CNN says that in two hours the House will vote to emasculate the House ethics committee.
This is an incredibly important event, embodying lots of forces, including modes of instability which make it hard to see a path in which this species survives.
CNN reports that the motivation is a belief that the committee has been perverted already, and used to pursue political agendas, compromising the basic principles of democracy. That is certainly true, and I can't help thinking of an old friend of mine who ended up in Congress who would have every reason to join what Ted Cruz called "the peasants with pitchforks."
However, I also can't help thinking about what the fraudulent "transparency and accountability" changes ACTUALLY meant at NSF. Far from curing whatever ills were there on a small scale,
in a few islands, it created a mechanism of NONtransparency and central control by puppetmasters not visible to the public... and when the gestapo consolidates total control over the House, it may be game over.
Someone recently asked me whether computer control would avoid some of the gross instabilities we are moving towards. But computers are not magic; they too can lead to garbage out or to mediocrity, or can be empowering, depending on design. In truth, in 1979 I was excited when I was able to flesh out a new algorithm for intelligent decision making (a GENERAL deep learning algorithm, Dual Heuristic Programming DHP, capable of juggling billions of variables, unlike the simple temporal difference method HDP which I had published in 1977 in GSY); however, when I started to try to prove stability, I found that CONFLICT OF INTEREST effects (improper terms or gaps) led to substantial possibilities for collapse or entropy. Only in the Handbook of Intelligent Control, 1992, did I publish a "slight" variation with math showing it did not have that problem. (Some folks would wait for the kind of rigorous proof we published in Automatica last year, for a simpler design... but..
lots of other things to do here.)
Here's the thing: the short circuits they are putting now into Congress, and the remedies most likely to change the game more, all imply a huge amount of entropy. More important, they seriously weaken
the embryonic hopes of sustainable stabilization mechanisms. The same may be said of Mike Roger's plans for actual mutual destruction in the cyber sphere.
But, having zero power, having been zapped by the gestapo myself (along with more than half the
previous scientific leadership of NSF, as the rest is also under substantial and effective attack)...
maybe it's time for me to catch up on reading and (ala Voltaire) my own garden... I really feel bad for the kids who will actually have to live in this world... but inner space is big enough.
=========================
A few hours later: this has been cancelled or postponed. (Whew!).
It intrigues me to consider the analogy to Obamacare: a quick sledge hammer is often more destruction than fixing, but serious technical improvements are needed... if we are smart enough to do serious technical improvements. Are we? TBD. At ourenergypolicy.org, I have also posted my thoughts (as one of the vetted energy experts) on some other issues up in the air...
Tuesday, January 3, 2017
Friday, December 30, 2016
Trump's space policy: making Russia great again and turning US into an ant
Promise Versus Reality in
Human Settlement of Space
I still have access to a huge
network of technical, economic and human information
regarding space. As of the
end of 2016, the information coming back points to a high probability of
a near-term disaster in that
sector, where Trump may promise and sincerely try to rise to the level of John
Kennedy... but then end up with a fate similar to Richard Nixon – who also had
the great thrill of being elected and reelected before reality caught up with him.
My motive in writing this up is a wild
hope that someone might be able to prevent disaster in time for the State of
the Union speech, or at least in time for when decisions become irrevocable.
Small hope? Better than nothing, but Nothing may yet come...
--------------------------------------------
I wish I could explain this
in a quick twitter burst. I have tried, and failed, as I will describe later.
A basic problem: even when your car is urgently about to
explode, a quick thrust of the sledge hammer won’t make things better. Here is
a RELATIVELY simple picture, unfortunately the minimum needed to avoid disaster...
to keep this car from exploding... I will add more detail later... even a bit
on methods and sources..
1. Disaster before Trump:
Much of America’s erosion as
a real great power has been due to what Trump has called “the swamp,” a system
of corruption quite similar to what Ayn Rand depicted in describing Taggart’s
DC operation in Atlas Shrugged.
(No, I do not believe everything
in that book, and I do not believe everything in the Bible. One would have to
be a total fuzzhead or schizo to believe everything in both of THOSE books! But
they both have moments of intense clarity and realism. I can’t say that the
Catholic Church was totally irrational when it banned public access to the Bible
a few centuries ago, or that rulers of Morocco were wrong in saying that
certain parts of the Koran should not be discussed with children in general.)
When I was in Senator Specter’s office, as the person assigned to handle space
policy in 2009, I saw first hand how the swamp creatures’ operation worked to
prevent any new wave of US progress in space, getting rid of efforts to develop
new high technology to max out our capabilities in space launch in order to reduce risk, in order to get rid
of the painful uncertainties and anxieties for investors which had occurred
when there was real competition, and in order to shift jobs to areas of low
skill and low understanding of advanced technology; Shelby and Lamar Smith are
current centers of the swamp creature movement, in effect, to drown out hopes
of humans in the galaxy.
2. What COULD be done:
Concretely, when I was at
NSF, for a few years they let me fund the most advanced serious concepts of
hypersonic flight to orbit, and to exploit the full peer review capabilities of
NSF, interagency cooperation and workshops to probe what is actually possible. I learned that “off the shelf” (high technology
readiness) technology would allow us to reduce costs to earth orbit by a factor
of 10 or 100, beyond anything now in sight realistically from “old space” (Lockheed
and Boeing and such) or from new space (like SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, XCOR,
Blue Origin and many others). World class industrial cost estimators agreed
with the realism of a $12 billion total 5-year price tag to get to flying
prototypes (already enough to
dramatically increase our
space launch capability!) and, more
important, an upgrade of Boeing’s Seattle plant to be able to pump out low-cost
spaceplanes as well as they pump out Dreamliners. (It is so hard for me NOT to
say anything about important and exciting technical details, right now... but
essential as they are they don’t go in the summary section.)
