Digitizing our minds, our thoughts, our lives

Ted Folkert

June 8, 2018

This subject reminds me of the old song line “every time we say goodbye I die a little,” simply because every time we think we understand digitization, some mind-boggling technology seems to appear out of nowhere and our old beliefs die a little, again and again and again.

Those of us who are old enough to remember when we used adding-machines and calculators to do computations can’t help but be overwhelmed by computer technology, which seems to advance at breakneck speed, in gigantic leaps instead of at one bit of data at a time. We who consider ourselves adept at utilizing computer technology to our advantage keep getting mesmerized as we seem to watch the old computer fly over our heads and out of the ballpark just when we think we have a grasp on automation and digitization.

When I graduated from college, computers were not even available. We used adding-machines, and calculators, and hand-written calculations to solve mathematical equations. Now a problem which would take minutes or hours to resolve, can be done in a second by entering simple data into a computer.

That was the old rate of speed for our computers. The world’s fastest computer now, they tell us, can compute 200 quadrillion calculations in one second, a task which would require 63 billion years for one person to calculate.

This machine built by IBM and Nvidia can do calculations in one second that would require 2 million laptops to complete. It has more than 9,000 processing chips, more than 27,000 graphics processors, and almost 200 miles of cables. The cost was a mere $200 million.

It is beyond the conception of most of us to imagine the commercial or scholastic value of such computational capacity, but it certainly speaks volumes in conceiving the unlimited technological advances and the opportunities for resolving some of humanities most pressing obstacles of survival.

And before we get all giddy about this potential expansion of life, I guess the next question may be whether Planet Earth, which now has more than 7 billion inhabitants, can support the number that may be required if the current rate of progression is multiplied by this amazing technology. We went from 1 billion to 7 billion in a couple of hundred years without this super computer. At that rate we will have more than 70 billion 200 years from now. It is unimaginable what the growth may become with the ability to solve life’s equations at the rate of 200 quadrillion calculations per second.

We may need many more wars to keep the population at a level that the planet will support.

Think about it!

(Computer and computational statistics came from Steve Lohr, New York Times, June 8, 2018)

Memorial Day – 2018

Ted Folkert

Memorial Day is a good day to question the causes and results of warfare, especially when we acknowledge the sacrifices of those who have served and particularly of those who paid the ultimate price.

What causes war? History tells us that many wars resulted from racism, ethnicity, religion, anti-Semitism, and tyrannical plunders. But, is war caused by a quest for power, a quest for territory, a quest for financial dominance, a conflict between domineering egos? Is it just a response to abusive actions of powerless grassroots activists? Is it actions of would-be tyrants or dictators seeking expansion of dictatorial power on the backs of powerless subjects and enormous wealth amassed on the backs of the poor? Or is it triggered by sabre rattling gone bad, challenging a leader’s image or political survival and forcing a demonstration of superiority?

And beyond the physical conflicts are those which seem to be festering due to sabre rattling of narcissistic dictators and narcissistic presidents, without common sense and compassion for the welfare of their people and the rights of others to protect the welfare of their people. Personality conflicts and misguided political beliefs creating precarious risks of catastrophic results for the safety and welfare of innocent people – an inexplicable display of power without provocation which simply necessitates additional expansion of war materials and weapons which consumes more of the planets finite resources and wastes financial resources that could provide beneficial necessities for the populous in terms of food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education, and living conditions.

One might wonder if humans are any more civilized overall than wild animals. Wild animals seem to kill each other for food, fear, territory, and sex. Are humans overall much different? Which causes of wild animal killings do humans avoid? Good questions.

It must be less stressful to initiate warfare if you can send other people’s children there to do the fighting and experience devastating injury or loss of life.

Stokely Carmichael has been quoted as having said years ago when discussing the military draft: “It is like white people sending black people to make war on yellow people to protect land stolen from red people,” – an interesting analogy that may have more reality than we care to acknowledge.

