"Multiple factors account for the rising proportion of older Americans in prison. First, ever the trendsetters, baby boomers are somewhat more criminally active in late life than were previous generations."
Blogging on bureaucracy, organizations, USDA, agriculture programs, American history, the food movement, and other interests. Often contrarian, usually optimistic, sometimes didactic, occasionally funny, rarely wrong, always a nitpicker.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Those Damn Boomers
I'm a member of the silent generation (born 1941) so naturally I don't like the boomers. Turns out I'm right, as usual. Two sentences from a piece on trends in incarceration:
Alaskan Ag--The Reality of Climate Change
The skeptics of climate change challenge the accuracy of temperature graphs, so I like to find phenomena which can't be challenged, like the Northwest Passage or growing cabbages outdoors in Alaska.
(I remember back in the late 70's there were a few farms with bases or maybe normal crop acreages on record in Alaska. )
(I remember back in the late 70's there were a few farms with bases or maybe normal crop acreages on record in Alaska. )
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Congressional Research Service on Payment Limitation
A new website has lots of Congressional Research Service reports (which are usually not made public, unless the member of Congress who requested the report releases it), including this one on payment limitation issues.
The Times and GMO Crops--Something Screwy
NYTimes has a front page article on the usage of GMO crops: comparing the yields and herbicide usage between US/Canada and Europe. Not sure how I got this referral, but this commentary post
seems quite on the point, pointing out some of the problems in the article.
One thing I haven't seen discussed; perhaps it's too elementary for these writers to explain, but it's straight line graph of yields. Turns out the Times sticks its graphics in a separate url--I've stolen it here:
The arrow points to the place where GMO's come into play and the graph covers early 80's to 2015 I think. What I don't understand is what the lines represent. If they show the average increase/decrease in national yield each year, each would be a jagged line, with an upward slope. So it must be some average over the time period. But obviously an average over the whole time period won't show any change for GMO adoption in the middle of the period. It might be an average over the whole period for Western Europe and two averages for US/Canada--one up to the adoption of GMO's and one after, but it's certainly not labeled that way nor explained.
The unit of measure is "hectograms per hectare", which is a metric yield measure, like kilograms per square meter. I read the graph as implying the corn yields for the US and Western Europe are the same, which can't be right. I know damn well corn yields in the US vary greatly, so there's got to be a big difference between countries. I did a search and found this: "These analyses indicate that Western Europe started with a lower yield than the USA (29,802.17 vs 39,895.57 hectograms/ha) and managed to increase yield much more quickly (1,454.48 vs 1,094.82 hectograms/ha per year) before any use of GM corn by the USA." (The source is some Kiwi's blog working on the same issue back in 2013. See this post.)
On a football Sunday I've now exhausted my energy on this issue--perhaps more later.
seems quite on the point, pointing out some of the problems in the article.
One thing I haven't seen discussed; perhaps it's too elementary for these writers to explain, but it's straight line graph of yields. Turns out the Times sticks its graphics in a separate url--I've stolen it here:
The arrow points to the place where GMO's come into play and the graph covers early 80's to 2015 I think. What I don't understand is what the lines represent. If they show the average increase/decrease in national yield each year, each would be a jagged line, with an upward slope. So it must be some average over the time period. But obviously an average over the whole time period won't show any change for GMO adoption in the middle of the period. It might be an average over the whole period for Western Europe and two averages for US/Canada--one up to the adoption of GMO's and one after, but it's certainly not labeled that way nor explained.
The unit of measure is "hectograms per hectare", which is a metric yield measure, like kilograms per square meter. I read the graph as implying the corn yields for the US and Western Europe are the same, which can't be right. I know damn well corn yields in the US vary greatly, so there's got to be a big difference between countries. I did a search and found this: "These analyses indicate that Western Europe started with a lower yield than the USA (29,802.17 vs 39,895.57 hectograms/ha) and managed to increase yield much more quickly (1,454.48 vs 1,094.82 hectograms/ha per year) before any use of GM corn by the USA." (The source is some Kiwi's blog working on the same issue back in 2013. See this post.)
