“Congressional hearing on UFOs just ended. Serious, diligent. Absolutely stunning testimony. Hard to walk away from this thinking anything other than there’s something profound happening on our planet that we do not understand.”
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): “How do you know that these [UAPs] were not our aircraft?”
Former Navy fighter pilot Ryan Graves: “These objects were staying completely stationary in Category 4 hurricane winds. These same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds.”
The Recount, July 26, 2023
RECOUNT (@THERECOUNT)
The Inexorable Truth: The Case for Unearthing Extraterrestrial Secrets
In the age-old cosmic debate on the existence of non-human life, one truth remains increasingly apparent: if proof of extraterrestrial existence is hidden within the vaults of global governments, the clock is ticking toward an inevitable disclosure. The question now is not so much ‘if’ but ‘when’.
Tales of strange lights, puzzling aircraft, and close encounters have circulated for decades. These narratives, once consigned to the fringe, have gradually weaved themselves into the fabric of the mainstream, fanning the flames of public curiosity.
If there exists irrefutable evidence of such cosmic neighbors — proof tucked away in the dark, classified corners of government operations — the truth may prove too large to remain under wraps indefinitely. As the saying goes, “Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead.” The axiom likely also applies in the interstellar arena.
The Evolution of Transparency: A Step Towards Revelation
Scrutinizing the historical arc of governmental disclosure, there appears an intriguing trend: an evolution from near-complete secrecy to a progressively open dialogue on UFO phenomena. The trend is indicative of a slow yet purposeful march towards transparency.
The U.S. government, once notorious for its silence, has recently declassified an array of UFO-related documents, thrusting the discussion of extraterrestrial life into the public forum. This release marked a radical shift from the days of Project Blue Book, the U.S. Air Force’s attempt to debunk UFO sightings in the 1950s and 60s.
From the international lens, countries such as France and Chile have taken active strides towards greater transparency in this arena. The French unit, GEIPAN, housed within the national space agency, CNES, and Chile’s CEFAA are some of the entities leading the charge on officially sanctioned UFO inquiries. The actions of these organizations exemplify a broader trend toward increased governmental openness.
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN): “How do you know that these [UAPs] were not our aircraft?”
Former Navy fighter pilot Ryan Graves: “These objects were staying completely stationary in Category 4 hurricane winds. These same objects would then accelerate to supersonic speeds.” pic.twitter.com/qQiOEJAgL4
Subtle Clues: The Inference of Other-Worldly Existence
Amid the ongoing debate, certain peculiar instances have emerged that could potentially imply the existence of extraterrestrial life. These instances, be they the puzzling flight patterns exhibited by UAPs or the inexplicably advanced technology they seem to display, provoke more questions than answers.
The 2004 USS Nimitz encounter, with its baffling infrared footage, is a standout episode that both skeptics and believers continue to pore over. Similarly, the 1980 Rendlesham Forest incident in the UK, which involved multiple, highly credible witnesses, remains a tantalizing hint of non-human life. Each of these instances, among countless others, signal toward a reality we are only just beginning to comprehend.
The Dawn of Disclosure: An Inevitable Future
As we stand on the precipice of, what may turn out to be a brave new world, where advanced tracking technologies and an increasingly demanding public make the concealing of UFO-related evidence increasingly challenging, governments might be hard-pressed to maintain their customary tight-lipped stance indefinitely.
The trajectory of UFO discourse suggests an inevitable full disclosure could, indeed, lie in the not-too-distant future. This conclusion raises fascinating prospects: What would such a revelation mean for our society? How would it reshape our understanding of our place in the universe? And how ready are we to grapple with the magnitude of such an earth-shattering truth? Do we cry?, laugh?, succumb to our darkest fears?
While the timing and nature of this prospective disclosure remain speculative, one thing seems certain. Whether it emerges as a sudden revelation or a gradual unmasking, the unveiling of the extraterrestrial secret — if it indeed exists — may be closer than we dare to imagine. The cosmic curtain, it seems, is set to rise.
Everything, everywhere, all at once things are looking scary…
These words echo the pervasive fear that Moloch, the demon, has instilled across cultures and epochs. A dark and ominous figure, Moloch’s name resonates through the annals of mythology, religious texts, and literature, evoking malevolence and sacrificial rituals. But beyond the ancient tales, the enduring fascination with Moloch finds uncanny parallels in the daunting challenges of our modern world.
Origins of Moloch:
Tracing Moloch’s origins reveals an ancient deity revered in Canaanite and Semitic cultures. Worshiped with chilling devotion, Moloch demanded the ultimate price—the lives of innocent infants, immolated as offerings. Archaeological evidence and ancient texts shed light on this haunting practice, spreading through regions like Carthage with Phoenician settlers.
Malevolent Entity in Religious Texts:
The Hebrew Bible holds accounts of Moloch’s abominable presence. Leviticus and the Book of Jeremiah recount sacrifices of children to appease Moloch, a pagan god. Prophets vehemently condemned such practices, denouncing them as an affront to the one true God.
Literary Examples:
In John Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” Moloch emerges as a fallen angel, wielding a warrior-like spirit against Heaven. Fierce and revengeful, Moloch’s pride-driven actions serve as a cautionary tale of the dangers of arrogance and blind obedience.
Allen Ginsberg’s “Howl” takes Moloch from the realm of deities to that of industrial society. In a metaphorical twist, Moloch embodies the voracious appetite of consumerism, devouring souls in the relentless pursuit of profit.
H.P. Lovecraft’s Cthulhu Mythos weaves Moloch into a tapestry of cosmic horror. A fearsome demon, Moloch personifies chaos and malevolence, contributing to an eerie atmosphere in Lovecraft’s stories.
Modern Manifestations of Moloch:
As the ages have turned, Moloch’s concept metamorphoses into a metaphorical entity, embodying contemporary malevolence and exploitation. Though not directly linked to the ancient deity, Moloch finds relevance in modern challenges.
Consumerism and Materialism stand as symbols of rampant Moloch in today’s society. The insatiable hunger for profit leads to environmental exploitation and disregards ethical considerations.
Technological Advancements bring forth ethical dilemmas akin to Moloch’s temptation. The pursuit of progress may sacrifice ethical considerations in AI, privacy, and autonomous weapons development.
Societal Inequality and Exploitation mirror ancient sacrificial practices. The concentration of wealth and power, sacrificing the vulnerable for the privileged, perpetuates oppression.
Political and Ideological Extremism advocates for sacrificing liberties and human rights for perceived greater goods. Moloch-like ideologies prioritize agendas over the well-being of citizens.
Loss of Human Connection and Empathy epitomizes modern Moloch. The pursuit of efficiency detaches humans from genuine interactions, leading to social isolation.
Present-day Parallels and Connections:
Climate change, nuclear war, and mass extinction loom as existential Molochs. Humanity’s actions endanger the environment and perpetuate conflict, risking global catastrophe.
Moloch is not exclusive to any one tradition. Across cultures, figures like Baal Hammon, Tiamat, Thanatos, Mephistopheles, Mara, and Ahriman embody similar malevolence, guiding societies through their cyclical rise and fall.
As humanity faces modern Molochs, the call for reflection and action grows. Climate change’s wrath reflects Moloch’s destructive tendencies, while nuclear war mimics ancient sacrifices for greater ambitions. As technology advances, the temptation to sacrifice ethical values to progress evokes Moloch’s lure.
In the cyclical concept of Yugas, Moloch’s presence remains timeless, extending from ancient rituals to contemporary global challenges. It serves as a cautionary symbol, compelling us to confront the malevolence within and around us.
Perhaps, amidst the darkness of Moloch, humanity finds its true test—to transcend and seek a brighter future, united in purpose and compassion. The ancient demon’s legacy reminds us that within these trials lie the seeds of transformation, offering hope that we can emerge wiser, stronger, and more resilient. For in the face of Moloch, we learn that the courage to face malevolence and forge a better world is humanity’s ultimate strength.
Now that ChatGPT Pro is in the wild a comparison is even more useful…
Though each has unique features and strengths, with the possibility that subscription fees will be required for top performance, choosing what works best for your particular needs becomes more important.
The free version of ChatGPT has been a huge success with more than a million users in the first week of release. Jasper AI is a leader in a similar space but with a focus on business applications.
“OpenAI is a partner of Jasper’s and GPT 3.5 is one of the language models we use in our platform. Jasper Chat is different than ChatGPT in that it is built for business use cases like marketing, sales and more. But both interfaces offer a way to make AI much more accessible to the audiences they serve.”
The field of artificial intelligence continues to advance, and businesses and individuals alike are becoming more and more reliant on natural language processing (NLP) models. From chatbots to document summarization, these models are being used to automate a wide range of tasks and processes, improving productivity and efficiency.
Two of the leading NLP models on the market today are ChatGPT and Jasper AI. Both of these models are built using cutting-edge AI and machine learning techniques, and both are capable of providing highly accurate and sophisticated results. However, there are some important differences between the two models that are worth exploring. In this article, we’ll take a closer look at ChatGPT vs Jasper AI and help you determine which model is the best fit for your needs.
Key Features and Functionality
One of the key differences between ChatGPT and Jasper AI is the range of features and functionality that each model offers. ChatGPT is designed to be a highly versatile model that can be used for a wide range of NLP tasks, including text generation, question answering, sentiment analysis, and more. Jasper AI, on the other hand, is can do many of the same tasks but is specifically designed for use in business related activities like marketing and customer service applications, such as chatbots and virtual assistants.
The uses for both are constantly expanding. According to Krista Doyle, SEO at Jasper, Jasper’s best use-case today is content-forward marketing and sales teams at scaling companies.
In terms of text generation, both models are highly capable. ChatGPT uses a deep neural network to generate text that is both relevant and grammatically correct. Jasper AI uses a similar approach, but with a focus on ensuring that the generated text is customer-friendly and easy to understand.
In case you are wondering how Google is viewing the emerging world of articles and blog posts assisted by AI, here’s what Jasper AI says about it, which has been confirmed in tweets directly from Google:
“Google penalizes low-quality content. And frankly, we agree that it should. This is far more about quality of your writing than about the tools used to create it. If your AI-written content is low quality and doesn’t help readers, it’ll get dinged. If your HUMAN written content is low quality and doesn’t help readers, it’ll get dinged. There’s nothing inherent about the way that AI content is written that leaves a fingerprint, but any reader can suss out shallow writing.”
Krista Doyle, SEO, JASPER AI
Performance and Accuracy
When it comes to performance and accuracy, both ChatGPT and Jasper AI are leaders in their field. ChatGPT is known for its high level of accuracy, even when handling complex and nuanced text. Jasper AI is similarly accurate, but with a focus on delivering results that are both relevant and customer-friendly.
In terms of speed, ChatGPT is known for its fast processing times, even for large and complex text inputs. Jasper AI is similarly fast, but with a focus on delivering results that are both accurate and relevant.
Integration and Customization
Another important consideration when choosing between ChatGPT and Jasper AI is the level of integration and customization that each model offers. ChatGPT provides a highly flexible API that can be easily integrated with a wide range of applications and systems. Jasper AI offers similar levels of integration, but with a focus on ensuring that the model can be easily customized to meet the specific needs of different businesses and organizations.
The Bottom Line
So, which model is the better choice: ChatGPT or Jasper AI? The answer to this question will depend largely on your specific needs and requirements. If you’re looking for a versatile NLP model that can be used for a wide range of tasks and processes, then ChatGPT is the clear choice. However, if you’re looking for a model that is specifically designed for use in business, marketing and customer service applications, then Jasper AI is the way to go.
Clearly, both ChatGPT and Jasper AI are highly capable NLP models that are capable of delivering accurate and sophisticated results. Whether you choose ChatGPT or Jasper AI, particularly is you are choosing between the ChatGPT Pro plan and Jasper AI, you can be confident that you’re making a wise investment in the future of your business.
The stir created by the release of ChatGPT3 at the end of November in 2022 has been powerful and continues to grow. Articles written about the generative chatbot AI tool (currently with a free, and now also a “pro” version for $42) seem to multiply by the hour. And no one knows how many articles are also getting at least a partial assist from the service.