I posted a few more details,
as of 2008, in the space part of www.werbos.com,
but need to update that part...
At one point, I asked the guy
running the national security work at the Marshall Institute: “What happens,
strategically, when one nation can orbit ten to a hundred times as much into
orbit, for ANY purpose? Who really owns the highground of space at that point?
Do we really want to relinquish the US fate?” Before that, I had a long
friendly meeting with the Major General who ran the National Security Space
Office, who gave direct orders in my sight “to get this started yesterday.” But
two weeks later, the dinosaurs ate him.
3. Where we are now:
In DC, the term “stakeholder
process” has become a euphemism for corruption and corporate welfare, the
general system
which Trump has called “the
swamp.” For many people embedded in that particular corporate culture... if you
can’t turn all decisions over to a coalition of Lockheed and Boeing lobbyists,
you need to find another hero in the same kind of PR business. And so, the
exciting effort to get out of the swamp and make America great again in the
space launch business has been shanghaied by another corporate welfare
movement, this being the one to pick SpaceX as a kind of new virtual monopoly.
Lots of good intentions, moving towards a disaster. Ironically, I myself did my
best (which was relatively effective) to get SpaceX more visibility on Capitol
Hill when I worked for Senator Specter, and I really do not want to use harsh
language here. But objective reality... nature.. Murphy’s Law can be quite
unforgiving, even for the nicest of people with the best of intentions. The
current stated Trump space policy is to cut back on stuff like the great space
dinosaur called SLS (great!), to rely more heavily across the board in civilian
and military space on strong competition for launch services (also great, part
of what SpaceX has asked for), and to rely on the private sector for new
development of launch technology (OOPS!!).
That new launch technology, well beyond the capabilities now present OR
IN SIGHT of the New Space companies, is what offers the 10 to 100 times
improvement in launch capability. By analogy... if our lives depended on Elon
Musk developing a new unified field theory on his own, without effective strategic help...
well, some of us would be reviewing what we do or do not know about afterlife.
That’s where I am right now, at the end of the day (and perhaps of the human
species beyond earth).
Still, there is some hope
that the EU, India or Russia might fill in, and occupy the high ground. (China’s
space programs look as mired as ours.) Wouldn’t that be an interesting end to
Trump’s six to eight years, an image of the US as a little old bug overshadowed
by a Russian mother ship? Or even a simple coup d’etat as the generals who have
the intelligence data decide they just won’t put up with it (egged on by a
variety of folks emotional about Russia, some who support democracy less than
Netanyahu supports the two-state solution)? This is a serious crossroads folks,
and I’m not the only one worried.
4. What Could Be Done
Many people resist rational
policies because rationality is not exciting to them. But that is the only
possible way forward. It can be packaged to be exciting (even scary) at times,
but if we fall into “let’s play dress up and pretend Elon Musk is Iron Man or
Andrew Carnegie” we lose what hope is left.
At a technical level, when I
was in a few inner circle meetings at the international Hypersonics conferences
of the AIAA (lead society for real aerospace technology, though IEEE is also
big there) ... my entree was control technology and systems technology. But
anyone really good in systems engineering knows the importance of fighting the
perpetual pitfalls of tribalism, and of working hard to protect and defend
other pieces of the puzzle, other specialities which complement one’s own. I
have learned that the number one urgent need, to get to orbit at low cost with
rockets or airbreathers or more advanced technology from Russia, is now to
restore, upgrade, digitize and harden Boeing’s technology for “hot structures.”
Wow is that hard for your garden
variety ersatz rocket scientist to understand! Let alone the PR people who
really hate being reminded that the used cars they are selling would all lose
their tires after just a few trips!
How could nature possibly be
so cruel to cancel all the value of huge investments just on the basis of
something so mild and petty as the skin of spacecraft melting away as it enters
or leaves the atmosphere at high speed? (For rocketplanes, repeated reentry is
the challenge, but advanced airbreathers and “Ajax” technology also require
skin which is robust when going up.)
DARPA’s little XS program is
the closest we now have to developing that technology, but they don’t have
enough money.
Also, they have political
oversight. I remember very vividly when Senator Shelby’s person, attending a
meeting at the Pentagon with me and Gary Payton (head of USAF space programs),
expressed puzzlement about that, and she and other leading authorities said “of
course we know how to solve that problem. TPS is the solution..” and the
political appointees overseeing DARPA have insisted that TPS be the lead there,
as “we know it works.”
Lots of folks know it works,
and that’s a key reason why the US and the secret Chinese military space programs
are going nowhere. They know it works, and it doesn’t. (Musk by contrast is
counting on a combination of older technologies, manna from heaven and
incredible expensive wastes of fuel. I do hope we can supply the manna, which
neither he nor NASA Ames show any sign of being onto yet. Ames COULD be
upgraded, with new money and strong more serious technology
inputs.)
TPS – active cooling of the
leading edges – was in fact the technology which the National Aerospace Program
of Ronald Reagan relied on. NASP ended up as a great failure for Reagan and for
me and for many others, but it was our best try so far, and it did develop some
useful technology. I worked very closely with McDonnell Douglas at the height
of NASP.
(Just look up The Handbook of
Intelligent Control by White and Sofge, and google about it. Some things in 1992 were ahead of where the
industry is today!) When the NASP program office decided it was finally ready
to fulfill Reagan’s vision, with enough proven well-tested component
technologies to put together to design a vehicle with real data (not Musk data),
the net payload worked out to be negative... because of the huge weight of the
very best active TPS system which the best people in the US were capable of
supplying. (Actually, White and I had an idea for how to cut the TPS weight in
half, by really risky new combinations of technology, but from a systems viewpoint you’d be an idiot to choose
that over what Boeing proved out before at Wright Patterson test labs. To do
it, you’d also have to give tons of money exactly to me and to White... not a
set of technologies they teach even at MIT lately. China and UK are closer to
it... but it really is scary.)
