Moved from D1 forum

[eppie]

Had Ralph Nader and the greens not taken roughly 2.75% of the vote in the 2000 election, Al Gore would have almost certainly been elected president. Power is not just winning elections, but influencing their results, as anyone with the smallest inkling of European politics can tell you. The US has a monolithic system dominated by two parties, but by and large, this is the result of peoples' choices. When other parties are defeated, is it their lack of access to funds? Or the unpopularity of their platforms and candidates? Surely some of both, but even in the most diverse countries, voters still display something at least resembling the left-right split in the US. This is a generalized phenomenon. There is no great mass of popular opinion waiting to rally behind a radical party, only a whole lot of people with a whole lot of different opinions.

-Jester

This is an interesting point though. Some time ago I read an article about some journalists that explained to a group of Americans certain laws and regulations and systems which were implemented in Sweden and the US ....without telling them where they were from. It turned out that a majority (I believe large*) favored the Swedish system over the American one.

Once you have a quasi two party system there is no turning back. You end up with two parties on each side of the middle with lots of career politicians whose only real goal it is to keep their job, and other types of personal gain.
Even when a considerable part of the voters actually wants something else, people will vote for the least bad party....just so that the worst party will hopefully not win.


* to make sure kandrathe doesn't come back to me with one of his websearches and tells me it was actually not a large majority)


ps this thread became really spectacular!!
I was planning to write a reply on kandrathe's story about raising cows, but I don't know what that really was about.

[Jester]

Even when a considerable part of the voters actually wants something else, people will vote for the least bad party....just so that the worst party will hopefully not win.

Arrow's impossibility theorem tells us that voting is a nontrivial game. There is no system that both accurately represents voter preferences, and is immune to tactical voting. Different systems generate different problems - I like some kind of mixed constituency/proportional top up model myself. It's no magic bullet, but maybe it's least-bad.

The real core of the problem is that people have neither well-ordered preference sets nor complete information. You can get people to agree that apples are better than oranges today, and that oranges are better than apples tomorrow, simply by changing the framing of the question, or asking them in different moods, or telling them a few well-selected facts (true or otherwise), or any of a hundred other tricks.

No country has gotten around this intrinsic problem. Every country I have ever been in seems to think that their own politics is a uniquely terrible disaster*, and most also seem to think that the solutions are simple - until they have to agree on them with someone else, at which point it all falls apart.

-Jester

*They are all wrong, unless they are Italians. My condolences, Italy.

[kandrathe]

* to make sure kandrathe doesn't come back to me with one of his websearches and tells me it was actually not a large majority)

I believe there is something unique to the distinctly independent and egalitarian culture in Scandinavia (and exported here). Due to the convenience of e-mail and airplanes, our disconnected families have become reacquainted, allowing me to understand better the origins of my families various Scandinavian behaviors (and misbehavior).

ps this thread became really spectacular!!

I was planning to write a reply on kandrathe's story about raising cows, but I don't know what that really was about.

Well, at least an aptly bovine reference to this mess of excrement being flung about wildly. Have I ever told you the story about my friends who make their own fireworks?

[--Pete]

Hi,

Owned.

We've progressed beyond that stage of history. Ownership is now a relic of the bygone capitalist era.

However, we're still in the pw0nd stage.

Does anyone have a particularly good recipe for Mint Juleps? That is if it doesn't rain.

I live in Seattle. Hot rum toddies are much more appropriate than mint juleps here. Once upon a time I did live in Atlanta and knew about mint juleps -- but those memories have rusted away.

*They are all wrong, unless they are Italians. My condolences, Italy.

No condolences needed. As long as we can have good coffee, good wine, three excellent meals a day, and an afternoon nap (preferably with someone else's SO) we're satisfied. We tried all that empire/government/economic/religious nonsense two millenia ago -- all it got us was barbarian invasions.

(The above was for humor -- though an Italian by birth, I've long since given my full alliance to the USA.)

--Pete

---

Hi,

Have I ever told you the story about my friends who make their own fireworks?

It's hardly a challenge, unless they use nitro-glycerin as the explosive.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

It's hardly a challenge, unless they use nitro-glycerin as the explosive.

No, I don't think they wanted to dance that close to death. Being perfectionists and engineering types, they worked diligently on formulating the optimal mix for their version of the silver salute. They'd number each salute, and test them by measuring how high they would blow a steel cauldron. I remember they quickly moved up to perchlorate, picric acid and aluminum powder to maximize the oxidation, and acceleration. They used a glue gun to seal the tubes, and being federally licensed, they were able to build pretty walloping salutes. Ah, memories. One moved away, and one died... from natural causes, not explosives. I always felt that with friends like these, who needs an untrained militia.

[eppie]

, picric acid and aluminum powder to maximize the oxidation, and acceleration.

Picric acid is pretty dangerous, especially when dry. I would never use that in fireworks.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Picric acid is pretty dangerous, especially when dry. I would never use that in fireworks.

It's actually the salts of picric acid that are highly unstable (although still more stable than nitroglycerin, or than lead, silver, or mercury fulminate (IIRC)).

