Monday, April 17, 2017

The History of Dog Food

From a facebook post, edited.
Feed your dog good food, not dry food every meal. Even canned dog food is chopped up throwaway parts, fat, gristle.  A good meal for a dog is meat, brown rice and a vegetable. Milk and egg. They really like vegetables, especially cooked broccoli, carrots, sweet potato. You want to baby them? Put a little butter on the veggies.

 Don't forget the fat, gristle, and skin you throw "under the table". Dogs lived on that and other human garbage ever since they quit hunting as wolves.  At some point in history, a subset  of wolves, found it easier to live off the garbage of humans, a pretty messy bunch, who even then left offal, gristle, bones, and half eaten meals in their dumps which were the on the edges of their settlements on non-arable land.  These "follower" wolves lost the ability to hunt with a pack, and avoided humans by barking instead of howling.  They barked to alert the herd, no longer a pack, to intruders for mutual protection, but also alerted the smart, well-armed humans to dangerous intruders animal and human.  The follower wolves kept dangerous wild animals away from the dump and therefore the settlements, lived off of and cleaned up the human leftover food to the mutual benefit of both species.  In the beginning the follower wolves were still vicious wild animals, but learned to avoid the well-armed humans and were tolerated for their garbage collection and warning behaviors. 

 Hat tip to Jon Franklin for much of the above.   From there to The Wolf in the Parlor and under the table you will have to read his book of the same name.  Available at https://www.amazon.com/Wolf-Parlor-Came-Share-Brain/dp/0312662645 and elsewhere.
  T
 Animal food is the invention of the white flour industry to use the nutritious parts of the grain they throw "under the table."  

 In the late 19th century the big flour mills in the Midwest had a shelf life problem for their traditional whole grain flour.  The shelf life was too short to get the product to the population centers on the East Coast. Their solution was to separate the germ which was the spoilable part before final milling to create the standard American "White bread" flour.  

Once separated from the whole grain the germ spoils rapidly unless processed and the flour mills had trainloads of the stuff to get rid of.  Dumping was not an option as rotten grain germ is a smelly nuisance. Animal food processors and cereal producers had the ability to steam process the germ into stable pellets and flakes for later consumption and white flour became economical to produce. 

 An amusing industry sprung up arbitraging trainloads of short lived germ as they went from the mills to the germ processors.  Neither the mills nor the germ users could afford an interruption in the supply chain, but of course wanted the best price at their end of the chain.  The arbitrage involved the timing of the trains.  Guess right and the processors bought high, guess really wrong and you had a trainload of garbage to clean up.
 


Thursday, April 13, 2017

On Humor

 Another guest post to begin an essay I have been thinking about for a couple of years now.
 
Nyah Wynne
Somehow we have gotten this notion in the culture that humor is value-neutral. That something being a joke means it doesn't mean anything, it doesn't affect anything. But it's absurd. Humor has a powerful social function. Several in fact. It can help people bind over shared adversity. It can smooth over feelings of social discomfort around uncomfortable or uncertain events and ideas. In this last, a message about how to think about something is often included implicitly. But it also plays a very large role in social censure and definition of in/out group. As social censure it acts as an attack against people -doing- things that are culturally deemed unacceptable but not so bad that they warrant punishment(or where social systems don't exist to enact punishment). This can be very useful, as mocking those acting rudely or engaging in petty cruelty can help to correct those actions, or can be destructive if the taboos they enforce/reinforce are unjust.

But this same social censure can end up targeting whole groups of people along utterly arbitrary lines. And when they do they tend to create/reinforce and recreate in each new generation systems of social advantage/oppression. Humor is possibly The Strongest Inculcation Tool for teaching prejudice. Because it is a set of social cues we are primed to respond to without thinking. Because humor has such a strong group-bonding component, the social incentive to laugh along with the joke is high. And when you see others laugh with the joke, the incentive to tell similar jokes is high. And the group bonds over it, and the message sinks in without really ever being critically appraised. And eventually that message forms a baseline subconscious assumption about the world unless you run into a strong reason to actively work to weed it out.

It ends up playing a part in defining on a deep level who is and isn't fully worthy of empathy. Who 'deserves' abuse. Who should automatically be respected and who shouldn't. And these same things end up coloring how we see the world. How we respond to what people in various groups say and how they act. Who is given the benefit of the doubt and who is suspect. Who is assumed to be competent or worth listening to. What sorts of ideas are even worth consideration, because humor is extremely good at painting whole ideas as beneath contemplation and therefor dismissed -without ever being consciously evaluated-. Whose ideas are worthy of such thought.

Because the same mechanism involved in many of these sorts of jokes is the social tool we use to single out rude people, or liars, or people who cheat. It's never just a joke. It's a bit of prejudice you learned at some point that you never even noticed yourself learning, which you are passing on without realizing you are doing it. No one joke is going to just make a person prejudiced, but each little bit adds up. Because as rational and introspective as we might think we are, as humans we are all pretty impressionable, and worse we tend to be very blind to how we are being affected.