A more complete plan for how to fix NASA, with lots of bells and whistles, is posted as an article in:
http://www.werbos.com/JSP-Fall-2016-Composite-Final-12-13-2016.pdf
In a way, this represents a joint viewpoint of IEEE and AIAA, as I was deputy chair of the IEEE Committee on Transportation and Aerospace Policy in 2015, and Ed chaired the AIAA Colonization committee (with tons of access to
current industry work on such issues). I did not accept to be chair of that committee in 2016 because the previous VP of IEEE-USA for government relations overrode a unanimous vote of the committee to accept this as an official IEEE position. We have reached a point where substantive technical inputs are more and more essential to avoiding disasters in many, many areas of policy! If only professional PR/lobbyist views ever get to the top... well, it all is at risk.
A more complete plan for how to fix NASA, with lots of bells and whistles, is posted as an article in:
http://www.werbos.com/JSP-Fall-2016-Composite-Final-12-13-2016.pdf
In a way, this represents a joint viewpoint of IEEE and AIAA, as I was deputy chair of the IEEE Committee on Transportation and Aerospace Policy in 2015, and Ed chaired the AIAA Colonization committee (with tons of access to
current industry work on such issues). I did not accept to be chair of that committee in 2016 because the previous VP of IEEE-USA for government relations overrode a unanimous vote of the committee to accept this as an official IEEE position. We have reached a point where substantive technical inputs are more and more essential to avoiding disasters in many, many areas of policy! If only professional PR/lobbyist views ever get to the top... well, it all is at risk.
=============
OK, I am out of time today.
You might search this blog for what I learned about NASA from its earlier
effort to build a Mach 6 airplane without an engine (keyword: legends), and how the stakeholders
got rid of the one guy at NASA headquarters who really tracked and tried to
provide technical oversight to prevent that.... Much much more meat for all of
this...
If OSTP lived up to the original vision and scuttled the corruption which has grown there lately, under orders to follow the stakeholder system strictly, disasters like this might be easier to avoid... well-meaning fuzzy leadership or technically ignorant leadership has been a growing problem.
I vetted this by asking specific technical questions about the SpaceX (and Trump) plans of many people, some very well embedded in the aerospace community. The best that any of the SpaceX crew could come up with was
"well, we have done our own tests, and of course we can't say more to nonmembers." But Dr. Paul at WPAFB assured me that his was the only test facility in America able to test all three kinds of stresses which a reentry vehicle must pass,
and it did not come cheap for the government. When I visited it, it was sobering to see the many hundreds of test articles there at any time... let alone the thousands tested over time.. and I was very pointed in asking: "Is it true as I have heard that only the Boeing article ever passed the whole suite"? Yes, even though every one of those thousands were supposed to be certain to work and well-funded by SOMEONE. The ((now declassified) TASC evaluation said that all three competitors failed at first, in the most serious test to date, even Boeing's, but they figured out how to change the design and make it work to the full satisfaction of the group paying. (CIA at that time.)
Many DC salesmen argue we don't NEED reusable rockets, because expensive expendables are cheaper when you orbit just one payload per year. That's greta if our plan is for the US to orbit just one payload per year (even in event that someone kills a key satellite) and for someone else to be able to orbit thousands efficiently and economically. Any hope of human settlement of space would require the latter. I really know those DC salesmen... and I remember the DARPA-funded global reach vehicle which melted and exploded not so many years ago (after a valid program was modified by political appointees responding to a guy I actually met in other contexts).
If OSTP lived up to the original vision and scuttled the corruption which has grown there lately, under orders to follow the stakeholder system strictly, disasters like this might be easier to avoid... well-meaning fuzzy leadership or technically ignorant leadership has been a growing problem.
I vetted this by asking specific technical questions about the SpaceX (and Trump) plans of many people, some very well embedded in the aerospace community. The best that any of the SpaceX crew could come up with was
"well, we have done our own tests, and of course we can't say more to nonmembers." But Dr. Paul at WPAFB assured me that his was the only test facility in America able to test all three kinds of stresses which a reentry vehicle must pass,
and it did not come cheap for the government. When I visited it, it was sobering to see the many hundreds of test articles there at any time... let alone the thousands tested over time.. and I was very pointed in asking: "Is it true as I have heard that only the Boeing article ever passed the whole suite"? Yes, even though every one of those thousands were supposed to be certain to work and well-funded by SOMEONE. The ((now declassified) TASC evaluation said that all three competitors failed at first, in the most serious test to date, even Boeing's, but they figured out how to change the design and make it work to the full satisfaction of the group paying. (CIA at that time.)
Many DC salesmen argue we don't NEED reusable rockets, because expensive expendables are cheaper when you orbit just one payload per year. That's greta if our plan is for the US to orbit just one payload per year (even in event that someone kills a key satellite) and for someone else to be able to orbit thousands efficiently and economically. Any hope of human settlement of space would require the latter. I really know those DC salesmen... and I remember the DARPA-funded global reach vehicle which melted and exploded not so many years ago (after a valid program was modified by political appointees responding to a guy I actually met in other contexts).
Monday, December 19, 2016
Assassination of Russian Ambassador to Turkey
This event today is certainly entangled with crucial larger issues in play, and possible outcomes.
Among other things, one immediate issue appears: will Erdogan tell the real truth to Russia and to the world? I hope any serious major power with serious intelligence capabilities knows by now not to take at face value the PR of folks quite willing to "bend the truth" for their political purposes. The news says it was a Turkish policeman who shouted "Ali Akbar." Erdogan wants to blame everything on Kurds and Yezidis, but to accept such BS PR right now would be a strong warning about the sanity and maturity of anyone believing it. (Sure, Russia has some value in being tactful and not saying "BS PR" itself to the TV, but.,.. )
At best, Erdogan might have just been "playing to his base" by shifting Turkey to be more of an Islamic Republic with Sunni theocracy and sharia and so on... just as Trump has at times played to a base. But it is clear that "playing to that base" has serious consequences. Purging the independent thinkers and managers form the police and the army of course creates the potential for this situation... and a lot more. In his deal with Erdogan, Putin was ... making a deal with the devil... while Erdogan himself might have executed an actual employment contract of that sort.
