Jeff Duntemann's Contrapositive Diary Rotating Header Image

Odd Lots

Yes, I know I haven’t posted since the end of June, but I had a very busy July. So bear with me; I’m trying to get back in the Contra saddle on a much more regular basis. A fair bit of good stuff has piled up in my notes. Perforce:

  • WordStar 7 for DOS can now be had as a free download, thanks to the work of SF author Robert J. Sawyer. The product has changed hands a great many times down the decades, and as best we can tell it’s now abandonware. Caution suggests that if you’re a retrocomputing fan, better snag it now, before somebody pops up with a copyright objection.
  • The Heartland Institute has a very nice free 82-page full-color PDF overview of climate issues from a skeptical perspective. Beyond global warming it covers sea levels, droughts, violent weather, crop yields, and much else. A lot of the data cited comes from the NOAA, which I still consider a reliable source.
  • There’s a new image-generating AI called FLUX from Black Forest Labs that apparently knows how many fingers and toes humans have. Sorry, guys: I’ll believe it when I test it.
  • Chris Martz put together a map displaying the record hottest day in August for all 50 states. The hottest August temp we’ve ever seen in Arizona was in…1905. Not much of a climate apocalypse, eh?
  • Solar cycle 25 has handed us the highest sunspot count in 23 years. This cycle was supposed to be weak. And we haven’t hit the likely peak yet. We may not see that peak until 2025 or 26.
  • New research shows that elenolic acid, found in olives and olive leaves, brings down blood sugar and reduces body weight. I have to wonder if this is why the Mediterranean Diet appears to work. Elenolic acid is available OTC, and I’m tempted to try it and see if it will trim a little fat off my waistline.
  • Here’s a nice BBC piece about an obscure British clergyman who predicted the existence of black holes in…1783. The guy should be way better known than he is, given that he also identified the inverse square law in 1750.
  • For any of several reasons, electric vehicles are dangerous. [Link removed by me; see comments.]
  • Copyright issues in training AIs are ongoing. MIT summarizes the use of "copyright traps" that embed nonsense sentences into text by hiding it somehow. (White text on white?) This allows software to determine if a piece of text was used in training. (Just how is too complex to explain here. Read the article.) My response is that finding "invisible" text in blocks of text is an easy challenge for software, especially with Web content. I envision a Web crawler that checks for copyright traps and either refuses to add trapped content to an index, or else scrubs the traps outright before copying the scrubbed text to a local database used for AI training. Bottom line: There is no easy solution to this problem.

15 Comments

  1. Wayne S says:

    Whoa, wait a minute.

    1) If the map showed hottest temperatures ever, I think it would be more applicable to your argument. NOAA reports the hottest temp in Arizona (128 F) occurred at Lake Havasu City on June 29th, 1994. It is also reported that Phoenix reported a record breaking high (116 F) on Aug 3 (114F in 1974).

    2) Instead of relying on a single data point somewhere in Arizona, there ought to be a way of using more temperature data to get a feel for how hot the weather is. And, not surprisingly, there it is on the internet (https://www.azfamily.com/2024/08/02/phoenix-pace-set-record-hot-summer-beating-2023/)

    PHOENIX (AZFamily) — We know Arizona is hot in the summer, but recent summers have been hotter than normal. Phoenix is on pace to set a record for the hottest summer on record. The record high was set in 2023, when the combined average of low and high temperatures in the summer of last year was 96.2 degrees.

    As Mantz says “The press say the U.S. is experiencing unprecedented heat this summer. Data doesn’t lie, but journalists do.” I suppose it comes down to what data is used and how it is interpreted and who is espousing what view. That just makes it harder for us common folk to vet the data.

    1. The point I was making is that “hottest on record” is a loaded term, intended not to inform but to terrify Americans into thinking the world is going to burn up and take them with it. The stats are often taken from weather stations within massive urban heat islands, something most common folk don’t understand.

      We have a network of weather stations around the US deliberately positioned far away from urban heat islands, and their statistics tell a very different story. It’s called the US Climate Reference Network (USCRN.) When’s the last time you heard that mentioned in the news? It’s relatively new (2005) and so it’s hard to look to it for long-term trends yet, but it’s a good start.

      With that in mind, I suspect that Phoenix summers may be getting hotter because all of the new construction going on (and there’s a lot) absorbs heat, making the Phoenix heat island larger and hotter than it was before. This increase has nothing to do with CO2 and everything to do with clay tile rooftops, concrete, and blacktop roads absorbing solar radiation and then passing on the resulting heat to the air above it.

