says this and their sheeple start spouting the same crap. Another authority says that and their sheeple starting mouthing off about that. Pure stupidity.<br />
<br />
You don't have to think to lose weight, but, it helps. What helps more is understanding metabolism, one's own metabolism in particular. Lacking that, brute force it on a 1,000 calorie a day diet. Wicked hard, could be dangerous for some so many people won't recommend that for fear of liability.<br />
<br />
I'm a high school drop out with almost no formal education in nutrition or metabolism. As I've said before, take everything with a grain of salt. Think before doing. If it isn't working for you, stop. Most important, know yourself.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-23002416620553412952017-02-19T02:33:00.000-05:002017-02-19T02:33:29.033-05:00Solar Watch ChargingA few years ago I bought a Solar watch that wasn't holding a charge. Being the kind of guy I am I built a solar watch charger, stuck the watch in it and let it charge for a week. Works great now, holds a charge for a week or so. That was back in 2012 and I have talked about it a few times on the Internet since. I tried to drum up some funding for producing a short run of a few thousand Solar Watch Charging boxes, but, short sighted dorks couldn't see the value.<br />
<br />
My first Solar Watch Charger (SWC) was a cheap, plastic, watch box that I stuck a 12v LED in the top of. I wired it to a 12v adapter.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhc4cNC_TweZTfOaXmQw5KYtA9cMSdFk4Gum0SzIaU6z9hlLM_20GRu2kLAERIAW2LJURk3Eb2MDBG2S814xMSKPYs3DLuz_3v1DEkqoADGutgjQnVIw1nSw7MLxY262VxGftH09Q/s1600/IMG_20170219_013959.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhc4cNC_TweZTfOaXmQw5KYtA9cMSdFk4Gum0SzIaU6z9hlLM_20GRu2kLAERIAW2LJURk3Eb2MDBG2S814xMSKPYs3DLuz_3v1DEkqoADGutgjQnVIw1nSw7MLxY262VxGftH09Q/s320/IMG_20170219_013959.jpg" width="221" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Later I built a few others, timers, batteries so I could travel with them, etc. I worked with a timer on You Tube and in the post I discussed using it for an SWC. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0eLz5n58lo) Don't watch the video if you are looking for a solar watch charger, I don't show it being used for that, although, I am currently using it for that purpose.<br />
<br />
I actually hooked it up to an aquarium light I bought off of eBay. I used to have the light plugged into a regular timer, the "geek" timer is just because I like messing with stuff. I used those double sided tapes they use for those hooks that can be removed from walls to attach the light to the side of the jewelery box.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFf3xhCNBAEzp2fXSlM0UaS7DGBGwQwjnI6TV1x6ixSTXmAUSaacbuwooXwqRLny21o2xv6YH261W_OuM3E8VSzSlPeYHdpwld0g1jnIT4pp1ZfsWGzS9OUzER8quVnrTrrEndBQ/s1600/IMG_20170219_013832.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFf3xhCNBAEzp2fXSlM0UaS7DGBGwQwjnI6TV1x6ixSTXmAUSaacbuwooXwqRLny21o2xv6YH261W_OuM3E8VSzSlPeYHdpwld0g1jnIT4pp1ZfsWGzS9OUzER8quVnrTrrEndBQ/s320/IMG_20170219_013832.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I broke the aquarium light clamp because the clamp was designed to fit on a wall thinner than the wooden toolbox I use as a jewelery box. I leave the top open, but, I could wire lights into the lid so I could close it, I just haven't done that yet. (comma splice) The light comes on for about an hour a day to keep my solar watches charged. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
There is a guy who took my idea, ran with it and built a really hokey device. He used to sell it for $10 bucks, then more, now it runs almost $30 on Amazon. People have built lights in watch boxes. All pretty simple stuff anyone can do really cheap.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The easiest way to charge a watch is to just set it somewhere and put an LED flashlight on top of it. Just buy a cheap, short, LED flashlight, turn it on and put it on top of the dial. Leave it for a while. Yeah, sometimes the flashlight falls over, but, anyone can prop it up. This is the main reason I couldn't get funding, everyone wanted to know why anyone would buy something they could do with a $1 flashlight.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhZRP3FyKc5nIZl8-Us8wz8_xyyClS2-wk2ZvGEf70azCYGj9oOnqfP7UEz8hmha9PYXvnNddhTQ6UY-BT8wR6XYgULqktpZPsZeUkEg1mpXPPxJ0J0A6GO17CnlRvSOmfkDvqMA/s1600/IMG_20170219_021649.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="230" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhZRP3FyKc5nIZl8-Us8wz8_xyyClS2-wk2ZvGEf70azCYGj9oOnqfP7UEz8hmha9PYXvnNddhTQ6UY-BT8wR6XYgULqktpZPsZeUkEg1mpXPPxJ0J0A6GO17CnlRvSOmfkDvqMA/s320/IMG_20170219_021649.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
There are these LED puck lights, buy one at a dollar store, put it under a shelf and shove your solar watch under the light. Easy Peasy. Costco sells LED Puck lights that have a timer built in and a very cool remote. I had to wire a wireless remote into my timer to turn the lights on and off.</div>
<br />
There are hundreds of ways to solve this solar watch charging problem. I've shown a few here and discussed another. I like building stuff.<br />
<br />
Still, I imagine people will be producing SWC systems into the future. Any of us who own more than one watch needs a way to keep our watches charged. I like the aquarium light best, so far. I can keep 8 watches fully charged in my jewelry box pretty easily. <div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-85858207140198115542017-02-16T22:57:00.002-05:002017-02-16T22:57:31.466-05:00Elon Musk, idiot at large<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="8dtas-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8dtas-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8dtas-0-0"><span data-text="true">Since the industrial revolution began "robots", automated machines, have been doing work that people used to do.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="8gjrm-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8gjrm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="8gjrm-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="1gcul-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1gcul-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1gcul-0-0"><span data-text="true">At one time people wove cloth on simple looms. As looms became more complicated and more automated fewer people were needed to weave the same amount of cloth.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="1et12-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="1et12-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="1et12-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="a52i1-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a52i1-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="a52i1-0-0"><span data-text="true">At one time paper was hand made. It was incredibly expensive and labor intensive. Today machines make paper and we literally sh*t on it, of course, far fewer people are employed per any amount of paper.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="dvvp-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="dvvp-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="dvvp-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="7je5n-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7je5n-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7je5n-0-0"><span data-text="true">Think about how many galley slaves lost their rowing jobs...</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="as54p-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="as54p-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="as54p-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="nfcm-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="nfcm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="nfcm-0-0"><span data-text="true">Now, I could write reams about the jobs lost to automation. From weavers to bullard operators. Truthfully, no one would care.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="mhnj-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="mhnj-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="mhnj-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="amoa-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="amoa-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="amoa-0-0"><span data-text="true">But, Elon Musk starts running his mouth about jobs being lost to robots and suddenly people are freaking out. Yes, people are going to lose jobs to automated machinery, "robots", just like they have been for hundreds, even thousands of years. That is never going to change. Unemployment will grow, and fall.