Reprint? Reprint.
In previous item on swamping or flooding I linked back to a semi-related question that I had left open in 2017.

The related question about two-sided scales was actually answered later, but I wasn't thinking about it when I wrote the answer.

Here's the core of the question:

= = = = = START REPRINT 1:

It's easy to measure deltas of order vs chaos in physical objects like houses and paintings, or semiphysical 'performances' like software and music. Is it harder with non-physical things like language and logic?

No, it's not harder.

Some of these are one-sided scales with increases and decreases along one vector; others have opposing vectors with a net resultant.

Language? Two-sided. Making a new and useful word, or a new and useful phrase, is an increase of order and value. Silencing useful words, or swamping useful words with intentionally misleading words, is destruction of value.

Facts? Two-sided. Making a new and valid observation via senses or instruments is an increase of order and value. Silencing a valid fact, or swamping a valid fact with invalid facts, is destruction of value.

= = = = = END REPRINT 1.

The question was answered last year in the topic of Bridges and Balances. I showed how a bridge can measure ORDER VS CHAOS.

= = = = = START REPRINT 2:

Personal Equation Machines calibrate and exercise an astronomer's accuracy and reliability in detecting the truth of a sidereal transit. This is an extremely specialized calibration. Can we find a way to calibrate and train broader powers of truth detection?

If it's possible at all, I think a balance or bridge is a promising path. I'm continuing from last week's discussion of balances and bridges.

= = = = =

I'll use two different types of balance or bridge to show how a balance can detect dynamic or functional qualities, not just static measurements like weight and resistance. These balances send a signal toward the object being measured, and detect the difference between the sent and received signal. If the object is a faithful reflector or amplifier, the difference can be nulled. If the object introduces its own distortions, the difference can't be nulled.

First: The standing-wave balance, commonly used in acoustics labs, sends a steady sound wave down a tube toward a sample of an unknown substance. By changing the frequency of the wave you can set up a resonance in the tube. If you can achieve a resonance or standing wave, you can measure the difference between incident and reflected waves by measuring the strength at the nodes or low points. A perfect reflection leads to zero pressure at the node points.



Here we're using a GenRad tuning fork oscillator to drive the speaker, and using a GenRad sound level meter to pick up the resultant sound. The sample goes in the cap at the left end. The microphone has a long probe extending through the speaker into the resonance tube, and the probe can be moved back and forth by pushing the microphone car. (Incidentally, the car is sort of fun to 'drive', and can be controlled vernierly with the big wheels.)



Polistra has opened up the sample cap, and Happystar has a precut sample of an unknown material ready for insertion.



With the oscillator driving the speaker, we can see the green outgoing wave first, then the violet reflected wave by itself, then the interference pattern of the incident and reflected waves. The open end of the microphone probe is roughly centered in the tube. (I've shifted the reflected wave upward for easier visibility.)



Here's a more schematic image of what really happens. Bear in mind that there's no such thing as zero air pressure. Sound waves are repetitions of increased pressure (red) and decreased pressure (blue) with the "zero" crossings at normal atmospheric pressure. As the incident and reflected waves move through the tube, the actual audible and measurable pressure at each location is always the result of mixing or summing the increased and decreased pressures. The nodes are the places that stay centered as the mix goes up and down.



= = = = =

Now we bring in the original question of sensing or measuring faithfulness of reflection. What happens when the material sample distorts the sound instead of just reflecting part of it? Some materials contain a variety of internal resonators that catch certain frequencies and create their own signals in response. Living things do this all the time.



There's no way to detect a node or null now, because the reflection isn't simply a copy or a negative copy of the original. There might be some points of lower sound, but they will be hard to spot amid the extra frequencies emitted by the active responder.

Several measuring tools for hearing are designed to pick up active live responses. The best is the OAE (oto-acoustic emission) instrument, which I detailed here. The OAE measurement is a truth detector, and is used in real life to detect fake claims of hearing damage.