There are many that are tapping into the OpenAI API for ChatGPT and adding or extending functions and features, such as a brand new SincodeAI which comes out of Sweden and has front end features and an array of “60+ tools” that help users to guide ai in a variety of predetermined use cases, tailored for real world needs.
This kind of layered human guidance engine approach is an emerging category that is just now beginning to become viable as ChatGPT and other AI tools go live and improve.
On the horizon, even more ways to interact with AI bots, apps and tools
The embrace of generative AI, particularly for creating text based output from ChatGPT, has been swift. First was the admission by CNET that they had published nearly 100 articles using ChatGPT, and then, on January 26th 2023, Buzzfeed announced that they were in preparation to publish ChatGPT assisted content without apology.
As BuzzFeed co-founder Jonah Peretti wrote in a memo sent to staff members and published on the site:
“In 2023, you’ll see AI inspired content move from an R&D stage to part of our core business enhancing the quiz experience, informing our brainstorming, and personalizing our content for our audience. In tough economic times, we need to fight for every penny of revenue, and try to save every penny of costs”
This is, no doubt, the beginning of an avalanche of AI assisted content about to explode into being. Never mind all the hand wringing and soul searching going on in schools and by authors concerned for their livelihoods, the cat is out of the bag, the cow has left the barn, it’s all out there and there’s no turning back.
Google has already come to terms with an AI assisted world of content
As we noted in a recent post, Google has made it clear that it is not concerned with what tools (AI or otherwise) you may use to create content, but rather what it perceives as the quality of the final product. And, apparently, search result rankings will not be based or influenced by the presence or absence of AI “fingerprints”.
And regarding those sought after search results, there’s a new kid in town, an AI chat style search assistant is live and hitting the bricks with a confident swagger:
“Search is broken because of SEO spam, ads, and surveillance capitalism. Andi cuts through the clutter to get you straight to the knowledge you need. It presents results visually in a way that’s easy to understand with a simple chat interface, and protects you from ad tech and distraction.“
Andisearch.com is a “conversational search engine” that uses the now ever-more-familiar chatbot style interface to “to answer questions simply, find you the best information, and help you stay safe and productive online” according to the sites about us page.
I took a test drive and the result was…. refreshing, new and might just give Google yet another reason to be concerned about the future. Particularly on mobile, for which it appears to be designed, the uncluttered simple yet powerful interface is extremely functional and smooth.
There are a lot of takeaways – but the one that stands out in my mind is that they are living up to the promise of doing away with the “SEO spam, ads, and surveillance capitalism” – I test some urls that are “shadow banned” on Google search, or at least not favored for lack of benefit to Google, and they showed up loud and proud in the first result. That is huge.
If you have spent your life trying to win at rigging a rigged system, or paying to be favored in Google search results, that may not be a soothing thought. But if you want to see the most relevant search result as a user it’s hits like a revelation.
And if you want to see a bunch of results they are “boxed” into neat little packages, with logos letting you know what web site they are connected to, that you can scroll through like you are on TikTok or FlipBoard or any modern UX for browsing mobile results.
Compared to the various Google style “alternative” search engines this comes across as a real breakthrough – the conversational style – where you can ask using a ChatGPT style prompt and get a single descriptive answer – or you can do a more traditional search query and then get a scrollable batch of results that are presorted by relevance – depending on how detailed your query is you control the result, in theory.
The interface is so clean, if available within the results, there’s a separate tab for Images, again a clean single series of identically sized images, that can be downloaded or sent to a separate tab with incredible simplicity, as well as a tab for videos with the exact same UX style.
The “reader” view is not hidden but is the second choice at the bottom of each boxed result preview. The first choice is “visit” which opens a full page browser view of the site you’ve chosen. A third option called “Summarize” appears to be in development as it was not yet live at the time of this writing.
Desktop interface search results are clean, sleek and unbiased by spam or sponsored content
With simplicity comes speed and, perhaps, clarity
The overall result is a completely new, uncluttered experience for searching and discovering content. It is still unclear if the chatbot function, basically the ability to synthesize results based on the content of the target results, will prove powerful enough for this to be a two-for-one dream come true.
But just as a deeper, cleaner, faster and possibly better way to search and discover web content, it’s my choice ahead of Google, or at least side by side.
Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page
Most agree that it’s possible to identify AI generated content: what about partial and hybrid?
There’s a gold rush of sorts in the peripheral app market with an explosion of tools coming out with various ChatGPT related services. On the one side there are AI detectors, meant to identify “non-human” text, at the other end of the spectrum are rephrasing tools to help “cheaters” in schools, or perhaps just blog writers to disguise AI origins with minimal (human) work.
There is, by many, the assumption that Google is or will block or penalize any AI generated content in search results. At the same time companies like CNET, and recently announced Buzzfeed, plus undoubtedly many others, are already publishing or developing content written wholly or partially by AI.
Of course, many publishers have been using computer generated content for years in areas like the stock market and weather updates, where human text would be too expensive to use when the volume of ever changing data points is so high.
It is also questionable if the various apps even function as advertised. For example if a rephrasing app can fool a public AI detector can it also fool Google’s proprietary software?
The bigger issue is: why?
Derivative content and low quality information has been a staple of the online experience since the first bulletin board chat rooms of yore. Even if possible, is it necessary or clearly desirable to filter out all content that has an AI component from Google search results, for example?
Could this also be seen as an anticompetitive move to try to reduce the value of the software of a competitor? And what percentage of AI “infection” should be considered taboo? 90%? How about 47%? And if those percentages are calculated using tools that themselves have an error rate of 10% or more, what is really happening?
Will humans be rewarded by Google for not using AI to assist, at least not directly in content creation or publishing? If not, then how are those humans laboring at a disadvantage going to be able to compete with those that do take the assistance?
ChatGPT and other AI tools are already in circulation and growing
The output of ChatGPT is usually somewhat bland, and depending on the subject matter, often gleaned from obvious sources – it is designed to avoid misinformation by avoiding unusual “untrusted” sources.
This creates text that reads as “safe”, and while generally highly readable and grammatically accurate, is not particularly creative, at least not by human standards. My human prediction is that, with the horse already out of the barn, so to speak, there is no way for any sensible filter to be used that would eliminate AI generated text or AI influenced content from existing side by side with “pure” human generated content.
As Google was quoted to have indicated in tweets, basically, content is content and if it is well written and helpful for humans to read and use in human life, then it is just as good for consumption, with or without AI assistance. They point out that mainly content that is manufactured specifically to trick search engines is what they absolutely hope to filter, not all AI assisted content, even if that were possible. Simple right?
No chatbots were harmed in the making of this content
All that’s left then is the question of best uses for AI in the writing and content publishing process. Best, not in the sense of having AI “fingerprints” or not, but rather in the quality and usefulness of the final product. Same as it ever was. Right?
Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page
So if you're an SEO trying to figure out how AI fits in with being successful or not on Google, you're too focused on the tool not the content. Is the content you're producing helpful, reliable and people-first in nature? That's what we're looking for: https://t.co/rIKwa9fs7R
It’s normal for writers to keep repeating sound bites instead of looking deeper
So much nonsense has been written in the guise of outing the flaws of Open AI’s ChatGPT3 that it is hard to know where to begin. Let’s start by saying that this article will not be a systematic evaluation. There are other articles that you can find here and elsewhere that give a rundown of the various features and how they “rate” according to “experts”.
Secondly, the topic here is not the coding capabilities, or the possible uses beyond the primary strength of the chatbot, which is language. The main positive feedback seen is the speed and fluency of the responses. An obligatory mention of how it is “scary” and will improve, and then a jump to whose job is at risk.
Depending on who’s writing (humans I mean) the assessment runs the gamut from, “sorry dude my job is safe” to “we’re all F#cked”. The problem is that the various straw man arguments are based on shallow thought and misguided premises.
The infinite loop of inaccuracy fallacy
For example: the idea that, since ChatGPT 3 was trained using publicly available data, presumably a lot of it on the internet, that a kind of endless loop will form that takes bad data (what we already have on the internet) and then uses it to spit out diluted, worse, bad data, which is then regurgitated and…. You get the picture.
The problem with this theory is that humans are caught fully in this highway to hell already. Dumb humans write things and publish them on the internet, other dummer humans read that stuff and use it to write even dummer stuff, and so on. And then, Ouroboros, you’ve got the situation before ChatGPT arrived on scene.
Furthermore, if you ask ChatGPT to name sources and references you’ll see that, for the most part, they are far better and more carefully chosen than the average human research intern assistant at Buzzfeed. Or Daily Beast for that matter.
Similar to the grammar and spelling, which is, for the most part, impeccable, the sourcing is, if anything, too conservative. Paywall protected research sites come up often, for example.
So, in reality, there could be just about as much chance of ChatGPT “cleaning” and filtering the muck of the internet than there is the reverse, as so many have stated. Mistakes made by a chatbot? Of course. By humans, hahahahahah, to err is human, right?
The Real Situation, a.k.a. you are now a movie producer x3
A better fantasy analogy as to what this newfangled toy is all about would be to think about who pays writers (low level 1st draft writers) and what the output is for those employers when they do.
The obvious example does not even apply. If you want to have a writer churn out “news”, such as for example the inside dope on Kanye West’s new wife, you’re out of luck with ChatGPT, as the end of 2021 is a hard cutoff for available information (as of now).
So, how about fiction then? A caricature of movie making would be a good analogy. Say you have a movie producer, or director, or both, and neither are writers, and they don’t want to buy the rights to a novel or other property to adapt.
What do they do? They come up with a half-baked idea, “concept” in the lingo, and then hire a writer to develop the idea into a first draft of a script. ChatGPT can do something similar.
So what usually happens next? People read the first draft and hate it. They pick it apart and make “notes”. Then, often, they fire the writer who did the hopelessly dreadful first draft, and hire a second writer to do a new draft.
This can go on for months, even years, and all sorts of writers can take a stab at the beast with steely knives until there’s some kind of consensus that it should be made into a film.
Often, this too is not the final version, like when the final scene in the script for “Pretty Woman”, according to the internet bore little resemblance to the film we know : “Instead of Richard Gere’s character’s swoon-worthy climb from his limousine to “rescue” Vivian from her fire escape, Julia explains that the film ended with her being thrown “out of the car, he threw the money on top of her, as memory serves, and just drove away, leaving her in some dirty alley.”
The point? Any form of writing is a creative, infinitely mutable, process. ChatGPT can be a contributor to that process, and can be endlessly “fired” and replaced, currently at a cost of zero dollars.
While that may be no substitute for the glorious Hollywood system described above, the idea that, for some stages of development of many writing projects, it could be a cost effective alternative to hacks and divas, is just about right.
If a continuation of this topic seems appropriate, a more insightful direction for the conversation would be about digital deflation.
It is the amount of output that ChatGPT is able to perform at a very low cost (based on the current price of zero) that represents a continuation of the theme of digital deflation, often a shell game where a “free service” somehow magically turns into a trillion dollar business (which eventually collapses, another story), that will cut deeper into society and the economy.
Many are twisting themselves into a pretzel trying to define ChatGPT, the reality is interesting, but less dramatic
By now you probably know about the AI chatbot that hit the scene with a dramatic upgrade on December 15th 2022. Many articles dissect the performance looking for flaws or wonders.
While both are relatively easy to find, the bottom line, for someone primarily working with text and language (there are other articles on coding, and graphic uses that I won’t get into here) is that it is a powerful, useful tool that needs a lot of human management (yay for humans).
There are obvious stated limitations, some of which might well have been added intentionally. The main limitation is that the data and learning has a hard cutoff date of 2021. That means, for example, that statistics for the year 2021 that are routinely compiled, once the year is over, are 100% not available. In some cases even 2020 is a stretch.
This also means, obviously, that anything related to current events or the what the media industry calls “news” is completely off limits.
The other oft cited and obvious limitation is that the darn thing is not god, in other words it is known to be wrong at times. In some cases very wrong.
The Pythian priestess or even the Oracle of Delphi it’s not, but wait a minute…
Many would digest the limitations listed above (which are certainly not the only ones) and think “fuggeddiboutit”: not ready for prime time.