Clearly Putin now has an option, after Trump's election, to move decisively to a different kind of deal. It would also have some costs (maybe quiet and lubricated), but a lot less than the kind of thing we saw today and where it might lead to. It helps to have a principled goal.
========
So many jokes floating in the ether....
China navy grabs a US research drone, opens it and sees the secret... the secret is "made in China." Oops.
Is it time to turn Turkey over to Assad?
...
but back to reality...
Among other things, one immediate issue appears: will Erdogan tell the real truth to Russia and to the world? I hope any serious major power with serious intelligence capabilities knows by now not to take at face value the PR of folks quite willing to "bend the truth" for their political purposes. The news says it was a Turkish policeman who shouted "Ali Akbar." Erdogan wants to blame everything on Kurds and Yezidis, but to accept such BS PR right now would be a strong warning about the sanity and maturity of anyone believing it. (Sure, Russia has some value in being tactful and not saying "BS PR" itself to the TV, but.,.. )
At best, Erdogan might have just been "playing to his base" by shifting Turkey to be more of an Islamic Republic with Sunni theocracy and sharia and so on... just as Trump has at times played to a base. But it is clear that "playing to that base" has serious consequences. Purging the independent thinkers and managers form the police and the army of course creates the potential for this situation... and a lot more. In his deal with Erdogan, Putin was ... making a deal with the devil... while Erdogan himself might have executed an actual employment contract of that sort.
Clearly Putin now has an option, after Trump's election, to move decisively to a different kind of deal. It would also have some costs (maybe quiet and lubricated), but a lot less than the kind of thing we saw today and where it might lead to. It helps to have a principled goal.
========
So many jokes floating in the ether....
China navy grabs a US research drone, opens it and sees the secret... the secret is "made in China." Oops.
Is it time to turn Turkey over to Assad?
...
but back to reality...
Sunday, December 18, 2016
Cyber Capabilities of China and Russia Which US Does Not Have
Cyber Capabilities of China
and Russia Which US Does Not Have
Whether we like it or not, the
world is right now undergoing a rapid, massive reorganization due to the emergence
this year of Information Technology (IT) powerful enough to suddenly make IT an
equal partner with money, biology and spirit as a basic force organizing our
lives on earth. I previously posted an “elevator
speech to Heritage House” on the big picture, and posted a vision of three
major steps needed to build a sustainable IT foundation. Parts of that vision
are really urgent, because we see serious crises around us right now, and the
possibility is real that good things may crumble away as bad things erode too
quickly.
I have made a lot of noise
about unbreakable operating systems recently (as in www.werbos.com/NATO_terrorism.pdf),
because a combination of policies by Mike Rogers and those pushing him from
outside NSA, and leaks of cyberattack technology, have created an urgent crisis
and a need for urgent technical action. I was very sad hearing one of our best
senators talking today about cyberattack capabilities unique to Russia, when
the press already covered how those capabilities came from the US but escaped
to the larger world back when I was writing that NATO paper. The higher steps
of the new IT vision, developing things like better intelligent markets and
collaboration tools, are important, but less urgent. But what about the middle
level, communications security?
I have not put out a proposal
for communications in the new global IT system. But certainly I see key aspects
of technology there which are quite
different from what most people know about.
For example, from my web
page:
Werbos,
Paul J., and Ludmilla Dolmatova. "Analog
quantum computing (AQC) and the need for time-symmetric physics."Quantum Information Processing (2015):
1-15. To see the full paper, click here. For more information on the amazing new
experimental results of 2015, and possibilities for confirmation, click here.
Notice
the citations in that paper to new unbreakable quantum communication designs
from China and India, well beyond what is possible in the digital, first
generation quantum technology which dominates most of the US work. (Apologies
to Seth Lloyd of MIT, cited in my paper, who gave us the first footholds into
the new continent of continuous-value quantum computing – but it goes much
further than that early foothold.) Howard Brandt, the quiet leader of US
government quantum technology, planned to showcase such developments in a
workshop at SPIE a year or two ago, but died very suddenly a couple of weeks
before that workshop. (Three or four of us did speak about the subject, but not
with the kind of energy that Brandt would have created.)
Luda
today tells me of a many-thousands-of-kilometers quantum communication line in
China, being used in a practical way for secure communication. The same systems,
she says, were proven in satellite communications as well. But I do not know
whether they have deployed second generation yet.
Can
we develop a third generation, exploiting time symmetry effects for even more powerful
communications? That is what my NATO paper talked about.
===========
Probably
I will say more later today. For now, there is a key point: time symmetry is
NOT the same as faster than light (FTL), backwards time telegraph (BTT) or forward-time
camera (FTC). I do see pathways to the latter, but the ghost imaging technologies
I cited in the NATO paper do not provide such pathways. All-angles triphoton is
crucial to the future of science AND OF CULTURE, and only Austria and Tsinghua
have the required entangled sources currently operating.
It is not a crucial national
security technology, and I hope the current blocks to US-China collaboration in
that focused area can be overcome.