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="26r11-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="26r11-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="26r11-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ndle" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true">Truthfully, over population is a far greater danger than automated production systems. Elon Musk isn't really an idiot, but, he has failed to understand the history of economics and manufacturing and that is pretty idiotic.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true">And, yes, people are going to become "cyborgs". I have a "machine" inside of me already, a heart stent. Medicine is going to use nanobots and people will have communication devices medically implanted in the future, just like they do today with cochlear implants.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true">Change is inevitable and hanging on to the past always fails.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9edtm-0-0"><span data-text="true">We need to reduce the global population, especially in places where there isn't enough arable land to support the local population. We really need a planet with less than 2 billion, preferably around 500,000,000, yes, 500 million. That is a heck of a population reduction, but, it is better than us burying ourselves in our own garbage.</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-53316643488486193362017-02-15T01:50:00.001-05:002017-02-15T01:50:29.625-05:00Christianity and marriage, once againI'm Christian, see if this logic makes sense.<br />
<br />
If marriage is of people, a creation of people and which people have authority over, then God has no authority over marriage and marriage begins when people say marriage begins.<br />
<br />
If marriage is of God, created by God and which God has authority over, then people have no authority over marriage and God has sole authority over marriage. Marriage begins and ends only when God decides it does.<br />
<br />
Now, some people will claim that God gave the church authority over marriage, but, there are no scriptures that tell us this. That's just something people who want control tell other people.<br />
<br />
Luke 16:13 KJV<br />
No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."<br />
<br />
Now, many people translate "mammon" into "money", but, if we look at the Greek translation it actually translates as "personified riches", as in "rich personality", what we might think of as "charismatic people" or leaders.<br />
<br />
"Origin: of Aramaic origin (confidence, i.e. wealth, personified)<br />
<br />
TDNT entry: 10:28,6<br />
<br />
Part(s) of speech: Noun Masculine<br />
<br />
Strong's Definition: Of Chaldee origin (confidence, that is, figuratively wealth, personified); mammonas, that is, avarice (deified): - mammon."<br />
<br />
Okay, so we choose between two masters, people and God. Which has authority over your marriage?<br />
<br />
Me, I'm a Christian so I believe God has authority over marriage. In my case, the Holy Ghost explained it to me and because I'm a person of reason the Holy Ghost used logic. It flew in the face of my personal beliefs, but, there was no denying the logic or the Holy Ghost.<br />
<br />
Nothing wrong with ceremonies and traditions, as long as we remember who is in charge of marriage. I'm glad you honored your children's wishes. Your marriage didn't begin when people said it did though, it began when God decided. If you want to know when that is, pray and ask God. Believe you will receive and God will give you the answer.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-59214322735138259742017-01-21T02:33:00.002-05:002017-02-16T22:59:52.122-05:00Disgusted with politics and annoyed at fear mongeringI have self identified as Republican since about 1990. I voted for Reagan and when he pussyed out with Iran in 1981 I was pretty pissed off. It took me a long time to get over that.<br />
<br />
Not that I would ever identify as a Democrat, slave mongering genocidal scum bags. Andrew Jackson is a national disgrace and should be removed from the $20. The United States first Democrat President was the most genocidal president in history and his "I'm too stubborn for abolitionists to change my mind" mule symbol is still the Democrats symbol. FDR and his concentration camps, I could go on with Democrats genocidal behaviors from their support of slavery to their support of segregation and the hate/fear mongering they do today.<br />
<br />
When Trump won the Republican nomination I began self identifying as Disgusted.<br />
<br />
Back in the 1980s-90s Trump was going to build the worlds tallest building. He totally failed, which made the World Trade Center Osama bin Laden's phallic target rather than some mythical Trump erection. During the attempt to grow his massive mythical erection Donnie managed to alienate the entire New York city pseudo intellectual elitist power base. Truthfully something I envy since I enjoy nothing better than pissing off a bunch of elitist pseudo intellectual morons, however, Donnie had to expand his business outside of New York since he had effectively eliminated himself from the New York real estate development market. Donnie went international.<br />
<br />
Any of you old couch potatoes who watched Dallas Reruns might remember when JR did the same thing and had to do the same thing. So far Donnie has continued being somewhat successful in the international market, but, I figure it is only a matter of time before he alienates enough people in the international market that his business is finished.<br />
<br />
So I didn't give a rats ass about all the B.S. people were spouting, Trump this, Trump that. I couldn't verify any of that bullshit, except for his being a misogynist like Billy Clinton and his famous desk hole. I didn't like Clinton even before that, after his lying about Monica I really had no use for him. I already didn't have any use for Trump so the misogynist crap didn't sway me. I already had no use for Trump, or Billy Clinton.<br />
<br />
The lying propaganda and fear mongering annoyed me more than Trump's locker room banter. At least he wasn't shoving cigars up inside some woman when she wasn't tucked into his knee space.<br />
<br />
The United States can't expand onto other worlds when Donnie Trump alienates the rest of the world the way he alienated the New York pseudo intellectual elitists. Now, yes, I kind of admire that in a way, but, to do business Trump needed those assholes working with him. Alienating that bunch of scumbags was in direct opposition to Trump's own best interest, and the idiot did it anyway.<br />
<br />
Regardless of the unverified hate speak I've seen published about Trump I think he will make a poor president, specifically because the idiot fucked himself up. That is some self destructive, mommie didn't love me enough, bullshit right there.<br />
<br />
Personally, I think all the lying bullshit just made Trump more electable. Really, telling unverifiable lies just made Trump more attractive to a lot of people, and undermined the reality of the few truths that were told about him. Sheeple are easily made afraid and all the people encouraging people to question their safety are just fear mongering. First comes the fear, then the ridicule, then the hatred and finally people work themselves up to become violent, trying to protect themselves against an imaginary fear.<br />
<br />
Pretty fucking sad. <div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-9285546602023253382016-10-15T16:29:00.002-04:002016-10-15T16:29:14.906-04:00Projecting probability of lithic artifact distribution across time in the Americas.
<style type="text/css">p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }</style>
<br />
I would suggest
that, by using proved statistical theory regarding atypical
distribution of data it may be possible to determine a rough
understanding of the minimum time frame of human occupation of the
Americas.
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Lithic artifact
distribution in the Americas is probably related to population
density.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
To do this, we must
ignore the arbitrary classifications of historic and prehistoric so
that we can understand the distribution of population, and therefore
artifact, density.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The density of
artifact distribution is probably going to be a left skewed
distribution where the distribution falls off suddenly when lithic
technology is replaced with newer iron age technologies brought over
from Europe, or when population density is decimated by European
diseases.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
We can assume that
the modality of the distribution of lithic artifacts will be around
the period of highest population density. When did Native Americans
first encounter Europeans and European diseases? Vikings? Columbus?