Think about it!

Faceless Wanderers

Ted Folkert

May 15, 2018

We see more of them every day. They must not have faces because we don’t seem to see their faces. Often, we don’t even see them. We just see their encampments, their tents, their shopping carts full of their life’s possessions. We see their blankets, their bags of clothing, their thin mats to separate them from the concrete. And we see piles and piles of trash left behind as they traverse from one sleeping place after another.

We see the police officers talking to them about finding another place to live. We see social workers talking to them about assistance programs and healthcare offerings. We see a clump on the sidewalk or the alley or the bridge underpass or overpass, which is the body of a sleeping faceless person, a person that we wish would get away from our neighborhood and sleep somewhere else.

Think about this for a moment. I say a moment because that is all the time we wish to expend on this uncomfortable subject matter. Think about having all your worldly possessions in one bag and carrying it around with you day in and day out everywhere you choose to go or are forced to go. Think about being asked or forced to leave everywhere you find that you think just might be a place where you can live for a while. Think about having your bag of worldly possessions thrown in the trash every time you leave it unattended. Think about trying to find a place to use the toilet or clean up each day. Think about trying to figure what and where you might find something to eat and drink each day.

Think about finding a way out of your hopeless situation. How do you do that? “Get a job” say those who have no compassion for the helpless and hopeless, no understanding of what caused their homelessness or what kind of help they need to climb out of the undesirable, deplorable, inescapable, and intolerable situation. How can you get a job when you have no place to clean up, no clean clothes to wear, and no way to hide your unhealthy and undesirable appearance? How do you get a job when you have no transportation and no mailing address and no telephone number? How you get a job when you have no references and no recent employment history?

The authorities tell us there are 40,000 or so. I suppose the actual number doesn’t matter, especially when we are asking you to imagine being just one of them. But the fact that the number just keeps growing means two things. It means the problems causing no place to sleep and no place to live are getting worse and it means that we aren’t doing anything to solve the problems.

Those of whom we entrust to managing our lives in the city, county, state, and nation can’t seem to find any way to deal with all this. Of course, it is no small problem with one easy solution. But I don’t think you have to be a rocket scientist to understand that people with no place to live need a roof over their head. And you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand that people who have nothing to eat or drink need someone to turn to for nourishment. And you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand that everyone needs personal hygiene and healthcare.

It seems like everyday we see them breaking ground for another high-rise building for housing or for offices for our enormously successful corporations. Not many of us could design or build such structures, However, they seem to get built and at a cost, expertise, and difficulty thousands of times greater than it would require in figuring out how to house and feed those among us who need some help.

It seems that simply saying that we have our priorities in the wrong order would be so much of an understatement of the ridiculousness of this situation that it would be laughable. Unfortunately, this situation in not laughable. It is shameful, inconsiderate, and incomprehensible.

We purport to be a society, a community, a city, state, nation – but we find the challenge of taking care of those in need to be insurmountable. But then we find building a one-hundred story building or a gigantic football stadium for 100,000 fans to be a piece of cake.

Now, that is deplorable, disgusting, and inhumane to say the least. I am looking for volunteers amongst our fearless leaders to go live on the street for a day or so. Maybe they should all be required to go live on the street until they find a solution to this horrendous problem. That should get some immediate results. Quicker than you could say, helpless, homeless, and horrendous.

Think about it!

Better Safe than Sorry

Ted Folkert

April 19, 2018

While you have that cellphone up to your ear, put it down for a while so you can consider some critical information about the possibility of each conversation on that device shortening your life. Not shortening your life due to receiving bad news, or wasted energy, or wasted time, or physical responses you may receive for insulting whomever you may be talking with.

No, shortening your life due to possible cancer-causing radiation from the cell phone antenna, which is widely believed to be a threat by many scientists, some of whom that told the wireless industry executives in the 1990s that such radiation may cause brain tumors.

