Look at the cumulative production of the CLR Holstein Federal wells -- many of these wells are very, very recent.
Politics
The Clash of The Titans
**********************************
Book the First: Soldier, Priest, and God: A Life of Alexander the Great, F. S. Naiden, c. 2019.
I can't decide whether to have this book in my library. I am severely constrained for shelf space. I only had a few minutes to look at the book while at B&N today. I spent most of my time on two other books, noted below. I'm in my Alexander the Great phase, which includes the "follow-on" early Roman Empire that replaced it. The Hellenistic / Alexandrian Empire had much in common with the Roman Empire. This book focuses on the "religious" side of Alexander but to make it a book of any size, many other topics are addressed. In some places the author tends to ramble, as if conversing, dictating the book. His editor failed in tightening up some of those sections. Several pages describing Alexander's death, for example, with no new information, tends to ramble on and on.Book the Second: The Landmark Julius Caesar, a new translation by Kurt A. Raaflaub, series editor, Robert B. Strassler, c. 2017.
I have limited shelf space but I'm beginning to think I may need to radically re-organize what precious little book space I have. I would certainly include the five volumes that currently make up the "Landmark Series." Chapter 12 in this volume is the "Alexandrian War."
Page 514:
Having gained control of Egypt and Alexandria, Caesar established himself as rulers those persons whom Ptolemy had named in his will, solemnly calling on the Roman people not to allow any change. The king, the older of the two boys, had passed on; so Caesar handed the throne to the younger one and to the older of the two daughters, Cleopatra, who had stayed loyal to him and under his protection.
The notes to those to lines: Ptolemy XIV Philopator, at the time hardly older than ten. This is the only mention of Cleopatra in this work, which is silent about Caesar's personal relationship with her. Other sources completely ignore Ptolemy, whom Cleopatra later removed by poison. In fact, Cleopatra was now the sole ruler of Egypt.
Page 648:
Cleopatra became Caesar's mistress and gave birth to a son, Caesarion (allegedly by Caesar), whom Octavian put to death in 30. After Caesar had established her on the throne in 47, with another younger brother nominally as her co-ruler, she paid an extended visit to Rome as Caesar's guest from late 46 until shortly after assassination on the Ides of March 44. Her meeting in 41 with Marcus Antonius at Tarsus, in Cilicia, blossomed into a long-lasting liaison from which two sons and a daughter were born.
Yes, that Cleopatra. The one that eventually aligned herself with Mark Antony until she saw he was going to lose the naval battle. This was some years later.Book the Third: 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, Yuval Noah Harari, c. 2018.
Lesson #2 -- in 2050, you might not have a job. The rest of the book? Pretty much a globalist. Probably not a Trump supporter.Of course, this may all be moot, as they say, since Occasional-Cortex says that the earth has but twelve years left as we know it. Wow, that's discouraging.
I do know one job that might be available in 2050: the "soup machine" repair person. I enjoy a cup of soup at lunch, almost no matter where I am. About ten days ago they did not have soup at Starbucks/Barnes and Noble because the "soup machine" was broken. Today, about ten days later, same story. And, no, I don't substitute. So I will read awhile, wait until I get home to have soup.
But, I'm thinking, if Mr Schultz can't keep the soup machines working in his Starbucks "restaurants," how can I think he could keep the country running? LOL. Yes, I know, the Starbucks "restaurants" in B&N aren't really part of the Schultz enterprise, except as a licensed kiosk. Whatever.
Cognitive dissonance: Mr Harari's book appears to be targeted to generation Z, the iGen, or the centennials as some call them. Using the follow dates:
It appears logical, then, Mr Spock, that Mr Harari has written his book for the centennials.
- generation X: 1964 - 1984
- generation Y, millennials, 1984 - 2000
- generation Z, centennials, 2000 -- present,
- in 2050, the youngest millennials will be 50 years old and the oldest, 64 years old;
- in 2050, the centennials will be 50 years old and younger
Elsewhere I have a page where I archive what I think will be "the next big thing." In this particular case, I was late to the game, someone else has already thought of it, but it looks fairly new/recent and I doubt most Americans have caught on to this yet. But if I'm correct, this will be the next big thing in the transportation sector. Not in transportation, but in "the transportation sector."