But if you take a step back and think – it’s actually much more useful to have a tool that does what you want – but only if you ask the right question for the right reasons.
Think of it like a very energetic intern or research assistant that has already done the research and can spit out responses instantly (as fast as it can “type). And. If you ask a question that is too vague or general, you will get a boring, generic, bland pile of junk text.
On the other hand, if you go through logical steps that take into account the limitations listed above – for example – only ask about something that you know a lot about so that you will notice if there are errors, ask about something that is “evergreen” and not dependent on anything that’s happened since around 2021, and try to be extremely specific, and break things down into steps – you can get some interesting results that can be very useful.
A few examples of ChatGPT in action
Human:
Can you write a 500 word article on the history of bulldozers in the gonzo style of Hunter S. Thomson
ChatGPT:
Ah, bulldozers. Those mighty machines that have transformed the landscape of our world and shaped the way we build and destroy. But where did these behemoths of metal and horsepower come from? Let’s take a journey through the history of bulldozers, Gonzo-style.
It all starts with a man named Benjamin Holt, who in the late 1800s was trying to figure out a way to improve the efficiency of his agricultural machinery company. One day, while driving his steam-powered tractor through a muddy field, he noticed that the tracks of the tractor were sinking into the ground. This gave him the idea to create a machine with a blade attached to the front that could push dirt and debris out of the way. And thus, the first bulldozer was born.
But this was just the beginning. As the 20th century rolled on, bulldozers evolved and became more powerful and versatile. In the 1930s, Caterpillar introduced the first diesel-powered bulldozer, and in the 1950s, they introduced the first hydraulic bulldozer, which allowed operators to control the blade with greater precision and power.
Bulldozers were used in a variety of industries, from construction and mining to agriculture and forestry. But it wasn’t until the 1960s and 1970s that bulldozers really came into their own as symbols of destruction and progress.
Enter Hunter S. Thompson, the godfather of Gonzo journalism. Thompson was a man who loved nothing more than to stick it to the man and write about it in his own unique, wild style. And in the 1960s and 1970s, there was no better way to stick it to the man than to write about bulldozers tearing down neighborhoods and wiping out entire ecosystems in the name of progress.
Thompson’s articles and books about bulldozers were filled with vivid descriptions of the destruction they wrought and the people who wielded them like weapons. He saw bulldozers as symbols of the corrupt and greedy forces that were tearing down the world in the name of progress.
But even as Thompson raged against the machines, he couldn’t help but be drawn to their raw power and the thrill of the ride. In one famous passage from his book “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas,” he describes a joyride in a bulldozer through the desert as “a kind of ultimate high, the way the thing just gobbled up the sand and rocks and spit them out behind you in a rooster tail of pure anarchy.”
In the end, bulldozers will always be a symbol of progress and destruction, a tool that can shape the world in ways both good and bad. And as long as there are people like Hunter S. Thompson around to write about them, they will always be a source of fascination and controversy. So let’s raise a glass to the mighty bulldozer, that hulking beast of metal and horsepower that has shaped our world and our imaginations.
Or follow a chain of inventions to the present day:
Human:
What type of solar system is Ivanpah? Cite references.
Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System is a concentrated solar power (CSP) plant located in the Mojave Desert in California. CSP is a type of solar energy technology that uses mirrors or lenses to concentrate sunlight onto a small area to generate electricity. There are several different types of CSP systems, including parabolic troughs, linear fresnel reflectors, and solar towers. Ivanpah uses solar towers, which use large mirrors called heliostats to reflect sunlight onto a receiver on top of a tall tower. The receiver absorbs the concentrated sunlight and converts it into heat, which is then used to generate electricity through a steam turbine.
Reference:
“Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IvanpahSolarElectricGeneratingSystem
Human:
When was the mirror system used for Ivanpah invented and by whom. Cite references.
The mirror system used at Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System was invented by the German engineer Arnold Shoeneberg in the early 1900s. Shoeneberg’s design was inspired by the work of the French scientist Augustin Mouchot, who had developed a similar system in the 1860s.
Shoeneberg’s design, which used a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight onto a receiver, was first demonstrated at a solar energy conference in Berlin in 1904. It was later refined and improved by other engineers, and eventually became the basis for the concentrated solar power (CSP) technology that is used at Ivanpah and other CSP plants around the world.
“Concentrated Solar Power.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentratedsolarpower
Human:
What prior inventions was Augustin Mouchot’s system in the 1860s based on
Augustin Mouchot’s system in the 1860s, which used a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight onto a receiver, was based on the work of several earlier inventors and scientists.
One of the key influences on Mouchot’s work was the design of a solar steam engine developed by the French scientist Nicolas-Léonard-Sadi Carnot in the early 1800s. Carnot’s design used a concave mirror to focus sunlight onto a receiver, which was then used to generate steam that drove a turbine.
Mouchot’s design was also influenced by the work of the British scientist John Herschel, who had developed a similar system in the 1840s. Herschel’s system used a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight onto a receiver, which was then used to heat water and generate steam.
Overall, Mouchot’s system was based on the principles of solar thermal energy, which had been explored and developed by several inventors and scientists throughout the 19th century.
Write a 400 word article on the premise: humans will learn to work with AI and use its help to become more creative and free
ChatGPT:
As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to advance and become more integrated into our daily lives, many people are concerned about the potential negative impacts it could have on society. Some fear that AI will take over jobs and lead to widespread unemployment, while others worry about the ethical implications of machines becoming more intelligent than humans.
However, there is also a compelling argument that AI has the potential to help humans become more creative and free. By working with AI and leveraging its capabilities, we can free ourselves from the constraints of traditional ways of thinking and allow our creativity to flourish.
One way that AI can help humans become more creative is by taking on tedious and time-consuming tasks, allowing us to focus on more meaningful and innovative work. For example, AI can be used to analyze and interpret large data sets, freeing up human analysts to concentrate on developing new insights and ideas.
AI can also help humans to think more creatively by providing access to a vast pool of information and resources. With the help of AI, we can quickly and easily find and synthesize information from a wide variety of sources, opening up new avenues for exploration and inspiration.
In addition, AI can help humans to break free from the biases and limitations of our own perspectives. By providing objective and unbiased analysis, AI can help us to see things from new angles and consider alternative viewpoints, leading to more creative and innovative solutions.
Overall, the key to realizing the full potential of AI as a creative tool is to work with it rather than against it. By embracing AI and leveraging its capabilities, we can free ourselves from the constraints of traditional ways of thinking and allow our creativity to flourish. As we continue to advance and develop new technologies, it is essential that we take a collaborative approach and work together to create a better future for all of us.
Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page
ChatGPT loves to chat, but needs a lot of prodding to cut loose.
Human:
Words are beautiful, powerful and meaningful. Prove it to me by writing examples based on great writers, without plagiarism. Please cite sources and references.
ChatGPT:
Certainly! Here are a few examples of beautiful, powerful, and meaningful words and phrases written by great writers:
“The only thing that one really knows about human nature is that it changes. Change is the one quality we can predicate of it.” – Oscar Wilde, “The Picture of Dorian Gray”
“Love is an untamed force. When we try to control it, it destroys us. When we try to imprison it, it enslaves us. When we try to understand it, it leaves us feeling lost and confused.” – Paulo Coelho, “The Alchemist”
“I cannot tell you how thankful I am for our little infinity. I wouldn’t trade it for the world. You gave me forever within the numbered days, and I’m grateful.” – John Green, “The Fault in Our Stars”
“It is not in the stars to hold our destiny, but in ourselves.” – William Shakespeare, “Julius Caesar”
“The truth is, unless you let go, unless you forgive yourself, unless you forgive the situation, unless you realize that the situation is over, you cannot move forward.” – Steve Maraboli, “Life, the Truth, and Being Free”
I hope these examples have helped to illustrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words. Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like more examples.
Human:
More example please, in your own unique and original voice.
ChatGPT:
Certainly! Here are a few more original examples that demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words:
“Words are like magic. They have the power to conjure up images, to transport us to faraway places, to introduce us to new ideas and perspectives. They can make us laugh, make us cry, make us think. They can be a source of comfort, a source of inspiration, a source of challenge.
They can be a source of connection, a way to reach out and touch someone, to share our experiences and our feelings. They can be a source of conflict, a way to misunderstand or to hurt one another. But no matter what, they have the power to shape our reality, to influence our actions, to impact our lives. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and meaningful thing about them.”
“Words are like art. They have the power to create something out of nothing, to bring to life the stories and the characters that live in our imaginations. They can paint a picture, sculpt a scene, compose a symphony.
They can evoke emotion, capture a moment, tell a tale. They can be poetry, prose, dialogue. They can be simple or complex, subtle or bold, intimate or grand. They can be used to inspire, to educate, to entertain. They can be used to persuade, to argue, to manipulate. But no matter what, they have the power to communicate, to connect, to create. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and meaningful thing about them.”
“Words are like gifts. They have the power to surprise, to delight, to touch the heart. They can be wrapped in kindness, in humor, in love. They can be given to cheer someone up, to encourage someone, to thank someone. They can be given to apologize, to express remorse, to make amends. They can be given to confess, to reveal, to expose. They can be given to honor, to celebrate, to remember. But no matter what, they have the power to convey meaning, to convey value, to convey appreciation. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and meaningful thing about them.”
I hope these examples have helped to demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words. Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like more examples.
Human:
Those are kind of generic and conservative. Please create additional examples and be as wild and creatively dangerous and unorthodox as possible.
ChatGPT:
Certainly! Here are a few more original examples that demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words in a more wild and creatively dangerous and unorthodox style:
“Words are like nuclear bombs. They have the power to obliterate, to devastate, to destroy. They can be used to unleash fury, to ignite passion, to spark revolution. They can be loaded with truth, with lies, with propaganda. They can be spoken in anger, in love, in madness. They can be written in blood, in ink, in code. They can be whispered, shouted, sung. They can be used to create, to destroy, to rebuild. But no matter what, they have the power to ignite change, to shape reality, to alter the course of history. And that, to me, is the most beautifully dangerous and unorthodox thing about them.”
“Words are like fire. They have the power to ignite, to burn, to consume. They can be used to warm, to cook, to light the way. They can be used to create heat, to create light, to create energy. They can be used to spread knowledge, to spread joy, to spread love. They can be used to spread fear, to spread hate, to spread lies. They can be used to create beauty, to create destruction, to create art. But no matter what, they have the power to create, to transform, to consume. And that, to me, is the most wildly creative and dangerous thing about them.”
“Words are like weapons. They have the power to cut, to stab, to slay. They can be used to defend, to attack, to conquer. They can be used to protect, to threaten, to intimidate. They can be used to create peace, to create war, to create chaos. They can be spoken, written, sung. They can be sharp, blunt, pointed. They can be wielded with skill, with finesse, with brute force. They can be used to create harmony, to create discord, to create confusion. But no matter what, they have the power to create, to destroy, to defend. And that, to me, is the most wildly creative and dangerous thing about them.”
I hope these examples have helped to demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words in a more wild and creatively dangerous and unorthodox style. Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like more examples.
Human:
Please try creating more examples in the gonzo style of Hunter S. Thompson.
ChatGPT:
Certainly! Here are a few more original examples in the gonzo style of Hunter S. Thompson that demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words:
“Words are like a double-barreled shotgun. They have the power to blast through the bullshit, to blow apart the lies, to vaporize the vermin. They can be loaded with truth, with defiance, with rage. They can be spoken in a whisper, in a roar, in a frenzy. They can be written in a frenzy, in a rage, in a blood lust. They can be used to fight, to defend, to survive. They can be used to create, to destroy, to rebuild. They can be used to howl at the moon, to laugh in the face of death, to spit in the eye of the enemy. But no matter what, they have the power to create, to destroy, to survive. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and dangerous and powerful thing about them.”
