| Wednesday,
June 16, 2010 Obama's
speech
Jerry,
Two things bothered me about Obama’s speech last night
(well…more than two, but two big ones). First of all, when he spoke of
looking to new energy sources, he made absolutely no mention of nuclear
power. I think he’s a fairly intelligent man, so my assumption is that the
omission was calculated. Was it to appease his party faction, and he’s going
to go there anyway (we hope!), or was it because he does not consider it
viable. I like to think that if he didn’t consider it viable he would have
just come out and said that.
The other item is that he practically broke his arm
patting himself on the back for appointing academia and scientists to a
commission to make recommendations to solve this problem. Unless he was
using a tactic lifted from Heinlein’s ‘The Moon is a Harsh Mistress’ where a
constitutional committee of academia, do-gooders and loudmouths was
appointed to keep them out of the way, this is a mistake. He needs to get
people who solve problems, i.e. engineers, not academia and scientists.
Of course, that is my humble, but less than impartial
opinion, since I am an engineer.
Tracy
Tracy Walters, CISSP
My guess is that there was nothing on the
teleprompter, so he didn't mention it. That sounds perhaps unduly cynical,
but I have come to believe that Obama really is less competent than anyone
supposed. He has all his life been told he is brilliant, but we see
absolutely no evidence that he has produced anything that requires hard
thinking or the ability to understand. I haven't even seen academic
publications that indicate brilliance or even competence. Perhaps I am
unduly judging him.
==
Would Bush have done a better job?
Dr. Pournelle,
You made the comment in Wednesday’s post “It's a good
illustration of the inevitable problems of electing a president who has no
executive experience.”
My question is, would Bush II and “Brownie” have done
a better job?
In my opinion, the way to stop this leak is not to
have let it happen in the first place. And, the people who were responsible
for that were not doing their jobs before Obama was even elected.
One of the things a good executive does is let the
people who are supposed to know what they’re doing…do it…until it becomes
obvious that those people haven’t got a clue. But when is that…day 1?...day
10?...day 50? And, even when the obvious smacks him in the face, what can
Obama do? The Legion’s “war fighters” aren’t prepared to deal with this kind
of thing. Where can he turn?
What puzzles me is why BP hasn’t been able to stop the
leak. Of course, they don’t care about the environmental damage (other than
the fact they’ll now have to pay for it). But, what about the $70 times
50,000 barrels worth of money a day that’s pouring out of that well. Surely,
not having that oil to sell should get their attention, unless they expect
to recoup the profit when prices shoot up because of “lack of supply”.
Was it Napoleon who said “never attribute to malice
what can be explained by stupidity”? Having worked for BP, I tend to think
the opposite might be true.
Don Etling
Clearly the way to stop that leak would have been
not to have it happen in the first place. Again it seems clear that had the
regulators done their inspections and enforced the regulations, it would not
have happened.
From what I can find:
Drilling operations
Deepwater Horizon worked on wells in the
Atlantis and Thunder Horse oil fields. In 2006 she discovered oil in the
Kaskida field, and in 2009 in the Tiber field.[15][16] On September
2, 2009, Deepwater Horizon drilled on the Tiber oilfield with a vertical
depth of 35,050 ft (10,683 m) and measured depth of 35,055 ft (10,685
m), of which 4,132 ft (1,259 m) was water, which was at the time the
deepest oil well in the world.[16][17][18][19] The well was more than
5,000 feet deeper than the design specification on the company's fleet
list.[20]
Deepwater Horizon commenced drilling on
Mississippi Canyon Block 252, referred to as the Macondo Prospect, in
February 2010 at a water depth of approximately 5,000 feet (1,500
m).[21] Mineral rights to drill for oil in Macondo Prospect were
purchased by multinational oil company BP in March 2008, at the Minerals
Management Service's lease sale.[22] Macondo Prospect is located in the
United States sector of the Gulf of Mexico, about 41 miles (66 km) off
the southeast coast of Louisiana. As of April 20, 2010, Deepwater
Horizon was still working on the site
[emphasis added]
It is my understanding that in January, 2009,
President Bush left office and was replaced by President Obama, who took
office along with a majority in each House of Congress. The deepwater rig
did a 4,132 deep well in Fall, 2009, which was at that time the deepest well
ever drilled. The well that caused the present gusher was begun in 2010.
If your point is that the bureaucracy wasn't
doing a proper job during the Bush Administration and should have been
subject to "change" I can agree. I have no great love for the Creeps who
governed after Gingrich stepped down as Speaker. Newt was the last adult
supervision in that Party. But at what point is the candidate who promised
Hope and Change to be held responsible for inadequate Change and reform?
As to why they have not been able to plug the
leak and why local efforts to contain the damage have been less than
spectacularly successful, the stories I have heard of the bureaucratic
mess in the cleanup make me suspect that the area would have been better
off if the Federal Government had simply said "It's not in our competence;
do what you can, you're on your own." I don't know if there's any
competence in BP; I do know that few people work well with a boot on their
neck and the threat of criminal prosecution publicly made at frequent
intervals.