When did the population of the Americas begin to drop?</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
We can further
assume that the farther left of the modality the less probable the
discovery of artifacts is.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The farther we move
from the mean, or the modality, the less probable it will be that we
will find an artifact.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
This implies that,
if we find an artifact, the artifact is within the higher
probabilities of the distribution of artifacts. In the case of a
skewed distribution a discovered prehistoric artifact is probably
between the mean, which will be on the left of the data point which
the artifact represents, and the modality, which will be to the right
of the data point the artifact represents.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
This has some
interesting implications. Some data points have been discovered as
far back as 30-35 thousand years before present. Do we assume that
these data points are to the right or the left of the mean?
Chebychev’s Theorum describes the minimum probabilities of finding
a data point in non-Gaussian distributions, however, it is not as
easy to determine the probability of discovering a specific data
point within the distribution without understanding the shape of the
distribution.
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Chebychev’s
Theorum allows us to say, for example, that the highest possible
probability of finding a data point between 2 and 3 standard
deviations on either side of the mean is about 14%. However, with a
left skewed distribution the probability of finding a data point to
the right of the mean is higher than the probability of finding an
artifact to the left of the mean.</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-46330058885435090772016-09-08T17:56:00.000-04:002016-09-08T18:01:47.936-04:00Tom Clancy's The Divison by Ubisucks MassiveI love gaming. Uncharted and Assassin's Creed are my two favorite game series. I like 3rd person shooters. 1st person shooters tend to give me PTSD nightmares, but, I like Battlefield Bad Company 1 and 2.<br />
<br />
Lately I've been playing Tom Clancy's The Division by Ubisoft, the publishers of Assassin's Creed. Awesome potential and incredibly bad implementation.<br />
<br />
The game is a semi-massive multi-player. Players start out playing a campaign game while interacting with other players at various social sites called "safe areas". There is no pause because various missions can be played by teams. Playing campaign solo there is no reason for the game to stay connected to the Ubisucks servers, but, the game can't be played solo campaign unless it is connected to the Internet.<br />
<br />
The first thing that is most obvious to me is a lack of overall management direction. Every game is going to have multiple development teams working in different areas. Division is so complex there are a crap load of different development areas with inconsistent goals.<br />
<br />
The biggest problem is the elitist, "survival of the fittest", concept which is designed to eliminate less "fit" players from the game.<br />
<br />
As expected, this works and reduces the number of people playing the "massive multi-layer". We could call this a "minuscule multi-player" instead.<br />
<br />
Of course, since their "survival of the fittest" concept worked players have been leaving the game in droves. The other early morning I was running around the dark zone and didn't see any other players for about a half hour. Of course, the first time I did it was a higher level rogue and it killed me.<br />
<br />
The game actually rewards players who kill lower level players in the Dark Zone, which is all multi-player. In the campaign game Non Player Characters, NPC, are generally the same level as the player.<br />
<br />
If the game wanted to encourage player to player competition, players would be penalized for attacking lower level players and rewarded for attacking players of the same level or higher. Instead, consistent with the "survival of the fittest" ideology killing off "weaker" players is encouraged. How dumb is that?<br />
<br />
There are tons of really bad and very inconsistent development ideology decisions being made are driving players away in droves.<br />
<br />
Naturally, some of the players are really angry because they have essentially wasted money on a game that is self destructive. Someone gave me the game so, I'm not out any cash money. Think about that, trying to have a game that depends on lots of players where players are deliberately eliminated because they aren't as "strong" as other players. <br />
<br />
Anyone interested has read about all the player complaints surrounding Division so I won't beat that horse.<br />
<br />
Today, I'm just pointing out the stupidity of developing a "survival of the fittest" game" and expecting to attract and keep players. The entire concept of "survival of the fittest" is to eliminate players until the last player, or few players, are left. Everyone else "dies". The game becomes a minuscule multi-player and Ubisucks loses their investment. <br />
<br />
Anyone who invested in a game designed to eliminate the majority of players from playing is an idiot. <br />
<br />
Of course, I doubt if even Ubisoft actually realized what "survival of the fittest" really meant. Ubisoft management probably threw the term around like a football never even thinking that eliminating players meant eliminating profits.<br />
<br />
That is the kind of ignorance that really amazes me.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-39727074299386880352016-07-20T11:23:00.001-04:002016-07-20T11:23:36.768-04:00The Give Wall Street a Payday Act, also called "affordable care act"Back on January 2nd, 2009 I decided to create a portfolio on Google Finance using publicly traded "health insurance" stocks.<br />
<br />
For those of you who don't know, there are essentially four kinds of health insurance companies and none of them insure health. They all insure that health care workers are paid, not necessarily that people who by "health care" insurance will be healthy or even have access to affordable health care. I'm on Social Security Disability for a heart condition and I can't afford health care. My prescription prices have gone up to where I can't afford them, even with the insurance I am forced to pay for. That's not really off subject.<br />
<br />
The affordable care act did not make health care more affordable, it made health care less affordable and I am a practical example of that. Digoxin, a really old medicine made from the Foxglove plant (when I say really old, I mean people were using this a thousand years ago) went from $10 for a 90 day supply to $90 for a 90 day supply. Once I pay a $250 deductible I have to pay a co-pay that is more than $10, so, pretty fucked. Where I once paid $40 for Digoxin I now pay about $130 a year.<br />
<br />
So what happened on Wall Street?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFM6ACcc1dZpLRRSlKakxAaXkclSMSGEXVOKePVVgKWOS4aUyI_DZwQ4ALn-xIDz_g354lbK0X7zzm_KV2-ffmjzvVeutpkPHmH9c3fL-LsiFmUzEtOLAFr51imp-Lg22Eh_QAtw/s1600/portfolio-2016-07-20.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="148" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFM6ACcc1dZpLRRSlKakxAaXkclSMSGEXVOKePVVgKWOS4aUyI_DZwQ4ALn-xIDz_g354lbK0X7zzm_KV2-ffmjzvVeutpkPHmH9c3fL-LsiFmUzEtOLAFr51imp-Lg22Eh_QAtw/s320/portfolio-2016-07-20.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
In case you are wondering, this represents a %17 annualized return.<br />
<br />
Yeah, that beats the street.<br />
<br />
I wish I had had the $32K to invest back in 2009. If you are wondering if I am cheating, feel free to check the January 2nd 2009 stock prices and create your own fake portfolio. Here is a screen grab to show the historical price for Aetna, AET<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRDbFSX5PDFu0Az3RWtsV7eoijComd4Xg8VUo8DZkypM75Fp6uzmLcqkXB_xP62Q9q_5F528lKq4dGgyTyFWsbp-kfodV1oJC73T0wcM-Agmo4XqfOSWOVAEQtliRSFyFU2tmBZA/s1600/portfolio-2016-07-21-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRDbFSX5PDFu0Az3RWtsV7eoijComd4Xg8VUo8DZkypM75Fp6uzmLcqkXB_xP62Q9q_5F528lKq4dGgyTyFWsbp-kfodV1oJC73T0wcM-Agmo4XqfOSWOVAEQtliRSFyFU2tmBZA/s320/portfolio-2016-07-21-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
I used this website for the annualized return formula.<br />
http://www.asecurelife.com/annualized-return-formula/<br />
<br />
I used this website to calculate the days between today and January 2nd<br />
http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=01&d1=02&y1=2009&m2=7&d2=20&y2=2016<br />
<br />
I used this website to calculate the return on the DJIA, %13.5<br />
https://dqydj.com/dow-jones-return-calculator/<br />
<br />
The "Affordable Care Act" was just a way for Obama and other politicians to screw the American Public and pay off Wall Street.<br />
<br />