After charges that a lethal brain tumor had been caused by cell phone use, a study was conducted by epidemiologist George Carlo, selected by Thomas Wheeler, leader of the cellular industry. According to Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie of The Nation magazine, Carlo notified the industry leaders that “the risk of rare neuro-epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than double in cell phone users – and an apparent correlation between brain tumors occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head and the ability of the radiation from a phone’s antenna to cause functional genetic damage was definitely positive.”

Of course, Wheeler publicly denounced Carlo’s findings in the press immediately and denied that there could be any such correlation. He proceeded to refute such accusations aggressively with public denouncements disparaging the credibility of George Carlo.

Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie relate this denial of Carlo’s findings to similar denials in two of the most notorious cases of corporate deception on record: the dangers of smoking and climate change. Tobacco executives were told that smoking was deadly and fossil fuel executives were told that burning oil, gas, and coal would cause a catastrophic temperature rise. Then, during a Congressional hearing, as most of us will recall, all the tobacco executives stood with right hands raised, indicating sworn testimony, that smoking does not cause cancer – and one can imagine that not a one of them believed that to which they were swearing. They all took one for the team – save the career and the profits at all costs – integrity be damned, human health and human lives be damned.

In all three of the above cases the leaders of the respective industries went to great lengths to deny and disprove the allegations, opting to protect their lucrative industries for their own benefit and that of their stockholders at the expense of the general welfare and safety of the populous.

Although the research continues, cell phones have not been proven to emit radiation which causes tumors or cancer. Much of the research points that way but none has been confirmed precisely. Now that “5g” technology is becoming available the likelihood may be even greater.

Regardless of the lack of definitive proof, it seems wise to keep the phone away from your head – use the speaker phone, Bluetooth, or text message capabilities – better to be safe than sorry.

Abuse of Power on Steroids

Ted Folkert

April 16, 2018

The future health of the American economy and the welfare of the proletariat – the working-class – the hoi polloi – of our society is under attack by our narcissistic president, who is totally absorbed in his own fame and fortune and is now using his undeserved presidential power to milk the U. S. Treasury and to disembowel the financial foundation of the economy for the benefit of himself and others rich and powerful who have no need or use for more wealth.

His every interest and every action are innate with ties to his personal benefit, a benefit that he perceives can only be accomplished by demolishing and rendering useless the U.S. government.

Our founders and governmental leaders since our founding have spent almost 250 years creating one of, perhaps, the strongest of economic systems ever established. The system has been altered, modified, amended, regulated, deregulated, honed, and tempered throughout this 250 years, but has become stronger and more functional for most of us over time.

Ronald Reagan tried to gut it during his abysmal eight years in office and started the ball rolling toward aristocracy and oligarchy, which, if we want to offer any excuse for his ignorance, was probably due to his brain washing as the radio spokesman for General Electric during the years prior to his presidency.

Now, after we the American people, realizing our lack of attention to our well-being, started electing leaders with more egalitarian views and more educated economic backgrounds and understandings, the economy, although not where it needs to be regarding egalitarianism, better serves most of us and has provided economic growth and improved living conditions for several decades now.

And along comes Trump, the guy who gives narcissism a whole new meaning, the guy who doesn’t read, listen, or care about the general welfare of the people who aren’t named Trump, the guy who is only interested in his personal aggrandizement and gratification, who is taking a wrecking ball to the foundations of our government so that it will better serve himself.

As if his lack of education, understanding, concern, or interest in the American governmental system and economy isn’t bad enough, here is who he selected to head up the departments which are fundamental to professional management and productive administration of their missions:

For Secretary of Education he gives us a lady, a billionaire, a promoter of private education who considered public schools as “dead end.”

For Secretary of State he gives us a guy who had negotiated billions of dollars deals with Russia.

For the Environmental Protection Agency, he gives us a climate-change denier.

For the Department of Energy, he gives us a guy who campaigned to abolish the department.