= = = = =

Second example of a dynamic balance or bridge: an old GenRad tube tester.



We have the same basic pieces. A tone generator drives the grid of the tube. When the voltage between the grid and filament of the tube increases, the flow from filament to plate decreases, and thus the voltage in the output loop. Ideally the output loop should provide an amplified reflection of the input loop. The earphones pick up the difference or balance point between the two loops. Adjusting the variable resistor R1 is like adjusting the small weight on a balance, compensating for the amplification.



Here Polistra is listening for the null while adjusting the resistor to reduce the amplification to equality.



As the pot moves both ways, the reflection in the output loop increases and decreases. At some setting of R1, the reflection will exactly null out the incident signal. If you had to divide the output signal by 4 to hear an exact balance or null, this tells you that the tube was multiplying the input by 4. The setting of R1 thus gives the amplification figure of the tube.



Now we introduce distortion, as we did with the standing-wave acoustic reflection. When the sample being examined (the tube) creates its own noise or active responses, there's no chance of nulling the output. The output loop can never be either a copy or an inverted copy of the input, no matter how much it's reduced by R1. There will always be something extra audible.



= = = = =

Both of these dynamic or functional balances can perform a service that would be hard to define and measure in a simple balance, though it's actually a common situation with a simple balance. Think of trying to weigh a puppy on a produce scale. You could tell that the animal was restless and wiggling around, but the scale wouldn't be able to measure the restless behavior itself. The wiggling would be an unwanted factor, and you'd have to approximate the mean weight in the middle of the jumping and tail-wagging.

As mentioned at the start, this doesn't reach the ultimate goal of a balance-style truth calibrator or exerciser. The active setting of the microphone car or R1 would be the equivalent of tapping the telegraph key on the Personal Equation Machine. There are several huge missing steps. How would this active setting serve as an exercise to help you USE your detection ability? How would a balance try to null out a more abstract "sample" of a moral question? Is there a more concrete "sample" that will accomplish the same exercise?

= = = = =

= = = = = END REPRINT 2.

Labels: Asked and answered, Equipoise

  ¶ 10:51 PM

  Random Quora irritation
In Quora discussions (and lots of other web places) a constant theme is ALL AMERICANS CARRY GUNS.

Foreigners warn other foreigners against visiting America because they've seen every American totin and shootin.

Where do they SEE these guns?

I've lived most of my life in gun-totin parts of America, usually lived in 'shady' neighborhoods and sometimes worked in allegedly gun-totin occupations like construction.

In 50 years of adult life I have seen a gun exactly ONCE. I was clerking at a motel in Enid, definitely a totin place by reputation. A guest left his pistol under the pillow when he checked out, and asked me to fetch it for him before the room was cleaned and re-rented. Even in that [pillow]case, I wouldn't have SEEN the gun if I hadn't been asked to find it.

I'm sure many of the people around me have been carrying, but never openly.

Where do the visitors SEE guns? It's a complete puzzle, or else a complete lie.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 8:50 AM

  Was KT right?
Reading a Collectible Auto article on the '49s. Needless to say, it quotes KT Keller's famous speech berating Californians for assuming that nobody wears a hat. KT made cars that wouldn't knock your hat off.

Was he accurate or just selling?

In the same article a detailed chart of interior dimensions answers the question.

Front headroom in Chevy was 34 inches. Ford was 35 inches. Plymouth was 40.

40 - 34 = hat.

It wouldn't make much difference for shorter people, but for an average or taller man KT was quantitatively accurate.

I'm 5'8, median for that generation. A quick measurement finds 32" from chair to scalp. So a 1949 hat on my head wouldn't fit in a Chevy, and would fit in a Plymouth.

Hat or not, a taller interior makes entry and exit easier for everyone, and feels roomier.

Labels: Asked and answered, Real World Math

  ¶ 4:43 PM

  Where's the GUILD for software?
Another where's the guild question. In this case I'm not really puzzled by the absence of a guild response because I know exactly how and when the guild was subverted and flipped. It happened 20 years ago.

