The first three chapters of my latest book are on the Amazon webpage. (Click on the ‘Look inside’ link.) The publisher’s webpage is here and you can also buy it from any major retailer. (Note: This will be the new top post for a while. Later posts are below.)
There is nothing that illustrates how privileged members of the US legislature are than the situation with Kentucky senator Mitch McConnell who is 84 years old and has been in obvious serious physical and cognitive decline for quite some time. He was last seen taken by ambulance to a hospital.
Public emergency services records indicate that paramedics were called to his Washington address on 14 June, where they administered CPR on an unconscious person who was allegedly suffering a cardiac arrest – one whose identity has been withheld. McConnell had been in a Washington DC area hospital ever since.
Since then he has not been seen or heard from in public. The long silence resulted in demands for proof that he was still alive. Although some congressional Republicans say that they have spoken to him, Republicans now routinely lie about pretty much anything as long as it serves their interests so this was greeted with some skepticism. You can see why they would lie. If McConnell is dead, then the governor of Kentucky Andy Beshear would be able to appoint an interim until a special election were held and Republicans would not want to have a Democratic senator replace a Republican one, given how small their current majority is.
[Read more…]
I am a big believer in public libraries, seeing them as one of the great egalitarian institutions, enabling anyone to gain access to the world of information and entertainment even if they have no money. But for precisely that reason, the rapacious capitalists in the US dislike them, since in their view the idea that something should be offered free to everyone is anathema. It is part of their effort to undermine access to what are clearly social goods, such as universal free health care and free public education.
So defenders of libraries need to have all the arguments to combat the capitalists who use social conservatives to attack libraries because they have offerings that do not conform to their personal prejudices.
Ashlie D. Stevens writes that the Chicago Public Library system has introduced a novel idea. At the bottom of each check out receipt, it tells the user how much money they saved by using the library and not buying the items.
One afternoon I came home with “Magic Is Dead: My Journey Into the World’s Most Secretive Society of Magicians,” “Village School” and “Cold Comfort Farm,” a stack suggesting either eclectic tastes or a person throwing darts at a bookshelf. Shortly afterward, I received the standard email from the library listing my new acquisitions and their due dates.
Then, underneath the administrative business, came a little piece of information I had somehow never noticed before: You just saved $58.94 by using your library. You have saved $231.79 this past year and $1,107.24 since you began using the library!
I stared at this. My first thought was not, “What a compelling demonstration of the economic value of municipal services.”
My first thought was: I want that number higher.
I took a screenshot and sent it to my sister, who lives in another state.
“Oh, that’s satisfying,” she replied. “I wish my library did that.”
She was right. Somewhere inside me, a tiny rewards-program customer had been activated.
After that, I started browsing the library website differently: less like a catalog, more like a streaming service with unusually eccentric licensing agreements. Did I need the complete box set of “Nip/Tuck”? Maybe. A Blu-ray collection of British noir? Quite possibly. What about both movies called “The Illusionist” — the bittersweet French animated one about an aging magician and the Edward Norton one in which he is also, confusingly, a magician?
If the library adds up all the savings of all its users, the number it arrives at would be a powerful and tangible demonstration of how important libraries are to people and communities. I am going to suggest this idea to the two local libraries that I frequent.
I own a lot of books. But many of them, including the one I am currently reading, were first borrowed from the library and then, while reading them, I decided that I wanted to own them for future reference or other reasons.
The article I linked to yesterday about the potential AI bubble focused on Larry Ellison, founder and CEO of Oracle, who has invested much of his personal fortune and borrowed heavily in order to compete in the AI race. The opening sentence had a parenthetical remark that got my attention, which was was “Larry Ellison woke up in his 33-bedroom, 34-bathroom oceanfront mansion in Florida.” This is part of what has become known as real estate porn, where we are invited to vicariously experience how the rich and famous live. It is of course no secret that these people compete with each other for status symbols that display their wealth in the form of such mansions, luxury yachts, private jets, and even private islands.
But I began to wonder as to whether anyone would ever need so many bedrooms and bathrooms, other than to boast about them. The answer probably is that no one needs them, they just serve as wealth markers. But who stays in them on a regular basis? Are they mostly empty?