Think about your humor. What you laugh at. What jokes you pass along. And if you get called on a joke, instead of getting defensive, consider questioning the joke itself. Why you found it funny, but also what sort of messages it's conveying. You telling this kind of joke doesn't make you a bad person, you just picked up somewhere that it was funny. But it still has an effect, even if you don't see it.
Mel Brooks/Groucho Marks:

Tragedy is when I cut my finger.  Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die.
 All humor is ultimately a pratfall, but most important the pratfall happens to "them" not "us."  Think of any ethnic joke.  OK you got one don't you?  Now name your most important in-group.  Your church, your school, your community.  Now tell the joke with the ethnic group replaced by the in-group name preferably aloud in the in-group.  Is it still comedy or does it become a tragic comment on the failing of the group, or worse it makes you rude to point it out.  

 The truth of the pratfall is irrelevant to the designation.  You may claim it is ironic, or if it is perceived to be on them, satire but the message is clear: This is what they are/do and we must be careful that it never happens to us.  

 One of my favorite religious jokes is the poem 
We are the world's sweet chosen few.
The rest of you be damned!
There is room enough in Hell for you,
We won't have Heaven crammed.
Note the open sewer there.  It may be simply a mud hole if you don't believe in Hell, but nevertheless if one of "us" fell into that mud hole all would rally around to rescue the victim, and the joke falls flat.  The message for apostates is unmistakable and the message for non-believers is that you deserve the open sewer preferably sooner rather later, and "we" will be glad to help. 

"It's a joke, son." is a way of defusing criticism of behavior that is not consistent with the mores of our tribe by associating it with another tribe, preferably one that is not too dissimilar but clearly not one of us.  Interstate jokes being the most benign as the neighboring state is clearly a lot like us and only the worst of them indulge as the butt of the joke. The sharp edge remains however to remind "son" that we don't do things like that.  If the cutting edge of the humor doesn't cause a bit of discomfort in the audience of the comic it probably was wasted and unsuccessful.  

Humans laugh because they are uncomfortable but either unsure of the source of the discomfort or because the source of the discomfort is a trusted figure of some sort.  Consider tickling.  Tickling is a serious invasion of personal space.  But only someone that has permission to invade personal space can be in a position to tickle.  It is a restrained aggressive act, but protest would be inappropriate so we express our discomfort with laughter. 

Da Capo. 
 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brain-can-distinguish-between-real-and-fake-laughter/?WT.mc_id=SA_FB_MB_FEAT
“Laughter is really interesting because we observe it across all human cultures and in other species,” says Carolyn McGettigan, a cognitive neuroscientist at Royal Holloway, University of London. “It's an incredibly important social signal.” ...
Subjects whose medial prefrontal cortex “lit up” more when hearing the posed laughter were better at detecting whether laughs were genuine or not in a subsequent test. (This brain region is involved in understanding the viewpoint of others.) “If you hear a laugh that seems ambiguous in terms of what the person means,” McGettigan explains, “it makes sense that you're going to try to work out why this person sounds like this.”

 There is a lesson in this for those who persist in telling jokes that are offensive to some.  They can tell that some are "laughing to be a part of the crowd" or to be polite.  How they deal with that knowledge is an important social signal that can in an extreme situation be a reason for calling them out as an asshole that does not belong in the social circle they pretend to be in. If it is yours, kick herm the hell out. No Platform the asshole.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

On Those CSI Questionaires

Retweeted John Paczkowski (@JohnPaczkowski):
Some good @ceodonovan here: Nobody Knows What Five Star Ratings Mean. That’s Bad For Gig Workers https://t.co/VV3kiWnwa1https://t.co/vPtpQkJX1C

LikeShow more reactions
Comment
Comments
Suzy Thompson
Suzy Thompson Fuck. I hate systems that are designed to force you to be dishonest. In my mind, 5 stars is exceptional and I want to reserve it for only the best experiences. But this is saying that I have to give five stars unless I want to penalize the worker, and there's actually no system to support (or perceived value in) giving high praise. Good to know, but feels like shit. -_-
Like · Reply · 3 · 1 hr
Carlin Black
Carlin Black I used to make a good living teaching a FUBAR UI where the CSI rating was Very Satisfied=10, Satisfied=5, Good =3 and downhill from there.
Like · Reply · 39 mins
Carlin Black
Carlin Black If a service provider ever asks for a good survey rating, the only acceptable answers for the individual provider if hesh did a decent job is the highest possible rating. For most systems anything less has serious consequences. You are not being asked your opinion on anything, you are being asked to compensate a service worker. http://customersatisfactionmanagementassoc.com/

CUSTOMERSATISFACTIONMANAGEMENTASSOC.COM
Carlin Black
Carlin Black You can register your opinion of the institution as you wish on the survey introduction, but when you get to the "Thinking about the person who handled your problem" chances are that pay is directly related to your rating. If they were at least competent just hold your nose and pick the highest rating on all questions. Many times their job hangs on a string of 10s or 5s in a five star rating system.
Like · reply · Just now

Monday, April 3, 2017

Allocating Chores in a Multi-person Household.