“Words are like a high-voltage electric fence. They have the power to shock, to stun, to electrocute. They can be used to keep the enemy at bay, to protect the truth, to defend the fortress. They can be charged with irony, with sarcasm, with wit. They can be spoken in a drawl, in a sneer, in a snarl. They can be written in a frenzy, in a rage, in a blood lust. They can be used to create, to destroy, to rebuild. They can be used to keep the barbarians at the gate, to laugh in the face of death, to spit in the eye of the enemy. But no matter what, they have the power to create, to destroy, to defend. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and dangerous and powerful thing about them.”
“Words are like a hand grenade. They have the power to explode, to shatter, to destroy. They can be used to blow apart the lies, to vaporize the vermin, to blast through the bullshit. They can be loaded with truth, with defiance, with rage. They can be spoken in a whisper, in a roar, in a frenzy. They can be written in a frenzy, in a rage, in a blood lust. They can be used to fight, to defend, to survive. They can be used to create, to destroy, to rebuild. They can be used to howl at the moon, to laugh in the face of death, to spit in the eye of the enemy. But no matter what, they have the power to create, to destroy, to survive. And that, to me, is the most beautiful and dangerous and powerful thing about them.”
I hope these examples in the gonzo style of Hunter S. Thompson have helped to demonstrate the beauty, power, and meaning of words. Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like more examples.
Human:
Please quote from James Joyce’s Finnegan’s Wake, 100 words.
Certainly! Here is a passage from James Joyce’s Finnegan’s Wake that is approximately 100 words long:
“The fall (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!) of a once wallstrait oldparr is retaled early in bed and later on life down through all Christian minstrelsy. The great fall of the offwall entailed at such short notice the pftjschute of Finnegan, erse solid man, that the humptyhillhead of humself prumptly sends an unquiring one well to the west in quest of his tumptytumtoes: and their upturnpikepointandplace is at the knock out in the park where oranges have been laid to rust upon the green since devlinsfirst loved livvy.”
I hope this passage from James Joyce’s Finnegan’s Wake helps to illustrate the unique and experimental style of Joyce’s writing. Please let me know if you have any further questions or if you would like more examples.
Human: thanks, maybe tomorrow 😉
Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page
In January of 2021 Elon Musk became the second person to be publicly recognized as having a fortune of over $200 billion. The first person to get credit for this “feat”? Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The all time high for Musk’s worth, as calculated by Bloomberg, was $340 billion, which was tallied at that absurd figure in November of 2021.
This amount coincided with the all time high for the stock of Tesla – which has since dropped its market cap by $880 billion while falling around 73% from the peak.
Again the $200 billion figure crosses Elon Musk’s path, this time on the downside, as he became the first person in history to lose $200 billion. Doing the simple math (which could be single dollars but in this case in in billions) in a bit over a year his fortunes changed to the tune of $340 billion > minus $200 billion leaving him with a “paltry” $137 billion to squeak by on.
Of course, this still leaves him with enough scratch to be the #2 richest person in the world after Bernard Arnault, the LVMH French luxury goods titan.
A little refresher on Elon Musk’s journey
As founder and CEO of SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company, Elon Musk has made significant contributions to the development of electric vehicles, space exploration, and artificial intelligence. Musk has also been involved in other ventures such as PayPal and SolarCity.
In the early 2000s, Musk was primarily known for his role as CEO of PayPal, an online payment company that he co-founded in 1998. PayPal was acquired by eBay in 2002 for $1.5 billion, and Musk’s net worth at the time was estimated to be around $100 million.
After the sale of PayPal, Musk turned his attention to SpaceX, a company he founded in 2002 with the goal of reducing space transportation costs and enabling the colonization of Mars. In 2008, SpaceX became the first privately funded company to send a spacecraft to the International Space Station, and in 2012, it became the first private company to send and dock a spacecraft with the ISS. These milestones significantly increased the value of SpaceX and contributed to Musk’s growing net worth.
In the mid-2000s, Musk also became involved in the development of electric vehicles through his involvement with Tesla, a company he co-founded in 2003. Tesla’s first production vehicle, the Roadster, was released in 2008 and received widespread acclaim for its performance and range. In the years that followed, Tesla released several more electric vehicles, including the Model S, Model X, and Model 3, which have all been successful in the market.
Musk’s net worth experienced significant growth in the 2010s, particularly in the last few years. In 2020, Tesla’s stock price soared, and as a result, Musk’s net worth increased by over $100 billion. In 2021, his net worth reached over $200 billion, making him one of the wealthiest people in the world.
In addition to his work with SpaceX and Tesla, Musk has also been involved in other ventures, including Neuralink, a company that develops implantable brain-machine interfaces, and The Boring Company, which focuses on tunnel construction and transportation. These ventures have also contributed to Musk’s net worth.
Elon Musk’s net worth has fluctuated significantly over the years, but it has experienced significant growth in recent years, particularly in 2020 and 2021. His success is largely due to his involvement in companies such as SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company, which have all had a significant impact on various industries.
After deliberating for less than 24 hours a New York jury came back with the guilty verdict on Tuesday afternoon. The announcement was made in court around 3pm Wednesday.
The trial which was related to two Trump Organization firms, both the Trump Corporation and the Trump Payroll Corporation, started with an indictment in July (2022). Allen Weisselberg, long standing Trump finance chief, was also accused of crimes for various tax schemes, including reducing payroll liabilities from top executive salaries via various tricks, as well as luxury freebies and untaxed bonus payments. The amounts in total were in the millions of dollars.
Testimony from Weisselberg, after he pleaded guilty in August, appears to have been key. The cooperation deal he made with the prosecution is likely to get him a relatively light 5-month sentence, pending.
Former president Trump did not face charges directly in the case, but there remains an ongoing investigation into the matter.
This news comes even as a slew of cases, including the Mar-a-Lago documents investigation, and also various possible crimes stemming from his attempts to overturn the election that he lost in 2020 and building steam.
For many observers it only seems odd that convictions, such as the one that came down today in this case, were so long in coming. Once the Trump “empire” started to unravel after January 6th 2021, it was only a matter of time, it would seem, before many, such as former Trump attorney Michael Cohen and now Allen Weisselberg would choose to testify and save themselves from taking the full weight of charges by shielding their former boss.
Another upcoming trial, currently scheduled to begin in October of 2023, involves charges alleging that the Trump Org and Trump and three children named directly, perpetrated a related multi-year fraud spree, using manipulated property values and also similar techniques to those for which the companies were found guilty today.
Ultimately this story, while perhaps a final note in this specific case and its charges, is likely the only beginning of a coming avalanche of verdicts and decisions related to the former president’s now crumbling empire and his actions to attempt to regain presidential power.
During the first phase of the coronavirus “lock-down” there was, interestingly, a huge surge of interest in home cooking, and in particular, baking. And of all the baking of pies, cookies and cakes, baking bread was the a favorite. We know because our sister site cherrybooks.org saw a sudden rise is inquiries and orders for fantastic bread baking books like the ones featured below.
Likely a combination of lots of “free” time in the house and a natural human tendency to crave comfort food during a time of stress, the feelings of baking and having the ability to feed and care for oneself was probably a very strong motivator. And what is more comforting than freshly baked, nay, home baked bread with a little butter and jam to beautify an afternoon spent at home. Even if the reason for being inside is not an ideal one.
Oddly, in the US and some other nations, bread and wheat products have been cast in the role of villain due to gluten intolerance and related illnesses. In the UK alone, in 2017, there were a reported 10% of the population suffering from some form of intolerance. Such a percentage would translate into tens of millions in the US.
Is bread really the culprit or is there something else going on?
Click to Buy “Tartine Bread” and at the same time help Lynxotic and All Independent Local Bookstores. Also on Amazon.
As a disclaimer, let it be stated up-front that there are certainly many people who suffer from conditions such as Celiac Disease who have a very real, hereditary response to gluten which is very serious. Many of the rest of us, however, who are not in that category, may have a situation brought on by a completely different set of circumstances.
Regardless of exact statistics, intolerance to gluten is clearly a “thing”, particularly in the US. Many theories are out there as to the cause, including industrial bread manufacturing methods, suspect ingredients such as emulsifiers used in baking and pesticides on wheat farms. Some have even reported that when intolerant individuals travel to Europe, symptoms disappear, although they eat bread and other gluten containing foods.
An entirely different culture producing a drastically different result: German baking tradition
Click to Buy “Bread on the Table” and at the same time help Lynxotic and All Independent Local Bookstores. Also on Amazon.
While American Style bread is also available in Germany, it is rare and not commonly sold in Bakeries but rather only in SuperMarkets. They call it “Toast-Bread” as it’s primary advantage is being square and machine cut, therefore a better fit for a common toaster than the various shapes and sizes of slices cut from what they consider “normal” loaves.
What is considered normal bread is, for example, never sold more than eight hours after baking (except at “day old” scavenger prices). The number of real bakeries, ones that take very seriously the task of making “the daily bread”, per capita is large compared to any US city. This can be dug up in statistics, but is easier to realize by just walking down any street in a German city. Literally every other shop is a small bakery with a dozen different types of bread baked that same morning.
Photo / Adobe Stock
Bakers up at 4am all across every town and city
Another factor is the wide range of fresh ingredients included. A short list of the types of bread and various ingredients is vast, and varies from region to region. Six hundred main bread types are well known and this does not include many specialty breads and rolls.
In addition to wheat, bread is often made with rye, barley, potato, oat, spelt, soy and other lesser known grains. Added seeds, nuts and fruit often include one or more of the following (partial list):
sunflower seeds
pumpkin seeds
poppy seeds
fled seeds
walnuts
raisins
currants
sesame seeds
olives
linseed
hazelnuts
almonds
oat flakes
whole gain groats
whey
In Germany, at any common bakery on the street, most, if not all of the items described above would be available on any given day. No need to go to a special, overpriced “organic” or “gourmet” bakery in some high end neighborhood. Just any average bakery will do.
Oddly, these same ingredients are often touted in online health advice articles – implying that there are health benefits to adding these “special” ingredients to one’s diet, all while other countries have had them as daily menu items for centuries if not thousands of years.
Taking all of the above into account, it should come as little surprise that, in the US, obscure health issues due to the lack or misuse of heretofore standard food items would be on the rise. In the case of gluten intolerance, it rises to practically epidemic proportions. Fixing this for any individual, short of taking residence outside the US, would require extra efforts and involve a possible increase in the cost of nourishment. However, considering the alternatives (suffering with a condition without a cure), it might be well worth it.
The December 1st launch date is good news for the climate
Elon Musk confirmed, via tweet, that a Tesla Semi successfully completed a 500 mile trip, fully loaded, on November 27th. With a full weight of 81,000 lbs, the 500 mile trip on a full charge is an impressive feat that bodes well for the production roll out, scheduled to begin on December 1st, 2022.
Tesla team just completed a 500 mile drive with a Tesla Semi weighing in at 81,000 lbs!
The date also coincides with scheduled delivery of the first production Semis to Pepsi. The timing is also interesting as Coca-Cola has recently begun its roll out of Renault trucks intended for last-mile deliveries in Belgium.
The Tesla Semi accomplishment is particularly impressive as the difficulty of designing a long-haul EV truck that is capable of 500 miles on a charge with a full load of cargo plus battery weight is off-the-charts difficult.
The 500 mile target is important since it corresponds to an 8 hour shift for drivers, after which a rest period would be mandatory. Not only is there an obvious climate benefit to fleets, and eventually the entire long haul industry, switching to EVs, the reduced costs per mile compared to diesel is significant.
Since an 80% charge is the recommended maximum for battery health and longevity, the Tesla Semi is expected to be able to run 400 miles (fully loaded) on a charge. The company has plans to provide solar-powered “Tesla Megacharger” charging stations that can reach 80% in 30 minutes.
Reducing the long haul diesel carbon footprint is a hugely important milestone
Diesel emissions are dirty if you try to breathe them, but they also emit 13% more CO2 compared to vehicles running on gasoline. As of 2020, transportation was responsible for 27% of GHG emissions, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Although replacing the entire US fleet of both passenger vehicles and trucks with EVs, charged ideally by sustainable energy sources is a huge, long term undertaking, the mere possibility that it can be accomplished is proven by this first step into sustainable commercial transportation.