Health Care insurance doesn't insure health care. It insures that health care providers are paid for services, regardless whether they perform them or not and regardless of whether those services improve the health of those the services are provided to.<br />
<br />
Obama care should be called the "make sure Wall Street and corporate Health Care providers are paid off act".<br />
<br />
Back to the four types of Health Care providers.<br />
<br />
The first is non-profit.<br />
<br />
The second is private for profit.<br />
<br />
The third is privately owned by a private or public for profit conglomerate.(public means stock shares are publicly traded, not that the government owns the conglomerate)<br />
<br />
The fourth is a for profit publicly owned, meaning stock shares are publicly traded.<br />
<br />
As far as I'm concerned all Health Care services should be non-profit and this includes insurance.<br />
<br />
Society has become dependent on water, communication, electricity, heating energy, groceries and health care. All of these should be exclusively non-profit organizations.<br />
<br />
Corporations should not be able to profit from those things which people depend on to survive.<br />
<br />
Aside from my personal views, which some people would say are "left wing" because their intellects are so small they only see in binary dichotomies, I suggest investing in health care.<br />
<br />
I should have predicted the pharmaceutical issues, but, I missed that. I focused on insurance providers.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-86975834474473839672016-07-10T22:47:00.002-04:002016-07-10T23:02:04.816-04:00Black Lives Matter<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="228nt-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="228nt-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="228nt-0-0"><span data-text="true">I don't get why people think saying "Black Lives Matter" is racist. Truthfully, I don't believe there is any such thing as "Black" as far as people are concerned. Yeah, I know I live in a world that makes a distinction between skin colors, but, really?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="3cdh0-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3cdh0-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3cdh0-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="2be0l-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2be0l-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="2be0l-0-0"><span data-text="true">What is "Black"? I read a definition the other day, "Black: A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa." In logic this is called a circular definition, a logic fallacy. That's what racial division is, a logical fallacy. <a href="http://faculty.wwu.edu/rcm/Power/Power%20first/Race%20Science_files/Biological%20Aspects%20of%20Race.html" target="_blank">In fact, scientifically, race does not and has never existed. </a></span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="2be0l-0-0"><span data-text="true">"</span></span><span data-offset-key="2be0l-0-0"><span data-text="true">Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not
exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they
have ever existed in the past." </span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="4d2tj-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4d2tj-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4d2tj-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="3pk6c-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="3pk6c-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="3pk6c-0-0"><span data-text="true">So what makes "Black Lives matter" racist? No one is saying "Black Lives Matter More Than Other Lives", which would be racist.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="4hjse-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4hjse-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4hjse-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="2kslu-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2kslu-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="2kslu-0-0"><span data-text="true">If I said, "Oranges taste great", would that mean "Apples taste like crap"? Would anyone infer that apples taste like crap if I say "Oranges taste great"?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="7pa1-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7pa1-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7pa1-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="7q6jp-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="7q6jp-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="7q6jp-0-0"><span data-text="true">In the same context, the people saying "All Lives Matter" aren't saying anything exactly wrong, but, there is the issue of invisible privilege.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="cbka9-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cbka9-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cbka9-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="4o6ji-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4o6ji-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4o6ji-0-0"><span data-text="true">What is privilege? Privilege is when a Black friend tells me that a company isn't hiring and I put in an application and I'm hired when my Black friend isn't. White privilege exists and I was fortunate enough to have benefited from it, and know that I benefited from it.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="cvjik-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cvjik-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cvjik-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="ea32e" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">Saying "All Lives Matter" is a lot like saying "Let them eat cake", it is a comment that identifies a lack of understanding of privilege. The legend is that Marie Antoinette believed that everyone had access to bread or cake and if there wasn't any bread they could eat cake. Similarly, the statement "all lives matter" echos the belief that all people are treated equally. In reality people are not treated equally.<br /><br />Peter Dinklage said something while playing Tyrion Lanister on Game of Thrones, "When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar. You're only telling the world that you fear what he might say".<br /><br />I've had a lot of internet bullies stylizing themselves as "hackers" censor my words over the years because they hate what I have to say, they hate free speech and they hate everyone who doesn't think exactly like them. Fascists who are incapable of accepting the concept of freedom. They censor people because they can, like the hall way bully locking kids in lockers or knocking books out of a kids hands, they do whatever they can get away with because the rules don't apply to them.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">When we stylize terms like "Black Lives Matter" as racist because they don't include "White people", when the truth is the term does not exclude white people, we are demanding a privilege that is not ours to own. We are claiming that our lives are more important than theirs. We are bullies knocking the books out of people's hands.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
</div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">Most of the people I know honestly believe that All Lives Matter, but, they don't understand how the invisible privilege of their skin color, their socioeconomic status, their education, have influenced their thinking. They actually believe that Black people have the same opportunities that White people have.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">"All Lives Matter" comes across a lot like "Let them eat cake" to those of us who understand the damage invisible "White" privilege has done to the "Black" community over the last 400 years.</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">I think race is a psychotic delusion that results in destructive behavior. Like anyone dealing with a bunch of psychotics I have to deal with them, I need to challenge their psychosis, I need to listen to them, sure, but, I don't need to sympathize with them or humor their delusion that people are different because of their skin color.</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">We do tend to segregate people into different groups based on ethnicity and appearance. In fact, people adopt specific appearances when they want to be accepted as a member of a particular social group.</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">We don't need to do that though. We don't need to force people into particular social roles based on their appearance, it is just something we do.</span></span><br />
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true"><br /></span></span>