      The hottest decade of the 20th century in the US was the 1930s. Look at the map and notice how many states had their hottest August days in that timeframe. Other data and other graphs exist to support this. My personal bottom line: We know far too little about the forces that act upon climate to pin the blame on one factor, especially in the service of scaring Americans into giving up their cars and gas stoves to “save the world” when the world is doing fine all by itself.

      1. Jim Dodd says:

        You said, “The stats are often taken from weather stations within massive urban heat islands, something most common folk don’t understand.

        We have a network of weather stations around the US deliberately positioned far away from urban heat islands, and their statistics tell a very different story.”

        This is wrong. The massive heat islands were not always there but we have built up the areas and what we see now is what we have caused since the original stations were placed there. And deliberately placing stations far away from urban heat islands is the definition of bad science. Statistics are only useful when the sampling is done correctly and consistently.

        One data point per state is the worst possible way to delude ourselves that we’re not really in trouble. WE ARE IN TROUBLE. And I am shocked that you, of all people, would be fighting against the work of trying to keep it under control.

        1. Temps taken from the middle of huge urban centers made of megatons of concrete and blacktop are not measuring climate. They’re measuring heat from various sources, most of them emerging from city mass and mechanism. My personal weather station here typically reads five to seven degrees lower than what they show on TV. (I’ve checked readings from my weather station against a lab thermometer, and they always match.) We’re a long way from the city center, and in our general area, large lots are the rule, with structures being a much smaller fraction of lot size than in newer, denser subdivisions where houses and garages are much closer together, with far less “empty” space in any given lot.

          So what are we measuring? Air heated by urban mass & mechanism, or air in natural settings? Placing weather stations far away from heat islands is excellent science, because we’re not measuring urban heat. The USCRN exists to measure air temperature without the bias of urban heat islands. Please tell me how that’s bad science.

          I’m 72 and have been following the climate issue for a long time, since the climate crew were predicting an imminent ice age. We are not in trouble. Why? Because for decades now, supposed climate experts (along with doofy outliers like Greta) have been telling us that “we have only five years to avoid climate catastrophe.” Five years later, no catastrophe. Repeat. Maybe ten years this time. No catastrophe. Again, and again, and again, ad nauseam. Read this interesting collection of climate alarmist predictions over the past 50 years. They’re scans of news items, so they are not fake–just, well, wrong.

          https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/

          I am a contrarian by nature. I rarely accept conventional wisdom at face value, especially when conventional wisdom seems intended to bolster political agendas.

          And in the meantime, those oh-so noble climate “experts” roaring around the world in CO2-belching private jets to conferences that could just as well be held over Zoom or its siblings give me the impression that it’s all just an excuse for rich guys to have carbon-rich fun while telling me that my gas stove is destroying the world. I’m curious what you think about those conferences and the people who jet off to them while warning that we have, lessee, what’s the latest–oh, seven years before the end of the world.

          I have a solution to the carbon dioxide problem–assuming that there is one, which I doubt. What’s yours? Take as much space as you want. I and my regular readers are listening.

          1. Jim Dodd says:

            Weather stations are not just in cities. As a matter of fact, most official city weather information comes from somewhere NOT downtown. But the weather station wasn’t moved downtown to come up with higher readings just so experts could make up something called global warming. It’s one part of the big picture.

            I have a a degree in electrical engineering and another degree in biology. I’m 73 and I’ve studied this stuff, too. In fact, I worked for the US Geological Survey for 13 years and one of my first assignments was to upgrade the machine that measured tree rings in one of the labs used by climate scientists. Then I went to work for a company that makes measuring and logging instruments and weather stations (Onset Computer Corporation) and worked there for 33 years. Yes – you will now say that I’m one of those experts who don’t live by what we preach. Being an expert makes you ineligible to talk about these things according to you and your friends. My electric Chevy Bolt is charged from the solar panels on the roof of our house.

            It is the rich oil, coal, gas, and automobile executives that are putting out much of the misinformation about global warming that you’ve got to worry about. That’s the money behind the political opposition to doing anything about global warming. My answer to reducing CO2 in the atmosphere (and the ocean – that’s another problem we haven”t addressed as much) is to keep doing what we are doing to to fight off the lies and misdirection being spewed in as much volume as CO2.