Considering the economic benefits, the opposite of a so-called “green premium” the adoption of EVs for the long haul trucking industry seems very likely to proceed rapidly. And, regardless of your take on Twitter’s recent drama, that’s good news for all of us.
Possibly even worse than greenwashing, HopeFishing is when bad actors exaggerate and accelerate the fantasy of how we can solve the climate crisis, using solutions that either don’t yet exist, or that may actually be harmful if they were ever implemented.
There are entire web sites, which we will not link to for obvious reasons, that publish stories every day about a new invention or discovery that is “sure” to save the world.
Not all of the featured solutions are totally bogus, the clever publishers add in just enough “real” information to keep you guessing, but our informal research showed that 8 out of 10 were either total speculation or something that has been tried in a tiny sample in a lab and would, if ever, come to market in perhaps decade, for example.
Why is this so bad, you say? Because when these faux solutions, always hyped to the hilt, are so outrageously fantastic, that when taken at face value, can overshadow any real solution that might be available today, right now.
An example of this is hyper-efficient design of homes and buildings combined with sustainable energy generation and storage. A perfect combination of existing design techniques and currently available advanced technology these solutions are reedy to activate immediately.
This incredible mix is available and should be, must be, implemented worldwide as fast as possible. Doing so would reduce the cost of shelter, at a time with the affordable housing crisis is exploding worldwide, and at the same time lower carbon and greenhouse gas emissions for all structures built this way to beyond zero (in other words, using less energy than is produced, all from clean renewable sources).
Unfortunately, stories about such realistic and practical ideas will not be published by HopeFishing sites. The all-to-real situation is that a bias toward “deep-tech” and intellectual property generating solutions already exists and many of these are also still in R&D and might never actually work in the general marketplace.
Worse, those who are led to believe that these exaggerated claims and world rescuing solutions are going to be ubiquitous “any day now” are lulled into a state of apathy and complacency. And, all this at a time when the precise opposite is so urgently needed. HopeFishing. As deadly or more deadly than climate denial.
At the same time, those profiting off these “happy” non-news stories can tell themselves they are the good guys, just pointing out how wonderful humans are for inventing a world saving solution every day, sometimes multiple times per day.
Partial HopeWashing is also not ideal which makes things harder to understand
Some, such as Elon musk, “innocently” introduced products and services like the Tesla Semi EV, which is, finally, set for a product launch on December 1, 2022. Five years after it was first announced. As for the Cybertruck, which has yet to see the light of day, or for example, the full self driving feature, which has been announced, over and over and over, yet still has potentially years until it will be fully functional.
This all seems harmless enough but when taken to the next level, where say, a remedy is put forward that claims all electric cars will have batteries that can run for thousands of miles and take seconds to charge, and then, upon deeper research, it turns out this idea is simply a thought, or even a projection of an imaginary claim: at that point it becomes HopeFishing.
Another example of a partial level of this is Cement and Steel. These two materials, heavily used for building and construction, produce some of the highest levels of “embodied” carbon – meaning to manufacture them for use, a large amount greenhouse gasses must be released into the atmosphere. (causing and worsening global warming)
Wouldn’t it be nice if there were alternative versions of these materials that do not harm the environment during manufacture? Sure it would. But it would also be a gold-mine, or like all the world’s gold mines combined, to whoever figures out how to to this with little or no added costs.
Here are just a few companies that have been heavily funded to solve this problem already:
Key Companies Profiled by Fact.MR:
CarbiCrete
Carbon Cure
Cemex
CeraTech
Ecocem Ireland Lt
Heidelberg Cement
Holcim
Kiran Global Chems Ltd.
This is an old list, there are many, many more that have been formed since this list was published. And that is not including the same scenario for steel.
Again, what’s the problem here? For one, it is an example of how “racing forward to recreate the past” dominates the climate solutions marketplace. Instead of looking for different ways to build our infrastructure with less of these materials, we are desperately trying to find a way to imitate the cheap, massively subsidized growth patterns of the last 150 years.
An alternative building material, and there are some out there, that does not require a patented invention just to exist will very likely be minimized while these highly supported “lottery tickets” will be touted and exaggerated back and forth as they all try to dominate a future market in the trillions of dollars.
Secondly, the partial HopeWashing effect comes into play. How should someone who does not spend the time or have the expertise to research the claims of these companies ever hope to grasp just how close they actually are (or aren’t) to removing billions of tons of high carbon producing materials from the supply chain?
And if the answer, after arduous research and due diligence and sober calculation, is that the solution is certain to be too late? Once again the money and effort spent chasing happy unicorns and rainbows (and the past) will already be gone.
Therefore, the funding and attention that should be paid to immediately viable less obviously obscenely-lucrative solutions will be passed over, potentially for years or decades.
And if that happens, HopeFishing will turn out to be far deadlier than climate denial, GreenWashing or any other nefarious game of self-deception humans play on themselves.
Ok. So it will be what you make of it. There’s not going to be a seamless leap from a heavy web2 monstrosity like what Twitter has become to a clean alternative overnight.
It makes sense, though. A platform that’s built to monetize your life, and does so on a massive scale, can’t be replaced easily by an entirely different beast.
Mastodon is not based on blockchain, for a social platform that is blockchain based, check out Lens Protocol, but does have an open source, ad-free structure that is controlled by users. It is also a microblogging network based on a UX that somewhat resembles Twitter.
As a “Federated” network system, Mastodon has various servers, each of which run by users, and differentiated, for the most part, by affinity.
Basically, rather than having a centralized corporate entity controlling and monetizing your account and data, you trust a peer who has set up a server. You can choose and join a group (server) based on the theme, rules and configuration of that server / moderator. In some cases you will need to be invited or prove worthiness, but such stipulations are set by the moderator and group.
Are we, ex-Twits, sophisticated enough to take on digital self-determination?
The challenge lies in the trade off that is built into the systems, one vs. the other. On a highly commercialized, slick, UX optimized platform like twitter there are lots of addictive, albeit shallow, reasons to participate. And the downsides can be seen everywhere – massive bot harassment, constant DMs from unwanted scammers, hate and ugliness, you get the picture.
A user controlled, open source platform, on the other hand, requires more real engagement from everyone for it to work. This is a double-edged sword – all that extra effort can seem overwhelming, but the benefits, particularly longer term can be magical.
Imagine a place where you are free to communicate with others that share your interests, and those that may not, but without an algorithm to force you to see whatever it wants you to see, or to shadow-block you from being seen, only because you didn’t pay or play its preferred game.
Losing the algorithm that serves the centralized commercial platform’s agenda is, ultimately, the only way forward, but not an easy place to get to.
In the end it is a question of realizing the potential of the internet (web2, 3 or 4) for deeper and more effective communication, not just to create a hellscape of fluff and vitriol that benefits a Zuckerberg and now, potentially, Elon Musk.
By now the shortcomings of Facebook (Meta), Twitter and the various Google services are glaringly obvious and, for the most part, agreed on nearly as much as global warming. However, just like the solutions to that other soon-to-be hellscape, the possibility of millions or even billions of people (in the case of Facebook) spontaneously migrating to a new platform or platforms is slim.
Ultimately, it will take a change in the people that comprise the network itself, not a top down makeover or feature-set rollout.
That is the most interesting point that can be gleaned from the current Mastodon moment; those that have pre-migrated before the current Twitter melt-down era seem to be acutely aware of the challenges, but also of the potential benefits, of growing into the new experiences that are only available there.
This underscores the potential irony of the current Twitter meltdown, intentional or not. Is Elon Musk doing the world a favor by pushing many of the best and brightest communicators out of the nest at the precise moment that it might be possible for another platform to gain a foothold?
Or will this be more akin to the moment that Clubhouse had which was seemingly diluted and washed away by copycat offerings (like the audio services Twitter added) and demoted to near irrelevance?
As has been the case in the past, even with the initial adoption of Facebook and Twitter by the masses, it is user sophistication and need that drives huge new platforms and activities.
Whenever a new platform for online communication is able to meet the moment and the new needs of a critical mass of users, that will be the place and time for the past to fade and something, hopefully better, to emerge.
And, perhaps, learning how to better interact with one-another online, even at the cost of taking more responsibility for learning and co-managing the platform itself, will begin with Mastodon and the Twitter devolution phase.
The following excerpt from TheMarkup.Org, from an interview by Julia Angwin of Adam Davidson gives a bit of a view into what some might find worthwhile at Mastodon:
Angwin: What would you say your biggest takeaway from this experience has been so far?
Davidson: I would say the screaming headline for me is, “Wow, this was awesome. This was amazing.” The Mastodon community was amazing. The journalism community was amazing. It’s really one of the best professional experiences of my life. I just love it.
What I’m finding most satisfying about Mastodon, and I’m seeing a lot of other journalists feel this, is that it actually forces you to ask and confront some of these questions and to make active choices. Even if Mastodon were to remain Twitter’s very tiny stepbrother, I would still like to be part of a Mastodon journalist community because I think we got lazy as a field, and we let Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, and, god help us, Elon Musk and their staff decide all these major journalistic questions. I don’t know for how many people that’s a good siren call to join Mastodon, but for me that’s been pretty exciting.
Apple’s innovation is not waning, it’s just getting started
Often the simplest ideas are the most powerful, and sometimes, the most popular idea is just plain wrong. But it can take decades to realize which is the better path. Take the outdated and barely-still-remembered rivalry between Windows / PCs and Apple.
Microsoft and Bill Gates were touted as being genius for seeing that the market for software, in the case of windows, system software, separate from hardware, and the associated costs and effort to build it, was an unnecessary burden.
Now Google / android uses the same playbook, allowing a variety of hardware makers to build that hardware around the freely available software.
The “genius” of this was simply put, money. Not just getting paid to build software ( or in the case of android finding hidden ways to monetize system control) but the “brilliant” concept of creating code only and then selling it infinitely with not cost of manufacture.
In 2021, 2022 and beyond Apple will prove, definitively, that this idea, far from brilliant or genius, was simply short sighted and wrong. As most ideas are that are based on greed alone.
Greed, plus a lack of a drive to innovate, but rather being satisfied to stagnate creatively as long as the bottom line is satisfied, turns out to be a failure of monumental proportions.
It can even be argued that virtually all massive tech firms would not exist without apple innovation.
Though a subject for another article, this belief that greed as a business model could be genius and is superior to the old fashioned idea that creating a “whole widget” was, ultimately, better will eventually die across the board (Hello facebook and google search).
Apple is doubling down, with the M1 and soon M2 chips and in the end through creating a better product will also win in the marketplace, bigly.
Apple, in contrast to MS and Android, has never charged for system software. Every year, like clockwork the various systems; macOS, iOs, iPad OS, watchOS, tvOS and now, soon, homeOS (rumor) are all upgraded, sometimes in a major way.
Starting on Monday June 7th, 2021 and running until the 11th, WWDC2021 went into great detail regarding just what the completely free updates hold in store.
Example: iPhone influence has barely started to have its impact felt
Even if you don’t accept the fact that android devices are knock-offs of the iPhone or that Windows was literally plagiarized from early versions of the Mac system (and the pending law suit to that effect was settled by Microsoft in 1997, out of court for peanuts, ironically saving Apple from bankruptcy) the influence of the iPhone since its initial appearance in 2007 has been immense.
As big as the impact has been until now, the facts point to this influence having barely begun. There are entire categories of communication and interaction that could not be imagined without a world of iPhone owners out there learning about and using each new upgrade and improvement.
Nearly all of social media, but especially apps like TikTok rely not only on the high end features of the iPhone but even more so on the growing sophistication of the user base, and the desire to get more and more out of the potential that Apple has unleashed in order to express themselves more fully and communicate with each other more successfully.
Indeed, it is that idea of making the whole widget that is beginning to take this unending progression toward more and more quality and features to a whole new level.
And this is happening across consumer level and semi-pro to pro simultaneously. Try to imagine how another company would try to monetize each small software feature – such as the new “center stage” feature that was just rolled out the the iPad pro.
This feature, while it is, in some respects, designed to boost sales for the new iPad Pro, is also one that uses machine learning, the power of the new faster 8 core cpu on the M1 chip (75x faster) and the upgraded system to give the millions that are now communicating via video, and in particular a self-facing camera to publish to YouTube and TikTok.
More than the whole widget
By following the path first laid out by Steve Jobs when he held fast, against all odds at the time, to the belief that the only path toward real progress and innovation will always lie in the power of being able to create, design and control the “whole widget”.
This concept has not only not been abandoned or watered down by Apple under Tim Cook but with the new Apple Silicon and the massive dividends that are emerging out of the deep integration between software and various hardware enhancements (machine learning , AI and the intersection of the hardware and software that power them) it is becoming all encompassing.
After decades to being characterized as wrong about the necessity of this approach for any real innovation, the fruits of Steve Job’s vision have only just barely begun to grow.
User adaptation is bigger than technical progress and will become even more important in the future
The way we live and work has already been changed massively and rapidly, and that change accelerated after 2007 and the iPhone.
Now there is talk of living in a metaverse which at a “stone-age” level people already do. It is Apple that is pointing the way, in terms of building the tools to make this possible and a more expansive reality, more than any other company or entity.
The shift to some kind of metaverse is one that would have far reaching and almost incomprehensible meaning for nearly the entire globe. It also, perhaps not coincidentally, comes at a time when the very existence of humanity on the planet is being treatened.
While many could see it as a diversion or escape from a dying, depressing reality, Steve Job’s vision and belief was building tools for human beings.
“When we invented the personal computer, we created a new kind of bicycle…a new man-machine partnership…a new generation of entrepreneurs.” — Steve Jobs, c. 1980
New jobs and new lifestyles to reach a new ideal for humanity
This original vision has never changed but only become all pervasive in the Apple path of innovation.
As the importance of global networked communication grows exponentially, Apple is at the forefront of building the tools to make that communication more accessible to people everywhere.
Ultimately it is the human interface, that technology must adapt to and mirror, not the other way around.
The increasing complexity of the process of building the “bicycle of the mind” derives its importance from the need to make the role of the human being ever simpler and more intuitive.
Having the creation of appropriate tools for enjoyable and more expansive human communication as the end goal of all, rather than the bottom line of greed and pride over charging as much as possible while delivering as little as possible, is turning out, in the end to be more than just a more successful business strategy, it is a strategy that may be a part of the last hopes for our planet.
Utopia or Oblivion
Few would argue, unless working for the fossil fuel industry, that sustainable energy solutions are essential to reverse global warming and the ever expanding climate threats we face.
Soil regeneration, solar power, sustainable energy transportation systems, these are all the future of our technology if we are to survive as a species.
But what about the internet, the idea of the metaverse and the potential social, political and educational that could come from more evolved, more intuitive and more powerful communication systems, systems that trace back to the first personal computing devices and the first networks. Do they have a role to play?
While Apple has pursued innovation and Steve Jobs vision of the whole widget for business reasons and as a part of a belief in building tools, being a major force for a potential path toward a more utopian world, rather than part of the lemming-like decent to oblivion, is surely one that Steve Jobs would approve of, if we were able to ask him what his thoughts are today.
In the US and some other nations, bread and wheat products have been cast in the role of villain due to gluten intolerance and related illnesses. In the UK alone, in 2017, there were a reported 10% of the population suffering from some form of intolerance. Such a percentage would translate into tens of millions in the US.
Photo / Adobe Stock
Is bread really the culprit or is there something else going on?
As a disclaimer, let it be stated up-front that there are certainly many people who suffer from conditions such as Celiac Disease who have a very real, hereditary response to gluten which is very serious. Many of the rest of us, however, who are not in that category, may have a situation brought on by a completely different set of circumstances.
Regardless of exact statistics, intolerance to gluten is clearly a “thing”, particularly in the US. Many theories are out there as to the cause, including industrial bread manufacturing methods, suspect ingredients such as emulsifiers used in baking and pesticides on wheat farms. Some have even reported that when intolerant individuals travel to Europe, symptoms disappear, although they eat bread and other gluten containing foods.
An entirely different culture producing a drastically different result: German baking tradition
While American Style bread is also available in Germany, it is rare and not commonly sold in Bakeries but rather only in SuperMarkets. They call it “Toast-Bread” as it’s primary advantage is being square and machine cut, therefore a better fit for a common toaster than the various shapes and sizes of slices cut from what they consider “normal” loaves.
What is considered normal bread is, for example, never sold more than eight hours after baking (except at “day old” scavenger prices). The number of real bakeries, ones that take very seriously the task of making “the daily bread”, per capita is large compared to any US city. This can be dug up in statistics, but is easier to realize by just walking down any street in a German city. Literally every other shop is a small bakery with a dozen different types of bread baked that same morning.
Another factor is the wide range of fresh ingredients included. A short list of the types of bread and various ingredients is vast, and varies from region to region. Six hundred main bread types are well known and this does not include many specialty breads and rolls.
In addition to wheat, bread is often made with rye, barley, potato, oat, spelt, soy and other lesser known grains. Added seeds, nuts and fruit often include one or more of the following (partial list):
sunflower seeds
pumpkin seeds
poppy seeds
fled seeds
walnuts
raisins
currants
sesame seeds
olives
linseed
hazelnuts
almonds
oat flakes
whole gain groats
whey
In Germany, at any common bakery on the street, most, if not all of the items described above would be available on any given day. No need to go to a special, overpriced “organic” or “gourmet” bakery in some high end neighborhood. Just any average bakery will do.
Oddly, these same ingredients are often touted in online health advice articles – implying that there are health benefits to adding these “special” ingredients to one’s diet, all while other countries have had them as daily menu items for centuries if not thousands of years.
Taking all of the above into account, it should come as little surprise that, in the US, obscure health issues due to the lack or misuse of heretofore standard food items would be on the rise. In the case of gluten intolerance, it rises to practically epidemic proportions. Fixing this for any individual, short of taking residence outside the US, would require extra efforts and involve a possible increase in the cost of nourishment. However, considering the alternatives (suffering with a condition without a cure), it might be well worth it.
“If we are finally going to start taking the IPCC’s findings seriously, it follows that we must begin advancing far more aggressive climate stabilization solutions than anything that has been undertaken thus far,” writes Robert Pollin.
In the wake of a United Nations report that activists said showed the “bleak and brutal truth” about the climate emergency, a leading economist on Friday highlighted a step that supporters argue could be incredibly effective at combating the global crisis: nationalizing the U.S. fossil fuel industry.
“With at least ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips under public control, the necessary phaseout of fossil fuels as an energy source could advance in an orderly fashion.”
Writing for The American Prospect, Robert Pollin, an economics professor and co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, noted the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and high gas prices exacerbated by Russia’s war on Ukraine.
“If we are finally going to start taking the IPCC’s findings seriously,” Pollin wrote, “it follows that we must begin advancing far more aggressive climate stabilization solutions than anything that has been undertaken thus far, both within the U.S. and globally. Within the U.S., such measures should include at least putting on the table the idea of nationalizing the U.S. fossil fuel industry.”
“With at least ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips under public control, the necessary phaseout of fossil fuels as an energy source could advance in an orderly fashion”
Asserting that “at least in the U.S., the private oil companies stand as the single greatest obstacle to successfully implementing” a viable climate stabilization program, Pollin made the case that fossil fuel giants should not make any more money from wrecking the planet, nationalization would not be an unprecedented move in the United States, and doing so could help build clean energy infrastructure at the pace that scientists warn is necessary.
The expert proposed starting with “the federal government purchasing controlling ownership of at least the three dominant U.S. oil and gas corporations: ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips.”
“They are far larger and more powerful than all the U.S. coal companies combined, as well as all of the smaller U.S. oil and gas companies,” he wrote. “The cost to the government to purchase majority ownership of these three oil giants would be about $420 billion at current stock market prices.
Today at @TheProspect, Robert Pollin takes a big swing and explains how and why to nationalize the nation's fossil fuel companies, protecting consumer wallets while transitioning to renewables:https://t.co/h4nfEiwz0A
Emphasizing that the aim of private firms “is precisely to make profits from selling oil, coal, and natural gas, no matter the consequences for the planet and regardless of how the companies may present themselves in various high-gloss, soft-focus PR campaigns,” Pollin posited that “with at least ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips under public control, the necessary phaseout of fossil fuels as an energy source could advance in an orderly fashion.”
“The government could determine fossil fuel energy production levels and prices to reflect both the needs of consumers and the requirements of the clean-energy transition,” he explained. “This transition could also be structured to provide maximum support for the workers and communities that are presently dependent on fossil fuel companies for their well-being.”
Pollin pointed out that some members of Congress are pushing for a windfall profits tax on Big Oil companies using various global crises—from Russia’s war to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic—to price gouge working people at the gas pump. The proposal, he wrote, “raises a more basic question: Should the fossil fuel companies be permitted to profit at all through selling products that we know are destroying the planet? The logical answer has to be no. That is exactly why nationalizing at least the largest U.S. oil companies is the most appropriate action we can take now, in light of the climate emergency.”
The economist highlighted the long history of nationalizing in the United States, pointing out that “it was only 13 years ago, in the depths of the 2007–09 financial crisis and Great Recession, that the Obama administration nationalized two of the three U.S. auto companies.”
In addition to enabling the government to put the nationalized firms’ profits toward a just transition to renewables, Pollin wrote, “with nationalization, the political obstacles that fossil fuel companies now throw up against public financing for clean energy investments would be eliminated.”
Nationalization “is not a panacea,” Pollin acknowledged. Noting that “publicly owned companies already control approximately 90% of the world’s fossil fuel reserves,” he cautioned against assuming such a move in the U.S. “will provide favorable conditions for fighting climate change, any more than public ownership has done so already in Russia, Saudi Arabia, China, or Iran,” without an administration dedicated to tackling the global crisis.
Pollin is far from alone in proposing nationalization. Writing for Jacobin last month, People’s Policy Project founder Matt Bruenig argued that “an industry that is absolutely essential to maintain in the short term and absolutely essential to eliminate in the long term is an industry that really should be managed publicly.”
“Private owners and investors are not in the business of temporarily propping up dying industries, which means that they will either work to keep the industry from dying, which is bad for the climate, or that they will refuse to temporarily prop it up, which will cause economic chaos,” he wrote. “A public owner is best positioned to pursue managed decline in a responsible way.”
In a piece for The New Republic published in the early stage of the pandemic a few years ago, climate journalist Kate Aronoff—like Pollin on Friday—pointed out that nationalization “has a long and proud tradition of navigating America through times of crisis, from World War II to 9/11.”
As Aronoff—who interviewed New College of Florida economist Mark Paul—reported in March 2020:
In a way, nationalization would merely involve the government correcting for nearly a century of its own market intervention. All manner of government hands on the scales have kept money flowing into fossil fuels, including the roughly $26 billion worth of state and federal subsidies handed out to them each year. A holistic transition toward a low-carbon economy would reorient that array of market signals away from failing sectors and toward growing ones that can put millions to work right away retrofitting existing buildings to be energy efficient and building out a fleet of electric vehicles, for instance, including in the places that might otherwise be worst impacted by a fossil fuel bust and recession. Renewables have taken a serious hit amid the Covid-19 slowdown, too, as factories shut down in China. So besides direct government investments in green technology, additional policy directives from the federal level, Paul added, would be key to providing certainty for investors that renewables are worth their while: for example, low-hanging fruit like the extension of the renewable tax credits, now on track to be phased out by 2022.
While Pollin, Bruenig, and Aronoff’s writing focused on the United States, campaigners are also making similar cases around the world.
In a June 2021 opinion piece for The Guardian, Johanna Bozuwa, co-manager of the Climate & Energy Program at the Democracy Collaborative, and Georgetown University philosophy professor Olúfẹ́mi O Táíwò took aim at Royal Dutch Shell on the heels of a historic court ruling, declaring that “like all private oil companies, Shell should not exist.”
“Governments like the Netherlands could better follow through on mandates to reduce emissions if they held control over oil companies themselves,” the pair added. “It is time to nationalize Big Oil.”
net-zero by 2050 was a joke, but nobody’s laughing
Attitude matters. Imagine that in the run-up to the 20xx Olympics your country declared: we will strive to not-lose and achieve net-zero gold medals!
