Sunday, September 20, 2020

Stealing The Wrong Answers: Chinese Policies Seem Too Focused On The Past

 The Myth of the Twentieth Century guys mentioned near the end of the podcast a story about a group of Chinese nationals coming over to America and making extensive efforts to steal seed and perhaps map out corn fields in the Midwest.

I think this is, as has often been the case, another example of China fighting an old fight.  

Certainly, genetically alter crops are a sort of innovation, but we already have plenty of evidence that our over-dependence on them- and on corn, soy beans, etc...  is not good.

Government interference in agriculture keeps us stuck on a path we've been on since the World wars, yet all indications point to a need to end heavily monocropping and move into restoring biomes.  The genetically altered, heavily subsidized crops are ultimately a dead end.  We can certainly reach parity in production, and probably increase over all production with a larger number of crops- and the North American grasslands can produce a massive amount of beef and other ruminant animals.  Plenty of food, and we get to repair our ecosystems too.

Now, maybe China is studying this to help it become a dead end faster.  It wouldn't make much sense for them to attack our food supply though- we have been the bread basket for Communists since there were Communists.  The Chinese communists seem to have figured out how not to do some of the dumbest things various commies have done, but it's still a huge country with a lot of mouth to feed.  It is most likely these surveys of Midwestern farms are an attempt to copy, not destroy.  They still have enough disruptions in their own food supply for them to want American supplies available.

This is like spending a lot of time and energy trying to figure out how to make the old VHS videotapes while there's plenty of better tech lying around.  

Thursday, September 3, 2020

The Public Health Travesty

    Perhaps the time has finally come for them to stop it with the pandemic nonsense.  They just touted that various steroids help with COVID-19. They showcase Dexamethasone, which I had seen mentioned earlier in a Japanese youtube video.  I still don't know enough Japanese to be able to find it again, but the point is, clearly some folks knew about it earlier.

And there is another video I will not be able to find- a doctor talking about budensonide- he got banned by various social media sites- but basically, when people came to him he asked himself what would he usually prescribe for these respiratory symptoms, and thus gave them budensonide.

Now, after hearing this I went and dug into one of my cabinets.  At some point- maybe 10yrs or so ago, I had some sort of respiratory thing going on.  I was given two medications by a doctor- Ventolin and Pulmicort.  Pulmicort turns out to be a brand name for this budensonide.  It came in a weird deliver system because it is fine powder you inhale, so the product is shaped like a bullet with a dial at one end so you get the right measured amount and then suck this stuff into your lungs.  I didn't like this idea very much.  I was much more comfortable with the Ventolin.

So this budensonide sat in my cabinet for years and is probably no good anymore.

Why do I mention all this?

If we had zero press on this virus more people would be alive, because doctors would have stuck to what they know.  But since we had the sky is falling pandemic nonsense, most doctors followed CDC guidelines, which is to do nothing until someone needs hospitalization.  Now, these previous protocols did regularly treat coronaviruses, because that's a large family of viruses, not just one single monster nobody knows anything about.  

But they emphasized testing, and emphasized staying home and isolating from anyone for 14 days.  And if you got bad enough, they emphasized those damn ventilators, which increased your risk of dying dramatically.  It may be great news they are finally admitting we have treatments, but it's absolutely horrible when you realize we would have been better off if no one knew anything about this disease.

Public health fails again.  

Thursday, August 6, 2020

Defending Free Speech Is Often A Poor Strategy

Another day, another story about a social media company suspending, blocking, deplatforming- whatever- someone because they allegedly violated terms of service. 

 The standard response to be indignant and sputter about free speech.

 LEE KUAN YEW was in a similar situation as Trump is now. LKY went directly for stronger libel and slander laws to stop the media from constantly dragging him and his administration through the mud.

Now, naturally, those disposed to yell free speech in the first place tend to not be inclined to do such a thing. They like free speech, and tend to be fair- they want their enemies to have the same freedom of speech. 

 But we need to think in terms of what social media is doing now (not to mention the horrible lying the more mainstream media has been doing, but that's more directly answered by LKY's approach). 

When a so-called 'platform' company determines you have violated their terms of service, that company is implying something. Recently Twitter said something about Trump or his campaign spreading misinformation about the coronavirus. This statement, at the very least, implies Trump or his campaign lied.  

There have been other sorts statements companies have made, which, for instance, implies violence. 

And then there's every goofy decision- whether it's banning Alex Jones or shutting down random twitter accounts dedicated to frog memes. 

Every TOS decision is beyond accusatory- it is framed as a statement of fact. And too often, it is not a statement of fact, but rather a lie. Lies must be addressed.

The right tends to ignore the lie and argue the principle of free speech. The lie then becomes part of a background of 'facts'. Those that do not pay close attention may begin to think the lie is true. 

Meanwhile, these organizations continue doing exactly what they are doing, over and over, regardless of the freedom of speech arguments. If, however, each of these decisions by social media companies were a financial hazard- well, they'd either stop quickly or go out of business due to exorbitant legal costs.

