Rebane's Ruminations
November 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

  • George Rebane

    Recent reports of private drones being flown above active wildfires again makes me lose another dollop of faith in the brainpower of my fellow citizens.  Why anyone would want to endanger the fire attack spotters and tankers fighting the fire is beyond me.  So I started noodling on how to solve the problem.  The easiest would be for either the OV-10 spotter or a ground-based unit to just zap the drone with directed EMP.  That would fry enough of the drone’s electronics to bring it down.

    DirectedEMPFrom some back of the envelope calcs, such a ‘weapon’ would not be bigger than a small refrig to have a directional beamwidth sufficient to concentrate the EMP’s energy to an altitude of about one or two thousand feet above ground level.  When a rogue drone is spotted, the incident commander is notifed and queried as to its legitimacy; and if illegitimate, it is zapped.

    Then I googled ‘directed EMP’ and got a snootful.  It’s not a surprise that a lot of people have been thinking about various versions of such a device.  For example, here.

    Now you would think that DARPA would already have put out a couple or three contracts to create such a portable, short range, directed EMP device for military purposes if nothing else.  But as an old electronics engineer, it seems to me that such a gizmo could also be developed in your garage were you of a mind.  Who knows, there might arise a lively market for the Mk1Mod2 Drone Zapper all across America as people begin to see unknown drones hovering around their properties.  Think of all the legal ramifications if such drones start showing up missing.  Can privacy be a legal justification for zapping a drone hovering outside your window or over your house?  Is it legal to remove a bug you discover in your house, or a surreptitiously placed surveillance camera in your yard, or a hovering drone outside your window?

    How about self-defense?  ‘The damn thing came down at us at a threatening angle, we didn’t know what its intent was or what it would do, so we zapped it.’

    Anyway, I think the DZ may be the coming thing at a fire house, police department, or at a neighbor with an attitude.  Who knows, maybe someone has already built one, we know the Russians have.  Rumors and reports abound as to how something that was probably a more powerful and less directed EMP weapon, mounted on a Russian Sukhoi fighter which then ‘attacked’ and compromised major electronics systems on a US destroyer in the Black Sea.  I’d bet the ranch that the Pentagon is at least developing systems of equivalent or greater capability.  Creating EMPs with a nuclear explosion is so yesterday.

    Anyway, keep checking your Hammacher-Schlemmer (say that fast three times) catalog for a Christmas gift this year for that buddy who has everything.

  • George Rebane

    OldGlory2

    As you again wish America a happy birthday, take a look at this rendition of ‘God Bless America’ led by John Wayne and all the show biz greats of 1970 some of whom get a mite choked up.

  • [While the old sandbox was getting full, the comment thread on the externalities post kind of petered out and segued into looking at the externalities implied by AGW, and then it started circling the old climate change barn again.  A request was made to continue it here – fair enough.

    But before diving in one more time, I’d like to point out some strongly orthogonal aspects of discussing climate change cum AGW.  Having ignored or not understood them in the past has led to the predictable Nowhere.  Here’s a partial list –

    - Verity of paleo climate records, - Verity of recent – last 50K years – climate measurements,

    - Definitions of earth’s atmospheric temperature,

    - Definitions of sea levels,

    - Data handling methods to create a usable sets of inputs to models,

    - Knowledge of climate physics – terrestrial and extra-terrestrial – viz sub-processes and their large scale integration (e.g. the earth’s carbon cycle, cosmic rays impact on cloud cover),

    - General Circulation Models (GCMs) – their design, programming, and testing,

    - Validating GCMs – data sets used, performance criteria, selection/tuning of model constants, sub-model transfer functions and stabilities (bifurcations to chaos), sensitivity to inputs, …

    - Interpretation of GCM outputs – obtaining reliable variance measures, accept/reject criteria, …

    – Understanding the impact of human interventions on climate (let alonge AGW).

    In a reasonable world (not the one we live in), debating climate change between people who understand the science, math, and modeling (of complex, stochastic, dynamic systems), and those who don’t is not possible.  One side can cite and interpret the technical literature, and other side can only appeal to ‘consensus science’ or my scientist(s) are smarter than your scientist(s).  Nevertheless, in today’s world such debates are exciting, important, and even fun – each side viewing the other as unredeemable troglodytes.   When the participants are tired of finally insulting the quality of their opponents’ double helixes, and the debate “is heard no more: it (was again) a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”, nevertheless but advising public policies penned by grossly ignorant and hubristic central planners.  Have at it.  gjr]

  • George Rebane

    ‘We know best what’s good for the people.’ –  from the Central Planning Bible

    Lately several readers have been discussing the whys and wherefores of (economic) externalities.   It’s a slippery concept to apply as may be deduced from its definition.