The current holocaust is based HEAVILY on cheating with software.

The use of software to create and expand a fake crisis began with the Carbon Cult, with Mann's fake hockey stick models showing exponential increase of CO2 "pollution".

A more visible example for outsiders was VW's diesel cheating. Diesel is intrinsically and incurably MORE DIRTY THAN GASOLINE, but the Carbon Cult flipped the comparison and redefined diesel as clean because VW bribed them to flip. VW then used software to fake the numbers. The control computer in each car sensed when the car was connected to an official test rig, and outputted artifically low numbers.

Same thing with the "virus". Exponential models can't possibly represent reality because reality is never exponential. Governments use the models because governments want to kill everyone. Software processes the "cases", and HIPAA prevents us from checking the "cases". Even if the "cases" were honestly counted, "cases" are THE WRONG FUCKING MEASUREMENT. Just as with diesel vs gasoline, the holocausters have flipped medicine upside down, redefining "cases" as dirty.

The proper MEANING of "cases" isn't in the models, so we don't get to hear it.

= = = = =

From a modern perspective it seems obvious that ABSTRACT software makes cheating easier, but this total misuse wasn't always normal. There was a guild spirit in software that tried to protect the craft from misuse and cheating.

When did it change? 2000. Dotcom. Cheaters took over the biz.

Computing began with the government census, at a time when the government wanted accuracy. From 1890 to 1990 software mainly served corporate accounting. Computers were seen as fancy adding machines, and they were REQUIRED to be strictly honest.

Bookkeepers and their adding machines were the honest end of the system. After the bookkeeper had carefully verified the accuracy of the double-entry ledger, the accountant walked in and arbitrarily moved numbers around to cheat on taxes. This may be unfamiliar to outsiders, but it was standard procedure. You can see the setup powerfully in this Racket Squad episode.

The machine was the honest end, and the human accountant was the criminal.

The dotcommers reversed the paradigm. They used the software itself to create false impressions of their wealth and corporate solidity, then used software to manipulate the market, and had no compunction at all about ruining lives to EXPONENTIALLY increase their wealth.

Labels: #defundpublichealth, Asked and answered, Carbon Cult

  ¶ 12:27 AM

  Middens
The KSHS website has suddenly turned active again after several months of lockdown. Might be a sign that Kansas is starting to unlock? Hard to tell.

One of the new items happens to answer a random thought I'd been entertaining this week. I was thinking about the Goodnow Mansion, which was across the street from the house my parents owned for much of my school years in Manhattan. I spent a lot of time digging around in the midden behind the Goodnow house, which contained all sorts of relics from earlier decades. I remember a Model A bumper and other car parts.

Interesting trash disappeared in the '70s as part of EPA's "cleanup", which offshored trash along with industry and skills.

This week I was randomly wondering why K-State didn't pay any attention to that midden. They were doing archeology digs in those years, and the midden was just 6 blocks from campus, AND Goodnow was the founder of K-State. Should have been interesting to them, but apparently wasn't.

Turns out K-State did get around to investigating the midden, much later after it was buried.

Here's a horse bit from the Goodnow midden. (It's possible that I might have examined this item, but I was only interested in car stuff and electric stuff, so I wouldn't have remembered it.)

Labels: Asked and answered, skill-estate

  ¶ 12:50 PM

  We never needed them.
I like to dream about a Nuremberg Trial that executes all the Public Death Officers. Justice is a splendid fantasy, but justice is extinct in the Sorosian world.

More realistically, it's PAST time to ask whether we EVER needed those officers. Even before they switched from Public "Health" to Public Death in March 2020, they simply WEREN'T NEEDED.

When it comes to fighting viruses, we already have all the weapons we need. Our immune system has been fighting microbes for a billion years, and it has a vast array of weapons, plus the internal intelligence to create new weapons.

This happens without any effort or thinking on our part.