But first, let's do a walk through. How did this happen?
A year ago, a bunch of GM folks spent an afternoon "brainstorming." The group consisted of the "lead consultant" who already knew where she was going to take the group.
The rest of the group were marketing folks, designers, and engineers, all with experience in American pick-up trucks.
The purpose of the exercise was to brainstorm what the "next big thing" in American pickups will be.
So, the leader of the group, after the usual introductions, purpose of the meeting, rules of brainstorming, etc., with the first question: "What defines the American pickup truck today? What do those who buy pickups want?"
The first response: towing capacity.
The leader says, "Let's go for a drive."
The folks pile into a small minibus and take a tour of downtown Detroit. After a 35-minute drive, they return to the conference room having seen two dozen or so pickup trucks on the road.
Leader: "So, how many pickup trucks did you see that were actually towing anything."
I assume readers already know the answer. On my way home from B&N here in north Texas, the home of pickup trucks, I saw too many pickups to count. How many were towing anything? None.
Leader: "So, if it's not towing capacity, what is it?"
The group said cargo space. The leader repeats the experiment: a 35-minute minibus tour of Detroit.
Leader: "How many pickups were carrying anything substantial?"
Same response as to how many pickups were actually towing anything.
Leader: "Come on guys (and gals)! What defines the American pickup truck today? What do those who buy pickups want?"
Finally, someone in the back says, "tailgate parties."
"Give that person a round of applause. Yes, the American pickup truck is all about tailgate parties. Tailgate parties at the beach. Tailgate parties at the football game. Tailgate parties any/every summer evening. Yes, the American pickup truck is all about tailgate parties."
With that the brainstorming group got down to business. I see GMC is already ahead of the pack with a very interesting version of the pickup truck tailgate.
My hunch: Nissan will have copied it by the end of the year, and Ford will raise the bar. We're going to see a lot of "tailgate" modifications / versions over the next several years.
Some decades ago the big selling point / competitive feature of the minivan (now pretty much out of vogue) was the number of cup holders. I kid you not. If you do the research you will see that the minivans were starting to separate themselves from the herd by the number of cup holders than had, and the hide-under-the-seat cargo bins. If something as simple as the number and placement of cup holders can make the difference I have a long list of things one can do to / do with a tailgate.
One idea: some vans now have hydraulic lifts. We already have remote-controlled hydraulic activated rear and side hatch doors on minivans. Hydraulic lifts for pickup trucks is a no-brainer.
From twitter today, February 3, 2019:
Who cares? "The strongest, the most advanced." The strongest? See above. No one cares. Except for bragging rights, I suppose. The most advanced? Should they have said "not the most advanced, but a nice color"?
The screenshot above: that's not what I see when I'm driving. That's a showroom photo. Big deal. Owners don't even see that view once the pickup truck is in the garage.
This is the view (below) I see when driving and the view folks see when actually using their pickup truck. (Yes, 99% of the time when I'm driving, the tailgates I see are in the "up" position -- but this was the first graphic I found.)
I guess marketers think the front end is more impressive, sexier. Probably so and that's why the ads/commercials will still emphasize the front end, towing capability, cargo capacity.
GM/Ford need to market "lifestyle." Tailgate parties at football games -- especially today -- Super Bowl LIII (for millennials, "53"). Tailgate parties at the beach. Hauling surfboards. Hauling ATVs. Carrying hunting dogs. Hauling garden supplies. Home supplies from Home Depot/Lowes.
Just FYI, that 12 years (until doomsday) figure comes from a UN climate report. The claim isn't that the planet is doomed by 2031, the claim is that if emissions aren't curbed by then the planet will eventually pass the 1.5 degree C warming mark. It's basically when the graph passes the point where even if emissions were cut to zero post 2030 you can't avoid 1.5 C temperature rise. That is less some unknown methods or technologies don't come along that aren't currently considered.