On a football Sunday I've now exhausted my energy on this issue--perhaps more later.
Saturday, October 29, 2016
Weren't Abedin's Emails Synced?
If I understand, the FBI got a PC/smartphone from Anthony Weiner as part of their investigation of his texting and found some of his wife's emails also on the PC/smartphone. I'm not clear:
- did Abedin have an email account on the PC or did she receive/send emails under her husband's account?
- if she had a separate email account (most likely) was it different than the account(s) for which she's already turned over emails?
- if it was different, was it associated only with the PC or their ISP account or was it a cloud account (i.e., hotmail/yahoo)?
- if it was different and unique to the PC/home, did she fail to reveal it to the FBI?
- if it was part of a cloud account (i.e., she had one email account which she accessed from different devices, which I assume is probably the most common configuration these days) was the account on the PC synced with the cloud account?
- if it was synced, then presumably the FBI should have already seen the emails.
Friday, October 28, 2016
Politics Back in the 18th Century
From Boston 1775 which has been running a series on the celebrations of Washington's birthday (first as president, then as historic man) and the controversies involved as Americans tried to figure out what sort of government and society they had, Albert Gallatin writes:
"The court [i.e., the Adams administration]is in a prodigious uproar about that important event. The ministers and their wives do not know how to act upon the occasion; the friends of the old court say it is dreadful, a monstrous insult to the late President; the officers and office-seekers try to apologize for Mr. Adams by insisting that he feels conscientious scruples against going to places of that description, but it is proven against him that he used to go when Vice-President."
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
First the Truck Drivers, Then the Soldiers
Kevin Drum blogs about the threat to long distance truck drivers (and a commenter notes the follow-on impacts on restaurants, etc.) presaged by Uber's use of a self-driving truck (with driver on board) to ship Budweiser a long distance.
Meanwhile, the NYTimes discusses new developments in weapons, including autonomous drones.
Meanwhile, the NYTimes discusses new developments in weapons, including autonomous drones.
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
GMO's in Africa
Technology Review has a piece on trials of GMO crops in Tanzania and the possibility African countries are becoming more open to them. I think this is how change occurs--while humans may resist the new, usually there come times when the advantages of the new outweigh the resistance.
But the example of Japan's resistance to modern firearms cautions that it can take a long time for the advantages to become clear.
But the example of Japan's resistance to modern firearms cautions that it can take a long time for the advantages to become clear.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Politics Is Checkers Not Chess
Some of the bloggers I follow, particularly Althouse and Powerline on the right but also some on the left, sometimes fall into fancy theories about what the other side is doing. IMHO they tend to be a bit paranoid, figuring that their opponents are smart enough to play a double game. Unfortunately I don't have any examples to hand; maybe now I'm posting on the subject I'll remember to point out future examples as I come across them.
As you can tell by my description, I usually doubt such posts. In my experience, it's often better to consider that people have tunnel vision and focus on the near than to expect them to be playing games. My metaphor in the title then is people play checkers, not chess. I suppose expert checker players can set traps, but even beginning chess players can come up with a knight fork, or a revealed check.
I'm blogging today because it seems to me that the Wikileaks of Podesta's emails tend to confirm my view--I haven't noted any fancy stratagems being revealed, just day-to-day planning.
As you can tell by my description, I usually doubt such posts. In my experience, it's often better to consider that people have tunnel vision and focus on the near than to expect them to be playing games. My metaphor in the title then is people play checkers, not chess. I suppose expert checker players can set traps, but even beginning chess players can come up with a knight fork, or a revealed check.
I'm blogging today because it seems to me that the Wikileaks of Podesta's emails tend to confirm my view--I haven't noted any fancy stratagems being revealed, just day-to-day planning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)