This got me thinking about the massive castles of Europe that likely serve as the inspiration for these modern day monstrosities, one of the most iconic being Buckingham Palace in London. It has 19 State Rooms, 52 Royal and guest bedrooms, 188 Staff bedrooms, 92 Offices, and 78 Bathrooms.
[Read more…]
The New York Times Magazine has a very long article that asks the question, being posed in many quarters, as to whether we are in an AI bubble. The argument that we are hinges on the massive amounts of money that is being spent on data centers and computers estimated by Cory Doctorow to be currently running at about $1.4 trillion while the AI companies are getting revenues of only about $50 billion from subscriptions to their services. So where is the rest of the money coming from? From borrowing, as rich investors pour money into these AI companies in the belief that they will grow rapidly and be profitable at some point. This belief drives up the stock prices. As Doctorow says:
I’m pretty baffled that there’s people who say it’s not a bubble. Let’s just run the numbers again. Trillion dollars in expenditure this year, over $1.4 trillion total, $50 billion revenue. Seven companies, the magnificent seven that are 35% of the S&P 500. Six of them lose money on AI, and the seventh one makes money from the other six. [The ‘other six’ are Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Oracle, and Anthropic and the seventh is the chip maker Nvidia – MS]
…That’s Nvidia, yes. They’re all passing around the same hundred-billion-dollar IOU really fast and pretending it’s in all of their bank accounts at once. The assets depreciate really quickly. They amortize those data centers and the GPUs in them over five years. They actually replace them every two to three years. The replacements, pretty intense.
…GPUs, data centers, and the AI that runs on them, right? They’re saying that these things are going to last them about five years. The reason that matters is if you spend $1 trillion on stuff that’s only going to last five years, then in five years, you’re going to need another $1 trillion if you want to stay in business at least. Nvidia is actually doing some pretty amazing things with new generations of chips every year.
One of the ways they’re getting such performance out of these chips every year is they’re throwing away one of the principles that normally constrains new technology manufacturers, which is backwards compatibility. These new chips, they have really different heat dissipation, networking, power consumption, and often you can’t put them in the same building. You need to basically tear the data center down to the foundation’s lab and build another one for the next generation of chips.
…These are not durable assets in this model. A third of the stock market, their assets depreciating every three years. They’re spending $1 trillion a year. They’re making $50 billion a year.
I cannot see how any event that calls upon participants to beat each other to a pulp can be called a sport and so am baffled that anyone would want to watch such things as boxing or kickboxing, or other mixed martial arts (MMA), which seem to have even fewer protections against injury than boxing. In the past we did have other dangerous contests such as duels but were able to ban them presumably because they had no redeeming value. But boxing and MMA do require some level of athletic prowess and thus seem to escape opprobrium. As long as the people in involved in MMA are consenting adults with full knowledge of the possible dangers involved, there seems to be little to be done other than look away
These things are bad enough when the combatants are ordinary people but what is one to make of a recent kickboxing event between two people like these?
[Read more…]
We are now back to the US randomly bombing Iran again, even hitting a wedding, and Iran retaliating.
Iranian media said that the wedding ceremony was being held in a home in the city of Kuhestak, Hormozgan province, late on Tuesday when a US missile struck, with shrapnel and debris from the strike killing and injuring people.
Among the dead was a four-year-old child, Amir-Ali Karimi, and a 16-year-old, Mohammad Mollahi.
…A video of the aftermath shows colourful wedding streamers and decorations strewn across the ground, and shoes abandoned in the rush to escape the attack.
“You wicked people have attacked people’s homes and turned their wedding ceremony into a funeral,” said a man filming the aftermath of the strike, shared by Fars news agency.
…Iran responded by launching drones and missiles on US bases across the Middle East, including in Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE. Iran’s military spokesperson, Lt Col Ebrahim Zolfaghari, vowed “heavier, broader, and more crushing and devestating” retaliation.
…In February, a strike on an elementary school killed at least 156 people, including more than 120 schoolchildren. Independent investigations concluded that the US likely carried out the strike with the assistance of AI, though the US government said the incident remained under investigation.
In a recent post, I discussed the book An Ugly Truth that looked at how Facebook/Meta valued engagement on the site as the most important goal because its profits depended upon having more and more users and having them spend more more and more time on the site. Racist, misogynistic, homophobic and other hateful posts had the effect of creating more engagement and so the company was reluctant to crack down on on them, doing so only when their was a massive public outcry.