For Housing and Urban Development, he gives us a neurosurgeon who considers poverty a “state of mind.”

All the above choices, mostly billionaires, lean heavily against taxes, health care, the environment, public education, and civil rights. Birds of a feather flock together, as my mother would have said.

It seems safe to say that any historian, governmental authority, or economist with exemplary credentials would consider the above cabinet a potential governmental wrecking crew.

Tom Steyer, a noted California billionaire, has been funding a campaign for impeachment of Trump and has gained thousands of signatures in support of his campaign. His efforts, although they may only be a fruitless exercise. are commendable in that he has the courage and passion to attempt to change destructive leadership, not only with his money but with his considerable effort. It is hard to not join in his effort even though it may not culminate in impeachment, as it would certainly send a much-needed message to his excellency, Trump.

It seems that an effort more achievable and more meaningful could well be an all-hands-on-deck effort to change the majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives by our votes in the November elections this year. Democratic control in both houses would render Trump much weaker in legislative endeavors and perhaps enable legislation to reverse some of the damage he has done which can be passed without presidential signature by appropriate levels of congressional approval. Such a position would make his final two years at the helm of this ship-lost-at-sea to stay afloat with limited damage until we can return our government to adult supervision in 2020.

Think about it!

The Inept Finger on the Trigger

Ted Folkert

April 11, 2018

“Déjà vu, all over again,” as someone once said, is a danger that we should now fear, not only as a nation, but particularly as parents or grandparents of draft-age kids.

Inferences have been made by historians and other political commentators of military actions having been initiated as a tactic of distraction from public displeasure against leaders with the power to declare such actions and personal reasons for such diversionary tactics.

Such inferences were discussed after the 911 disaster when George W. Bush, after initiating military action against Afghanistan, suddenly diverted the military against Saddam Hussein in Iraq, purportedly because Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. Some of us assumed that such action was in retaliation and vengeance for the attempt to assassinate his father, George H.W. Bush, when he was president.  And some of us thought such action was a tactic of distraction to divert attention away from GWB’s incompetence in office, which was becoming more apparent daily and was dominating the news cycle at the time.

Now we have a president which gives the term incompetence a whole new meaning, who has made a laughing stock of the office, who has been abusive to political appointees time after time by hiring them and firing them, with little regard for their careers and no identifiable reasoning other than the demand of sycophantic delivery of his message, which is: “I am great, brilliant, know all things, and nothing else matters except the embellishment of my image.”

Unfortunately, he has his finger on the trigger which could generate massive turmoil worldwide, losses of trillions of dollars, losses of millions of lives, unlimited damage to our environment, and massive waste of the Earth’s precious resources – and perhaps merely to divert attention away form his miserable incompetence, dishonesty, and disregard for anyone other than himself.

Congress should step up and do the right thing. They should enact legislation, even if it requires a constitutional amendment, to eliminate presidential power to initiate any type of military action without congressional approval. The thought of one person having the authority to do so is without common sense, not only to eliminate personal reasons from the equation, but to require discussion and debate of such measures at length and the ultimate consensual decision which considers all ramifications involved, instead of merely the momentary whims of one elected official.

This should be a nonpartisan action. Who, in their right mind, could disagree. Those who have seen warfare would surely support such a measure. (Where is Dwight Eisenhower when we need him)

Having one person in a position to create warfare and endanger the lives and welfare of everyone in the nation is very scary. It seems unnecessary, unwarranted, and inane. It is times like this when the urgency of such action becomes imperative and demands non-partisanship, mutual beneficence, and common sense – for the COMMON GOOD.

Gun Violence or Civil Rights, our choice!