<span data-offset-key="e2k52-0-0"><span data-text="true">And we need to stop doing that.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-36752010863329753262016-07-09T16:07:00.002-04:002016-07-09T16:07:43.886-04:00Delusion and Race and psychosisI looked up the definition of delusion on Google today and this is what came up:<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<b><i>de·lu·sion<br />dəˈlo͞oZHən/<br />noun<br />noun: delusion; plural noun: delusions<br /><br /> an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder.</i></b><br />
<br />
Then I went and looked up the Biological Aspects of Race. This is what I found at:<a href="http://faculty.wwu.edu/rcm/Power/Power%20first/Race%20Science_files/Biological%20Aspects%20of%20Race.html" target="_blank"> http://faculty.wwu.edu/rcm/Power/Power%20first/Race%20Science_files/Biological%20Aspects%20of%20Race.html</a><br />
<br />
<i><b>There is great genetic diversity within all human populations. Pure
races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist
in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have
ever existed in the past.</b></i><br />
<br />
Okay, so a delusion is believing in something that isn't real and race isn't real.<br />
<br />
Interesting.<br />
<br />
So I decided to look at what psychosis is. I looked at <a href="http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Early-Psychosis-and-Psychosis">http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Early-Psychosis-and-Psychosis</a><br />
<i><b><br /></b></i>
<i><b>Psychosis is characterized as disruptions to a person’s thoughts and perceptions that make it difficult for them to recognize what is real and what isn’t. These disruptions are often experienced as seeing, hearing and believing things that aren’t real or having strange, persistent thoughts, behaviors and emotions.</b></i><br />
<br />
Psychosis is characterized as difficulty in determining what is real and what is not real. Race isn't real. Race is a delusion. Someone who believes race is real is psychotic.<br />
<br />
This is really straightforward and satisfies Occam's Razor.<br />
<br />
However, people like to complicate things and since they want to believe in Race and don't want to think of themselves as delusional psychotics at the same time we make shit up.<br />
<br />
Race is a social construction. Race is a reality of society. Race is real because we make it real by thinking and talking about it.<br />
<br />
That's the biggest bunch of bullshit.<br />
<br />
Race isn't real. Race is a psychotic delusion and the actions predicated on that delusion, Racist acts, Racism, are the actions of psychotics.<br />
<br />
period.<br />
<br />
Psychotics will self justify anything and everything. They will invent the most convoluted and ridiculous explanations why they are the sane ones and everyone else is psychotic.<br />
<br />
Ain't buying it. Race ain't real. Believing race is real because we believe race is real is a circular fallacy. It's bullshit.<br />
<br />
<div id="stcpDiv" style="left: -1988px; position: absolute; top: -1999px;">
Psychosis
is characterized as disruptions to a person’s thoughts and perceptions
that make it difficult for them to recognize what is real and what
isn’t. These disruptions are often experienced as seeing, hearing and
believing things that aren’t real or having strange, persistent
thoughts, behaviors and emotions. - See more at:
http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Early-Psychosis-and-Psychosis#sthash.18Sj5QNv.dpuf</div>
<div id="stcpDiv" style="left: -1988px; position: absolute; top: -1999px;">
Psychosis
is characterized as disruptions to a person’s thoughts and perceptions
that make it difficult for them to recognize what is real and what
isn’t. These disruptions are often experienced as seeing, hearing and
believing things that aren’t real or having strange, persistent
thoughts, behaviors and emotions. - See more at:
http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Early-Psychosis-and-Psychosis#sthash.18Sj5QNv.dpuf</div>
<div id="stcpDiv" style="left: -1988px; position: absolute; top: -1999px;">
Psychosis
is characterized as disruptions to a person’s thoughts and perceptions
that make it difficult for them to recognize what is real and what
isn’t. These disruptions are often experienced as seeing, hearing and
believing things that aren’t real or having strange, persistent
thoughts, behaviors and emotions. - See more at:
http://www.nami.org/Learn-More/Mental-Health-Conditions/Early-Psychosis-and-Psychosis#sthash.18Sj5QNv.dpuf</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-29617255988302395402016-07-04T17:02:00.000-04:002016-07-04T17:02:24.310-04:00life on other planetsWhat are the odds of life developing on a planet?<br />
<br />
That actually isn't the big question, but, people imagine it is. The big question is, what is the probability of two intelligent, technologically astute, civilizations interacting?<br />
<br />
Let's suppose the timeline of life on Earth is typical with a standard deviation of a million years. Earth is 6 billion years old. Life, 3.8 billion. Humans 6 million. Modern, technologically, nuclear, humans, 70 years, so far.<br />
<br />
Let's suppose our species lives 5,000 years in a state of technological advancement during which we can recognize extra terrestrial, intelligent, life.<br />
<br />
Anyone familiar with statistics can see where I am going.<br />
<br />
There isn't any guarantee human advanced civilization will last 5,000 years. It could last 100,000 or 1,000.<br />
<br />
A standard deviation of a million, 0.1%, sounds reasonable when discussing the development of life.<br />
<br />
Unless humans and at least one other species exist as a technologically advanced species for one standard deviation on the "life timeline" the odds of humans and another species being able to interact socially are minimal.<br />
<br />
Then there is the distance issue, which I addressed in my blog entry discussing the infinite monkey theory. Let's assume 1/10 solar systems have a planet capable of supporting intelligent life. Let's assume an average distance between planets of ten light years. A range those ten solar systems in a spherical distribution around Earth. Let's assume a fifty/fifty chance of intelligent life. We need to travel 20 light years to find a planet with intelligent life, and there is a 1/200 chance, based on our stdev of 1M and 5k civilization span, that we find a concurrent intelligent species so we need to travel 4,000 light years.<br />
<br />
Let's suppose parallel universes are governed with the same assumptions, 1M stdev, we will assume 20K of civilization, 5K intelligent civilization, 50/50 life develops at all.<br />
<br />
1M/20K = 1 in 50 universes with concurrent civilization. 1 in 200 with advanced technology. Double that cause of the 50/50. We would explore 400 universes to find one similar to ours.<br />
<br />
There are "infinite" universes so there could be one where things are almost identical to this one, but, then we run into the same scale of odds that we had with infinite monkeys banging on an infinite number of 101 key keyboards producing all of Shakespeare's plays, which are an average of about 80,000 characters. 1/keys*1/characters.<br />
<br />
Astronomical.<br />
<br />
Sliders, alternate universes, etc. All crap.<br />
<br />
In addition, if you tried to travel to an alternate universe you would have to travel to where the planet in the alternate universe would be, not where it is.<br />
<br />
Let's suppose the solar system is moving just 100,000 miles an hour. It moves faster, Google how fast you are moving when you are standing still.<br />
<br />
Okay, suppose it takes 1 second to travel to a different universe. You are now 30 miles (more like over 150 miles, but we agreed only 100Kmph ) from where you started. Not thirty miles on the ground. Thirty miles along a tangential line drawn from where you started before the Earth turned under you, spun along the axis of the solar system and the galaxy and the universe, which is expanding. You are falling like a rock towards the planet, exactly like a skydiver without a chute.<br />
<br />
Toward a planet where you have about a 1 in 400 chance of finding technologically developed civilization.<br />
<br />
Okay, so you do your work. You invent a craft capable of traveling at the speed of the Earth moving through the universe, which is wicked faster than you probably believe and way faster than people have traveled so far. You plug this supper engine on a shuttle capable of landing and taking off from a planet and figure out a way to jump between universes.<br />
<br />
Our space ship, which unlike the ship in Interstellar does not need a rocket to escape Earth's gravity, and like the space ship in Interstellar can land and take off other planets without a rocket. The Interstellar ship only needs a rocket to escape Earth gravity because it's fictional. We have a "real" fictional ship that doesn't need a rocket to leave any planet.<br />
<br />
We have to play catch up with the alternate planet which was traveling past us, if we are smart enough to avoid getting t-boned by another planet or the sun. We wave to travel several million miles "up", away from the plane of the Earth's orbit just to avoid the sun, which is coming at us like a bullet train, and it's gravitational pull.<br />