All we need to do is STAY HEALTHY in general. Good sleep, good diet, sunlight, fresh air, lots of exercise, frequent (but not hermetically sealed) contact with other people, work, confidence, purpose. In other words, live a normal and healthy life.

THE PUBLIC DEATH OFFICERS EXPLICITLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY PROHIBITED EVERY ASPECT OF A NORMAL HEALTHY LIFE.

Vaccines do help with some viruses that are especially deadly and contagious, like smallpox and measles. Vaccines don't help much with flu and common cold viruses, and the current Haute-Couture Branded Virus is basically the common cold with a designer label. "Waiting for a vaccine" is thus a vicious and sneaky way of saying "We intend to continue the genocide until we kill all of you."

Vaccines were developed long before Public Death Officers, and are distributed without the help of the Public Death Officers. Most vaccines are administered by commercial pharmacies.

The original "justification" for the Public "Health" Officers was sanitation. They probably improved sanitation in some places, but the same thing could have been accomplished without forming new agencies.

Decent governments have always paid attention to pollution and sanitation. Water supplies, sewers, and trash collection have been part of government duties for thousands of years, and are still part of government duties. They're handled by civil engineers, not Public Death Officers.

The rest of the job is up to our immune systems, PROVIDED we are allowed to use them.


So what good do those agencies do? ZERO GOOD, INFINITE EVIL. Even before they switched to genocide, they weren't needed. We certainly don't need official genocide. Supposedly we fought WW2 to get rid of official genocide. We said Never Again. Well, it's AGAIN now. What are we going to do about it?

Labels: #defundpublichealth, Asked and answered, immodest and imperative proposal

  ¶ 10:37 PM

  Dumbest science headline of the week
First, when I say dumbest I'm excluding the entire categories of "climate change" and "social" "science". Those areas are genocidal, which is a separate axis. Most of the research in those areas is also dumb, but there's no point in separating dumb genocide from smart genocide, dumb torture from smart torture.

Among the items that can be treated as dumb vs smart, this one takes the cake:

Headline: Can our thoughts alter our brains?

Answer: The PURPOSE of thought is to alter the brain.

Every thought either creates new associative pathways or reinforces old pathways. This has been broadly known for many decades. We're just starting to explore the actual mechanisms.

At the first instant, those new or altered associations are just signals, but every signal causes axons to seek new connections which alters the brain in VISIBLE ways.

The cited research finds that those VISIBLE paths are VISIBLE on MRI scans, which shouldn't be surprising.

The research itself isn't dumb. Only the headline is dumb. A smarter version would be

HOW does thought alter our brains?

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 2:14 AM

  Y phone plug != phone plug?
Speaking of non-universal technologies, I was fiddling pointlessly as usual with this old Philmore crystal receiver...



which has separate binding posts for headphones.

All radios in the '20s had separate binding posts for headphones...



and all headphones had separate wires, usually with soldered-on tips to avoid fraying....



But the cable itself was always a twisted pair in one insulator, so a single plug would always have made more sense. The single plug was always available...



and it had an obvious name: phone plug.

Modern radios and audio equipment have coaxial phone plugs, which started out at the same size as Bell Tel switchboard plugs and gradually got smaller.

This 1969 catalog page shows the range of sizes, unchanged since then...



When did the standard change from separate to coax? It was certainly before the '60s. All the equipment sold and used during my lifetime had coaxial phone plugs.

GenRad, the calibration company, calibrates the answer.

A 1920 audibility meter, with separate binding posts for phones:



A 1945 wavemeter, with only a coaxial phone plug:





And the answer is: A 1939 wavemeter indicates the transition graphically! Both types of output available!

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 8:45 AM

  Patient DXers, patient roofs
The indispensable American Radio History has uploaded 50 YEARS of biweekly newsletters from the National Radio Club, a BCB DX club based in Buffalo.

The publisher's address looked residential, so I got curious and Googlestreeted it. I hoped to see a forest of antennas. Nope, the original publisher must have died, BUT:



Can you guess which house was running a business for 50 years that involved lots of radios and a VariTyper and a Multilith press? Three phases, and the first two don't count.