Now Facebook/Meta has settled a lawsuit brought by various states alleging that, among other things, the company was cavalier with the harm done to young children.
Last Wednesday, Meta reached a settlement with the attorneys general of forty-seven states, who had sued it for illegally manipulating the attention of children. The settlement will cost the company, which didn’t acknowledge wrongdoing, up to seventeen billion dollars, a striking figure. Even more striking is a detail reported by the Wall Street Journal: during the second quarter of 2026 alone, Meta spent more than two billion dollars on its legal defense.
At the dawn of what is now called the New Atheist movement, I proudly called myself one, seeing myself as an ally in the fight against religious obscurantism. I now feel embarrassed by being identified with that label and distance myself from it. This is not because of what the label itself might signify. Labels (and language) are malleable and transitory and the meaning that I ascribed to it, that it meant that I believed that at a fundamental level, science was incompatible with anything at all supernatural which, inter alia, means that there are no gods of any kind, is something I still believe.
The problem is that New Atheists are now identified not by any definition but by a group of people who wrapped themselves with that label in the early days and thus is now associated with Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens, along with those who later chose to be aligned with them. Three of them (Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens) have been revealed to have deplorable political and social views unconnected to the ones that attracted me. I now feel that the New Atheist label cannot be reclaimed from those associations and so feel compelled to abandon it in order to avoid being grouped in with them and their views.
Dennett and Hitchens have since died but others have joined with Dawkins and Harris to become part of the culture wars, moving away from dealing just with science and religion and going on to attack postmodernism and so-called ‘woke’ ideologies that they attack in the name of science. In the process, they have started to espouse deeply reactionary views and seem to now be more at home with right wingers and even MAGA types, as can be seen by their vociferous opposition to what they consider to be censorship by the left and what they call ‘cancel culture’. Under the banner of defending free speech and science, they now defend those who have been condemned for their sexist, Islamophobic, racist, and transphobic views.
[Read more…]
So what has been happening to the Lincoln Pool?
What is clear is that repairs to fix the peeling paint liner are nowhere close to being completed. Trump may have tried to hide the disaster by erecting a fence around the pool to keep out observers but unfortunately for him, it turns out that there is a live cam feed from a camera atop the Washington Monument that is pointed directly at the pool so that anyone can see the status of the pool at any time. As you can see for yourself, as of today it is still empty of water and looks like a mess, with a gash in the paint lining running right down the middle for the length of the pool.
Meanwhile the administration is still pathetically clinging to the fiction that vandals are behind the problems.
Work to correct the cracking and flaking liner at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool is underway, weeks after the government dropped charges against people accused of vandalizing the pool, citing instead the “botched” renovation efforts.
…Workers could be seen power washing the pool’s basin and using caulk applicators on the perimeter expansion joint. Some workers ripped up large sheets of damaged liner, and used leaf blowers and brooms to sweep up smaller pieces of liner debris.
Asked about the work, the Interior Department referred The Washington Post to new signage posted at the east end of the pool. Those signs said that the National Park Service and contractors are “repairing areas damaged by vandals and completing a historic effort to clean, fix, and beautify the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Memorial Pool.”
In response to my post wondering why Trump hates Canada and suggesting that that country may look elsewhere to trade and even join the EU or BRICS, there were some very informative comments about other options to those extreme steps. As result, I decided to look into this topic more closely and discovered that other serious commentators have explored various options
The short answer is that while it is theoretically possible for Canada to join the EU, it is also unlikely since it would have to surmount major obstacles, a major one of which is the long land border with the US that would require more stringent customs checks. (Recall the thorny issues with the much shorter Ireland-Northern Ireland border after Brexit took the UK out of the customs union (that allowed free transport of goods over national borders) while Ireland stayed in.)
Back in January 2025, just after Trump took office, an editorial from The Economist made the case for why Canada should join the EU, citing Trump’s openly expressed contempt for Canadian sovereignty and its then-prime minister Justin Trudeau. It argued that both Canada and the EU had much to gain from such a union, and that Trump’s recent jingoism and threats of tariffs have only made the case stronger.
[Read more…]