<br />
Yes, our velocity and direction of motion remains the same<br />
<br />
Imagine even microscopic variations in velocity or direction of motion between alternate universes that have had billions of years to magnify.<br />
<br />
So, travel to alternative universes is out until we can predict planetary motion in alternative universes and we have craft capable of velocities that allow us to correct for the travel time differentials between universes. Once we do that...We have to deal with our odds, as explained earlier.<br />
<br />
This is wicked complex and most people have no clue how complex this really is because fiction makes it seem as if it is nothing.<br />
<br />
Just dealing with travel to other planets is, literally, dealing with astronomical odds, even if we try alternative universes.<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-35745829536621148422016-07-04T08:54:00.001-04:002016-07-04T08:54:53.586-04:00biogas digesters in poverty level communitiesI like biogas digesters. They offer an incredible tool to eliminate diseases caused by contact with waste products while generating a natural gas which can be used for cooking and heating as well as a high quality organic fertilizer.<br />
<br />
<br />
Sociological studies show that people living in poverty tend to be predominantly Kinesthetic learners. This makes sense because our success depends a lot on how well we get along with other people, which depends on our learning and communication style.<br />
<br />
Biogas digesters are not "set and forget" systems. They require discipline and constant maintenance. Digestible waste products must be added every day. Using a biogas digester requires a commitment to shovelingfresh shit on a daily basis.<br />
<br />
Biogas digesters often fail, primarily because of improper use and maintenance. I would really like to find a teacher with expertise in kinesthetic education who can develop a training program for using and maintaining a biogas digester system.<br />
<br />
Generally, documentation on these kinds of projects is absent. That represents a challenge.<br />
<br />
To address the problems with improper use and maintenance would take several steps. The first is documenting failed biogas projects. The second is documenting the type of digester used and the proper use and maintenance of the digester. The third is developing a kinesthetic program to educate operators in the proper use and maintenance of the systems. Fourth is to actually teach. Fifth is to constantly review and improve the education system.<br />
<br />
<br /><div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-17007544147424474492016-06-28T15:26:00.002-04:002016-06-28T15:27:37.021-04:00Archaeology, Sherlock Holmes and MetacognitionI'm going to take another class in archeology, which means I am probably taking a class with an instructor who learned basic logic watching reruns of Sherlock Holmes movies.<br />
<br />
Sherlock Holmes rarely used deduction. Holmes used abduction based on induction.<br />
<br />
Lets take a common scene. Super detective notices a man with some specific details, for Holmes in the 1890s this could mean what appears to be drips of wax on his coat cuff, shaggy, uncut hair, a hat that appears to need brushing. Notice "appears". We can't make absolute statements based on simple observation. What looks like wax probably is wax, but, might be something else. Holmes "deduces" that the man is unmarried because no self respecting wife would allow her husband to leave the house in such a state.<br />
<br />
First, this is induction because it moves from the specific to the general.<br />
<br />
Second, this is abduction because the conclusion uses an unproved hypothesis as the basis for the conclusion. There is no evidence that wives actually care about their husbands or that caring for a husband means grooming them or that men are incapable of grooming themselves.<br />
<br />
Because fiction refers to this process of "abduction" as "deduction" most people can't tell a fact from bullshit.<br />
<br />
Anthropology and Sociology are primarily deductive meaning, typically, the study moves from the general to the specific. We want to understand a community so we study the community and then we study individuals within the community.<br />
<br />
Deduction always results in a fact. Induction always results in a probability. Abduction is speculation, which is why we generally don't discuss abduction in science, except in the context of fiction like the super detectives on television.<br />
<br />
This is not to say that an Anthropological or Sociological study will always result in a fact, just that anthropology and sociology can develop facts.<br />
<br />
Archeology is necessarily inductive. Archeology examines something specific, an artifact, and induces probabilities about that object based on studies of community.<br />
<br />
Archeology also uses a lot of abduction or speculation based on probabilities theories.<br />
<br />
Reading books by Dillehay, Meltzer and Adovasio and their focus on how their abductive inferences are "true" is a hilarious ride through egotistical and logical stupidity.<br />
<br />
Not looking forward to trying to deal with this stupid bullshit. They call themselves archaeostars! Adovasio does anyway.<br />
<br />
Fortunately, there has been some common sense and logic injected into the process and the application of archaeological theory is called "archaeological inference", meaning that the application of archaeological theory to specific artifacts creates inferences, not facts.<br />
<br />
This is different from the application of scientific analysis of artifacts which produces probabilities, like age and specifics like composition or DNA analysis.<br />
<br />
These facts about an artifact are collected. Archaeological theory is applied and abductive inferences about the artifact are developed. Supposedly archaeologists know that these are not facts, they are inferences, but, reading the egotistical arguments in Dillehay, Meltzer and Adovasio tells me that these people actually believe their inferences should be accepted as "fact" or "truth" or "reality".<br />
<br />
It makes me want to puke.<br />
<br />
But, at least there is a semi reasonable process we can call kind of scientific. Not that I expect any archaeologist I meet to actually understand the difference between reality and speculation.<br />
<br />
Thus, metacognition or knowing the difference between knowing what we know, what we believe and the difference between knowing and believing. <div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-7333419631953883242016-06-25T11:17:00.001-04:002016-06-25T11:17:12.238-04:00Einstein is full of shitThe problem with infinity is that most people cannot comprehend the concept. For example, there is the infinite set of integers and the infinite set of real numbers between each and every integer.<br />
<br />
So the infinite set contains an infinite set of infinite sets. A lot of people would consider this fairly useless mental masturbation, however, understanding the difference between infinity and practical limits is wicked critical.<br />
<br />
For example, mathematically if we start at zero and calculate the distance between point A and point B as "D" and attempt to use division, as in B=(B-A)/2, to define the steps necessary to reach B we enter the infinite set between the finite set of (A,B) because we are using that infinite set as a function, or a portion, of the finite set.<br />
<br />
In reality though what we have done is confused units from the finite to the infinite.<br />
<br />
It is like the old joke about the engineer and the mathematician, the math guy can't talk to a pretty girl because he moves towards her in a proportional function of the finite distance which results in a curve that can never achieve intersection.<br />
<br />
The engineer uses an interval function which results in a straight line that intersects.<br />
<br />
The engineer meets the girl while the mathematician becomes stuck in an infinite loop.<br />
<br />
So the question is, when accelerating do we move based on the addition of energy or do we move based on the multiplication of a proportional velocity or mass?<br />
<br />
In fact, since energy is mass, as we expend energy to achieve velocity we reduce mass because we are working, from a practical application, with the addition of energy and the subtraction of mass rather than the multiplication of proportional velocities and proportional masses which can only result in an infinite mathematical loop.<br />
<br />
And that is why Einstein is full of shit.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-50898320527807977082016-06-21T13:38:00.001-04:002016-06-21T13:38:14.597-04:00Christ is a Fat, depressed, drunk?<div data-contents="true">