As I slid through that neighborhood trying to spot the exact address, I also answered a question that has bothered me for a long time. How does Buffalo deal with 100 inches of snow every year? We never see reports of disasters. All of the houses in the neighborhood were built in the '20s, all have solid and straight roofs and gutters. You can't reach those roofs with a rake. So the roofs are holding up with minimum attention.

What's the secret? Turns out to be the same thing I observed in Spokane a few years ago.

Steep roofs with occupied attics. Cape Cod.

Modern writers insist that you need PERFECT INSULATION and a COLD ROOF to avoid ice dams. Nope, the old builders found the correct answer by EXPERIENCE. A warm steep roof melts the snow almost immediately, so it doesn't get loaded down and doesn't form dams.

And for a perfect contrast, Tesla's all-theory idiocy, which by a neat coincidence is "manufactured" in Buffalo.

Later, more from the NRC newsletters: Though based in the northeast, two of their main correspondents were in familiar spots. Their TV editor was in Ponca. At that time Ponca had a hard time picking up the TV stations in Tulsa and OKC, so everyone with a TV needed a good antenna. All TV was DX. Another regular correspondent was in Spokane, right in this neighborhood. His house was near the cliff with a clear view to the south, and most of his DX was from the south.

Labels: Aberree, Asked and answered, Patient things

  ¶ 6:00 AM

  Airships
In radio shows and short movie serials from the '30s, flying machines are always called airships or just ships. This is especially noticeable in adventure serials focused on flying, but also shows up in other contexts. For instance, an Ex-Lax ad in a 1940 'Strange as it Seems' episode compares the regularity of Ex-Lax to the scheduling of airships. "You know the Chicago ship will arrive at 3:45." [Pun intended? Probably not. Dirty words weren't at the front of most minds in those days.]

By the '50s, airship was entirely absent, replaced by airplane. Did this happen during WW2? The Google ngram thingie answers the question nicely.



Just after Pearl Harbor, both airplane and aircraft replace airship. Later on, airplane fades out in favor of aircraft.

The change is so sudden that I wonder if media received an official order.

= = = = =

A pretty good marker for the transition point is the 1940 non-interventionist spy serial K-7. All flying machines are airplanes or planes. The transition comes in especially handy in this episode about bombing planes stowed on ships.

Agent Pat shouts:

"Agent Z! Agent Z! There are also planes aboard the other ship!"

This would have been tricky in the previous vocabulary....

Pat: "Agent Z! Agent Z! There are also ships aboard the other ship!"

Z: "I'm sorry, Pat, your message is ambiguous. Could you elucidate?"

Pat: "There are also vehicles which rise from the ground using the Bernoulli Principle aboard the other vehicle which floats on the surface of the ocean using buoyancy!"

Z: "Too late, it already exploded."

Labels: Asked and answered, Language update

  ¶ 1:26 AM

  Backwards Boris
Boris, who is basically Trump with a college degree, has written an article:

Ignore the pessimists - if we can put a man on the moon, we can solve the Irish border problem

The tired Apollo analogy is backwards for Brexit.

Apollo was flying into completely uncharted territory.

Brexit is RETURNING from the moon of the EU back to the earth of Britain.

Britain was an independent nation for about 1000 years. Britain then became a dependency of EU for 25 years. Returning from the unchartered territory to the chartered territory doesn't require a rocket and a "can-do spirit".



It requires an eraser and an "undo spirit". Find all treaties and laws created to satisfy EU. Delete. A week of work for competent clerks who know what they're looking for.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 6:01 AM

  Plan ahea
Following on previous item.

KSHS has a second set of records from the Missoury Fur Company, led by Clark in 1812. This set is in English, and mainly deals with the finances and bylaws of the corporation itself. The first set was in semi-French, and recorded the transactions of the store that sold supplies to the explorers.