    An externality is “a consequence of an economic activity that is experienced by unrelated third parties. An externality can be either positive or negative.”  – Investopedia.

    If a producer (Agent A1) provides a quantity (Q1) of goods/services to a customer (Agent A2) willing to pay price P1 for them, then we have the costs of production and price driven demand represented by the classical producer-demand curves showing the market realities arrived at by A1 and A2 – that is, Q1 exchanged for $P1.  In this situation each agent has satisfied his own utility for money and goods.

    Now enters agent A3 who is neither a producer nor consumer, and he determines that there are people out there negatively impacted by such production/consumption transactions.  By fiat A3 (usually the government) has the power to assess, attribute, and allocate what it determines is the ‘social cost’ of such unhampered transactions.  It attributes such a cost to a given industry (economic activity) and, in its wisdom, allocates a portion MEC (marginal external cost) to A1 – as a tax, tariff, license fee, imposed purchase of, say, carbon credits, etc – that A3 claims is a negative externality.  But in reality A1 experiences MEC as an added cost of production to his existing MPC (marginal private cost) of production.  This yields a new MSC (marginal social cost) production curve experienced by A1.  And the new price point now shifts to P2 at which price A2 is willing to buy only quantity Q2. (See my modified figure below from Environmental Economics.)

    Externalities

    (more…)

  • George Rebane

    [This is the transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 1 July 2015.]

    Today the country is under terror alert, and the FBI is setting up counter-terrorism control centers across the land as the rest of us prepare to celebrate America’s 239th birthday this weekend.  We know the world is broken, and when we contemplate the state of our Union, it is clear that we also have a lot of mending to do.  Many recognized students of the American scene tell us that today “Political polarization is at unprecedented levels, with large portions of the electorate convinced that the other side is not only mistaken in its political views, but evil.”

    Here in Nevada County radicals have threatened to disrupt the annual 4th of July parade when the local Tea Party unit marches by after having been told, “If you continue to support this anti-constitutional, anti-Christian ideology, start packing or pay the consequences of the outing of the cruel inhuman people your T Party represents.”  Local law enforcement is taking this seriously.

    But in spite of the worldwide killings by Islamic radicals, and the political turmoil that grows inside our borders, we can still reconcile if we remember how we once were as reported by our 19th century visitors.   We were seen and saw ourselves as a unique people who were open, neighborly, generous, egalitarian, feisty, and prideful with over the top patriotism.  We had a passion to get ahead and see what’s over the next hill.  And all those qualities were wrapped up with an undeniable individualism; we knew what made me only me, and no one else.

    Because of that we were not of one mold.  Our Founders knew that and gave us an America that was not meant to be the same America for everyone; our land was intended to accommodate diversity.  Artist, writer, and professor of computer science David Gelernter said, “The founders designed a vast garment for America that hugs where it should hug and stretches where it should stretch; each state creates its own society, and the Constitution stitches them all together into a comfortable, sensible union suit.”

    However such an America has not been our recent direction.  Long ago we were warned by de Tocqueville that when government “covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform” such that it “compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people”, then we have arrived at the doorstep of tyranny.

    Sociologist and political philosopher Charles Murray believes we can begin finding common ground by joining to oppose those patently ridiculous rules and laws which stupefy and compress us all into a bi-partisan misery.  Is it not ridiculous that any American lacks the means to live a decent life?  Is it not ridiculous that our towns and cities can no longer afford to provide basic services?  In a nation as diverse as America, is it not ridiculous to impose one-size-fits-all national policies that involve morally complex cultural differences?  Without giving up our core beliefs, we can all work together to eliminate such ridiculous conditions in our land – and that joint effort can serve as a start for more things to mend America that will bring us back together.