Monday, June 29, 2020

Metastasis: The Goal Is Always More, Even If It Kills The Host

In many senses, it seems we have protests without a coherent goal, but from a systems perspective we know what will be promoted. Men remotely capable of being police officers will be police officers in some sense, but there will be yet another layer of bureaucrats overlaid on already existing processes. Many of these will be women who learned some power point in college and have some pathetic degree, which ensures they know little to nothing. They will hamper whatever is left of the police force, and it will be very likely the sort of people would want to be police officers (remotely competent) will leave in frustration and go elsewhere.

If, however, we stopped some of the worst practices in this country, we would be stopping the 'progress' the left has imagined it has had, while returning sanity to our lives. At some point, the Minneapolis power structure decided it was a good idea to get their police force trained by Israelis in the fine art of kneeling on someone's neck as a restraint technique. And, pertinent too, they did this rather recently- in an age where cell phones with video cameras in them were known things.

Would a city liable for property damage allow such training? I think not. It is a fundamental thing to understand- either the bureaucrats are held liable, or they run rampant. And so they have. The city is not liable, as it once was, back before all this revolting 'progress.' And now the police force isn't even required to protect and serve. No, they are now basically enforcers- revenue generators for the city, ultimately.

But I don't think police particularly view themselves in this way. I think many continue to try to protect and serve. But they are given orders, and despite whatever leeway they may have in interpreting them, those orders- not the feelings of a particular officer- are what usually puts them at odds with the people. If you have a quota of tickets you've got to hand out, you have to make that quota, even if they refuse to tell you the specific number. They'll just keep telling you you have it wrong until you get the right number.

There can't be, in any sense, a situation in which ten more voices, some of which will no doubt contradict each other, and many of which will no doubt derive their livelihoods from the actions of the police, court system, city hall, etc...- no way, in which more of this cancer will solve the problem. The craziness of the bureaucracy will be more pronounced, and the quality of the police force will be reduced.

Already, if you pay attention to whatever bureaucratic rules you have to follow, especially after COVID- isn't it technically impossible to work? Are you asked questions about your health? Do you gloss over that coughing fit you had because you know why it happened? Or your breathing problems because you know it's the mask they make you wear and not a virus. What if we stopped providing the bureaucrats the benefit of our ability to discern reality and just scrupulously reported? We'd get nothing done.

When does this actually become a problem for the bureaucrats? Don't they need us to get stuff done? It doesn't seem like it. It seems like they get rewarded as things go to shit because the political answer always seems to be more of them for everyone one of us.

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Pattern of Omission: Could an AI pick up on it?

I have seen a similar pattern happening in the media in many science related fields. In some cases it's actual researchers apparently committing these acts. The most obvious case right now is hydroxychloroquine. This was a safe drug, there is research into it for coronaviruses in the past. Zinc and azithromycin are part of the original protocol because of the mechanism via which scientist think it stops viral replication.

The pattern of omission here is there is usually no mention of zinc, sometimes no mention of azithromycin, and definitely no mention of the proposed mechanism. I haven't heard any mention of ionophores and how they would help zinc get into cells in order to stop viral replication from any mainstream source.

This isn't new. Nutritional research is rife with this sort of thing. Allegedly low carb diet studies, where, for instance the rat chow they used isn't remotely low carb enough to engender ketosis. The questionable nature of using rats in the first place. I suppose it's not quite as bad as poisoning rabbits with cholesterol- something rabbits wouldn't ever get in their diet normally- and then declaring cholesterol bad for humans, but it's pretty bad.

But, in any case, it seems to me these things might be trackable in some way. It's not easy for a program to see the omission, but we probably have enough examples of the pattern where a program could guess the pattern is re-occurring. Feed it the good examples of hydroxychloroquine being explained appropriately, and then the bad examples. Same thing with other clear examples of omission. Then let it crawl the web and try it out on many things. I think it's possible because I think there's more than just the omission itself. There are probably word choices, grammar, maybe even simple things- like author names- that could help a program reliably categorize whether there is a pattern of omission.

There's the crassly simpler thing to do- figure out what Silicon Valley is suppressing. This is probably good on it's own in a certain sense, but unfortunately, it is not enough for what I want, which is to understand what is true. Or at least have a more accurate map of the territory than what they want to provide.

But it is clear there are patterns. I suspect Silicon Valley has noticed this, and I think they go with these big name companies as the fact-checkers, or as authoritative voices, because it's easier to keep the narrative front and center that way. An A.I. would have no particular regard for the narrative, nor does the narrative remain the same in any sane way for it to be a standard to measure against. Indeed, I remember finding people in the field were also into making language gender nuetral- so I suspect they were attempting to get the result they want, but in the end it wouldn't make any sense. You just hobble your program that way. It needs to sample what is and identify patterns that actually exist.