The clerk who kept these records had a habit of doodling, and didn't have a sense of proper graphic layout. Here's the title page:



Like the old PLAN AHEA poster.

His ledger and his math doodles show how the columnar approach was still strong even in a strictly decimal system.

Part of the ledger:



Note the lack of leading zero on the cents column, and the blanks instead of zeros on amounts without cents.

And his doodles:



Again, even in a familiar layout of a subtraction problem, and even with actual decimal points indicated, the cents and dollars are felt to be distinct columns.

Question: Was the leading zero introduced by adding machines and cash registers?

Easy answer: No. Here's a sample ledger from an 1844 bookkeeping text:



No cents indicated by 00, two and a half cents indicated by 02½.

Leading zero was available and taught before machines, but probably enhanced by dealing with machines.

Labels: Asked and answered, Real World Math

  ¶ 12:04 AM

  Are they stupid? No, they're evil
Skimming some of the latest dump of Integrity Initiative documents. I don't know enough about UK players and agencies to judge what's going on, so I'm ignoring those documents.

One document in the US section answers a question I've been wondering about. It's an analysis of RT and SputnikNews.

All US media demons and politicians have been telling us over and over that RT is pro-Trump. This is factually false, and you don't need secret clearance to see that it's false. Just READ the damn thing. RT's attitude is identical to MSNBC or CNN on all issues EXCEPT Russia. During the 2016 election RT endorsed Bernie. They're still completely unfriendly to Trump.

Question: Do the media and intel agencies believe this? Are they so hopelessly locked inside their own self-reinforcing bubble that they only listen to the screeches inside their own alien heads?

Answer from the document: NO.

Coverage of Trump by RT and Sputnik is, in fact, uncharacteristically balanced. Some recent reports have presented the Republican candidate favorably, such as when he endorsed a number of critics for re-election 'in an attempt to ease party tensions', or accused Clinton of founding the Daesh terrorist group. Others, however, were unfavorable. One quoted a neo-Nazi leader as backing his candidacy; another accused him of hypocrisy. One report even asked, 'Is Trump an embarrassment to the GOP because he's an incompetent, uninformed, pathological menace, or because he's just saying out loud what most Republicans now believe?'

No such balance is apparent in the two outlets' coverage of the other candidates. Clinton is the most obvious target. In August alone, RT reports covered accusations of corruption, lying and ill health against her; accused her of launching a McCarthystyle 'witch hunt' against Trump; and linked her to the use of nuclear weapons in 1945. Sputnik's reporting called her and her team 'war hawks', accused her of wanting to 'make more families suffer' the deaths of soldiers, and named her the 'Queen of War'.

Earlier in the electoral cycle, Bernie Sanders enjoyed similar lavish coverage, with headlines such as 'Why only Sanders can prevent "President Trump"'. In March, RT even ran an interview claiming that Clinton and Google were collaborating to rig the results against Sanders, with the interviewer asking, 'Sanders scored a 35% swing, maybe, in Michigan, I mean, it hasn't worked so well for Clinton, has it?'

Exactly right. A correct summary of the real data.

So the intel agencies can't be forgiven on the basis of self-contained ignorance. They KNOW they're lying about Russia.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 2:05 AM

  Y no discrimination lawsuits?
In watching the Tesla anti-cult reporters I've noticed something. The truest of Tesla true believers .... the buyers who continue to LOVE the car and the company even when the company delivers nothing or delivers a useless undrivable brick .... are from China and Vietnam and India.

I can't think of an innate reason for this tendency. Those three groups are hugely varied culturally and genetically. The only thing they have in common as immigrants is prosperity. People who come here from that corner of the world are self-selected entrepreneur types, driven by a desire for wealth. Recent immigrants from Mexico or the Soviet zone are less wealth-driven and less wealthy.

If Elon wasn't the anointed prophet of Gaia, leftists would be noticing this pattern and suing him for race-based advertising. The suits would be false, like all "discrimination" suits; but the pattern would be obvious enough to win the case.

