Category Archives: Web Article Review

AI-controlled stop lights

Boston and other cities have piloted tested AI-controlled stop lights and found that they can reduce “stop and go traffic”. This seems encouraging to me, but not very imaginative and I hope this is not the end of the story. Stop lights are such an old technology, and it seems to me that with modern LED lights and screens we should be able to do much better. Each traffic lane, including lanes dedicated to light and un-motorized vehicles, need their own signals. Let’s get rid of the colored circles and make every single traffic light a series of arrows, so that we can control who is allowed to go forward entirely separately from who is allowed to make a turn from each lane. Pedestrians also need their own signals, and the heavy/highway vehicles, light/unmotorized vehicles, and pedestrians must never, ever have signals that put them in the same space at the same time. I won’t buy the idea that this would be “too expensive” – I happen to be traveling in a middle income country at the moment and I see a lot more arrows and countdown timers on traffic lights compared to what we have in the U.S. (although the jurisdiction I am in is no traffic safety utopia for sure.) If this sounds like it would be too inefficient with today’s system, this is where AI should come in and make it efficient and safe, at each individual intersection and for the system as a whole.

Another level of science fiction would dispense with the lights and screens, and embed them in our vehicle windshields, augmented reality glasses, headphones, etc. Vehicles that are entirely computer controlled, of course, can just get their signals from cellular or wireless networks. We are not there yet at least when it comes to widespread access/adoption of these technologies, but the technologies themselves either exist or are on the horizon.

September 1 U.S. election check-in

Here’s my “official” take on the U.S. election for September 1. Sure, I admit I look at the polls almost every day. But I figure writing down the numbers and puzzling over them a bit once a month helps me to filter out some of the noise. So here goes. I still lean on the “Silver” numbers as probably reflecting the most well-thought-out adjustments of poll numbers to something close to reality. The 538 numbers are interesting to give a sense of how much small decisions about these adjustments matter, and the RCP numbers show what unadjusted (i.e., heavily biased) numbers would look like.

STATE2020 RESULTSilver Bulletin (August 1)Silver Bulletin (September 1)538 (September 1)RCP (September 1)
ArizonaBiden +0.4%Trump +2.7%Trump +0.6%Harris +0.3%Trump +0.5%
GeorgiaBiden +0.3%Trump +2.2%Harris +0.9%Harris +0.5%Trump +0.2%
WisconsinBiden +0.6%Harris +0.4%Harris +3.2%Harris +3.2%Harris +1.4%
North CarolinaTrump +1.3%Trump +2.2%Trump +0.4%Trump +0.3%Trump +0.6%
PennsylvaniaBiden +1.2%Trump +0.2%Harris +1.3%Harris +1.2%Harris +0.5%
MichiganBiden +2.8%Harris +2.6%Harris +1.9%Harris +2.4%Harris +1.1%
NevadaBiden +2.4%Trump +2.2%Harris +0.9%Harris +0.7%TIE

So going with the Silver numbers, the electoral college would be Harris 292, Trump 246.

270towin.com

Both Arizona and North Carolina have been in the Harris column during the month of August and flipped back over, while the numbers in Pennsylvania (>:-() seem like they might have tightened over the past two weeks. On the other hand, Georgia and Nevada are huge wins for the Harris campaign if they come through. Move Nevada and Georgia back into the Trump column and Harris still wins 270-268, with recount hilarity likely to ensue of course. This happens to match the RCP polling results above, if you give the Nevada tie to Trump. Surprisingly, she could lose Pennsylvania and still win the electoral college if everything else in the map above were to hold. But these things tend to be correlated and any event that moved Pennsylvania a whole point toward Trump would tend to move other states too. Unless we are talking some serious voter suppression or outright cheating by people in Harrisburg with pointy white hats in the back of their closets.

In the betting markets, PredictIt has Harris at a 56% chance of winning (the electoral college) vs. 47% for Trump (well actually $0.56 to $0.47 with about $0.08 given to other candidates, so apparently they don’t intend for these to add up close to 100%). Polymarket however has Trump at 51% to 48% for Harris. So whoever is betting on that site thinks they know something the rest of us do not.

So, my overall verdict is things look pretty good for Harris at the moment with two months to go. I think this election is hers to lose.

the staffing crisis

This article in Longreads blames the degradation of hotels and restaurants in Yosemite National Park on the Aramark corporation. I think it is part of a larger trend of absolute bare-bones staffing in the U.S. service industry which has been going on at least since the pandemic. Something just seems out of whack when workers are barely getting by, prices seem so high, and service seems so poor. Like it or not, a drop in migrant workers during and since the pandemic is part of the story, whether those pre-pandemic restaurant and hotel workers were undocumented or not. In the U.S. childcare industry, where minimum staffing levels are highly regulated, prices are out of reach of even the upper middle class. In more competitive and less regulated hospitality industries, staffing levels are just cut to the bone. In Asia where I happen to be at the moment, staffing levels at tourist attractions are much higher. This works because tourists are willing or able to pay higher prices than what the local economy alone would otherwise support, and because higher-income countries bring in workers from lower-income countries. Since this will probably never be palatable in the United States, and rents and overhead costs are not going anywhere but up, we are probably stuck with shitty service and miserably overworked restaurant and hotel staff for the foreseeable future.

the fastest trains in the world

Pop quiz: How many of the world’s 10 fastest trains are in the United States? I hope you didn’t answer anything other than 0. Our most impressive feat of transportation engineering of course has been to build a highway system so massive it sucks up all the money, attention, and imagination we could otherwise devote to any other type of transportation.