    We should think about these things as we make plans for this weekend.  And may I suggest that we all experience such togetherness this coming Friday evening, 3rd of July, on the Great Lawn of the Nevada County Fairgrounds at the ‘Happy Birthday USA’ festivities.  This celebration is brought to you by our own Music in the Mountains.  Get your tickets online and bring your camping chairs, blankets, and picnic baskets full of good things to join your neighbors as you listen to great American music and songs performed on stage by Nevada County’s own world class symphony orchestra and chorus.  It will be good to experience America again.

    My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on georgerebane.com where the transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively.  However my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

  • George Rebane

    Berlin – the German Ethics Council recommends that the Bundestag remove the legal prohibition of incest between siblings, citing that “in the case of consensual incest among adult siblings, neither the fear of negative consequences for the family, nor the possibility of the birth of children from such incestuous relationships can justify a criminal prohibition.” (more here)

    I have no idea of how the Germans got ahead of California on this one, but there is plenty of room for us to take the lead again.  We note that the Germans only expanded legal incest to siblings, parents and children having intercourse or making other kinds of whoopee is still prohibited.  That is open territory for Sacramento to sweep the field in opening up the pursuit of comprehensive “sexual self-determination”.

    LGBTQIA stands for “Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, and asexual” according to the Urban Dictionary that also informs us “LGBTQIA people are the only minority not federally protected.”  Not knowing what ‘intersex’ is, my immediate concern focuses on whether the existing 'I' covers incest, or do we need another one.

    In any case, will marriage be next?  Consider the possibilities. Given the SCOTUS rulings and all that, will 2015 be remembered as Springtime for Brave New World?

  • George Rebane

    Pot-based tourism in Nevada County is the topic of this week’s Union column by George Boardman whose comments are also often read on these pages.  This is a column full of thought provoking ideas, some obviously with tongue firmly planted in cheek.  But the gist of a TV series (‘High Country’) concerns local MJ jinks – both high and low – practiced by the natives in these foothills.  If well written, I can see many interesting and humorous sub-themes with interwoven characters – e.g. one based on ‘Smokey and the Bandit’ of our sheriff forever on the trail of a certain local RMJ grower.  Supervisor Beason’s concern that such notoriety for the county may keep high tech industries from locating here is legitimate, but I think the concern will abate when more closely examined in light of the overall benefit to our community.  Good piece (paywalled here) to get this conversation started Mr Boardman. 

    ‘We’re Losing the Cyber War’ and no one is “personally responsible” according to Ms Katherine Archuleta who heads our Office of Personnel Management that has now admitted to mismanaging the safe-keeping of tens of millions of detailed personal files on fed employees, former employees, and contractors with security clearances.  Most Americans expect a generous level of systemic incompetence from the federal bureaucracies and their staffs, especially their politically appointed bosses.  But Ms Archuleta has really broken new ground here.

    The purloining of these millions of files highlights two major concerns – our inability to stop Chinese and other foreign cyber attacks, and the potential damage that the information in those files can do to individuals who work for/with government in sensitive positions.  Of most concern are the security background check files that China now has on thousands of government defense managers and contract workers.  On active duty I also served as the S-2 Intelligence Officer of a nuclear capability artillery battalion.  In my possession and charge were several hundred security clearance files on members of my unit.  I worked closely with the local Army intelligence office charged with investigating people regarding potential changes in their clearances, and therefore have read many such files.  The contents’ depth and detail of such files is eye-popping, and in many cases can be used to blackmail people who hold/held such clearances to reveal classified aspects of the projects they work/ed on.  Serious stuff indeed that will now place a huge additional burden on the various gumshoe agencies who must start much closer levels of surveillance on (tens of?) thousands of vulnerable clearance holders.  (Yes Virginia, if you hold a high security clearance, then as a routine you will be periodically very closely ‘monitored’ – foregoing your privacy is the price paid by those of us who work to keep our fellow Americans secure.)

    And speaking of China, author and military analyst Peter Singer is making the Pentagon rounds giving presentations to our military warning of the strong likelihood that we will fight WW3 with The People’s Republic (more here).  I have ordered Singer’s new book, Ghost Fleet: A Novel of the Next World War, that will be released tomorrow, and is already on the Pentagon’s reading list (as have been a couple of his previous techno-thrillers).  So far we can surmise that Obama’s ‘Asia pivot’ has been executed with blindfold firmly in place as we continue to reduce our military’s ability to project force while China's technicians and military are rapidly expanding and exercising their country’s military and technical abilities which they daily exercise ‘in our face’ both in international waters and on the internet.