Ted Folkert
April 3, 2018

javas

No Place to Sleep

Ted Folkert

February 8, 2018

NIMBY strikes again. (You know, “not in my back yard”). Those with no place to sleep are going to have to relocate again as they have done again and again and again, and as whey will do forever, again and again and again. In California, as is the case in many parts of the country, affordable rent is a term from the past. This formula only works for those fortunate enough to earn a substantial income. The “good old days” when affordable rent was comfortable at about 20% of one’s income are gone forever. In California that formula doesn’t work for the renters or the property owners. If the property owners seek renters to fit that formula they may have extended vacancies. If renters seek properties which fit that formula they end up sleeping outdoors.

Many of those who are retired on Social Security, who have worked all their lives, cannot afford to pay the rent in this area and eat at the same time. And many of them lack the wherewithal to seek other housing areas which are more affordable.

Of course, sleeping outdoors requires being quite mobile. NIMBY prevails everywhere those who sleep outdoors choose to place their blankets. So, the police show up and the outdoor sleepers keep on the move.

There has existed a large encampment of outdoor sleepers along a river trail in the Anaheim, Costa Mesa area for some time. A place to which many have matriculated after being evicted from numerous places of encampment again and again and again. Now the NIMBYs have arisen again. Law enforcement is cracking down. A federal judge has provided some delay in the process, however, the NIMBYs always prevail. After all, who owns the elected officials in this country? It obviously isn’t the outdoor sleepers.

So, law enforcement moves in to follow the orders of their superiors to force these people to move on, as they have done again and again and again. Law enforcers issue citations, which is most cases is a waste of paper and ink. People with no place to sleep have no method of transportation to show up in court. If the do show up and receive a fine, they can’t pay it. Then they are a fugitive from justice. If they get a jail sentence they serve it and then return to the street again where they have been through this same process again and again and again.

So, has any ground been gained? Of course not. Steve Lopez of the Los Angeles Times talks about this all the time and has been a hands-on advocate for the homeless of this area. Unfortunately, the situation only continues to get worse as property owners respond to housing demand and continue to raise rents.

Once one becomes a victim of this way of survival the path to a homestead way of life becomes increasingly more remote. When one has no address or phone number, when one has no place to keep clean and presentable, and when one has no personal or employment references, employment is virtually impossible. That is where hopelessness prevails along with helplessness and despair – the big three.

We read about all the wonderful plans to build affordable housing for those with no place to sleep. We hear of big funding to help solve the problem. But nothing happens. They talk about solving this problem with their five-year and ten-year plans. What about today or tomorrow. Why not break ground and build some housing today or tomorrow and continue to do so for five years and then for ten years.

I imagine we could arouse hundreds of volunteers who would contribute time and money to help to provide for those who are helpless. There are those who either don’t understand the problem or don’t care about resolving it but there are also those who would lend a helping hand once our fearless leaders get done campaigning for reelection and decide to resolve this enormous issue.

All talk and no action. That seems to be the process in dealing with the problem. The money spent enforcing and adjudicating those violating law prohibiting such lifestyle, the money spent on cleaning up homeless encampments, the money spent on damages and repairs from those seeking warmth and shelter – all of the money spent on the negative side of this issue – would probably make some good headway toward resolving this crucial problem and providing some hope for the hopeless. Those who are experiencing this way of life due to PTSD from military duty, or from drug or alcohol addiction, or mental illness deserve professional help and a comfortable path to recover from their dilemma. And those who are simply in the downward spiral of joblessness or adversity deserve assistance in climbing out of the homeless entrapment and achieving a way of life with opportunity and livable housing.

Like my parents used to tell me – “don’t believe everything you hear.”

Dean Baker provides some profound insight regarding  erroneous information about tax cuts.

Excerpts from Dean Baker’s article: “The Corporate Tax Cut Bonanza” – January 22, 2018

” . . . . .  what is perhaps most disturbing about the Republican tax plan is that it seems to steer the United States in the opposite direction of proven paths to growth. Looking back in the past, whether across states or across countries, low tax rates have never been the spur to growth. The spur to growth has been a well-trained and well-educated workforce, coupled with the infrastructure needed to support growth.