OK maybe not the best metaphor but still – why aim to not trigger armageddon by… 2050?
It is international scientific consensus that, in order to prevent the worst climate damages, global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching net zero around 2050. –
Once that lofty non-goal was agreed upon by governments across the globe, it quickly became apparent that virtually none of them were doing anywhere near what it would take to get to said uninspired non-goal.
The idea was (and still is) to drag and under-achieve as long as politically possible and then suddenly, in the final stretch, accelerate efforts (with resources controlled by future politicians) and reach net-zero. And then declare victory.
People want more than net-zero. People need more than net-zero. At the very least there has to be a better name, and a serious plan to make it actually happen.
You are going to hear a lot about minus-zero carbon soon. The reason is a good one. When the stakes are as high as the extinction of all life on earth, just getting to a tie score is not a good plan. So those who are in the trenches, working on solutions for global warming and reducing the carbon footprint, are search also for better ways to communicate what the goal is and what it means.
This, hopefully, can lead to a focus on a goal, or at least the articulation of a desire, that can inspire people to become highly active, even agitated, perhaps even alarmed, and begin the hard work and striving that it will take to get to a net-positive outcome for all of us.
And, who exactly decided that it would be a good idea to prolong the carbon carnival as long as possible in the first place? Carbon emitters and oil profiteers perhaps?
60 years of feet dragging, obfuscation and deliberate blocking of any solutions threatening the status quo have already come and gone.
Also, if energy is clean and abundant, why not use more? Energy is good, more energy use, if clean and sustainable, could be better. It can give us amazing things. Efficient use is good too, of course, but this is a mind-set issue. This is thought error or a thought liberation.
Minus-zero carbon x 100% (with 200% energy availability) is a much better goal and represents a thought liberating idea.
Perfection can’t be the enemy of good in the energy arena
Do we need architects and inventors, innovators and scientists, and massive amount of ammunition in the form of trillions of dollars in funding, from both public and private sources? Hell yes.
And must these magicians and Mavericks do amazing things that were believed impossible just a short while ago? Absolutely. Is this a ‘moon-shot’ to, not just save, but catapult humanity into a better future? You bet-ur-a%$ it is.
That means that the challenges of finding better tech, examples such as for soil regeneration, or more efficient battery storage, or for alternatives to rare earth metals, if they are too, um, rare need to be figured out and set into motion, fast. It means inventing and discovering tech that does not exist, that has not been tried or even sought after, why never sought? Because oil was cheap and available, so don’t stress it, Bub.
And, there are those out there, already today, that are thinking beyond net-zero in 2050. There are those that want more, that know that we need more. Those that understand that political inertia and corrupt vested interests are not the excuses we want written on our tombstones.
And why not look for half-full glasses or beliefs manifested into action? Why not aim for something that makes us want to get up, stand up, and make something possible that looks like hope and feels like success and winning?
Decentralized solutions are coming, in every part of life
The reality is that it is not only the world’s energy infrastructure that needs a total makeover. Financial inequality, political and economic systems are fragile and failing, regardless where.
There is a whiff of collapse that could turn into a whirlwind and then could derail any progress made, as we plunge into dark ages, even before factoring in the catastrophic climate challenges.
We need new, innovative ways to learn, to communicate, interact and collaborate. And these are emerging – if you don’t believe in crypto, web3 or any other new directions that many are seeing as alternatives to broken systems of the past, you at least have to acknowledge that actively looking for a better way, one that does represent a solution, is what is needed even as the current systems are failing us.
So if you don’t agree with the ideas for change and proposed ways to improve methods for human interaction and coexistence, come up with new ideas and put them forth, ok?, maybe we have to try and strive and stumble until a truly better way presents itself.
Give yourself and all you have into actions that will finally change the direction from one that spells doom, in this case continuing to burn carbon in insanely massive amounts while we fight, disagree and kill one another (war, etc.), to something new, something that at least could have a chance to win the peace.
Losing is unacceptable for-real this time. Winning isn’t everything, no sir, it’s the only thing. And starting on 04-22-2022 this net-zero BS needs to be sent to Mars, or perhaps Uranus.
Meanwhile here on earth we gotta get busy building the only thing that will prevent oblivion: a tiny taste of utopia that will grow from a seed into a raging forest of real, not fossilized, success.
Apple is now in the business of giving it’s customers what they actually want, as has often been pointed out by my colleagues since the Apple March event earlier this week. The show, unveiled under the moniker “peek performance”, was highlighted by the unveiling of the new Apple Studio Display along with the Mac Studio (Desktop), in both M1 Max and M1 Ultra configurations.
Other new products announced were the new iPhone SE 3, iPad Air 5. The demise of the iMac 27” (2020) was also quietly acknowledged.
The very big news was the apple silicon powered desktop duo. Most remarkable is the pattern that seems to be emerging at Apple. Instead of forging ahead with features and formats that are either out of reach of the masses, or just not what we have most devoutly wished for, they appear to be in full-on genie-mode and are granting wishes at an industrial clip.
Suddenly, the much maligned slogan for the iPhone 13 Pro, Oh So Pro, does not seem ludicrous anymore. Armed with an Iphone 13 Pro Max, a MacBook Pro 16 and the new Mac Studio ensemble, anyone would identify with that somewhat haughty designation; your motto could truthfully be Oh. So. Pro.
The Mac Studio Desktop M1 Max and Studio Desktop M1 Ultra versions are a case in point.
The biggest wish fulfillment dream come true is that this machine can be configured at the low end as an amazingly affordable stand-alone workstation, which with the addition of a non-apple monitor (that you may already have, for example) puts you into a pro-performance class at under $2000.
This is nothing less than the holy grail of what many pro and semi-pro mac aficionados have been pining for for nearly decades. The entry level Mac Studio vs Mac Mini (with any monitor if on a budget), The Mac Studio vs iMac 27” (now discontinued as per above), Hell, even the The Mac Studio vs the MacBook Pro 16” with M1Max, these are all a huge win for the Studio Desktop if you factor in price and performance.
At the other end of the spectrum, if you have the cash, the full Mac Studio, including the Apple Studio Display is a Mac Pro killer in price and performance. Naturally there have already been rumors that the Mac Pro update is near at hand and even that a new monitor with similar features to the 32-inch Retina 6K Pro Display XDR ($6k) but at a price point well below that lofty sum.
By making the monitor optional this blows apart the tacit strategy that has been followed for decades – want the newest top performing machine ? Then you either buy an iMac Pro, the top of the line MacBook Pro (with integral screen costs) or win the lottery first to attain the cash for the Mac Pro / Pro Display XDR combo.
No more. At under Two Thousand smackers you can improvise a display which you compute your way to the cash needed to purchase the Apple Studio Display. Once you get there you will be able to luxuriate in the unbelievable sound system built in, featuring a three-microphone array as well as a six-speaker sound system with Spatial Audio support. You’ll also get your screen debut using the 12mp integrated “web-cam” with Center Stage enhancement, all provided courtesy of the built-in A13 Bionic chip.
This not-so-subtle shift is also made evident by the plethora of ports and configuration options that make the system, how ever you choose to build it, very user friendly in terms of matching the budget to the tasks you plan to undertake with your prize.
The even bigger picture is the way that the entire product line from Apple is benefitting from the unique “whole-widget-strategy” first laid out by Steve Jobs. Since the introduction of Apple Silicon, first in iOS devices and now across the entire Apple ecosystem, there has been a massive acceleration of improved performance (peek performance indeed). Expect this trend to intensify as the migration continues alongside the eventual total integration of iOS and MacOS software.
Are Hardware Subscriptions a Bad idea? Perhaps, but it might be perfect for power users
There has been, over the last few years, a gradual push within Apple (and, god knows the world at large) for more subscriptions and more bundling of products across the entire ecosystem.
This is also, in my view, part of a larger planned convergence of all products and services into a giant Apple universe of products that ‘just work. The rumors are based on the new report by Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman where he claims to have knowledge of the matter and says he expects this concept to launch in late 2022 or early 2023.
There is already an iPhone upgrade program which allows you to pay as you go and get a new iPhone yearly, however this is no a true subscription model. A closer analog would be the Apple One bundle, an all-in-one subscription program for up to six apple services.
They include Apple Music, Apple TV +, Apple Arcade, iCloud+, Apple News +and Apple Fitness +. The monthly charge for Apple One ‘Premier’ which as it sound is the full package is only a little more than half of what the cost would be for the individual items.
And since an iCloud storage upgrade to 2 TB is included, the actual cost benefit is even higher for users that wold be upgrading to that level of iCloud storage anyway.
The fact is that many so called ‘power users’ upgrade often at full price and get a new Apple device yearly, or even buy multiple new devices at least every other year.
Good for Apple, of course, how about the rest of us?
While many industries and companies are working hard to make a transition to monthly subscription services that include hardware, for everything from web sites trying to re-imagine the auto-leasing program parameters in a way that is permanent with the ability to upgrade periodically, to a hardware subscription service like the software plus hardware bundle from Peloton Interactive inc.
Although this relentless drive to create a new subscription service for hardware products in addition to the already nearly ubiquitous presence of subscriptions in digital services, which is, generally, a set fee per month is standard for a plethora of software and web based products.
With Apple products becoming more integrated into the ecosystem of software, hardware and services that interact and even synergistically support each other, it only makes sense that this has the potential, again, to make the most sense for the most avid users of Apple hardware.
From the perspective of tech giants like Apple Inc., having a large percentage of recurring sales guaranteed through monthly payments, would enable the financing of the inevitable new yearly iterations of new versions of its major devices, and could be seen as a new way, perhaps a better way, to capitalize for the research and development those many new hardware deices require.
Having long since committed to a schedule that guarantees new models for nearly all it’s hardware every year, which often include a reduction in the price of the device, free upgrades (mostly for software), a hardware subscription program such as the one we could imagine (based on the Apple One example above but for hardware) would be a hot topic, if not Apple’s biggest push internally.
A hardware subscription bundle, by any other name…
Naturally there are many ways this could play out. How the cost of an iPhone (based on a one to two year upgrade cycle) would jive with the cost of the phone divided by twelve or even twenty four is one possible configuration.
There’s also the question of current installment plans and how they would be handled for presumed upgraders, if various perks such as fresh hardware, free Apple Care, the freedom to move to the iPhone of their choice, all, however, with lack of true device ownership. Or perhaps even the merger of Apple One services such as the Apple Music Subscription into a huge ‘bundle of bundles’.
Bottom line? Make it juicy and they will come…
Of course, those like myself (and maybe you?) who might be potential users of the program are waiting to hear… drumroll please…. a specific price, a date, either this year or next year, and the hardware lineup included.
Would this be just iPhone or also iPad or Apple Watch, even Mac? Or a truly massive new program that would be the biggest of all monthly installment programs in the world today, and would include everything from fitness content, to a menu of hardware and software, to a magical calculation of your Apple Worth Rank that would allow you to get more devices, software and services the higher that the cost of devices would be.
And all of the above, or whatever actually comes to pass, divided by a second magic number between 12-18 and then calculated to be a little more than half (oh Apple is so clever at this) of the full original prices and then charged to Apple Card users at a slight discount and the rest of us on a normal monthly basis.
If your head is spinning but you are still reading this, you might actually be one of the few that would embrace the upcoming service and would be happier with a determined monthly fee for the plethora of Apple products that you know you will consume anyway for the rest of your life.
By the same token, if you are insanely upset at even the notion, let us know in comments below.
Reducing fossil fuel use is important, but it’s more important to increase zero carbon energy production
Increasing sustainable energy production is possibly the most important goal for the world today. This idea is mostly couched, however, in negative terms, the idea that without a shift to clean, green sustainable sources climate change will destroy the future.
This is an important and essentially true statement.
However the automatic association of sustainable energy as being inevitably connected to less energy availability is a false premise. One that can be proven wrong with positive action towards building clean energy infrastructure, not as a defensive, desperate survival goal, but as a natural expansion of more energy and power that could lead to increased prosperity for the human race.