    The big fear is that China has the ability at will to shut down major parts of our country’s infrastructure and critical military systems already deployed on our ships and aircraft.  How?  Both through advanced hacking technology, but most fearfully through Trojan functions in China-manufactured microchips that are already embedded in our civilian and military equipments worldwide.  Meanwhile the incompetents in Washington are dancing in the streets celebrating the victory which is crippling one sixth of our economy with sky-rocketing premiums and reduced access to healthcare for all except our top quintile or two.

    [30jun15 update]  This morning Union’s print edition informs us that the local loonie Left has sent hate mail to the NC Tea Party, threatening to disrupt this weekend’s 4th of July parade when the TP unit passes by.  Limiting free speech by the Left has become an ongoing drumbeat across the country that spawned in our universities, arches across the lamestream media, and now easilty reaches into local communities.  It is always the Left that calls for silencing its opposition wherever they encounter it.  The threatening writer has a history of hate toward the NCTP, and warns, “If you continue to support this anti-constitutional, anti-Christian ideology, start packing or pay the consequences of the outing of the cruel inhuman people your T Party represents.”  Local law enforcement officials are taking the threat seriously.  (I could not find this story’s URL on the Union's website.  We are now 20 years into the WWW, and sadly The Union still does not have a professional website; its current site is horribly designed and broken in many places.  Reminds one of healthcare.gov.)

    'Has China’s Stock Market Bubble Burst?’ asks a Stratfor article in its title.  When you read the article, it meanders all over the map giving reasons why it may, and then again why it may not have burst.  In short, they don’t know.  When I read one of these pieces with a questioning title that promises to provide the reader an answer, and then doesn’t, I get really irked (aka pissed to the gills).  (Elementary probability tells us how to represent ignorance about the truth of N equally likely competing propositions – you assign them each a 1/N probability of being true.  Will the coin land heads or tails?  Your correct answer to tell people that you don’t know is that it’s ’50-50’, or with probabilities ½ and ½ that it will land either way.)  When an article lays out arguments that equally support all N advertised alternatives, it implicitly assigns 1/N to each alternative.  In that case it shouldn’t use a title that implies it has any added information about the outcome.  Oh well.

  • [This is the first post-comment rules sandbox.  We await with bated breath … . gjr]

  • George Rebane

    Since its launch in 2007, RR has had an open, seldom mediated comments policy since I did not want this forum to become an echo chamber for near-conservatarian sentiments.  The blog’s purpose was to record my thoughts and observations about these eventful and fin de siècle years for humanity on this planet, and given that this worldview is admittedly outrageous to many, I wanted my readers to see and offer compelling counter arguments.   The prime audience for all this was intended to be the ideologically mid-road and undecided reader, of course with a considerable nod to my right-of-center compatriots who hopefully would bolster what I was able to stick into the dike against the progressive flood.

    RR took off beyond my expectations, attracting readers and (online and email) commenters to compose quite an audience despite that, I have expended no effort to popularize its diverse subject matter.  My intent was to attract only the well-read, or at least the well-reading visitors who would make up a cohort of intellectual peers.  I have never wanted to write for ‘broad audiences’, and consequently have often been admonished for using a ‘$10 word’ instead of the accepted handful of more folksy, compact, and dictionary-optional $1 words.  It is a weakness learned long ago when Buckley often drove me to my always open, unabridged codex of the English language.  As Popeye famously said, ‘Iyam what Iyam.’

    So I started writing posts that included my Union columns, and still include my KVMR commentaries, and people of all political stripe started commenting.  And then some commenters from both sides became irked at what seemed to be obvious errors, misrepresentations, and even displays of moral turpitude from the other side.  The subsequently returned punches began landing below belts.  And from the stats, traffic grew as more people joined in the fray either as passive readers or as ‘in the pit’ commenters.  Soon the comment streams were decorated with mudballs thrown at opposites for what also was clearly for the sheer fun of retorting outrage with greater outrage.   But always between the mudball exchanges, commenters took time to write lengthy considered statements, commentaries, and even essays on the topic at hand.  Providing such a forum, warts and all, became a raison d’etre for RR.

    Of late things have gotten more than a bit out of hand, and readers and commenters in greater numbers are asking that I attempt to restore some decorum.  So here goes.