Obama had a new opportunity to take charge last
night. His speech was political, and he used the opportunity to create a
slush fund to be administered by the holder of an office unknown to the
law. Then he went on to sell us cap and trade. Never let a crisis go to
waste.
==
Congress and the Gulf disaster
Jerry,
theoildrum.com have reprinted the letter that Congress
sent to Tony Hayward outlining the topics upon which he is to be questioned
at Thursdays hearing. It is, subject to a robust defence by Tony Hayward, a
completely damning document. It is a long document but worth the time as it
goes into detail which tomorrows news media will not. This is the link:-
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6604#more
John Edwards
It is a long document, and I do not have the
competence to separate opinion from fact in many of the assertions. I am
prepared to believe that BP took risks and decided for the cheapest rather
than the safest practice when there were decisions; I am not competent to
decide these matters. Clearly there are regulations that are needless and
onerous and do little good; clearly there are regulations that are needed
and vital.
The document seems to explain this well, and
certainly one will have a better understanding after reading it than one
had before -- I think Obama might so well to read it -- but I have no
great trust in Waxman's abilities and less in his impartiality.
==
The data shows that a massive oil spill in the gulf
does not cause permanent damage -
Jerry,
The data shows that a massive oil spill in the gulf
does not cause permanent damage. They predicted the end of the world with
the Ixtoc oil spill in 1979 but it didn’t happen
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/
06/12/95793/ixtoc-the-gulfs-other-massive.html
Thirty-one years since the worst oil spill in North
American history blanketed 150 miles of Texas beach, tourists noisily splash
in the surf and turtles drag themselves into the dunes to lay eggs.
"You look around and it's like the spill never
happened,'' shrugs Tunnell, a marine biologist. "There's a lot of perplexity
in it for many of us.
The environment is amazingly resilient, more so than
most people understand,'' says Luis A. Soto, a deep-sea biologist with
advanced degrees from Florida State University and the University of Miami
who teaches at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
"To be honest, considering the magnitude of the spill,
we thought the Ixtoc spill was going to have catastrophic effects for
decades ...But within a couple of years, almost everything was close to 100
percent normal again.''
Mike Plaster
Clearly in the millions of years that the Earth has
existed there have been catastrophic events. Including ice ages. Earth
abides. which doesn't mean we can be complacent.
I would like to see more on the Persian Gulf
recovery from Saddam's dumping all the oil of Kuwait into it. What is the
state of the ecology now?
Earth abides.
===========
On Finding a Local Dial Number -
Determining if a number is local or not is easy if you
have a normal landline phone.
Simply dial the number without a 1- prefix.
If the call goes through ... it's local.
If I need to use dial up I'll grab a list of potential
phone numbers and then try them out when I get to my destination.
--- Jim Coffey
This seems reasonable. Thanks.
===========
Afghan mineral wealth
Dr. Pournelle,
>>One wonders if someone somewhere hasn't known
about Afghanistan's vast mineral wealth for a long time? It's the first I
have ever heard of it, although I can't say it's astonishing given the
geology. Whether that can translate into actual wealth is another story.>>
I heard talk of this very soon after we went to
Afghanistan. Circa 2002. One indeed wonders how things would have turned out
if we had restored the Khan of Khans, and simply let him sign contracts to
start mining and divided the proceeds among the local clan chiefs. I'm of
the opinion that by now, the Taliban would have not been able to keep up
with the satellite dishes, blue-jeans, and ipods.
Yr Obsvt Svt,
Alan Atwood
I was in favor of restoring the Monarchy from the
beginning. The Khan of Khans comes from a family who understands that he is
really the Duke of Kabul with some fiefdoms scattered throughout the
country, and a bit of mystique that can generate loyalty. Or did. But that
was a doomed idea in those times. Liberal Democracy was going to end
history...
=========
iPad and the reading program
Dear Dr. Pournelle:
I've been reading a lot about how wonderfully
intuitive the new iPad's GUI is and how easily people of all ages learn to
operate it. I also remember you saying, several times in several blog
entries, that the Head Start Program would be much more effective if the
children were taught to read. I wonder, could your wife's reading program be
adapted for use on the iPad?
The device isn't all that expensive -- somewhere
between $500 and $1000 per copy depending on how much memory you choose to
load into it and which level of service you buy, I believe. I don't know if
the reading program is suited to very young children but, if it is or can be
made that way, it seems to me that it would be ideal for a sort of guerilla
learning program.
One could get a large cargo van, load it up with the
type of canopy that vendors use at farmers' markets and a folding table with
some folding chairs, and you'd have an instant classroom. If there were,
say, ten iPads loaded with the program then someone could set up shop at a
local park, for example, and be off and running. It would be a long-term
project, it wouldn't begin to pay off for some time but it seems to me that
this country could stand to benefit from a lot more people who could read
well. Good parents always want to give their kids any advantage they can and
reading skills are always an advantage, I would think.