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="b0ob0-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="b0ob0-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="b0ob0-0-0"><span data-text="true">If Christ came back as a fat, depressed drunk carrying a sidearm would you flock to him?</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="88plk-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="88plk-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="88plk-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="117qq-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="117qq-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="117qq-0-0"><span data-text="true">Matt 11:19 describes Christ as a Glutton. If I described an emaciated man as a glutton people would think me crazy. The idols, or icons, we make generally depict an emaciated man, but, if Christ had been emaciated describing him as a glutton would have destroyed the credibility of those describing Christ. Scripture describes Christ as being a glutton, overweight, fat.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="4eoco-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4eoco-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4eoco-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="c1p74-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c1p74-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c1p74-0-0"><span data-text="true">Luke 7:34 describes Christ as a winebibber. Someone who drinks too much wine. A drunk. This is not as easy to prove as a being overweight, but, it doesn't matter. Christ is perceived as, and described as, a drunk by people.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="cc3nc-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc3nc-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cc3nc-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="4ppu2-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4ppu2-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4ppu2-0-0"><span data-text="true">Isaiah 53:3 tells us that Christ is a man of sorrows, rejected and despised. Depressed in the current language.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="a5eg4-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="a5eg4-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="a5eg4-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="bcm01-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bcm01-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="bcm01-0-0"><span data-text="true">Luke 22:36 describes Christ as telling his disciples to sell their clothes and buy swords, the popular sidearm of the era. We know one of the swords belonged to Peter, John 18:10. Who carried the other sword? Was a Christ a “do as I say, not as I do” kind of guy or was Christ a “do as I do” kind of guy? If Christ is a “do as I do” we can assume he carried that second sword. We know he attacked people in the temple with a scourge, similar to what he was whipped with. John 2:15</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="4g4em-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="4g4em-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="4g4em-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="blln5-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="blln5-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="blln5-0-0"><span data-text="true">Scripture describes Christ, arguably, as a fat, depressed drunk carrying and using a weapon.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="cuviv-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cuviv-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="cuviv-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="c65ob-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c65ob-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c65ob-0-0"><span data-text="true">In our culture, and many others, this description is derogatory and truthfully the reason Christ was crucified, despised and rejected because people perceived of him as being a “bad person”.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="c5kcc-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c5kcc-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c5kcc-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="raeq-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="raeq-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="raeq-0-0"><span data-text="true">I figure history repeats so when Christ comes back he will be perceived of as a bad person by most people, just as he was two thousand years ago.</span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="c0pv-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="c0pv-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="c0pv-0-0"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="c718q" data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0"><span data-text="true">I'm ready for that because God opened my eyes. I look around and I see many people who have their own idea, just as the Jewish people did, of a conquering hero rather than a fat depressed drunk. I know God does things God's way and is not really interested in submitting to the will of people.</span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0"><span data-text="true"> </span></span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0">
<span data-offset-key="9p0ps-0-0"><span data-text="true">I don't depend on my understanding of how Christ is going to be when Christ comes back. I'm going to depend on recognizing Christ's voice, however people describe Christ.</span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-38442514257350124882016-06-20T13:21:00.001-04:002016-06-20T13:21:12.549-04:00Firearm liability and black marketsSome idiots are trying to sue the group that manufactured the rifle used in the Sandyhook elementary school shooting. Bushmaster is owned by Cerberus Capital through a subsidiary called "Freedom Group".<br />
<br />
This is a frivolous lawsuit. The suit itself cannot be won, it is intended as an intimidation device to be used to extort money from a firearms manufacturer.<br />
<br />
The problem is that these kinds of situations increase black market activity.<br />
<br />
It is not illegal to use the justice system in the United States to cost corporations money by suing them. It is a misuse of the justice system, a perversion, a way of causing damages legally.<br />
<br />
Lawsuits are expensive to address and there are many, many different tricks that some lawyers use to cause damages to other legally.<br />
<br />
This creates anger and sometimes a desire to obtain revenge. Since the misuse of the system was designed to stop a manufacturer from making something, some of those people who have been unemployed, or consumers who enjoyed the products produced by the organization, as a result of the immoral and unjust acts of extortion can obtain revenge by manufacturing the products in hiding.<br />
<br />
This has been true of alcohol, recreational drugs like ecstasy or meth, revolutionary pamphlets and weapons.<br />
<br />
When people engage in excessive punitive activities, as determined by those being punished, consumers, employees, supporters, those being "punished" often rebel. Make no mistake, "fans" identify with the object of their attention and feel "hurt" when what or who ever they are fans of is "punished", especially unfairly. Sometimes with hidden, impotent actions like spitting in food. Sometimes by blowing up federal office buildings. Often doing something inbetween these extremes.<br />
<br />
These actions may very well cause Bushmaster to go out of business, but, the unfair way that the legal system is being misused will cause animosity.<br />
<br />
This is incredibly stupid and it will backfire. Most people are like me, they will just go build their own. Some people are not, some people are wacked and some people are going to do wacked things because they are angry about inequity.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-57698090962458362092016-06-18T17:27:00.001-04:002016-06-18T17:27:58.099-04:00Electromagnetic firing pinWhat happens if we use an electromagnetic tubular push solenoid as a firing pin?<br />
<br />
No, I'm not going to explain specific forces required. I am not exactly sure what I used or of the legality of this exactly or the liability if some idiot tries this at home.<br />
<br />
It is a home made gun and that much is legal. I used a 24 inch long pipe so the barrel would be legal. The gun couldn't be carried since it required a car battery and I dissembled it years ago. I built it from junk I had in the garage one night about twenty five years ago, just something to do. I showed a couple of friends, but, it was fricking LOUD! and reasonably useless, so just an experiment. Motorcycle backfire can be a excellent excuse for loud noises. Just make sure your neighbors know that you work on cars or motorcycles so they aren't surprised at loud bangs.<br />
<br />