============
For your amusement, I hear lots of people asking "what does Russia really want?" The drumbeat of people itching for a stupid war is very disturbing. Certainly Putin wanted Trump, because he likes the idea of a genuine alliance focused on extreme sharia (the Third Caliphate movements including the Moslem Brotherhood.). Yet many people in the US depend on funds laundered from the Moslem Brotherhood origin, which is much more interested in overthrowing US democracy immediately than any of the original Trump people. I am very disturbed by people who sound as if they want a legal action to outlaw RT, a clearly expressed outlet for one set of viewpoints, even as the bigger and more covert flows of laundered money from the Middle East (e.g. to Fox or to various allies in Congress) are quietly ignored. Admittedly, Putin's recent deals with Qatar and Erdogan, as his earlier arrangements with Chechens, would have to be on the table in negotiating any alliance, but that still makes sense.
What does Putin really want? Luda said... she saw him express great regret on TV recently, about how he "has travelled to so much of the world, only seeing hotel rooms and offices." "What would really make him happy would be if he could join us on one of our kinds of adventures (small sample picture below), ideally with us and Katherine Neville to keep him company." Well... back to more immediate things...
Picture taken in Condor Pass in Peru, more than twice as deep as Grand Canyon, discovered only relatively recently by folks not native to the area.
============
For your amusement, I hear lots of people asking "what does Russia really want?" The drumbeat of people itching for a stupid war is very disturbing. Certainly Putin wanted Trump, because he likes the idea of a genuine alliance focused on extreme sharia (the Third Caliphate movements including the Moslem Brotherhood.). Yet many people in the US depend on funds laundered from the Moslem Brotherhood origin, which is much more interested in overthrowing US democracy immediately than any of the original Trump people. I am very disturbed by people who sound as if they want a legal action to outlaw RT, a clearly expressed outlet for one set of viewpoints, even as the bigger and more covert flows of laundered money from the Middle East (e.g. to Fox or to various allies in Congress) are quietly ignored. Admittedly, Putin's recent deals with Qatar and Erdogan, as his earlier arrangements with Chechens, would have to be on the table in negotiating any alliance, but that still makes sense.
What does Putin really want? Luda said... she saw him express great regret on TV recently, about how he "has travelled to so much of the world, only seeing hotel rooms and offices." "What would really make him happy would be if he could join us on one of our kinds of adventures (small sample picture below), ideally with us and Katherine Neville to keep him company." Well... back to more immediate things...
Picture taken in Condor Pass in Peru, more than twice as deep as Grand Canyon, discovered only relatively recently by folks not native to the area.
Friday, December 16, 2016
Most immediate possibility of us all dying
Is there a person out there ready and able to start a new world war post haste really?
No, I am not talking about Trump ordering demolition of the Chinese military islands in the South China Sea. In a hypothetical sort of way, I can see a possible chain of logic for why he might do that.
No, I am talking about something more immediate, more likely, more indefensible and more destructive.
CNN reported yesterday that Mike Rogers (not the Congressman) wants to use cybercom to conduct offensive retaliation against Russia (but he loves China and Iran too) for their actions in hacking the DNC. Since DNC is Democrats, he expects they wouldn't resist. They report we really have great cyberoffensive capabilities we can use, like Stuxnet,
Oops! Don't the CNN people have any memory, or read Fortune magazine? (OK, for decades I only read Fortune when google sends me there, but I do LOTS of all kinds of google stuff.) Don't they know that that cyberoffensive capability is out there now for anyone?
There is no nation on earth with significant energy whose electric power system is not highly vulnerable.
The reality is that any day now YOU could wake up to discover that your electricity is off, that it won't be on again for six months (forget your little diesel backup if you have one) , and that the same is true for the folks who brought you food. No problem, if you don't mind stopping food for six months, And Rogers (and the folks egging him on) don't seem to care.
CNN did at least note that if the US followed his desires we might experience a wee little pushback.
What's amazing is that we have such powerful people intent on causing such stupid damage to everyone, presumably for political purposes of their own, which are indifferent to whether we starve.
There COULD be a way out, if he had not abolished the department at NSA addressing the key protection issues. Is there any hope Trump's new people could understand what is going on and
install the urgently needed patches, while avoiding the immediate huge risks? (By the way, my paper at www.werbos,com/NATO_terrorism.pdf has already had significant international distribution.
For myself, I would feel it already said what needs to be said, but if it were really understood on first read we would be in a different situation. Yet I remember the Republican staffer who quoted Upton Sinclair... "There is no fact so simple that people can fail to understand if they feel their paycheck depends on not understanding.")
Enough. We may live, and we may die, and I just a retired old guy with other things on his plate and absolutely zero authority. Sensitive enough that I can wake up and feel what your future pain may be.
============
For the few days left in which Obama is President, I suspect he would NOT authorize this kind of warfare, but the particular gang involved might or might not care all that much about such niceties. (No coincidence they have offloaded a lot of stuff the way Ollie North did, but of course not reporting to Nixon in this case, and burned a few bridges that would make connections obvious.) More likely, Obama will support "name and shame" leaks. It will remind Putin of how the US might have
strengthened its policy of becoming "mother in law to the world" under Hillary.
======= Clarification Dec 17
CNN just had a guy saying "the left also says the American intelligence community wants a war with Russia and China." This speaks to the same incorrect implicit assumptions which led Trump to say
"it's those folks who told us Saddam had WMD." There is a big difference between long-term government employees and outside networks developing powers to harass intimidate and overrule them. The WMD story is a classic case, where honest hardworking people did not lie, but folks like Cheney and his minions (still very much around, recommending cabinet officials to Trump!) took over the communication channels. I did name the name Mike Rogers because CNN already reported on Cybercom, and the reorganization which wiped out Information Assurance was also reported in the press (as cited in www.werbos.,com/NATO_terrorism.pdf). Massive reorganization, and massive strengthening of connections which input from a network quite different from the "bureaucracy" legal hierarchy. The analogy to Ollie North... well, enough said. To look beyond Rogers, look up and out, not in and down, and least in that sector. Other sectors... well, Hillary herself has pretty clear earthy data by now.
No, I am not talking about Trump ordering demolition of the Chinese military islands in the South China Sea. In a hypothetical sort of way, I can see a possible chain of logic for why he might do that.