Today, the booming areas are not low-tax states like Arkansas and Mississippi, but relatively high-tax states like New York, Massachusetts and California.

For example, the long boom that followed World War II was associated with a huge increase in college enrollment and high school graduation rates, not tax cuts. We built the national highway system, which was the basis for the suburbanization of this period and was associated with the explosion of the automobile sector and a wide variety of related industries. In addition, publicly-funded research had massive spinoffs in everything from aerospace to the internet.

If we look across states today, the booming areas are not low-tax states like Arkansas and Mississippi. Rather, we see the greatest prosperity in relatively high-tax states like New York, Massachusetts and California. Businesses are attracted by the highly skilled workers in these states. And, while some of these workers are educated in these states, workers come from around the country and around the world because these are considered desirable places for highly educated people to both work and live.

The same is true comparing countries across the globe; in fact, the countries in which workers are most prosperous all have much larger government sectors than the United States. In Germany, whose workers enjoy high pay and long vacations, government spending accounts for 43.8 percent of GDP compared to just 37.6 percent in the United States, according to the OECD.

Instead of focusing on tax cuts, it would be good if the Republicans can look to the economic success stories of the present and recent past.

In France, where workers have enjoyed substantial wage gains over the last four decades and rank near the top in productivity per hour, the government accounts for 56.6 percent of the economy. There is a similar story for the prosperous Scandinavian countries: In Norway, President Trump’s apparent preferred country of origin for new immigrants, government spending accounts for 48.8 percent of the economy.

Instead of focusing on tax cuts, it would be good if the Republicans can look to the economic success stories of the present and recent past. Spending more to promote clean technologies can help keep U.S. companies among the world leaders in the area. Additional support for installing solar or wind energy and buying electric cars would also help. And, new funding to make college tuition free and reduce the student loan debt of recent grads would also help to expand the supply of skilled labor, as would more support for community colleges and other forms of training.

This route might not be the current orthodoxy among Republicans, but, unlike tax cuts, it is a proven path to broadly shared prosperity, and not just short-term profits.”

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ted Folkert – January 15, 2018

There will be many articles and remembrances for Dr. King today – as there should be. He was a tireless and stalwart crusader for redress for the plight of the powerless minorities who were impoverished and imprisoned in a life lacking equal rights, equal education, and equal employment opportunities and equal law enforcement.

He was denied an equal right to live his life and broadcast his opinion while opposing the plight of minorities in a country expressing the virtues of freedom from the wrath of dictators, monarchs, and other tyrants, but denying civil rights to people who looked like him, simply because they looked like him.

The worst outcome of his murder was, of course, the loss to his loved ones.

The second worst outcome must be our loss of his continued drive for equal rights, with his eloquent voice, his determined drive, and his persistent, non-violent movement for equality.

The third worst outcome must be the unsolved crime. James Earl Ray was convicted of his murder, but we still didn’t get the real culprits, those who hired him. Someone knew who they were but chose to conceal the truth for the benefit of continuing the racial intolerance of the South.

To get true healing from this loss, not for his family, there can be no solace there, but for our country and his cause, we still need to identify the culprit or culprits who planned and caused this horrendous assassination to happen. Justice still has not been served.

Dr. King knew he was a target but persisted fearlessly. He was thoroughly inspired to implement change in the lives of people who looked like him. He stated in his last public speaking, the night before he was assassinated, “I may not be there with you, but I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.”

Dr. King would be speaking loud and clear about racial justice now that we have elected a bigot to lead our country and who attempts to backtrack the progress of racial equality that we have enacted since Dr. King’s death. He would be speaking loud and clear about the racist voter suppression. He would speak loud and clear about the marching of white nationalists and about our president calling them “some very fine people.”

May his movement continue forward in spite of the bigotry we still endure in our society as we celebrate the life of Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr. May he rest in the peace he deserves and may he continue to see progress in racial equality resulting from his fearless leadership.