Labels: Asked and answered, Carbon Cult

  ¶ 2:36 AM

  Asked and answered
Perfect asked-answered pair, from National Catholic Register headlines.



Nuff said.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 6:15 AM

  When you know how things work.....
A good direct source of information helps to understand what's going on. Satan's media will always destroy your understanding of what's going on. Eliminating common sense is a MAJOR PART of Soros's mission. Satan wants you to be COMPLETELY VULNERABLE, completely defenseless physically and mentally, completely incapable of predicting what will happen next. If you follow the "logic" provided by Satan's media you will always be lethally surprised by ordinary events.

Here's a good example from the ONLY local source of direct information.

Since I got whomped by an SUV in 2008, I've become extremely patient. I'll always wait for traffic, always let cars go first. When a car halts in mid-block and motions me to cross, I'll do it, but otherwise the cars have total right-of-way.

A few days ago I was standing clearly on the sidewalk at a four-way stop, and motioned the car at the stop sign to go ahead. Instead of going, he shouted something about calling the cops. Huh? What's going on?

Now I see why.



It's not clear what the tweakers are trying to accomplish by this trick. They're not likely to get insurance payments. Or maybe that's a bad assumption? In any case this explains why drivers are suddenly pissed at patient pedestrians.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 1:02 AM

  How long did it take?
I was wondering how long it would take for Satan's media to blame Populists for the bridge collapse in Italy.

Answer: about 24 hours.

The anti-establishment Five Star Movement (M5S) faced scrutiny Wednesday because in 2013 its Genoa activists had opposed a planned road bypass. A provincial study by M5S had referred to the "fairytale (favoletta) of an imminent collapse of the Morandi Bridge."

As always, heretic witches are capable of time travel. In 2013 Five Star was a minor irritant, a clownish parody of politics, nowhere near the circles of power. Nevertheless, Five Star's 2013 comment blew up the bridge this week.

In the real world, infrastructure failure is one of the problems that ordinary people SEE AND UNDERSTAND, and it's one of the main drivers for Populism everywhere. In the real world, Five Star and Lega won the election BECAUSE the existing powers were letting the roads and bridges decay along with everything else. In the real world, the new government hasn't had time to START fixing infrastructure, let alone to COMPLETE the task.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 2:10 AM

  Corner of SE 14 and Cinderella ... redux
After noting yet again the decline of this neighborhood, which is aided by the copkilling Insatiable Aliens currently in charge of this fucked former "city", I happened to bump into some videos that explain how another neighborhood STOPPED declining.

Three years ago I wrote a sort of tribute to the Shidler-Wheeler area in OKC. I had lived there briefly in the '70s and loved the place even though I was going through a messy phase at the time. In 2014 the area seemed to be intentionally recovering, but I didn't know why.

= = = = = START REPRINT FROM 2014

After mentioning emptied-out neighborhoods in previous entry, I googlestreeted a couple of areas that I remembered from OKC. Have they been emptied yet?

I'd previously googlestreeted them about a year ago. At that time they looked perfectly familiar, unchanged from 1972. Ready to be emptied. No other destiny.

When I "drove" through them this morning, I thought: Whoa there! Did I type the wrong address?

No. It's the same address, but sometime between 2007 and 2014 it was magnificently gentrified.



Above is 2007, below is Aug 2014. This is typical (though not universal) of the whole neighborhood around Byers and SE14. The houses aren't any bigger, but they're smartly renovated. Presumably some of the occupants are new, but I doubt that everyone was forced to evacuate. So the old occupants are pulling up to fit the new standard.

OKC has broken the boom-bust ratchet! Instead of ripping out the smallest shacks, transform the shacks into cottages ... Then the cottage people will come ... Note the little hipster car! ... And the shack people will either leave or rediscover how to be cottage people ... Which most of them were at one time.

THIS IS THE CORRECT ALTERNATIVE TO EMPTIED-OUT NEIGHBORHOODS.