No, I am talking about something more immediate, more likely, more indefensible and more destructive.
CNN reported yesterday that Mike Rogers (not the Congressman) wants to use cybercom to conduct offensive retaliation against Russia (but he loves China and Iran too) for their actions in hacking the DNC. Since DNC is Democrats, he expects they wouldn't resist. They report we really have great cyberoffensive capabilities we can use, like Stuxnet,
Oops! Don't the CNN people have any memory, or read Fortune magazine? (OK, for decades I only read Fortune when google sends me there, but I do LOTS of all kinds of google stuff.) Don't they know that that cyberoffensive capability is out there now for anyone?
There is no nation on earth with significant energy whose electric power system is not highly vulnerable.
The reality is that any day now YOU could wake up to discover that your electricity is off, that it won't be on again for six months (forget your little diesel backup if you have one) , and that the same is true for the folks who brought you food. No problem, if you don't mind stopping food for six months, And Rogers (and the folks egging him on) don't seem to care.
CNN did at least note that if the US followed his desires we might experience a wee little pushback.
What's amazing is that we have such powerful people intent on causing such stupid damage to everyone, presumably for political purposes of their own, which are indifferent to whether we starve.
There COULD be a way out, if he had not abolished the department at NSA addressing the key protection issues. Is there any hope Trump's new people could understand what is going on and
install the urgently needed patches, while avoiding the immediate huge risks? (By the way, my paper at www.werbos,com/NATO_terrorism.pdf has already had significant international distribution.
For myself, I would feel it already said what needs to be said, but if it were really understood on first read we would be in a different situation. Yet I remember the Republican staffer who quoted Upton Sinclair... "There is no fact so simple that people can fail to understand if they feel their paycheck depends on not understanding.")
Enough. We may live, and we may die, and I just a retired old guy with other things on his plate and absolutely zero authority. Sensitive enough that I can wake up and feel what your future pain may be.
============
For the few days left in which Obama is President, I suspect he would NOT authorize this kind of warfare, but the particular gang involved might or might not care all that much about such niceties. (No coincidence they have offloaded a lot of stuff the way Ollie North did, but of course not reporting to Nixon in this case, and burned a few bridges that would make connections obvious.) More likely, Obama will support "name and shame" leaks. It will remind Putin of how the US might have
strengthened its policy of becoming "mother in law to the world" under Hillary.
======= Clarification Dec 17
CNN just had a guy saying "the left also says the American intelligence community wants a war with Russia and China." This speaks to the same incorrect implicit assumptions which led Trump to say
"it's those folks who told us Saddam had WMD." There is a big difference between long-term government employees and outside networks developing powers to harass intimidate and overrule them. The WMD story is a classic case, where honest hardworking people did not lie, but folks like Cheney and his minions (still very much around, recommending cabinet officials to Trump!) took over the communication channels. I did name the name Mike Rogers because CNN already reported on Cybercom, and the reorganization which wiped out Information Assurance was also reported in the press (as cited in www.werbos.,com/NATO_terrorism.pdf). Massive reorganization, and massive strengthening of connections which input from a network quite different from the "bureaucracy" legal hierarchy. The analogy to Ollie North... well, enough said. To look beyond Rogers, look up and out, not in and down, and least in that sector. Other sectors... well, Hillary herself has pretty clear earthy data by now.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Yin and Yang and Xi JinPing
This week, the noosphere seems to have decided it is time to give me a flood of inputs related to China. But with warring factions within the Trump camp, with radically different goals, I sadly conclude it is probably not a good idea to discuss more than a few small bits of them. Certainly there are factions both within the US and within China which would love to see a war in the South China Sea, and even rational people on both sides face a tricky problem in how to deal with determined crazies on the other side. Rational people on both sides would find it remarkably easy to arrive at
arrangements (as I have noted before) which would be an emphatic win-win and free up resources to address common very serious problems (like the larger plans and capabilities of the Moslem Brotherhood, a particular organization which many underestimate).
Before his rise to power, Xi Jinping said very important things about the fundamental importance of unifying the subjective and objective views. But... there are huge practical issues in how to implement that. As I noted at www.werbos.com/Mind_in_Time.pdf, the best of Confucianism addressed those basic issues of zhengqi better than other world "religions" (though is Freud a religion, and does he count?). But when he attended the "Thousand Year Academy," Mao learned all that, and noticed how Confucianism in practice had developed extremely destructive aspects, due to twisting to serve warlords and such. (Zu Xi? sp?). Maybe his most important saying there was "all of China is my family." At the level of the noosphere, all of earth is our family... and even our Self.
Xi has rightly concluded that the value-free pursuit of truth must be supplemented by consideration for values, for affect, and that the degenerate forms of Confucianism would cause real problems if used in a simple-minded way to fill that gap.
But the deep contradictions persist, and the folks who want to make useless war for lack of larger perspective are not encompassed by the slender reeds now in use. A more complete and modern objective view is essential, building on the past but building beyond it and making stronger connections.
All for now.
==============
Well... let me add that I have tried to learn what I can from the whole body of human experience as pertains the human mind, and the aspects which go beyond the mundane and the obvious.
So of course I know about yin and yang, as does everyone in China. My COPN "flag" includes an icon I really like, which I developed, with a rose on the yin-yang, to symbolize the goal of... full development of human potential. To me, that is coequal with survival of the species as a basic goal, never to be forgotten, valid across all of humanity.
But I also probe Western traditions. So, for example, I attended two small discussions of a book called the "Kybalion," downloadable for free on the web. I remember vividly a friendly Lebanese woman from the 1970s who swore by that book, and what it seemed to mean at the time.
This year, knowing more, and connecting to others in the group as I once connected my NSF panels... I find it a lot easier to penetrate to the objective meaning behind it, what it really says.