I would never use any of them in fireworks.

--Pete

[LavCat]

It's actually the salts of picric acid that are highly unstable (although still more stable than nitroglycerin, or than lead, silver, or mercury fulminate (IIRC)).

I would never use any of them in fireworks.

--Pete

Myself, I used a mixture of powdered sucrose, powdered magnesium, sodium peroxide, potassium chlorate, calcium carbide, iodine, and a very small amount of oxidane.

Had one friend whose specialty was mercury fulminate, and another who was into nitroglycerin (as I recall he said his father's company manufactured it). Then again, I had friend who tragically just tried gasoline. Reminds me of another friend whose professor, Louis Fieser, invented napalm. Though I think we've been through this thread before.

Changing the subject only slightly, my grandson recently sent up his first rocket! Unfortunately we never were able to find it. Sad as this was, it led to a lovely conversation with one of my retired coworkers: I had never known she was into such things.

In researching Fieser's wartime work I was amused (in a solemn way) to learn of Project X-Ray, which is said to have incinerated an American airbase in New Mexico. One of the participants in X-Ray was the actor Tim Holt, though the description of the airbase immolation reminds me more of Police Academy than of Tim Holt movies. I particularly liked the bit about the "general's car".

I've been working my way through the series and last night watched Police Academy 3. I have Police Academy 4 in my disc drive, but ran out of time before the sun came up. Films 1&2 stand on their own, but 3 really requires having watched the preceding ones. Turns out 4 is only available in "Fullscreen", which is neither true nor funny.

But back to Tim Holt and the bats, I have long been interested in watching The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. We have the DVD and I placed a hold on it. This film is iconic, if only for the stinkin' badges. Which should be enough to get this thread moved to the WoW forums in my opinion.

[kandrathe]

Which should be enough to get this thread moved to the WoW forums in my opinion.

It is true that our threads are non-linear to the point of being tree shaped, thanks for the forks!

[--Pete]

Hi,

Had one friend ... who was into nitroglycerin ...

Easy stuff to make. In high school, I built an outdoor lab in the back yard. I used railroad ties and triple 1" glass plate (with clear adhesive between the pieces and a zig-zag mirror (2 reflections to eliminate the left-right confusion). I made Waldos from bamboo, wire, and pulleys. I made most of the explosives whose formulas were obtainable from the library -- destroying about a dozen home made work tables in the process. I'm surprised your friend survived -- nitro is nasty stuff.

Changing the subject only slightly, my grandson recently sent up his first rocket!

Congratulations. I think I still have a box or two of rocketry odds and ends (including a launch platform and about 40 assorted Estes engines) somewhere around here. It's a fun hobby, but all that running is too much for my old legs. My last attempt -- liquid fueled X-15 replica with radio control for recovery and landing -- got rekitted a few times before making one last, expensive, crater.

... The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. ...
... if only for the stinkin' badges.

I love that scene, how Alfonso Bedoya goes from defensive ("Badges? We ain't got no badges.") to confident ("We don't need no badges!") to aggressive ("I don't have to show you no stinking badges!")

I was on a trip, carrying classified material, with a supervisor once. There was a strike going on, so we crossed the picket lines not wearing our ID badges. We got to the security office, where we were going to store the briefcase with the classified material. When we got inside, the security guard in charge asked us where our badges were. The wise guy supervisor got about as far as "We don't need no ..." before three automatics were aimed at us. Needless to say, we hurriedly showed our badges.

Did you know that in November, in the North Atlantic, a large liner (like, say, the Mauritania) could routinely bury as much as a quarter of its length in an oncoming wave?

--Pete

[LavCat]

Did you know that in November, in the North Atlantic, a large liner (like, say, the Mauritania) could routinely bury as much as a quarter of its length in an oncoming wave?

No, but in the same month actor Lance Kinsey ran naked through the streets of Toronto at night for the filming of Police Academy 3.

I think I've mentioned that the only large liner I've been on was torpedoed and sunk*, so I try not to think too much about such things. (*Not while I was on it, fortunately.)

[--Pete]

Hi,

I think I've mentioned that the only large liner I've been on was torpedoed and sunk*, so I try not to think too much about such things. (*Not while I was on it, fortunately.)

Wow, I missed that. What are the details? Where, when, why, all that good stuff. Inquiring minds ...

--Pete

[LavCat]

Hi,

I think I've mentioned that the only large liner I've been on was torpedoed and sunk*, so I try not to think too much about such things. (*Not while I was on it, fortunately.)

Wow, I missed that. What are the details? Where, when, why, all that good stuff. Inquiring minds ...

--Pete

The liner was the Raffaello. I took a crossing in her heyday. Shared wine with the rich and famous, and no, I shan't drop names. Sadly with the advent of air travel and oil prices such things faded into history. She was sold to Iran in 1976 and subsequently sunk by an Iraqi torpedo in 1983: 28° 49′ 0.24″ N, 50° 52′ 36.58″ E.

[--Pete]

Hi,

The liner was the Raffaello.

