Benevolence

Benevolence and self-direction (described below) are usually near the top of the values we all share. Each of us also has an internal hierarchy of values, where we rank our values based on those we find extremely important to those that don’t really motivate us at all.

~ Chris Bailey, from There are just 10 basic values

slip:4ucite3.

Benevolence—in my opinion—only pops up on our radar once we have enough time, energy and resources. Whether or not it’s clear in that moment, that’s because we, for the first time, manage an honest look back and actually realize all the places where we’ve received help from others. So that’s nice for ourselves, but also for the entire human race.

ɕ

Variance

However—fourth—over the last century there’s a huge relationship between how rich a country is and the variance in growth. The richest countries have low variance: They all stubbornly keep growing at around the same 1 or 2%. However, middle-income countries vary enormously.

~ “Dynomight” from, Do economies tend to converge or diverge?

slip:4udyaa1.

There’s several different interesting threads in this article. But this point about variance leapt out at me. I’m reminded of how just the other day, a piece about statistics that I mentioned was talking about variance (if you clicked through and read the article.) Variance feels like a sort of second-order thinking that I probably should be doing more often.

ɕ

That’s not what I had assumed

Khan’s first powerful victories came from the reorganization of his military units, splitting his soldiers into groups of ten. This he stole from neighboring Turkic tribes, and unknowingly converted the Mongols to the decimal system. Soon enough, their expanding empire brought them into contact with another “technology” they’d never experienced before: walled cities. In the Tangut raids, Khan first learned the ins and outs of war against fortified cities and the strategies critical to laying siege, and quickly became an expert. Later, with help from Chinese engineers, he taught his soldiers how to build siege machines that could knock down city walls. In his campaigns against the Jurched, Khan learned the importance of winning hearts and minds. By working with the scholars and royal family of the lands he conquered, Khan was able to hold on to and manage these territories in ways that most empires could not. Afterward, in every country or city he held, Khan would call for the smartest astrologers, scribes, doctors, thinkers, and advisers—anyone who could aid his troops and their efforts. His troops traveled with interrogators and translators for precisely this purpose.

~ Shane Parrish from, Ego is the Enemy: The Legend of Genghis Khan

slip:4ufoeo1.

My understanding had been that Khan was a slew of things—vicious, ruthless, indefatigable, insatiable—which I’m certain I’d picked up through osmosis from countless small direct portrayals and indirect mentions I encountered randomly. I try not to rely on entertainment to be educating, but I hadn’t looked into this larger-than-life historical figure, and had wound up ill-informed.

This piece from Shane Parrish goes on to talk about humility. I don’t think anyone would have used that word to describe Khan. But it does make sense! What would someone who is humble do? (Click through. Click through!) They’d be continuously learning and always open to new ideas. They’d be searching for people who can teach them things. Sure, Khan went a step or three further to burn, pillage, etc. But he also did that continuous-improvement thing.

ɕ

Experience

So does experience really make you an expert? What does it actually mean to be one? It turns out, we don’t learn from experience in many contexts.

~ Shane Parrish from, Robyn Dawes: Does Experience Make You an Expert?

slip:4ufodo2.

You’re really good—an expert even one might say—at many things. But being really good at something… Having a lot of experience doing that something… Does that make you an expert? I think those things are not sufficient. To be an expert one must also explicitly understand the principles underlying the activity. I’m very good at sitting on chairs—but I’ve never studied chairs; their design, their mechanical structure, their aesthetics. I’m not expert.

ɕ

When is the last time you did nothing?

Blaise Pascal famously said that all human miseries arise from our inability to do this. But I think it’s really just an unwillingness. He’s right about the arising miseries though—not knowing how to deliberately do nothing is a crippling disease that leads to bizarre, self-defeating phenomena like workaholism, cigarette smoking, rude smartphone behavior (see below) and eventually war and pestilence.

~ David Cain from, 4 Absurdly Easy Things I Do That Make Life Disproportionately Better

slip:4uraau1.

Not to be confused with, “doing something that doesn’t advance you towards a goal.” That’s still doing something. A lot of people spend a lot time doing all sorts of that busy-nothing; I see you on the street, in your car, at the cafe, the glow of the TV in your homes, and I can tell by the words that I overhear that all that stuff is important to you. There’s a good book, What Makes Your Brain Happy: And Why You Should Do the Opposite, which I offer for your consideration.