 In our household once the 2 boys were old enough to participate we bid for chores in 1/4 hours. Lowest bid got the chore. Wash, vac, and dust went cheap. Bathrooms and catbox went high. Evening meals including cleanup stabilized at about an hour. Breakfast was high as only one wanted it. Weekend dinners were higher. Bidding ended when everybody had about the same bid hours for chores.

Was this a money transaction?

 Nope hours. Catbox 2hrs. Each dinner 1hr. etc bid until every chore was covered and everybody had same bid hours of chores, which may or may not have had any relationship to hours to do the chore. The catbox was 5 min per day and 10 minutes once a week to change litter, but only one of us wanted to do it. A chore had no time associated with it until bid on.

 Allowances, tuition, lunch money, etc. were basically need based, adults and kids alike.   Unadjusted for incomes which went into the common fund.  

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Fundamentalist Abrahamic Religions


Another guest post to start:

The biggest lie ever pulled over the eyes of the modern church is that “conservative values” equal Christian values. The “Christian” Right has a billion dollar messaging empire taken from the pages of a Madison Avenue Playbook.
The “Christian” Right has nationwide radio networks (Salem Communications and others), worldwide television networks (TBN, home of John Hagee, Hal Lindsey, and many others), publishers, mega-churches, political pundits, best-selling authors, media personalities, celebrity pastors, a vast number of wealthy donors, branded media empires (Focus on The Family, The 700 Club, etc.), Political Action Organizations (The Heritage Foundation, The Christian Coalition, etc.), on and on.
They have an agenda, a ton of money, and they want the power to impose their vision on the entire country via public policy. Some of us have watched the hijacking of our faith over the last 35 years with shock and horror. The agenda of the right has nothing to do with the teachings of Christ. Actually the two sets of values are opposite in nature.
8 years ago we decided to start speaking out against the twisted ideology of The “Christian” Right and its influence on society. If someone doesn’t expose what’s happening with a counter narrative, they will achieve their goals. Nothing stands in their way. A large percentage of Christians are already hoodwinked.

https://www.facebook.com/#  
My reply:
Unfortunately The Religious Right not only the "Christian" Right is firmly rooted in the Pentateuch whatever it is called by the fundamentalist, and ignores all commentary including the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus who was an apostate Jew not a Christian.

While I support their message I cannot support with anything but a token any organization that conflates Christ with Jesus.  Rational Christian and pariticualrly politically leftist Christians should follow and like their facebook wall and if possible supportt their ministry.

Monday, March 27, 2017

The Ministry and Passion of the Humanist Jesus


As you know my sources are strictly biblical.  I studied most of the religious and scholarly translations of bibles scholastically and philosophically since an early age. I never was a believer. Most of my studies were to poke at believers of all faiths.  

The Synoptic Passions were probably fable designed to remove Jesus but not his messages from the public eye. The post resurrection meet-up stories were probably only to let in group know the truth. Then Paul hijacked the passions to deify his Christ and the fables became TRUTH™.



The passion was not a cover up in the modern sense, simply a punctuation to the radical humanist ministry of Jesus.  Most popular preachers of his time ended up being executed by secular or religious authorities. John the Baptist and most of the others you have heard about.  Martyrdom was the capstone of their career.  

"I am finished." there was nothing more to add and continuing to preach would have got him killed eventually. His cults could carry the subversive message without him better than with him and seem to have done a pretty good job. His radical humanism "Love thy personal God with all thy heart... and love thy hated neighbor as thyself." was both social and religious heresy subject to sudden death.

It has nevertheless stayed alive underground through the dark ages, and blew wide open in the Enlightenment. Still heresy both civil and religious but even in America half the population is compliant with it civilly or religiously. In Europe the numbers are even higher.

Jesus was certainly a married man with children and as such had obligations to stay alive to provide for them. My personal theory is that Mary Magdalene was an integral part of the creation of his message.  It has to me a definitely feminine slant to it. Defiantly opposed to civil and religious patriarchy.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

Pascal's Wager


A guest post from beliefnet

fler0002 1/15/2004 11:15 PM

And we also discover that only those who believed in God and gave their lives to Him will enter into heaven and those who didn't will go to the torment of hell... what then??

What is it that you find to love in a deity that threatens you with eternal torment if you make one wrong decision?

Does a perfect deity sound like one who feels that it is just to torment you forever because of a choice you made based on the limited knowledge, and some erroneous knowledge, that you had when you made the choice?