Double Bravo to OKC for doing it RIGHT!


= = = = =

Later: Presumably most of the work was done by individual contractors and flippers, but the results have a coordinated 'look'. This implies city planning or urging. Those brick mailboxes were starting to appear in the 2007 googleview, and they're all over the neighborhood in the newer picture. They must have been a city effort to give the neighborhood an instinctive and distinctive identity. OKC has been running a clever and productive neighborhood-identity program for quite a while, but I don't see any references to this well-defined little area in online discussions of the program.

When I lived there, the 'perceived boundaries' were the river on the north, SE17 on the south, High on the east, and Central on the west. I did most of my shopping along Central and only occasionally went over to Capitol Hill.

Aha. Here's the only specific description online. The document is a 1994 survey for historic landmarks, which looks down its haughty nose and sniffs:

Shidler-Wheeler #1 district is primarily residential, consisting of bungalows, Folk Victorian, and shotgun houses. Included is a row of brick-veneer shotgun houses on SE15. The area is approximately from SE10 to SE15 and S Byers to S Laird, comprising most of the Central Addition platted in 1908. Many of the houses were built prior to the 1920's; however, many have been drastically altered, some demolished, and a number of inappropriate infill buildings constructed. The survey determined that the area no longer meets the criteria for National Register listing.

Drastically altered? Inappropriate infill? Hmph to you too, assholes.

Infill is a city's salvation.

= = = = = END REPRINT FROM 2014

Now the video made by the organization responsible for the recovery:



Nice to see LOCAL people trying to restore a place they love.

Labels: Asked and answered, infill, Shack people - Cottage people

  ¶ 3:14 PM

  And the lion shall lay down etc
The latest item at KSHS is a nice dose of feelgood.



A picture postcard advertising Cozy Corner Poultry Farms in Erie. Date is given as '30s.

Sidenote: The rabbit's face looks more 'horsey' than rabbits I've seen recently. Not surprising because rabbits are genetically closer to horses than to rodents or carnivores. Have domestic rabbits been bred for flatter faces in recent decades?

Later: Yes.

Labels: Asked and answered, Zero Problems

  ¶ 12:14 AM

  Assange still doesn't get it
Assange twitter:

"Left infatuation with online censorship has now led to pervasive on online censorship of the left. I warned you."

He links an article on the 'World Socialist' website which DOES get it. Even after reading and linking the article, Assange misses the point.

Google is manipulating its Internet searches to restrict p ublic awareness of and access to socialist, anti-war and left-wing websites. The World Socialist Web Site (www.wsws.org) has been massively targeted and is the most affected by your censorship protocols. Referrals to the WSWS from Google have fallen by nearly 70 percent since April of this year.

ANTI-WAR is the key. Left and right, liberal and conservative, had some meaning in earlier centuries, but since 1946 there is only one** variable. Globalist vs non-globalist.

The globalist tripod: Banks, Intel agencies, and leftist groups.

All official "parties", and all politicians who are allowed to take office, are globalist. All work for the benefit of Five Eyes. All work for finance. All work for monopolistic corporations.

Most of the official "parties" and politicians have a leftist branding, but the branding is irrelevant.

I'm not familiar with this World Socialist party. I don't need familiarity.

Google has told me which side WS is on.

Google wants to eliminate WS from its library and advertising mechanism, so WS is anti-globalist.

It's not a backfire as Assange thinks. The old First They Came For routine doesn't wash. Deepstate doesn't destroy every group, it only destroys groups that oppose Deepstate. Deepstate doesn't care if you defend the "rights" of a brand you dislike, because "rights" do not exist.

**Only one variable: In other words, Graybill's law is recursive. It not only narrows skills and resources down to one skill and one resource, it eliminates all laws except Graybill and all variables except globalism, which is a unary variable. Globalism has only one value, T. Any country or person or organization that attempts to set Globalism to F immediately ceases to exist.

Labels: Asked and answered

  ¶ 2:04 AM