ReplyDeleteIf AOC or anyone else is actually selling such a claim as the end of the world, they're wrong. It's hard to separate what these politicians say or mean from what the opposition reports. Be it Trump or AOC, the opposition party tends to give the least generous interpretation of statements they can muster.
I think Algore said we had but ten years back in 1994 to take action.
DeleteI'm not sure how transferring $100 billion from the "west" to give to islands the South Pacific will solve the problem but perhaps the UN knows something the rest of us do not know.
And considering that the biggest polluters (China, India) are not part of the solution ...
... but at least Australia is doing its part.
This shows the limitations of nation states all fighting for their own self interests. Nation states, while great for many things, are not good at solving global problems. More and more we have issues that are global in nature: pollution, trade, internet (general information), intellectual property, air transportation standards, product standards in general... the list goes on. As to best navigate all that, ask someone smarter than me.
DeleteWhen it comes to the future and the pace of change relative to the past I try to keep an open mind. At '84 I barely got bunched in with the millennials and slowly find myself in the last few years getting tastes of that confusion that comes when the young people throwing out there things that initially give a sting of disagreement. When I think of how differently I processed my billing and accounting even ten years ago, it sort of blows my mind at how fast things change in just some mundane everyday tasks.
Given modern medicine is just over a century old, modern nation states are 600 years old, and the gold standard dropped 50 years ago, I expect change as a given. The idea that, at some point, nation states might be replaced with something else shouldn't be too surprising given the trend of change. The trick with replacing systems is replacing them with something better, change for the sake of change is of no benefit.
I didn't mean to ignore the Gore retort. That may be a fair point. I'd have to dig into his claim. Generally I don't take him very seriously. A Democratic candidate taking on the mantle of a scientific claim didn't do anyone any favors. Given our unhealthy political tribalism, it turned a boring subject into a heated partisan badge. Al Gore would be best to just go away.
Delete...and according to some people I've read, he's egotistical as hell and you can't get a word in if you're having dinner with him. Part of the reason I'm not a fan of the "figurehead" methodology to framing reality. I'm much more interested in ideas than the celebrities attached to them. Reason #1 I'd be a terrible politician, I don't like the game.
I would say that we've had global challenges ever since Alexander the Great. The Vikings might disagree. It seems like Alexander's solution was as good as any. He was educated by the smartest guy at the time (Aristotle) and he was magnanimous in victory (generally speaking). He inculcated the best ideas of those nation-states he conquered. And, most impressively, he left local governments pretty much alone ... as long as they paid their taxes and didn't rebel.
DeleteWith regard to Algore: Scott Adams got it exactly right. As Algore presents AGW: AGW is simply a marketing scheme.
DeleteWhen I see 1,500 private jets flying into Davos, it pretty much tells me all I need to know. These billionaires want a piece of that marketing scheme. They certainly aren't concerned about CO2 emissions (nor am I for that matter).
It shows they aren't concerned with their C02 emissions not that they aren't concerned with the general concept. Doesn't surprise me in the least.
DeleteDoesn't Scott Adams argue that hypocrisy isn't a convincing argument? It was a point I disagreed with when I read Win Bigly as I seem to be bothered by hypocrisy. He might have statistical evidence on his side though.
Hypocrisy. I've long lost the bubble on what Scott Adams thinks regarding hypocrisy. If he thinks hypocrisy is a convincing argument, he is quite wrong.
DeleteI'll let you be, thanks for chatting, something to do on the lunch hour.
ReplyDeleteSome examples where hypocrisy doesn't negate the factual claims. Doctors who smoke. Heath Department dietitians who are obese. Foreign aid workers who are obese. Wall promoters who employ illegal immigrants. Anti-gun politicians having armed security. CEO's promoting US jobs that send jobs abroad. Pro public education citizens sending their kids to private schools. Those claiming inequality is a problem use every tax loophole available. ... the list goes on.
My point being that people are often contradictory. We don't always lead by example. True for thee but not true for me is not an uncommon approach. To play the other side of the coin, sometimes I wonder why so many are waiting on governments to force them and others to adopt changes rather than adopting the change right now on their own. We are funny folk.