It was very amusing for me, this time, to read chapter 15, about "mental gender" to realize in a flash that this was very much the yin-yang concept. So much so that I wonder how much they actually drew on Taoism, how much knowingly and how much unknowingly.
But more. Yin-tang itself seems like a useful but fuzzy concept. Like "consciousness," it is a word
(OK, two words) with several different distinct and important meanings. Curiously... as chapter 15 got deep into the feelings and use they propose for the yin-yang concept... suddenly I could see beneath, and see that the core meaning is simply the objective/subjective duality which Xi JinPing has talked about (in more objective and concrete terms) and which I also wrote about in www.werbos.com/Mind_in_Time.pdf and in my big talk to the Confucius Institute in Qufu/LinYi
(posted somewhere on www.werbos.com/Mind.htm). It "adds meat to the bones," describing how this feels.
In a way, we all start like mice or monkeys, in a highly subjective state of mind. We gradually learn to "look in the mirror" (with the help of mirror neurons of course). Looking at ourselves in the mirror, we develop a concept of "Me" which is different from the "I" looking in the mirror, though the two are connected. Development of an objective view not only enables consistent, sane and powerful symbolic reasoning (one theme of my paper), but other capabilities as well, such as a certain kind of larger stronger Will. One of the other folks talked about the way that exercises like making yourself do things which do not come naturally is one way to strengthen the Will, but in general the objective view does this.
It is curious how a piece of sheer mysticism is such a strong advocate of the Objective or yang point of view. Maybe too strong. I reminded folks of how German and Russian folks in my past circle know of folks in those communities who took Will and Objectivity a bit too far, a bad extreme as bad as pure yin. I mentioned a guy I knew named Nguyen who had such strong yang control of his brain and his body that he did really outstanding world-famous work at Stanford, and did feats in the gym
as powerful as if someone else had hypnotized him to do amazing feats. (The book Hypnosis by Estabrooks is well worth reading, as I did when 14.) I mentioned how one day he went to the gym, gave strict orders to his body, his body obeyed, and he died of a heart attack right then and there.
The pure yang way, I concluded, is not the right or the natural way. Harmony and integration is the way. (That is what "sanity" is, as described more analytically in www.werbos.,com/Mind_in_Time.pdf and in my papers in Neural Networks.)
Yes, the Kybalion has useful suggestions, but, I said, it is important: (1) that the objective consciousness or Will work hard to listen to the other side ("Ferdinand smell the flowers"); and (2) in exercising yang "I am", it is important to exercise both the "I am" of the self and the "I am" of the larger Self, in effect the noosphere. We then discussed Bucke's Cosmic Consciousness, which I didn't actually read but intuit easily and scanned long ago.
Of course, the objective mind depends on the quality and degree of objective, scientific understanding. Even the peak of German and Russian cultures have had a long way to go in understanding some very basic things, and need to discipline themselves to use the scientific method,
which calls for us not to be overly attached to the models of the day, and calls for us to exercise mathematical probability theory as part of the very ground of our being. That applies to all nations -- and especially to China as it begins to explore the yang side of life more sincerely, with the combination of strengths and pitfalls it entails.
It is curious who utterly "yin" Trump is in many ways, reminding me of Japanese generals who would fight hard and effectively but fight like artists with an artist's yin view of the world.
Tough-minded pursuit of truth and even of scientific approaches becomes a necessity more and more for the complex world humanity as a whole tries to survive in.
And yes, I mentioned to the group how much more "yang" Luda is than most male leaders of states,
and how incredibly much I owe her.
arrangements (as I have noted before) which would be an emphatic win-win and free up resources to address common very serious problems (like the larger plans and capabilities of the Moslem Brotherhood, a particular organization which many underestimate).
Before his rise to power, Xi Jinping said very important things about the fundamental importance of unifying the subjective and objective views. But... there are huge practical issues in how to implement that. As I noted at www.werbos.com/Mind_in_Time.pdf, the best of Confucianism addressed those basic issues of zhengqi better than other world "religions" (though is Freud a religion, and does he count?). But when he attended the "Thousand Year Academy," Mao learned all that, and noticed how Confucianism in practice had developed extremely destructive aspects, due to twisting to serve warlords and such. (Zu Xi? sp?). Maybe his most important saying there was "all of China is my family." At the level of the noosphere, all of earth is our family... and even our Self.
Xi has rightly concluded that the value-free pursuit of truth must be supplemented by consideration for values, for affect, and that the degenerate forms of Confucianism would cause real problems if used in a simple-minded way to fill that gap.
But the deep contradictions persist, and the folks who want to make useless war for lack of larger perspective are not encompassed by the slender reeds now in use. A more complete and modern objective view is essential, building on the past but building beyond it and making stronger connections.
All for now.
==============
Well... let me add that I have tried to learn what I can from the whole body of human experience as pertains the human mind, and the aspects which go beyond the mundane and the obvious.
So of course I know about yin and yang, as does everyone in China. My COPN "flag" includes an icon I really like, which I developed, with a rose on the yin-yang, to symbolize the goal of... full development of human potential. To me, that is coequal with survival of the species as a basic goal, never to be forgotten, valid across all of humanity.
But I also probe Western traditions. So, for example, I attended two small discussions of a book called the "Kybalion," downloadable for free on the web. I remember vividly a friendly Lebanese woman from the 1970s who swore by that book, and what it seemed to mean at the time.
This year, knowing more, and connecting to others in the group as I once connected my NSF panels... I find it a lot easier to penetrate to the objective meaning behind it, what it really says.
It was very amusing for me, this time, to read chapter 15, about "mental gender" to realize in a flash that this was very much the yin-yang concept. So much so that I wonder how much they actually drew on Taoism, how much knowingly and how much unknowingly.