Wikipedia

Anyway, this link has a Youtube video of each of the world’s 10 fastest trains, which is cool. And yes, there is something slightly pornographic about these videos – basically nature has a plan for long skinny things slipping through fluids with minimal friction, and we’ll leave it at that. Of the 10, 4 are in Europe (Italy, Spain, France, Germany), 5 are in Asia (Korea, Japan, China x3) and 1 is in Africa (Morocco). One of the ones in China is a mag-lev train, which would be fun to ride. But if I had to pick just one, I would take the ride from Paris to Milan through the Alps. I would see two famous cities and countries I haven’t seen before, one of the world’s fastest train, a tunnel which literally took a generation to build, and hopefully a bit of the Alps themselves.

the latest miracle drugs

I remember when we were all supposed to take a baby aspiring to avoid inflammation, and at least some doctors were advocating preventive statins. Maybe some are still advocating those things, but the latest miracle drug seems to be Ozempic.

GLP-1 receptor agonist medications like Ozempic are already FDA-approved to treat diabetes and obesity. But an increasing body of research finds they’re also effective against stroke, heart disease, kidney diseaseParkinson’sAlzheimer’salcoholism, and drug addiction.

www.astralcodexten.com

So maybe everyone over 40 should start popping this stuff? I’m sure that’s what the drug companies want to hear.

Meanwhile, a proposal for the FDA to approve MDMA as a treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder was just rejected. It sounds like this may have been due to issues with the experimental trial, so somebody may try again eventually. There is also a “synthetic psilosybin” that it is rumored will be submitted for FDA approval soon. As I understand it, once a drug is FDA approved, any doctor can prescribe it for any symptom they want. So all you have to do is convince your doctor, if you can’t convince your doctor, find a doctor who is willing to be convinced.

I learned from this article that MDMA is technically an amphetamine and may affect blood pressure, so I would be hesitant to try it, or at least get used to it, for that reason. I have no such inhibitions about psilocybin, or legal cannabis for that matter. I won’t take any drug though, particularly in pill form, without knowing that it is from a regulated, quality-controlled source. The risk of contamination with fentanyl is just not worth the risk.

The time is now!!! (err…2016)

Bernie Sanders 2016

We’re not going to get Bernie Sanders as President of the United States. If we are lucky, we are going to get the next-in-line representative of the pro-big-business, pro-war center-right consensus, rather than the nuclear war and climate change treaty breaking, science denying, bigoted serial rapist. We are not going to get health care, child care, and education for the vast majority of hard working citizens any time soon.

Who is the next Bernie Sanders? It is not Kamala Harris. I don’t think it’s a member of the “squad”, who seem mostly caught up in rhetoric and symbolic action around race and gender, not benefits for working people. Bernie is not the most articulate or charismatic politician out there, he is just extraordinarily authentic and straightforward. He showed us the formula, now some talented leaders should be able to emerge and follow his example.

the universe is quite obviously a simulation

The universe is probably not a simulation on a silicone-based digital computer of the type humans have been able to conceive of and invent so far. But it seems useful to think of the universe, with its crystal clear gravitational, thermodynamic, and quantum operating rules (are these different things or one thing – they almost certainly are one thing, but don’t ask me to explain this, and don’t even ask Hawking or Einstein because they made some progress but weren’t able to fully explain these things), as some sort of operating system. Then all the events and information flows that take place within this operating system, including your and my consciousness and our seeming free choices, are enabled by and constrained by these rules. So that sounds like a simulation to me.

This is author Claire Evans describing a similar concept:

While writing about technology, I developed an interest in biotechnology, and in biology more generally. Right now there’s this intersection between computing and biology emerging simultaneously across disciplines. There are people creating artificial intelligence from the top-down, using traditional machine-learning methods, but there are also people working towards generating life from code from the bottom-up, using evolutionary methods. There are synthetic biologists programming cells like code, roboticists working with living matter, and researchers drawing inspiration from living systems—swarms of fish, flocks of birds, slime molds, or seedling roots—to imagine new computing architectures. Even traditional biologists are increasingly using terms like “computation” and “information processing” to talk about phenomena they observe in nature… 

I think we can learn a lot from trying to model natural systems. It’s only by attempting it that we realize how staggeringly complex even the simplest life forms are, and how completely bonkers it is that a single process could have brought us from a single cell to all the diversity of life on Earth. We’ll never be smart enough to create an algorithm with that kind of open-ended generative power, although it’s precisely its evolutionary creativity that brought us intelligence to begin with. For me, the ongoing life force that resists entropy—whatever it is that organizes living systems and makes them capable of complex emergent behaviors—is the most mystical thing. Thinking about it is as close as I get to religious feeling. It’s at the center of everything. 