Thanks. Wikied her. Interesting history.

--Pete

[Nystul]

Ah, I guess this is Junior high.

Told you so. Neener, neener.

I've been thinking deep thoughts about this "cost to the commons" issue. Clearly even if every nation is a good communist enlightened state, there will be some sort of market dynamic between the nations. Something may be in the best interest of a certain country and yet globally harmful. What we need is a single Communist World State, so that for example Supreme Brother Eppie's words of wisdom on beef rations can be applied equally to every man, woman, and child around the globe. And everyone can play Diablo for free (although personal computers may not be allowed if the world electric supply cannot support one for every family).

Until that day comes I will be eating as many steer and piggies as my pocket book allows, and thanking the good Lord for high metabolism.

[--Pete]

Hi,

What we need is a single Communist World State, ...

Yes. That is one of the requirements for "true" communism to work (or, looking at it from a different point of view, a common excuse why all attempts at communism to date have failed). I think it says something that capitalism can work in a world that has everything from (almost) a laissez-faire free market to strict communism, but communism needs to be protected to thrive.

Economists need to spend less time reading Smith and Marx and looking at history and more reading Johnny von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern and looking at game theory. Especially the results from studying and modeling the prisoners' dilemma which are coming very close to explaining what we call "ethical" behavior, including ethical economic behavior. Not to mention explaining why we are so much ruder on the highway (automotive or informational) than in person.

--Pete

[Jester]

Economists need to spend less time reading Smith and Marx and looking at history and more reading Johnny von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern and looking at game theory. Especially the results from studying and modeling the prisoners' dilemma which are coming very close to explaining what we call "ethical" behavior, including ethical economic behavior. Not to mention explaining why we are so much ruder on the highway (automotive or informational) than in person.

My sense is that economists spend almost zero time with Smith these days, and less with Marx, but quite a lot with game theory.

What they don't do so much, is go back and reapply the basic insights gained from game theory to the big picture ideas of the old economists, and instead spend their days designing ever more esoteric mathematical contraptions with it. There seem to be sharply diminishing returns to the insights gained from such formalizations, but since the win for the economist is in publications rather than understanding per se, I'm not holding out much hope.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

There seem to be sharply diminishing returns to the insights gained from such formalizations, but since the win for the economist is in publications rather than understanding per se, I'm not holding out much hope.

OMG*, economics has become a branch of theoretical physics. Or, perhaps the converse.

* Strictly a meaningless exclamation. Not to be interpreted as any statement of belief.

--Pete

[GhastMaster]

OMG*, economics has become a branch of theoretical physics. Or, perhaps the converse.

* Strictly a meaningless exclamation. Not to be interpreted as any statement of belief.

--Pete

LOL*, That asterisk was pretty damn funny.

* Yes, I really did laugh out loud.

[kandrathe]

Economists need to spend less time reading Smith and Marx and looking at history and more reading Johnny von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern and looking at game theory. Especially the results from studying and modeling the prisoners' dilemma which are coming very close to explaining what we call "ethical" behavior, including ethical economic behavior. Not to mention explaining why we are so much ruder on the highway (automotive or informational) than in person.

My sense is that economists spend almost zero time with Smith these days, and less with Marx, but quite a lot with game theory.

What they don't do so much, is go back and reapply the basic insights gained from game theory to the big picture ideas of the old economists, and instead spend their days designing ever more esoteric mathematical contraptions with it. There seem to be sharply diminishing returns to the insights gained from such formalizations, but since the win for the economist is in publications rather than understanding per se, I'm not holding out much hope.

I watched an interesting show on Hawking recently, in which he described the elegant manner in which imperfections cause folding in various aspects of our reality.

In general, humans are pretty simple minded creatures, and so we cling to our new toys and theories. Hopefully, we are in an aftermath of an era which is characterized by over reliance on what computers can do for us in terms of allowing us to create predictive models.

What is frustrating about software construction in general, and I extrapolate this to other modeling in general, is that you can describe a great deal of the normal behavior of a thing with a small amount of concise and elegant design. But, then, the devil is in the details. As you factor in exception, after exception, what started out as a simple elegant algorithm quickly becomes a Frankenstein of a twisted logic (structure).

Enter Chaos Theory... Or, the non-linear equation. The problem this raises in my field is that in general, humans are pretty simple minded creatures. We rely on a process of unraveling complicated things in an ordered process of decomposition. Based on that decomposition, or simplification, it is easy to draw a set of logical (linear) conclusions based on the examination of parts of the complicated problem. However, the world is probably not so much described by linear concepts, but rather remains and will remain predictable in special circumstances where brief linearity exists or is enforced.

Really though, because of the increasing velocity of change, it is becoming very, very difficult to use computer modeling, or statistical methods to make predictions. These methods can give us insight and a brief glimpse of possible conclusions based upon the limited reality that is modeled (e.g. our discussion on predictive climate change models). I believe and tend to trust more of a Delphi method, gathering many predictions/estimates (that use reasonable methodologies) and then based on all that data, make a reasonable justifiable prediction.