Best regards, Tim Scott
Porting her program to the iPad is I fear beyond
our capability. I agree it is a great idea, and it probably would work. The
entire program with all the recorded sounds fits on an older CDROM and
worked well on the earliest 80386 computers. Indeed, it ran in DOS on a
Z-80, so the iPad has enough power and storage. It should work.
I am discussing this with some people who may have
the ability to do it. We'll see.
Roberta Pournelle's
reading program works. It will teach just about any kid to read.
Some will learn much faster, but over 90% will learn in 70 lessons of about
thirty minutes a lesson. It has been used in pre-schools, juvenile detention
centers, adult education centers, public schools with large English as a
second language populations, private schools, and home schools. It works on
any system that can run Windows Explorer. It works.
===========
Solar Wind Poses Hazards On
Moon,
Jerry
It seems that the Moon poses a hazard of static
electricity:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2010/05/24/AW_05_24_2010_p62-220989.xml
"The Moon tilts only slightly toward the Sun, so the
solar wind flows fairly evenly over its poles. But as it does so, the wind
does not flow evenly into the bottoms of the deep craters at the poles.
Instead, the institute’s computer model shows its low-mass electrons easily
flowing over the jagged edges of the craters and into their bottoms,
creating a negatively charged cloud. The ions, a thousand times heavier than
the electrons, want to follow. But it is much harder for them to negotiate
the steep rim. Most do not make it. Those that do create an electron/ion
separation effect, or ambipolar electric field. It is at its most extreme on
a crater’s leeward edge—along the inside crater wall—and at the crater floor
nearest the solar wind flow.
On this leeward edge, the electron cloud “can create
an unusually large negative charge of a few hundred volts relative to the
dense solar wind flowing over the top,” says Farrell.
The situation is complicated by the extreme cold in
the permanent shadows of these craters, many more than a mile deep, where
temperatures can be -400F or lower.<snip>"
A mile deep. Sobering.
Ed
I make no doubt there is much to be learned from a
Lunar Colony. We know you can survive there for days; we also know that the
regolith can be piled on to shelters for radiation protection.
Space weather is a young discipline...
==========
Subj: In defense of naked Credit-Default Swaps
Before I read these pieces, I was convinced that naked
Credit-Default Swaps were Works of the Devil.
Now I'm not so sure.
The author is a member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry
Commission.
http://blog.american.com/?p=2554
>>The information in these CDS transactions is very
important. By watching the price of protection on C’s debt, which is
called the “spread,” it is possible for outsiders to get a good picture of
what credit specialists in the market think of C’s prospects for repaying
its debts in the future. If the spread is growing, it means most market
participants think C is weakening as a credit, and the opposite if the
spread is declining. This information is just as important to people who
are interested in lending money as the stock price is to people who are
thinking of buying or selling, say, IBM stock. If the CDS market were
limited only to those who actually hold C’s debt—that is, if “naked” swaps
were eliminated as Congressman Stupak would have it—it would not be
possible to get this kind of information from the market; it would simply
be too thin, and it would give false readings. It would be as though the
only people who could buy or sell IBM shares are those who already hold
them, with short-sellers eliminated.<<
http://blog.american.com/?p=768
>>Let’s think of it this way: an investor believes
that the stock price of, say, IBM is going to fall. He doesn’t own any, so
he borrows the stock and sells it short. Is that a bet? In what way does
that differ from the hedge fund buying protection against IBM’s default on
a bond that it doesn’t own?<<
Rod Montgomery==monty@starfief.com
==============
Subj: Programming Languages: Must we pay for good
compile-time checking with long compile times?
Dr. Pournelle said
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/
mail/2010/Q2/mail623.html#Friday :
>>... The important feature of Pascal was that the
compiler caught most errors: getting the program to compile might be
diffifult, but once that was done, it generally does what you expect it
will. That takes long compile times -- but a lot less debugging time. ...<<
Actually, as far as the long compile times are
concerned ... maybe not.
From page 19 of the PDF of the slides for Rob Pike's
talk at Stanford:
>>Go aims to combine the safety and performance of a
statically typed compiled language with the expressiveness and convenience
of a dynamically typed interpreted language.
It also aims to be suitable for modern systems
programming.<<
Go, like Pascal, is both type-safe and memory-safe.
That is: you cannot, in Go or Pascal, accidentally operate on Something in a
completely inappropriate fashion, nor can you accidentally perform pointer
arithmetic that yields a pointer to Something You Really Didn't Want To
Reach Out And Touch. Go and Pascal both lack the pointer arithmetic
operations that are so easy and so often used in C -- and so dangerous.
Remember all those "buffer overflow security exploits" we keep reading
about? Most of those come from botched pointer arithmetic.
From page 21:
>> How does Go fill the niche? Fast compilation ...<<
The Biggest Trick for getting fast compiles is the way
the Go Team organize the compilation process -- particularly the handling of
dependencies between packages. The compilation demo in the video is
impressive, and Rob Pike's arguments about why the results should scale
nicely to Really Big Programs are quite convincing.
Rod Montgomery==monty@starfief.com
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Wednesday
|