No, I’m asking about “doing nothing” as in sitting, or perhaps lying down, and being fully aware of the reality around you. For many years, I ran in terror from doing nothing. I ran to my todo lists or my goals or my habits designed to improve my life or my TV or my fiction books…

I started by intentionally setting out—if even for a few minutes—to do nothing. I’ve gotten pretty darn good at it these days. What I’m currently practicing is learning that doing nothing is the good stuff I should not feel guilty about.

Why not go do nothing right now?

ɕ

Lions and tigers and bears oh my

Imagine if the NFL had to choose between receiving taxpayer funds or allowing its players to exercise their First Amendment rights. Imagine if Facebook had to choose between Section 230 immunity and incorporating the First Amendment into its terms and conditions. Imagine if the First Amendment got the shot in the arm that it desperately needs.

~ Marc J. Randazza from, «https://www.popehat.com/2018/06/19/randazza-trump-twitter-the-nfl-and-everything/»

This article is rabid. I mean, feces-flinging monkies rabid.

…and suggests a really intriguing idea: What if, in order to receive federal money, or other special consideration from the Federal Government, that entity had to incorporate the principles of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constituation?

This spun me off on a tangent I had once followed long ago: The Constitutional Law concept of “incorporation.”

Question: It is obvious that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution restricts the U.S. Federal government. But does it also restrict each of the State governments?

What if your State constitution happens to NOT have free-speech protections built into it? Would that mean the State could limit your speech? What about all those other layers of government below the State government? What about all the other protections in the U.S. Constitution?

I mean– I bet you just ASSUMED the First Amendment protected you all the way down to your local government.

It turns out that the Judiciary, around the turn of the twentieth century, has been following a principle called “incorporation.” Thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution saying that States cannot deprive people of “liberty” without “due process of law” … BAM! The first Amendment is incorporated in “due process of law”!

…and then that made me nervous because it seems a little tenuous.

Try this: constitutional law concept of incorporation

…or Wikipedia’s, “Incorporation, in United States law, is the doctrine by which portions of the Bill of Rights have been made applicable to the states. When the Bill of Rights was first ratified, courts held that its protections only extended to the actions of the federal government and that the Bill of Rights did not place limitations on the authority of state and local governments.”

Wait, “portions”?! Oh this is sounding sketchy…

ɕ

co-pilot

navigation, cop watch, and awesome driving live-mix… cellular downloads– when you absolutely positely haveto be there, overnight.

ɕ

Overly simple energy-economy models give misleading answers

It is not intuitive, but complexity-related issues create a situation in which economies need to grow, or they will collapse. See my post, The Physics of Energy and the Economy. The popular idea that we extract 50% of a resource before peak, and 50% after peak will be found not to be true–much of the second 50% will stay in the ground.

~ Gail Tverberg from, Overly Simple Energy-Economy Models Give Misleading Answers | Our Finite World

slip:4uouoe1.

ɕ

Hermann Hesse on the three types of readers and why the most transcendent form of reading Is non-reading

For this reader follows the poet not the way a horse obeys his driver but the way a hunter follows his prey, and a glimpse suddenly gained into what lies beyond the apparent freedom of the poet, into the poet’s compulsion and passivity, can enchant him more than all the elegance of good technique and cultivated style.

~ Hermann Hesse from, Hermann Hesse on the Three Types of Readers and the Most Transcendent Form of Reading – The Marginalian

slip:4ubahe4.

ɕ

The Fukushima disaster continues

…if you manage to bust a fuel element, the best outcome is that huge amounts of radioactivity escape into the air and blow over Japan, just like before. The worst outcome is when two of these things get too close, perhaps because in pulling one out it breaks and falls against another one in the tank. Because then you suddenly have lots of fission, a lot of heat, a meltdown, possibly a big blast like before, and the destruction of the entire cooling pond. Or else the water boils off and the whole thing catches fire.

~ From, «http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/alert-fukushima-worse-than-chernobyl-now-in-crisis»

ɕ