            You are a really smart guy, Jeff. And I like your writing and I like that you have been such a proponent of Delphi and programming in general. I used to use Borland C++ Builder (as you know, based on Delphi) to write the programs our customers from all over the world used to show the results of their weather stations. Like you, I am a Christian. You could be using your gifts to spread the word that we are contributing to a problem that will affect us all.

      2. Wayne S says:

        Thank you for the information on the USCRN. I took a look at it. They produce charts every decade of temperature data from 1950 onward (along with precipitation and other info). Of interest are the comparison charts. The average temperature data for each weather station for a past decade is subtracted from the average for prior decade. They only show charts for the current decade (1991-2000) vs the past decade (1981-1990). This is a lot of data over the contiguous United States. This chart shows the temperature difference is warmer over most of the United States. By eye, even if you account for few places that are slightly cooler (central north). The chart is at http://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/land-based-station/us-climate-normals (but you have to click on “Comparisons” and the on “Normals comparison Maps” hot spots to see the charts. It paints a different picture than Mr. Mantz does with his chart.

        1. I think the most interesting USCRN graph in a lot of ways is the graph of temp anomalies since the network went live in 2005. Here’s a link to that:

          https://wattsupwiththat.com/u-s-surface-temperature/

          I’d say there is an upward trend, but it’s slight and I don’t see it as any kind of threat.

  2. Wayne S says:

    A couple of thoughts on the comments to date

    1) Remember Y2K and the problems it was going to cause? Most people just brush the hysteria off today as a non-event. What they forget is that there was a lot of programming work and effort put forth to prevent the worst issues. It is worth noting that the end result of “prevention” and the end result of “lack of risk” is indistinguishable. To claim there was no Y2K risk because nothing bad happened is disingenuous. It takes a deeper dive to see whether the risk was mitigated by other items or by better understanding of the data and science.

    2) Now that I’m on social security, I see dire predictions about the health of this program. Leaving all political arguments aside, WHAT IS CLEAR (if the program is to continue) is that making changes now would be much less disruptive and draconian than making change later, when the crisis occurs.

    3) Only a few people understand statistics (its power and pitfalls) though its basic principles are within the grasp of most everyone. In brief, you can prove almost anything by citing a few data points. While more data is better, one needs to beware of bias in the data. I think Mr. Mantz’ single chart fails in this area to refute the very complex issue of climate change.

    4) Only a few people understand and see in public discourse the proliferation of logical fallacies (the most common is the ad hominem fallacy (others worth mentioning can be found with a “logical fallacy” google search – I highly recommend it during this election year)). I note that Mr. Mantz in the weather chart you referenced, used at least one fallacy in stating “Data doesn’t lie, but journalists do”. (Bonus points for identifying them)

    4) Having the internet to look things up is wonderful, but most people don’t understand that the economics behind the internet is to keep your eyeballs involved so they get more money from advertisers. Algorithms exist to ascertain what you tend to look at and feed you more of the same. Without noting it, many are drawn into an “echo box” with people of like interests and beliefs. This is a horrible way to get a balanced view of the world and its complex issues. It is however, a great way for advertisers to make money.

    1. Side comment: WordPress does not allow much comment nesting, so actually having a conversation here is difficult.

      —–

      You’re right about Y2K. We took action and I’m sure a lot of failures were averted. What I objected to were the crazy exaggerated predictions, some of them by people who damned well should have known better. (I won’t name them; they caught plenty of rotten tomatoes at the time.) Key here is that we understood the nature of the problem, and fixing it was a well-defined challenge. Lotta FORTRAN went under the knife is fersure. Maybe some COBOL too. But that’s pretty much it. We knew what the problem was, we knew how to fix it, and then we did.

      Climate is not that kind of problem. We do not understand all the forces that act on climate, and some of them (especially cloud formation and cover) we can’t yet model. If you can’t model the planet’s albedo, I simply don’t believe that you can model the planet’s climate to any useful degree. So predicting the consequences is in an honest sense impossible. (I hope you clicked through to the list of stupid predictions that supposed experts published over the past 50 years.)

      Trying to scare the public into depriving themselves of important things (cars, gas stoves and heaters among others) doesn’t work and makes people angry, especially when predictions do not pan out. Angry people are much more likely to turn against such claims, and against the movement itself. And much of that scary stuff is actually kind of silly: I recall giggling over an article some years back claiming that climate change would cause more cases of psoriasis. I had it briefly when I was a tween; it’s largely genetic and often worsens in winter, so heat is not a factor. If journalists will lie about psoriasis, what else will they lie about? (That said, I don’t think Chris should have put it that way, but it’s objectively true that modern journalism is held in very low regard by the public. Claiming that climate change causes psoriasis is either a lie or gross stupidity. Neither will help the public believe in the problem.)