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

When Science Attacks

I think what we have seen so far is very consistent with a chimera accidentally (or otherwise) being released from a lab. We have unexplained superspreader events of a virus that doesn't live long in non-lab like conditions. So, what's likely here is that if you get the early release, it's very contagious, but as it spreads through the population it reverts back to normal coronavirus like behavior.

This is quite likely some sort of AIDS vaccine research.

And extremely likely some of the very same people responsible for lockdown are also responsible for this research. Possibly even the original SARS could have been the same situation. In the U.S., this type of research is banned, and it seems highly likely that they moved operations to China.

Unfortunately, China is currently being rather aggressive and doesn't want to divulge information about this situation. I think this is a mistake. It is simply hardening global opinion against China, and their current policy ends up being de facto pro-deep state. The very same deep state responsible for the various color revolutions, and the Hong Kong umbrella revolution, which Xi wisely and patiently handled in a way that kept deep state claws off of their interests.

It would make much more sense now to reveal this research, and those responsible for it, and point out that these people were taking advantage of China to do something dangerous there, which could not be done here.

This would change the political winds here in America, and potentially defuse anti-Chinese sentiment, especially among people who dislike globalists like Bill Gates or others who are playing this highly dangerous game with vaccines due to the indemnification given to vaccine companies. It has gotten so silly, it's doubtful the virus will even stick around long enough for them to create a vaccine, and some vaccine companies have basically turned into pump and dump stock operations- rely on a little good press to boost the stock, and then sell- seldom even bringing any product to market. Increasingly, too, they turn to governments to mandate vaccines- which in many cases have no value at all to those receiving them- especially with extremely young children.

In any case, as summer approaches, we get more sun and therefore, less virus. Sunlight directly kills the virus, reducing likelihood of transmission if you are outside versus hiding indoors, and sunlight also improves your immune system, enabling you to fight it off more successfully if you do get it. Hopefully people start to notice this, and we do not have to suffer much longer with this incongruity of being masked up while it's sunny outside.

Thursday, May 14, 2020

Graduating From Night Owl Status

I've done a bunch of things over the years which have greatly improved my circadian rhythms. Underlying all these things is this idea that we probably should be out in the sun a lot, and not have a lot of artificial light at night. The ideas are similar to the paleolithic diet, but we are not in the paleolithic, and I have to do things like work inside under florescent lights rather than be outside.

In the mornings I take 5000iu of vitamin D3 (probably a good idea to get some K2 to go with it). I got this idea from the late Seth Roberts, best known for his Shangri La diet, but he made a lot of great observations on his blog over the years. Another observation he made that seems to help in this arena is what he called morning faces. The premise was that we are designed to socialize, to we will tend to be more awake at times when we expect to be socializing- but you can actually use this by doing things like watching youtube videos where someone is just talking straight at the camera.

I try to get out in the sun and walk around with my glasses off during the day to get the full spectrum of light. Seems like the more sun the better, except don't burn- which seems deceptively simple, but in practice I have had to remember to start with really small amounts of time and build up, especially if I try to sunbathe. In recent years there's been some suggestion that it is the high Omega-6 oils that are causing the bad sunburns. My O-6 intake is pretty low, and although I did get red this spring, it did not progress to the type of sunburns I used to get as a child.

I eat a relatively low carb diet most of the time, though I am not sure how important this is for sleep. I do feel a lot of carbs right before sleep will likely disrupt sleep- perhaps wake me up due to low blood sugar later in the night. Also, I tend to get cramps in my feet and legs if I eat too many carbs and then go lay down in bed.

I take 3mg of melatonin at night and put on blue blocking glasses. I also have my windows covered so light won't come in at night.

One of the things I noticed was that the switch to daylight savings time messes me up. Ideally, I would wake up with the sun, perhaps not take anything at all, and let my body produce all this naturally. But since I have to work, I decided to set my wake up time in the summer at 6:30am, and sleep time is around 9:00pm. I take the melatonin at 9, and put on the glasses, but I don't necessarily go to sleep right away. In the mornings I will get up regardless of the day of the week and take the D3, but if I am still sleepy on the weekends, I'll go back to sleep.

In the winter, I get up at 5:30am and take the melatonin at 8pm. This means I don't have to shift twice a year, which we all end up doing when we follow the daylight savings time edicts.

I have coffee in the morning. There have been times I tried not drinking coffee and I did not notice a great difference. I have noticed alcohol close to bed can disrupt sleep pretty severely, leading to waking up in the middle of the night. From experimenting, I have noticed it is probably best to stop drinking at 6pm. It seems, from a dose perspective I can handle about 4oz of liquor or about a half bottle of wine without sleep disruption- but of course, much depends on how much over time, and how long before sleep.

It takes time, but eventually I got so habituated to it I noticed I get sleepy at the right time even in situations where I didn't expect it. I noticed this once at my mother's house where there was socialization, way too much artificial light, and I was mistaken about what time it was. And I have also begun to awaken a little before my alarm from time to time.