There is discussion about this on the web and there are a lot if idiots suggesting that anyone who tries this should be nominated for the Darwin awards. People have done this. I've done this. No trouble, just be smart about it, or you could blow yourself up, so, don't do this at home.<br />
<br />
The force required to activate a primer is a funny thing, it is actually pressure, not really force. Pressure is force distributed over an area. We call it force, 21psi of force, 15 newtons of force, etc, but, really, pressure is force distributed over area.<br />
<br />
Most firing pins, centerfire, are rounded at the end. If you look at solenoids you might discover that they have different ratings based on the diameter of the rod the solenoid is moving. A "1000" gram solenoid becomes "2000" grams when the diameter of the rod is smaller. 454 grams are roughly a pound of force. A 2000 gram solenoid is roughly, 4 pounds.<br />
<br />
If you get a double head nail, double head nails are the "McGyver" home gunsmithing "easy peasy" firing pins, cut the head off and round it or just round the point of a normal nail. Put it in an electric drill, have someone hold the drill and file the point round. That makes a fair firing pin for any zip gun<br />
<br />
By reducing the area of the force, you have increased the mechanical advantage. Truthfully, a 2000 gram solenoid will probably punch right through some primers once it is attached to a firing pin.<br />
<br />
Now, depending on what someone is firing the rest of the rig is important. Shotgun shells are not really high pressure, smooth bore, all that. Still, they need something strong enough to absorb the recoil. 3/4 inch black pipe with a pipe cap will do, but, make sure the rounded point reaches the primer. I've filled the pipe cap with different things. I like rubber hose washers, make sure the cap threads on securely and the pipe washer pushes the shotgun shell firmly into the barrel.<br />
<br />
If you attach the nail to the solenoid it will move in and out of the hole drilled in the pipe cap. Use a fired shell to set the distance from the pipe to the solenoid. I used U clamps for pipe into a 2x4 for the pipe. The solenoid was square. I had to notch the 2x4 for it and I used a simple C clamp to hold the solenoid in place.<br />
<br />
I C clamped the thing to my work bench and I used shotgun shells I had pulled the shot from. Getting the alignment and the stroke right was the hardest part. I only fired it a couple of times and it did work. <br />
<br />
I also considered drilling a couple of holes in the primers on fired shot gun shells and using nicrome wire or Estes rocket igniters to set off the reloaded shot gun shell, but, I never did do that.<br />
<br />
Doing stuff is fun, building stuff is fun. Messing with guns can be dangerous, so if you ever do any home gun smithing or reloading remember that it's dangerous and be careful. Shove a hunk of 1 1/4 pipe over the 3/4 pipe if you are worried about the breech pressure. Some epoxy will keep it in place.<br />
<br />
Now, some idiot is going to claim I "encouraged" some other idiot to do something stupid. I'm not encouraging anyone to do this, I'm just explaining how I did it and how it can be done. So, don't try this at home.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-91568099811000771262016-06-18T10:50:00.003-04:002016-06-18T10:50:26.525-04:00"righteousness", genocide and Internet StalkersOne of the things that amazes me is people who have no control in their lives. These are the abusers, the people who are constantly trying to force people to abide by their beliefs.<br />
<br />
Parents beating children into submission. Anonymous blackmailing, extorting and intimidating people. Bullies at school. Politicians. Religious fanatics.<br />
<br />
I'm opinionated and I'm not shy about sharing my opinions. They are generally well thought out, and when they are not I generally learn something from an exchange. I'm not perfect and I fall into the same traps others fall into, I just do it less often and I spend more time educating myself.<br />
<br />
But, there are those who cloak themselves in "righteousness" and they stalk people, abusing them, "for the greater good". They become the inciters of genocide, killing those people "who are not right".<br />
<br />
I've always been amazed at them, the older I've gotten the more amazed I have been. I thought it hilarious when righteous fanatics in anonymous adopted the image of a righteous religious fanatic who tried to kill King James for having the Bible translated into English.<br />
<br />
Like most of us, Julian Assange, anonymous, are not perfect. In some cases they do a lot of good. Wikileaks is a perfect example of an organization which increases public transparency of oppressive organizations. Extorting popstars or whatever is a perfect example of oppressive scum.<br />
<br />
Like ignorance, abusive behavior is something we all engage in.<br />
<br />
The word "schooled" is a synonym for "humiliating defeat" because teachers, those we entrust to educate ourselves and our children often humiliate students. We see it in movies. We see it in classrooms. We laugh. We do the same things, like teachers, like parents, we bully, ridicule and humiliate each other.<br />
<br />
Christianity is interesting because, alone among religions, it teaches forgiveness through faith. All other religions teach punishment. Christ teaches that if we have a problem with another person we shouldn't have anything to do with that person. Matthew 18. There is no punishment in the New Testament. Everyone who repents and believes is saved, regardless of their sins. The last becomes first and the first becomes last because all are equal.<br />
<br />
Most Christians don't hear that. They hear the same old story from all other religions, karma, law, good behavior, social hierarchy, secures a place in paradise and they demand punishment. It is sad. The book is there, most can read, few actually think about what they read.<br />
<br />
We see what we want to see. We see our own righteousness and without being psychotic there is no way to be completely emotionally detached and totally objective.<br />
<br />
We can train ourselves provided we decide we will learn. Few do, and that amazes me.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-51810448353785764232016-06-17T11:58:00.003-04:002016-06-17T11:58:52.720-04:00Friearms RestrictionsFirearms restrictions<br />
<br />
It is basic economics that the market in any product is driven by demand and the ability to provide a supply.<br />
<br />
There is a demand for a cancer cure and people willing to supply that demand so there is a market in cancer cures. Do they work? I'm no medical professional, but, I would say most of the cures for cancer being sold are less than effective. This is simply an example of demand creating a supply.<br />
<br />
There is a demand for recreational drugs and there is a supply. We call this the "war on drugs". Prescription drugs are widely available in this black market despite attempts at rigid market controls. Precursors for meth are controlled and meth is still available because there is a demand and there are people willing to supply that demand.<br />
<br />
The United Nations has been battling illegal firearms manufacturing for years. When the British were occupying Israel the Israelis built hidden, illegal, factories that produced firearms and ammunition. Google "illegal firearms manufacturers" and read about busts of people illegally making guns here in the states.<br />
<br />
As market controls increase, black market activity increases. As long as there is a demand there will be a supply. Period. Increasing regulations will only increase black market activity and create a "war" that makes the "war on drugs" look like a playground fight.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12657029.post-57321844587804259882016-06-17T11:58:00.000-04:002016-06-17T11:58:04.823-04:00U.S. GenocideU.S. Genocide<br />
<br />
The United States has participated in at least two genocides, Africans and Native Americans. Both of these were politically supported primarily by the Democrats. Andrew Jackson used a donkey to represent that he was too stubborn to be swayed by abolitionists or those advocating for Native Americans. The Democrats still use that symbol.<br />
<br />
It is very much like having the NAZI party around. During WW2 the Democrats controlled the government and rounded up ethnic people, Japanese, German, Italian, and put them in camps. I don't know exactly how many died during that round up, but, genocide is defined by targeting and killing people based on ethnicity. I don't think there is a specific number attached.<br />
<br />
Although, calling the rounding up of people and causing the death of, hundreds, thousands, A genocide does seem to detract from the genocides of Africans, Native Americans and Jews....<div class="blogger-post-footer">Copyright by John D. Ayer. All Rights Reserved.</div>John D. Ayerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08662722377040114818noreply@blogger.com0