      You’re also right about Social Security. The problem, again, is that all the fixes I’ve seen in detail (higher payroll deductions or means-testing benefits) will create a political backlash that might make any such fixes impossible.

      I think most people understand that ads float the search industry, but they mostly consider the ads ridiculous and ignore or block them. The real problem in the search industry is that some search engines are adjusted to leave certain things out of search responses. Talking about that in more detail would entail talking about politics, which I just don’t do here. Ditto echo chambers.

  3. Lee Hart says:

    Jeff, that “EVs are dangerous” article is seriously bad information. EVs are far *less* likely to burn than ICEs.

    Data from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), and government recall data from Recalls.gov all show that EVs are about 10 times less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles.

    As for fire departments needing “special equipment” to fight EV fires; they need “special equipment” to fight *any* vehicle fire — and they already have it! Firefighters are trained to fight electrical fires. All EVs have a “kill switch” that disconnects the HV pack in case of an accident or when emergency personnel want to disconnect it.

    The problem of people getting trapped in their vehicles has nothing to do with EVs — it is a problem with *many* vehicles (EV and ICE) that depend on the 12v battery to open doors and windows.

    Otherwise, the article is full of breathless misinformation and uninformed anecdotes. EVs can’t explode; there’s nothing explosive in them (unlike gasoline). EV chargers are *in the car*. Unless you are using a special high-powered “fast” charger, the EVSE (the external box with a cord) is basically just a fancy extension cord.

    I’ve been building and driving EVs since the 1970. Jeff, you may remember my little yellow Datsun pickup that I converted into an EV that I had at your house in Rochester. So it bothers me to see clueless articles about a subject where I have extensive personal experience.

    1. James Strickland says:

      Seconded. This is anti-EV propaganda. The site is clearly clickbait from the number of ads every two lines. For more sane data, start here:https://www.popsci.com/technology/electric-vehicle-fire-rates-study/

    2. Well, Lee, you absolutely do know more about EVs than anybody else in my circles, so I consider the link unreliable and the matter closed. I may remove the link but leave the bullet text in place as I often do when I discover I’ve been wrong about something after the fact.

      It is a little weird how often I see the MSM post stories on exploding/burning lithium battery vehicles, from Teslas all the way down to electric scooters. I guess we need a new saying about the media: “If it burns, it earns.”

      Thanks for making a detailed response, BTW.

  4. Jeff if you were giving away Wordstar for Free thirty years ago ,You’d be a superhero among students and the cash strapped… you might also Be on Remand
    (British term) , care of Bill Gates !!! BG was a very good business man…hell was.. he’s still alive but technically not much chop.. he got others to do all the hard yards. Still- that’s the mark of the successful technocrat.

  5. Jeff

    I have some interesting background on the Internet and telecoms versus the odd FL moyder trial… It’s amazing what you can get up to if you get focused on a potential mess up by the prosecutors. They are definitely after the right people. Inter ALIA I have been told to Stay out of FL be SA of Leon Cty by email (even though I am 10 000+ km away) and:

    I have managed to potentially annoy Mr J Gordon Beattie who is up in the firmament of AT and T network design – though by an email that was not supposed to go to him. I go on to him via….drum roll. not Mr Jeff Duntemann but the blog thingy that sits behind the QRPLabs website… I refer to GroupsIO of qrpLabs So I raised some questions about this and that with current cell phone technology and someone said “He needs to talk to Gordon Beattie….” as if every Schmo posting and reading that site knew who JGB was… and so it came to pass…

    I should add that theWaybackMachine is a very interesting even inneresting thing can can be used to winkle out all sorts of interesting stuff from various hidey-holes. Specifically the ProfsBlog … of FSU and other law professors.

    This is all do with the murder of Law Prof Dan Markel in Tallahassee in 2014.

    The technology and plain good luck used to ferret out the evil doers is quite an interesting study in HUMINT and raw database work. ….

    perhaps any more should be via email as the trial and trials are still on going.

    TEF

  6. re: Wordstar.
    I downloaded this archive and fed it to my retropc (10mhz v20/8087). After 4 days of decompressing it, and sorting out the hardwired directories, it works nicely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *