Science fiction is what happens when we’re not paying attention

Ant-sized radio/controller.

Popular science fiction often pictures a world that is radically different. Domed cities, flying cars, undersea communities, and colonies on the moon. All that may happen, but don’t hold your breath.

In the meantime, a much more prosaic but enormous revolution has occurred.

Take a look at 30-year-old pictures of your home town. And look again today. You will find many more similarities than differences. The same roads, buildings, schools, and hospitals for the most part. There are differences, no doubt, but the sameness is palpable.

But peel back the covers and take a closer look. Today, the people in those buildings carry personal supercomputers capable of many billions of operations per second. What is possible with that unimaginable power which, just a few decades ago, would have required a room-sized behemoth?

These magical devices are capable of assuming many roles. Camera, video recorder, music player, high-res movie viewer, GPS navigation device (land, sea, and air), detailed weather and radar station, foreign language tutor, voice directed personal assistant, capable game console, and much, much more. That this tiny device can speak to you and understand your spoken commands is alone beyond the fond desires of computer scientists of the last century.

But all this is nothing compared to the most important function: personal communicator. This tiny device which slips into a pocket can be used to talk to any one of billions of other people on earth. Or send and receive emails and text messages instantly. This interconnectedness, which drives social media, overcomes tyrants, and ties far-flung families together, is the most revolutionary change in communication in human history.

Over many millennia, since humans first developed the ability to speak, the speaker and the listener had to be in close proximity in order to communicate. Hunters talked and planned tactics. Leaders spoke to assembled citizens. Romans were entertained in the Coliseum. But all this required physical proximity in real time. If you arrived late, you didn’t hear the message.

The next wave arrived with the invention of writing, which was slow and expensive, but much improved with the invention of the printing press. Once information could be recorded either by writing or printing, the requirement of adjacency was removed. A writer could record her thoughts in London and send them via schooner and coach to Paris, where the words would be read and appreciated. So while proximity was no longer a requirement, the time for transmission was often days or weeks or months.

It wasn’t until the harnessing of electricity that we began to make real progress. Initially the telegraph and then the telephone allowed us to send information across the continent, first in minutes but soon in seconds.The time dimension of communication was being greatly reduced. But there was still a nagging proximity requirement. If you wanted to send a message, you must go to a Western Union telegraph agent, or find a telephone to use. Telephones were, at first, relatively rare. Perhaps there was one at the local druggist. Even when more commonplace in the home, how did you make a call when stuck on the road with a flat tire?

Finally, a huge event. The cellphone, based on wireless radio technology, effected a tectonic shift in personal communication. Suddenly, you could call anyone from anywhere. The barriers of time and space were both overcome. Add supercomputer capabilities and now we really had something. Star Trek stuff for real.

So what’s next?

The Internet of Things. Your thermostat, refrigerator, stove, car keys, toaster, even light bulbs will all come online. Groceries ordered automatically. Nutritional meals cooked while you’re commuting home. The car driving itself, you sleeping or reading on the way. This may seem farfetched, but it is not. Stanford University has invented a tiny wireless radio controller the size of an ant. These (or similar) devices, each costing pennies, will allow millions of objects in our homes and businesses to form intelligent networks. Not just us, but all our stuff will be able to communicate across vast distances in real time. The possibilities are mind boggling.

So while the buildings on Main Street will look much the same, what’s going on inside is purely magical. Science fiction is what happens when we’re not paying attention.

And it’s happening fast.

These kids deserve far better

Pathways to Education Graduates - Celebrating

Attleboro, Massachusetts, and Uniondale, New York, have something in common. Both are safe, with annual crime rates around 3.5 per thousand residents.

Uniondale, situated on Long Island near New York City, is home to many successful middle class families. Of the households with children, 73% are headed by married couples. The poverty rate is about 6%  and average household income is over $70,000.

Attleboro, quite similarly, has  67% of households with children headed by married couples and an average household income of about $64,000. The poverty rate is below 7%.

Attleboro and Uniondale are remarkably alike in important ways: low crime rate, solid average income, low poverty rate, and a high percentage of children living in married households.

But while Attleboro is predominantly white, Uniondale is  one of the most successful majority black communities in the nation.

Contrast this to Chicago, a majority minority city, where the annual crime rate is over 10 per thousand, more than three times higher than Uniondale. The average household income is $47,000 and nearly 30% of its residents live in poverty.  And those are the averages. For many, it is much worse.

The Chicago Tribune reports that the poverty rate for female-headed households soars to 40%, and over half of the city’s children live in such households.

What is the social cost arising from the cauldron of Chicago’s streets?

In the days since the lamentable events of Ferguson, nearly 200 victims have been shot and killed in Chicago, almost 800 wounded. Seventy five percent of these victims are black, as were the great majority of shooters.

For the year to date, 362 poor souls shot and killed, 2,484 wounded. There is a war going on in Chicago that rivals  our losses in Iraq and Afghanistan. And when you add in Detroit, and Boston, and Los Angeles, and Washington DC, and Miami, the statistics are truly staggering.

Activists, academics, and protestors (ably abetted by the media) have stoked the narrative that there is a war on blacks being waged by police. There is indeed a war being waged on blacks, but it is being prosecuted within their own communities. The greatest danger to a young black male in Chicago is another young black male. While this may be an uncomfortable concept, it is a truth revealed in Department of Justice statistics.

Imagine being a young urban black child, where every outing risks a credible threat of death or serious injury. Imagine the effect on his or her psyche, the damage it causes. The social costs are enormous, the moral stain on us for not responding is shameful. How can our leaders, political and activist, not speak out?

Some are responding.

Carolyn Acker, then the Director of the Regents Park Community Health Center, saw that the children of the neighborhood were its future. They would become its doctors and nurses, administrators and lawyers. But to do so, they would need an education, and the dropout rate in the community was an abysmal 56%.

She collaborated with others to create a program called Pathways to Education in 2001. Soon after Pathways went into action, the dropout rate began to drop – to 10%. This was an enormous success. The Pathways program has been replicated to several other communities with similar results.

How does Pathways operate? It is based on four pillars: counseling, academic, social, and financial.

For counseling, each student who signs up is assigned a counselor. The counselor regularly checks in with the student to see how they are doing. The counselor maintains high expectations and provides the student with encouragement and suggestions for achievement.

In the academic arena, tutors are provided and sessions are mandatory unless the student maintains a grade average above 70%.

The social aspect consists of regular activities with peers where students get to interact socially with other like-minded, academically achieving kids. They will have fun, learn new skills, and develop hobbies in a nurturing environment.

The final pillar is financial, in which students are given financial aid for public transportation. To the kids, it is a big deal to be able to ride the bus to school. But if their grades don’t stay up, or if they skip school, the aid is incrementally reduced.

The students participating in this program are amazingly successful compared to their cohort. They are graduating high school, going to college, and getting good jobs.

Pathways is a great success, albeit an expensive one.

But let’s stop and think a moment. Imagine a child in Uniondale growing up in a household with a caring mother and father. She would be counseled to succeed and expectations would be high. Her parents would assist academically, sitting down to help with homework. She would be enrolled in sporting teams, school band, church choir, and other social activities. And her parent would certainly support her financially.

Pathways works because it operates in place of the family, filling the role of the parents.

Here’s our call to action. Our policies and programs, designed to help and with all the best intentions, have devastated the black family. It is time to think constructively, with open, honest debate and determination to find a better way.

These kids deserve far better. To fail them is a sin.

That way lies tyranny

Dr. Jonathan Gruber - technocrat.

Liberty is a precious commodity. According to Freedom House in a 2011 report, only 43% of the world’s population live in freedom. And with Russian incursions into Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and ISIS murdering Christians and non-Sunni  Muslims in droves, and Chinese crackdowns in Tibet and Hong Kong, the trend is not a happy one.

Our country is based on a unique concept that all men are created equal. All humans – man, woman, gay straight, black, white, all colors, all genders, all races – are equal in the eyes of God.

This fundamentally important concept is enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Everyone is familiar with that part. But equally important is the next:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Let’s stop to think what this means.

In the American ideal, no other person is your better. This is a great departure from European monarchies, where rulers derived their authority by the divine right of kings. In a monarchy, the rulers are your betters and you are but a subject. The (hopefully) kind, benevolent, and wise ruler directs you on how to live your life.

But in our system of government, the young Latina working at Starbucks is every bit the equal of the governor of Massachusetts. Or of the President of the United States. Or of Jonathan Gruber. As citizens, all are equal in the eyes of God.

Which is why Dr. Gruber’s attitude is so outrageous.

In a revealing sequence of videos, Dr. Gruber, an MIT economist and contracted architect of the Affordable Care Act, pretty much informed us of his view of the electorate.

That the ACA was passed only due to the “stupidity of the American voter” and intentional obfuscation which created a lack of transparency.  That it would never have passed if we had only known the truth.

And the president joined in: if you like your plan you can keep it; if you like your doctor, you can keep her. And that costs would be contained. Dear reader, we personally can attest that none of these are true.

But the details do not matter – it is the attitudes that do.

Dr. Gruber, President Obama, and a plethora of other politicians and technocrats, share this belief: that they are your betters, that they know what is good for you, that they can force you to comply (for your own good, of course). Michael Bloomberg, for instance, as the mayor of New York, attempted to ban the sale of soft drinks in excess of 16 ounces. (The New York Court of Appeals, however, disagreed, and the ban was lifted).

A term for this is a technocracy, where government control of society is based on an elite of politicians and scientists, engineers and psychologists, and various other experts. And they all know how you should live your life. Makes one feel much like a lab rat.

And it’s easy to see how this has come to pass. Science is fabulous and has created many wonders.  Technology is powerful, recently turning North America into a net energy producer. Atheism has swept the land, pushing religion out of the public sphere (Happy Holidays). As technocrats come to believe less in a common creator, it is easier for them to believe that they are our superiors.

Is it possible that large sugary drinks are bad? Is it possible that universal healthcare is good? Absolutely.  But to impose mandates and bans is not the American way. Because the do-gooders who strive to do good are not your betters, they are your equals. Your choice to follow their advice should be just that: a choice.

The do-gooders should advise, should educate. And you should make reasoned decisions whether to eschew sugar, or wear a seatbelt, or buy health insurance. Your choice, informed and educated. But not compelled.

We are all equals. The brainiacs do not rule us.

That way lies tyranny.

The Agony and the Apostasy

The Creation of Adam, Michelangelo Buonaroti

The construction of the Sistine Chapel (Capella Sistina) was completed in 1481. Its construction was commissioned by Pope Sixtus IV for whom it was named. One hundred thirty four feet long and 44 feet wide, the huge chapel is a towering 68 feet high. The ceiling, originally painted in a field of blue with gold stars, was covered in beautiful frescoes by Michelangelo at the behest of Pope Julius II.

Michelangelo labored for four years, from 1508 to 1512. He painted over 5,000 square feet of frescoes containing over 300 figures. Some of the most beautiful art ever created, such as The Creation of Adam, embellish the chapel’s ceiling. In addition to being one of the world’s most talented sculptors and painters, Michelangelo proved to be a highly competent engineer, designing a clever scaffolding system that allowed services to be held in the chapel below as he painted above. Four years of talent, genius, and backbreaking labor resulted in one of the world’s most breathtaking works of art.

And at the end of these four year, Michelangelo approached Pope Julius and, on bended knee, kissed his ring and asked for payment. “No,” the Pope responded, “you did not do that. The chapel was funded by the Church. The paints were purchased by the Church. The laborers who erected your scaffolding were paid by the Church. You did not do that.”

A small fiction, of course, but of a spirit with the narrative presented by the Democratic left. Elizabeth Warren, Barack Obama, and, most recently, Hillary Clinton assert that entrepreneurs do not create businesses and corporations do not create jobs.

Those to the political right, Senator Cruz and friends, are aghast at such apostasy, believing that no one but entrepreneurs and corporations create businesses and jobs.

How to explain this chasm?

First, let’s try to understand what each side is actually saying. The Warren camp means to say that public spending, public infrastructures, public services, are all essential to the entrepreneur and corporations. That businesses and jobs couldn’t be created without reliance on government.

Those on the right recognize that government creates a public infrastructure. And, more importantly, it creates a system of laws that protects each citizen’s liberty and property rights. But they are just as adamant that, government or no, businesses and jobs wouldn’t exist without those who create them.

Both positions are a bit more sympathetic when viewed in a larger context. But which is right? This seems a bit of a standoff, a chicken or the egg puzzle. What came first, the jobs or the highways?

To answer this, we must delve into the tangle of Aristotelian logic and the concept of necessity and sufficiency. While logic can be quite complex (after all, it underlies all computers, the internet, Facebook, and silly cat videos), in this case it is quite straightforward.

This is something you already know. Think of the components of a grilled cheese sandwich: bread and cheese. Is it necessary to have cheese to make a grilled cheese sandwich? Obviously, yes. But is it sufficient to make a grilled cheese sandwich with only cheese? Equally obviously, no.

The cheese is necessary but not sufficient. The bread is also necessary but not sufficient. One needs both cheese and bread to prepare the grilled cheese sandwich. But to make simple toast, the bread is both necessary and sufficient.

Apply to the Sistine Chapel. The Pope is correct, Michelangelo could not have painted the ceiling if the Church had not built the chapel. But the ceiling would not have been painted so beautifully without Michelangelo (or someone of equal talent). Both conditions are necessary for the result. 

Fast forward 1,500 years. Senator Warren is correct that jobs and businesses could not (easily) be created without the infrastructure provided by government. But Senator Cruz is equally correct that jobs and businesses would not exist without entrepreneurs and corporations to create them. Just like a grilled cheese sandwich, we need both government and business. One cannot thrive without the other.

One way to view it is that government creates a canvas upon which the creative, risk-taking entrepreneur paints her vision, creating businesses and jobs as a result.

Which is a tale of caution, for those who would strangle government in the extreme risk the ability of entrepreneurs to create. But those who would smother business risk government as well. It is, after all, the taxes and fees paid by businesses and corporations and taxes paid by wage employees that support government. Without a healthy, bustling economy, from where will government funding be obtained?

Food for thought next time you see corporations and businesses taking it on the chin.