But more. Yin-tang itself seems like a useful but fuzzy concept. Like "consciousness," it is a word
(OK, two words) with several different distinct and important meanings. Curiously... as chapter 15 got deep into the feelings and use they propose for the yin-yang concept... suddenly I could see beneath, and see that the core meaning is simply the objective/subjective duality which Xi JinPing has talked about (in more objective and concrete terms) and which I also wrote about in www.werbos.com/Mind_in_Time.pdf and in my big talk to the Confucius Institute in Qufu/LinYi
(posted somewhere on www.werbos.com/Mind.htm). It "adds meat to the bones," describing how this feels.
In a way, we all start like mice or monkeys, in a highly subjective state of mind. We gradually learn to "look in the mirror" (with the help of mirror neurons of course). Looking at ourselves in the mirror, we develop a concept of "Me" which is different from the "I" looking in the mirror, though the two are connected. Development of an objective view not only enables consistent, sane and powerful symbolic reasoning (one theme of my paper), but other capabilities as well, such as a certain kind of larger stronger Will. One of the other folks talked about the way that exercises like making yourself do things which do not come naturally is one way to strengthen the Will, but in general the objective view does this.
It is curious how a piece of sheer mysticism is such a strong advocate of the Objective or yang point of view. Maybe too strong. I reminded folks of how German and Russian folks in my past circle know of folks in those communities who took Will and Objectivity a bit too far, a bad extreme as bad as pure yin. I mentioned a guy I knew named Nguyen who had such strong yang control of his brain and his body that he did really outstanding world-famous work at Stanford, and did feats in the gym
as powerful as if someone else had hypnotized him to do amazing feats. (The book Hypnosis by Estabrooks is well worth reading, as I did when 14.) I mentioned how one day he went to the gym, gave strict orders to his body, his body obeyed, and he died of a heart attack right then and there.
The pure yang way, I concluded, is not the right or the natural way. Harmony and integration is the way. (That is what "sanity" is, as described more analytically in www.werbos.,com/Mind_in_Time.pdf and in my papers in Neural Networks.)
Yes, the Kybalion has useful suggestions, but, I said, it is important: (1) that the objective consciousness or Will work hard to listen to the other side ("Ferdinand smell the flowers"); and (2) in exercising yang "I am", it is important to exercise both the "I am" of the self and the "I am" of the larger Self, in effect the noosphere. We then discussed Bucke's Cosmic Consciousness, which I didn't actually read but intuit easily and scanned long ago.
Of course, the objective mind depends on the quality and degree of objective, scientific understanding. Even the peak of German and Russian cultures have had a long way to go in understanding some very basic things, and need to discipline themselves to use the scientific method,
which calls for us not to be overly attached to the models of the day, and calls for us to exercise mathematical probability theory as part of the very ground of our being. That applies to all nations -- and especially to China as it begins to explore the yang side of life more sincerely, with the combination of strengths and pitfalls it entails.
It is curious who utterly "yin" Trump is in many ways, reminding me of Japanese generals who would fight hard and effectively but fight like artists with an artist's yin view of the world.
Tough-minded pursuit of truth and even of scientific approaches becomes a necessity more and more for the complex world humanity as a whole tries to survive in.
And yes, I mentioned to the group how much more "yang" Luda is than most male leaders of states,
and how incredibly much I owe her.
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Has Trump defected to the Moslem Brotherhood?
Not consciously -- but it raises questions about how much consciousness is there after all.
For Secretary of State... he has taken advice of Condolezza Rice and Dick Cheney.
Just a few days ago, when he derided the US intelligence agencies for being "the folks who told us Saddam Hussein had WMD", some folks on TV noted that no, the folks providing the intelligence were the professionals who had had a different opinion, but were overridden by the geniuses who created the Iraq war -- above all Cheney, with Rice as perhaps his most loyal agent on scene. And I have seen enough with my own eyes here to know who is who more than .. many.
Of course, the Moslem Brotherhood (the folks wanting a global Third Caliphate) were pushing the Iraq War, and Cheney's company (Halliburton) was dedicated to serving clients in the Middle East above all (based in HQ in the Gulf now, recognizing a long-term de facto reality).
What should Russia think about this? Already they must have questions about how Trump says he would be friendly to Russia but would pick a fight with Iran. Where does THAT go? It goes to a kind of inner conflict, which of course the Secretary of State (whom many now call the new Cheney) can steer. And that group wants a war with Iran as a top priority, though also a US-China War, because they are led by folks who know the ancient game of encouraging enemies to destroy each other to create a clear field.
All the dominos are falling that way this week -- these and some others I should not say more about even here in this obscure site.
Best of luck. You will need it.
For Secretary of State... he has taken advice of Condolezza Rice and Dick Cheney.
Just a few days ago, when he derided the US intelligence agencies for being "the folks who told us Saddam Hussein had WMD", some folks on TV noted that no, the folks providing the intelligence were the professionals who had had a different opinion, but were overridden by the geniuses who created the Iraq war -- above all Cheney, with Rice as perhaps his most loyal agent on scene. And I have seen enough with my own eyes here to know who is who more than .. many.
Of course, the Moslem Brotherhood (the folks wanting a global Third Caliphate) were pushing the Iraq War, and Cheney's company (Halliburton) was dedicated to serving clients in the Middle East above all (based in HQ in the Gulf now, recognizing a long-term de facto reality).
What should Russia think about this? Already they must have questions about how Trump says he would be friendly to Russia but would pick a fight with Iran. Where does THAT go? It goes to a kind of inner conflict, which of course the Secretary of State (whom many now call the new Cheney) can steer. And that group wants a war with Iran as a top priority, though also a US-China War, because they are led by folks who know the ancient game of encouraging enemies to destroy each other to create a clear field.
All the dominos are falling that way this week -- these and some others I should not say more about even here in this obscure site.
Best of luck. You will need it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)