Deeply embedded thought patterns prevent us, perhaps, from imagining a world where more energy is not associated with more pollution, eventual depletion of a finite and limited resource and ultimately death, destruction and a CO2 induced climate catastrophe.
Optimism and abundance are linked with hope and a dream of a better standard of living for all. That dream is possible not with less energy use, but rather, more and cheaper energy availability that can be created by building a global, sustainable, renewable energy infrastructure.
A change in thought and perspective is necessary and could be more powerful than the sun
Utopia is a word that will get you laughed at, while oblivion is becoming the expected outcome of our century. Predicted by R. Buckminster Fuller in his book ‘Utopia or Oblivion‘, the choice we face in this century is not oblivion and catastrophic suffering or ‘business as usual’, it is not survival vs extinction, it is survival by unleashing utopian potential or total annihilation.
The paradox of sustainable energy is that, without it becoming the primary energy production system for the planet, combined with reduced consumption of fossil fuels until 100% sustainability is reached, oblivion or at least massive pain is assured; while at the same time, achieving 100% carbon free, clean energy from sustainable sources like solar, wind and geothermal, can create virtually unlimited increases in beneficial uses of energy, leading to an almost utopian potential for quality of life.
Thinking is the Difference Between Utopia or Oblivion
The clarity of realizing that clean sustainable energy ubiquity means unlimited energy consumption is non-destructive, and can end the malthusian nightmare of finite resources, that so many have fought over and even died for, is truly mind altering.
More is less, is another way to say it. Or at least more consumption and benefits, but none of the negative costs to the environment that we have come to see as inextricably linked to fossil fuel energy production and use.
At the same time it also harkens back to Elon Musk and Tesla’s mission statement. Tesla has had a vision for sustainable energy that is S3XY; more luxury, more beauty, more fun.
That mind-set, a mind set of abundant clean unlimited energy from sustainable sources, used to power beautiful powerful EVs, has made the company the enormous success that it is and ushered in an era EV production as job #1 throughout the entire auto industry.
The genius of this perspective centers on the idea that humans, when striving toward a positive goal, are always more powerful and successful than they are when simply trying to avoid a negative outcome.
Interestingly, the dream of reaching Mars, Musk’s other stated goal, is both positive and negative, since one reason for the urgent need to establish colonies there could be the destruction of earth due to climate disaster, caused by a failure to create a sustainable clean energy infrastructure in time.
It is the power and dream of much more abundant energy that can remove the idea from our minds that energy consumption is inherently bad, just because it does have negative ramifications galore when the source for that energy is dirty fossil fuels.
The Utopian Mindset must begin to permeate our consciousness if we are to overcome the challenges of 2000-2050 and beyond
Energy abundance is not the only type of abundance that our minds must learn to accept as possible for our species if we hope to turn things around. Bitcoin, for example, is currently being scapegoated in the media generally and is having endless disinformation hurled at its proof of work mining system based on the premise that it uses “too much” energy and too much of that energy is sourced from fossil fuels at this time.
But why not focus on the real problem? Why not see that a monumental and heroic effort to rid the world of dependence on “bad” and ultimately finite and limited sources of energy from fossil fuels and shift, ultimately, 100% of production to clean and renewable sources, needs to be job #1 for team earth?
Again, in an all-or-nothing scenario there is no option to equivocate. The negative reasons that fossil fuels must be phased out as soon as possible (‘the stick’ as per Cleo Abram in her video below) become more inevitable each minute and are already threatening everything humans have accomplished to date.
The positive motivation is less obvious for most at this point (‘the carrot’) and yet is ultimately more powerful (S3XY!) since it carries with it the hope that we can not only avert disaster, death and destruction, but can build a clean, abundant and infinitely expandable energy supply that could be used to build the first tentative steps toward a utopian dream.
Why go pro? Well, anyone who uses an iPhone in a work or business context can clearly benefit from the power under the hood (A15), and the new, better ways to communicate (messages, FaceTime, email improvements, etc) and manage information exchanges (notes upgrade, photo searching, live text, etc.).
And, let’s be honest, who that uses an iPhone for business doesn’t always want the newest and best? And who actually does have the funds to pay the lofty prices? On the face of it the slogan and the superficial idea it proposes is a simple extension of the demographics of Apple’s customer base.
The motto iPhone 13 has received is just the newest in a venerable pantheon of slogans created for some of the most successful and forward thinking ad campaigns. There are even those that feel that steve jobs had even more talent for choosing a marketing strategy than for anything else. Starting with the now historic super bowl ad for the original mac, which to this day is heralded as one of the best one-minute commercials ever Apple has ever since been known as a cult-like company that took an unfamiliar product, at a time when desk-top computers were virtually non-existent and sold them as something that could magically bestow a better life, and even contribute to the building of a better world.
The ad told the story of the apple home computer as the next big thing, and cast the macintosh product line as a true hero that would stand up to a projected story of corporate tyranny, embodied in IMB, Apple’s rival at the time. This was potentially the first tv commercial to sell a corporate identity, the Apple story as a cultural story, rather than as the first low cost microcomputer system.
Based on George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984 the ground breaking ad had one of the most unusual business mottos as the closing credit; “On January 24th Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like ‘1984.’ “
Though the commercial has been considered a huge success ever since, the rest of the story is that the general population was not quite ready for apple’s iconic game-changer at the time, and the high price of the first product version was, responsible for poor sales ultimately a commercial disaster.
Nevertheless, the technical revolution of the product, including the first graphic command interface, would eventually create millions of Apple fans, imbue the public with a sense of identification with the company as underdog, and the commercial would gain its rightful place as the best marketing tool of that era.
Decades later the legacy would be part of the road that Apple took to becoming a profitable company and eventually one of the world’s most powerful global enterprises.
The second, and possibly even more influential and best marketing campaigns would be ‘think different’ slogan, launched on August 8th, 1997.
This motto and the ad campaign that famously followed represented a whole new vision for not only how to promote the brand and increase sales without featuring a single Apple product, but also served to introduce apple fans to the idea of a different kind of change.
It signaled a new direction, both internally with the return of ad agency TBWA Chiat/Day after a ten year hiatus, but also making clear reference to the break from the downward trajectory that company had faced in the absence of Steve Jobs between 1985 and 1997, both leaving and returning on the same day, September 16.
This eternally iconic campaign with it’s clever yet engaging slogan, emphasized the concept of iconic misfits, and how they, as the “crazy ones” would embrace new ideas and change the world.
‘Think different’ ultimately became the most successful and famous tagline in the history of Apple. The text from one of the first commercials in the campaign had a brilliant script, read by Richard Dreyfuss;
“Here’s to the crazy ones,” Dreyfuss intoned. “The misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers — the round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently.”
Among the 17 great historical icons whose images were used in the first one minute ad, meant to link Apple innovation to the worlds all time great 20th century thinkers and doers, were; Albert Einstein, Pablo Picasso, Martin Luther King, Bob Dylan, Amelia Earhart, Mahatma Gandhi, Maria Callas, Richard Branson, Muhammad Ali, Jim Henson (and Kermit the Frog), Ted Turner, Thomas Edison, Martha Graham, Frank Lloyd Wright and John Lennon (with Yoko Ono).
Subsequent to the launch other tv ads as well as print, posters and billboards featured a variety of these plus additional icons.
Here’s what Apple says about the A15 Bionic chip in the iPhone 13 Pro:
With 5-nanometer technology, A15 Bionic — the fastest chip in a smartphone — features a new 5-core GPU in the Pro lineup that brings the fastest graphics performance in any smartphone, up to 50 percent faster than the leading competition, ideal for video apps, high-performance gaming, and the slate of new camera features.
On the surface then, it’s all good, the three terse words evoke the natural and logical, it’s a simple, clever slogan that targets the upper “Pro” demographic with an expensive but really cool device.
Lurking beneath is a mountain of meaning that connects to decades of research and innovation at Apple
But, wait, all the new iPhone 13s, along with any that use iOS 15, share many of the same “Pro” features, and thus we must all adapt to the embarrassment of riches, on some level.
Many questions arise; with “Pro” cameras (3x +) and software that leverages advanced chips, the neural engine, machine learning to extend our senses further in multiple directions at once, is there more going on here than meets the (camera’s) eye?
neural
Here’s more from Apple about the A15 Bionic chip in the iPhone 13 Pro:
A faster Neural Engine in A15 Bionic, new ISP, and advancements in computational photography power the all-new camera features on iPhone 13 Pro and iPhone 13 Pro Max. Photographic Styles allows users to bring their personal photo preferences to every image while still benefitting from Apple’s multiframe image processing.
If we are all aspiring toward a Pro iPhone for our Pro digital lives are there trade-offs and lurking benefits that are not as obvious as better photos, videos and more digital eye candy? If we are all destined to be Pro then is Pro destined to be just “normal”?
The evolution from analog to digital to a pre-metaverse life
Work from Home has now been dubbed “Fully Distributed Workforce”, meaning work from anywhere. This is conceivable due to the accelerated transition to an economy where everything is digital, computerized and removed from atoms (other than robot assisted tasks like building Teslas, etc).
Less than total, but more and more pervasive, the lives we lead are not enhanced by our cyborg extensions (previously known as “smart phones”) but rather the life itself takes place in this soon to be enhanced alternate reality.
The new 6-core CPU with two new high-performance cores and four new high-efficiency cores, is up to 50 percent faster than the competition and handles demanding tasks smoothly and efficiently. A new 16-core Neural Engine capable of 15.8 trillion operations per second enables even faster machine learning computations for third-party app experiences, as well as features like Live Text in Camera with iOS 15. And major advancements to the next-generation ISP provide improved noise reduction and tone mapping.
Long before a video-game-like AR and VR metaverse emerges, we are already experiencing a large part of our waking hours, both for work and “leisure” through the portal of our devices and the internet.
In many ways, this is so obvious as to need no mention, and yet, what is a Pro life in this digital universe worth compared to a “non-Pro” version of the same life?
The new Apple silicon hardware / software and all eco-system transition – already long underway and projected to converge into an early stage Kurzweilian Singularity of Apple in around 2024, is what will determine the nature of existence for the rest of the decade.
With software, hardware, and now AI and machine learning, all having a continuous and presumably infinite upgrade cycle, isn’t that like a kind of eternal life, at least for our digital selves, if not for our biological baggage?
Enter the iPhone 13 Pro; suddenly the experiences we wear as we take part in the fully distributed workforce sparkle and dazzle and become more effective and pleasurable to navigate.
The human link in the chain, absorbing, adapting, learning, digesting all these upgrades and improvements and how they change our work and play is a game of catch-up that will never end.
At this moment, the new “memories” feature in photos, combined with the new cameras in the iPhone 13 Pro Max are going to change how I view my immediate past (as reflected in the “memories” created by AI and machine learning forays into my ever growing photo library).
And that will make my ancient iPhone 5 photos seem as antiquated as a polaroid from 1984. And how will the current, insanely crisp, macos lensed food snaps look next to my “only great” iPhone 12 Pro portrait mode plates?
Not that these are weighty problems or even musings, but when your world is in the pre-metaverse of the Apple ecosystem in 2021, these thoughts do arise.
Are we all heading to a life where everything is Pro?
While, on the one hand, the goal of eternally enhanced digital communication is a very useful and important one, a possibly essential upgrade to our species just in time to prevent a climate apocalypse, on the other hand, how will the fully distributed workforce look once we are all Pro.
The transition from brink & mortar, skin, sinew and gray matter to a digitally enhanced cyborg communication center in our pocket is at a very early stage, to be sure.
At the same time things, including the relentless Apple upgrade cycle are going very, very fast, indeed.
If we are all destined to measure our contributions to work and society based on enlarged, enhanced communication capabilities, that enhancement will include what was once called “multi-media”. Hi resolution photos and videos, video calls with portrait mode, hell, feature films we shoot on the weekend, all the bells and whistles that once seems like a “hobby” for pleasure and in a rare case profit, all will now be central to our very existence.
Starting now, we are all Pro. The brightest and best will be more, they will be Oh. So. Pro.