I’m fascinated by the fact that every living thing processes information, or computes, in a sense. Living things are each perfect computers that only do one thing—run themselves—and even the simplest ones are so complex they’re impossible to model fully. There’s a really interesting open-source project going on right now to create a computational model of a microscopic roundworm with only a thousand cells. Even that is considered an ambitious, long-term goal. Like, maybe someday we can build a faithful model of a worm in the computerAnd that’s just one organism! And life is about relationships, the dynamic interactions between organisms. So the best we can do is sample here and there. Because ecologies are so complex, and because they operate at different scales simultaneously, and across time, the only way to get any understanding is to create a number of different models and see where they might overlap. That’s where the truth is, if it exists. 

I’m trying to model a fairly simple one-dimensional system of soil, water, plants (really just one plant) and the atmosphere at the moment. Even this is a significant feat for my Windows 11 “gaming laptop”, and it’s a pretty simplified representation of the complexity that really exists even in a flower pot (worms, for example, are not represented but in real life they can make a big difference in how water flows through soil. You don’t need Einstein or Hawking to explain these particular wormholes, although Einstein’s son Hans Albert actually made some discoveries in the area of soil and sediment – you could even say he was “ground breaking” – sorry). Ultimately though, it is governed by energy potentials, which comes back to gravity and thermodynamics. And I have come to understand the universe just a little bit better as I play with this model and look at model output and some data together.

the last days of World War II

There is a new book about the U.S. fire bombing and nuclear attacks on Japan, leading to Japan’s ultimate surrender in 1945. I haven’t read the book, just listened to the FreshAir interviewed with the author linked to here. A book I have read, and which influenced me profoundly, was Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire. This new book (based on the interview confirms a few things I understood from that earlier book.

  1. In terms of suffering and loss of life in a short time, the U.S. fire bombings of Tokyo are one of history’s greatest war crimes. This new book says however that the U.S. was aiming for military targets and the bombing technology of the time was not that precise. On the other hand, the military apparently realized pretty quickly how awful it was and kept doing it anyway. For those who don’t know, a hundred thousand people or more were basically cooked.
  2. The Japanese military was just not going to surrender. Their plan was civilians to fight to the death to the last man, woman, and child, with sticks and stones if necessary.
  3. Japanese civilians were largely on board with this plan. The U.S. island hopping campaign and invasion of Okinawa were horrible, and any invasion of the Japanese mainland would have been another level of horror, human death and suffering beyond that. You could argue that the lives of U.S. soldiers, who had just been through hell in Europe (although U.S. casualties of course paled in comparison to British, European, and Russian casualties, and there were virtually no U.S. civilian casualties) were valued more than the lives of Japanese civilians.
  4. The emperor was in favor of surrender for months leading up to the bombing, but the military was largely in control of the emperor. Even after the atomic bombing, the military was still split and the emperor basically went against them to publicly surrender.
  5. Truman was kind of a bastard. I stand by this. Had FDR lived, I of course can’t say whether anything would have turned out differently, but I like to think it might have.
  6. One argument I hadn’t heard was that the Japanese occupation of China and Southeast Asia was killing as many as 250,000 civilians a month (!), and by cutting that short the American atomic bombing saved more civilians than it killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Maybe, but I still think there is a moral difference between deciding to kill directly and indecision which allows others to continue killing.

Are there lessons for today’s urban warfare and civilians who are willing to fight (real or perceived) enemies to the death. I won’t go there at the moment, but at least the number of zeros on today’s death and suffering is far fewer than the 1940s. Of course, one nuclear detonation could change that in mere moments.

Breaking news: a self-driving car “nearly crashes”

On the day this computer-driven car “nearly crashed”, how many cars driven by human beings actually crashed? How many human beings were killed or horribly injured? How many of these people killed or horribly injured were children? I am not asking the media to suppress news of the imperfection of computer-controlled vehicles, just to provide some context. And I think the context will show that even today’s imperfect technology is able to drastically reduce human lives lost and suffering compared to the status quo. And the technology will continue to improve.

existential threats and Trump

Some experts say (Toby Ord is one) that the odds of human extinction or at least the end of civilization as we know it is about 1 in 6 over the next hundred years. No recent administration has really done anything to address these risks, although Obama made some rhetorical flourishes in that direction. Trump actively increased the risk of human extinction by withdrawing from the Paris climate treaty, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, and the Iran nuclear treaty. This is another realm of immorality beyond being a mere serial rapist and tax cheat, and plenty of reason that electing him again is morally unfathomable.

The rhetoric we hear often paints a contrast between international cooperation and “pursuing national interests”. But what could be more in an individual nation’s interest than trying to ensure that the civilization it is a part of will continue to exist?