Or does it sound like a shell game designed to play upon your fears in order to persuade you to believe?

Does it sound like a policy that benefits the church more than it benefits the believer?

Does it sound like a plan to intimidate the uncertain by depicting their 'loving' deity as one that is bigger, stronger, and incomparably more vicious?

Does it sound like a plan that not only creates fears of what happens after death, but also creates in humanity fears of each other? Fears of any tolerance for anything other than what is sanctified by the church. Fears that turn into hatreds. Fears that turn into witch hunts. Fears that turn into jihads, crusades, and terrorism. Fears that turn into sexual abuse.

You are welcome to indulge yourself in all those fears. I for one have chosen to use reason to dispell them. I don't have to live with those fears, and consider Pascal to be a coward.
 If Pascal had a delete button he would have used it for this brain fart.  If I were guaranteed an eternity of bliss worshiping the glory of God, it is still a bad bet. Even if I bet on the right God. And spent the right amount of time learning how to worship the glory of God. What do I win? An eternity of more of the same. Talk about SSDD."

 The only life that counts is the one that begins with birth and ends with death. It is the only one we can be sure of, and Pascal's wager fails on the plethora of possible God bets each with different rules for living. So we live as if the only important contribution we can make is by living according to the best interests of our chosen society. The agnostics among us suggest that if God is the Maitre d' in the afterlife that is all Hesh would care about anyway.

Friday, March 17, 2017

Douchebag Tax

 Many years ago I proposed a tax with the unfortunate acronym of VAST.  Value Added by Status Tax.

 In concept it was very simple: For each category of consumption a basic level of value would be established:  An autonomous taxi trip for local transportation, a simple diner for a meal out, a street market for groceries, a basic Ford or Chevy for a car, a Boston Whaler for a boat, etc.  Any vendor charging more than the basic level value would be required to add a progressive tax based on the price paid minus the basic level.  If a family meal out were determined to have a basic value of $10 a restaurant charging $25 would be required to charge a small % tax on the extra $15.  A restaurant charging $100 would have to charge a larger % tax on the $90.  If well over the basic level the tax might be near 100% of the value added.  Each category would have its own rate to give politicians something to argue about, with luxury categories taxed at a much higher rate. 

Thursday, March 9, 2017

UBI and Economic Systems


 UBI might be a way to save Capitalism from worker exploitation, one of its major failings.  Capitalism is based on using resources effectively to maximize return on investment of capital.  One important resource is labor.  There are few incentives in Capitalism to provide adequate compensation to laborers.  For most jobs in a free labor market recruiting and training costs are minimal making employee turnover a non-issue compared to pay scales driving pay and working conditions to minimum legal standards.  Even in higher skilled jobs where recruiting and training costs are significant immigrant labor can drive average compensation down if visas are easily acquired by the Capitalist. 


 With a UBI recruiting and training costs become significant even for entry level jobs, as enterprises must entice employees to accept time constraints and cooperative work in competition with unlimited free time and independence with subsistence living costs covered.  Wages, working conditions and benefits would be an important part of the exchange.   


 Enterprises must also compete on quality of products especially in service industries, as entry level entrepreneurship is essentially risk free.  Employed workers with a bit of extra disposable income might choose to become capitalists by backing an entrepreneur with capital rather than labor.  E.g. Leasing a taco truck for a latino family with traditional food preparation skills.  A risk free transactionon both sides. The capitalist still has his job and if the truck doesn't pay a competitive wage for the entrepreneurs plus a return on the lease, at the end of the lease everybody goes back to the status quo. 


At higher skill (and pay) levels working conditions, hours and time off, benefits and other intangibles, will be a competitive necessity to retain high skilled employees that can easily save enough FYM to become a competitor.  Employee spin-offs will be an important source of competition in most industries even ones with extremely high entry costs.  See Lucid Motors as a recent new entry in the automotive industry.  


 An alternative economic system to Capitalism (never before tried) that might work is based on a UBI with a slight surplus over subsistence (UBI+) where people buy goods and services direct from the producers via apps like Amazon or Lyft with the producers funding their means of production via loans from the local thrift institutions that float the UBI, surplus and accumulated savings for speculative productivity aids.  Neither the thrift institutions nor the government would invest in or subsidize productive facilities.  Government spending on infrastructure would be treated as a consumer good.  Government itself would be as usual a slush fund for politicians. 

 The money supply would be managed by the Government by regulating the amount of the surplus to balance supply and demand in the economy.  

The government providing the UBI+ would collect taxes using a progressive income tax on producers, or a VAST progressive VAT on consumption.  Links to both are below the fold.

 ----------------------------

A thorough analysis of the tax effects of UBI based on income taxes.  
Hat tip to @miniver
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/why-we-should-all-have-a-basic-income/