    Commenter Rules: To lower the temperature and foster focus on issues, I will do my best henceforth to enforce the following commenter rules –

    1. Under topical posts, keep your comments obviously related to the topic(s) posted.  Use the nearest RR Sandbox to introduce other topics and invite discussion.

    2. Given the scope of comments that have become traditional on blogs, wordsmith your comments to be clear, concise, and complete.  And please read them over before you hit ‘Post’.

    3. Contend the presented ideas, interpretations, and opinions, and not their author.  Maul the message, and not the messenger.  If the messenger wraps himself in the message, then make your repartees as churchillian as possible.  Junior high school mudballs prohibited.

    4. Remember that RR is a long running blog that contains a growing body of thought, and is strongly ideological with multiple posts on a wide range of topics, including a separate ‘Conservatarian Credo’.  Please refer to or reference these as necessary to contend/expand an issue – every issue does not have to start with ‘Hello World!’  Either use the RR embedded search function or Google (‘xx’, rebane’s ruminations) to find previous commentaries and comments on any given subject.

    5. ‘Praise publicly and punish privately.’  Don’t launch personal attacks on other commenters or me.  Most certainly don’t publish other people’s personal information that is unrelated to the posted topic(s).

    6. Minimize the use of obscenities and profanities – i.e. do not use them in an obviously gratuitous manner.

    7. I invite bylines from RR readers.  If you have an extended thought on a topic you’d like to post on RR under your name, email it to me.  I’ll make the final determination.

    8. No spam or porn.

    Not a requirement, but as a courtesy to other readers, please identify by name/timestamp the comment to which your comment pertains.  My own format has been 'GeorgeR 153pm'.  Other lengthier ones also will serve.  Thanks.

    We’ll see how these work out.  I will do my best to enforce them ‘fairly’, but since that word has no uniformly accepted operational definition, you will almost certainly accuse me of being unfair.  Your complaints are welcomed.  I am reminded of the old coach who advised his players ‘Never seek justice, only mercy.’

    Parting note – please compose and keep your lengthier comments in a Word (or other text editor) document until you see the comment ‘survive’ on RR.  I will not take the time to ‘cleanse’ comments that violate the above rules, I’ll just unpublish them.  In that case, if you wish, you can edit out the offending part yourself and repost.  Note also that these rules are accessible under the upper right margin heading 'RR Fundamentals'.

  • George Rebane

    Given the 25jun15 SCOTUS ruling on ACA, I had to rush off a post on it since RR's readership will not sit idly by and let an occasion like this pass without extensive discussion and debate.  And this happening may even fit into these thoughts that I’ll try to weave together on equally impactive geo-political goings on.

    William Galston, left-leaning observer and columnist picks up on RR’s ‘beyond the tipping point’ assertion in his ‘Modern Autocrats Are on the March’.  Therein he cites David Clark of UK’s Henry Jackson Society who argues that “the great wave of global democratic change that began in the mid-1970s—doubling the number of electoral democracies in the space of three decades—has come to an end. Instead, we are now confronted with a powerful authoritarian backlash that is reversing some of these gains and encouraging a resurgence of anti-democratic ideas.”

    This according to many of us, including Galston, who have observed geo-political maneuverings over the last decade or so makes clear that while “the rise of violent Islamism has transfixed the world, another, graver threat—21st-century autocracy—is gathering strength. In the long run, it is sophisticated autocrats, not bearded zealots, who pose the greater menace to democracy.”  By this is meant that these sophisticated autocrats are not some conservative or progressive knuckle-draggers wanting to return to yesteryear, but instead are elites who take into account globalization, rising prosperity and digital communications, and, according to Clark, they have developed “new techniques of control and new justifications for monopolizing power that enable autocratic leaders to resist pressure for democratic change.”

    As we know, democracy is not a naturally occurring form of governance, and pure democracy is now the established tool of would be tyrants as the enthusiastically swallowed preamble to tyranny.  Today these elites “adeptly manipulate the façade of democratic procedures” to “co-opt their countries’ rising middle-classes.”  This is most evident in the Asian autocracies that preach to their citizens their cultural exceptionalism in the expression and practice of their ‘Asian values’.  And I agree with Clark that “the rise of the new authoritarianism shows that democracy is not the inevitable outgrowth of modernization and economic development.”  To confirm this we need look no further than our own shores.

    (more…)

9 comments on Zapping Drones