April 2017 – Amalgamated Contemplation

The world’s megacompanies are about to become true stateless superpowers—in all their power and complexity — Quartz

in the long run, the fragmentation of regulation likely implies the morphing of global companies themselves into new governance and operating structures. One possible model is to have the company organized as affiliated networks of independently operating, locally registered, privately held partnership structures to avoid anti-foreign backlash. We are entering an important phase where the choices of regulators will determine the geography of business and innovation more than the presence of technology and talent. The policy choices we make over the next few years will change not just the structure of future global businesses but also the competitiveness of entire nations.

Source: The world’s megacompanies are about to become true stateless superpowers—in all their power and complexity — Quartz by Parag Khanna and Sangeet Paul Choudary

Neil Postman, Revisited: Are We Having Too Much Fun? – The Atlantic

Source: Neil Postman, Revisited: Are We Having Too Much Fun? – The Atlantic by Megan Garber

In 1985, Neil Postman observed an America imprisoned by its own need for amusement. He was, it turns out, extremely prescient.

I thought of Neil Postman, the professor and the critic and the man who, via his 1985 book Amusing Ourselves to Death, argued preemptively against all this change-via-chuckle. Postman wasn’t, as his book’s title might suggest, a humorless scold in the classic way—Amusing Ourselves to Death is, as polemics go, darkly funny—but he was deeply suspicious of jokes themselves, especially when they come with an agenda.

He might whisper that, in politics, the line between engagement and apathy is thinner than we want to believe.

It wasn’t Nineteen Eighty-Four that had the most to say about the America of the 1980s, but rather Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. “In Huxley’s vision,” Postman noted, “no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity, and history.” Instead: “People will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.”

we shape our tools and thereafter our tools shape us

a condition, Postman put it, in which “facts push other facts into and out of consciousness at speeds that neither permit nor require evaluation.”

“In a print culture,” he argued, “writers make mistakes when they lie, contradict themselves, fail to support their generalizations, try to enforce illogical connections. In a print culture, readers make mistakes when they don’t notice, or even worse, don’t care.” In a television culture, he argued, the opposite is true.

Source: Neil Postman, Revisited: Are We Having Too Much Fun? – The Atlantic by Megan Garber

How to Avoid Going to Jail under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 for Lying to Government Agents – FindLaw

you are not qualified to know whether you are innocent of wrongdoing under federal criminal law

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States. Your lie does not even have to be made directly to an employee of the national government as long as it is “within the jurisdiction” of the ever expanding federal bureaucracy. Though the falsehood must be “material” this requirement is met if the statement has the “natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it is addressed.” United States v. Gaudin , 515 U.S. 506, 510 (1995). (In other words, it is not necessary to show that your particular lie ever really influenced anyone.) Although you must know that your statement is false at the time you make it in order to be guilty of this crime, you do not have to know that lying to the government is a crime or even that the matter you are lying about is “within the jurisdiction” of a government agency. United States v. Yermian , 468 U.S. 63, 69 (1984).

the only avenue for reform with respect to Section 1001 is in Congress

you can politely decline to be interviewed by the FBI agent. Tell the agent that you have an attorney and that “my attorney will be in contact with you.” If the agent persists, say that you will not discuss anything without first consulting counsel. Ask for the agent’s card, to give to your attorney. If you have not yet hired a lawyer, tell the agent that “I want to consult a lawyer first”

The absolutely essential thing to keep in mind is to say nothing of substance about the matter under investigation. It is preferable to do this by politely declining to be interviewed in the absence of counsel. … It is crucial to note that affirmatively declining to discuss the investigation in the absence of counsel is not the same thing as remaining completely silent.

You are not obliged to explain your decision to anyone.

I am not suggesting that you should obstruct the FBI or invariably decline to answer an agent’s questions. … Neither am I suggesting that it is generally acceptable to be interviewed by federal agents as long as your attorney is present. In fact, it is usually unacceptable and is often quite risky.

Source: How to Avoid Going to Jail under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 for Lying to Government Agents – FindLaw by Solomon L. Wisenberg

Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Long touted as the “perfect” energy source, fusion reactors share many drawbacks with fission—and even add a few new ones of their own.

tl;dr:

Terrestrial fusion reactors need to use tritium (neutron-rich hydrogen isotope) as fuel.
Tritium fuel can only be acquired from fusion and fission reactors, and it cannot be fully replenished from the fusion reactor itself.
The power required for a power plant to operate itself is called “parasitic power drain”. Fusion reactors require an enormous amount of power to operate and this parasitic power drain forces fusion reactors be very large in order to be economical. Furthermore, 75 to 100 megawatts of parasitic electric power is used (e.g. for refrigerators) even when the fusion reactor is off (e.g. for maintenance).
Deuterium-tritium reactions’ fusion energy output is 80 percent energetic neutron streams (deuterium-deuterium is 35 percent), not usable electricity or heat. These streams lead to radiation damage to structures, radioactive waste, the need for biological shielding, and the potential for the production of weapons-grade plutonium 239.
Neutron streams must be cooled to produce usable heat, but this incurs radiation damage to the reaction vessel (swelling and fracturing) and everything that it irradiates (e.g. coolant, the vessel, fuel assemblies,
non-structural components) will become radioactive waste over time.
production of plutonium 239 is possible in a fusion reactor simply by placing natural or depleted uranium oxide at any location where neutrons of any energy are flying about. The ocean of slowing-down neutrons that results from scattering of the streaming fusion neutrons on the reaction vessel permeates every nook and cranny of the reactor interior, including appendages to the reaction vessel. Slower neutrons will be readily soaked up by uranium 238, whose cross section for neutron absorption increases with decreasing neutron energy.
Tritium handling is hard and tritium is environmentally hazardous.
Deuterium and tritium are themselves usable as boosting/supplemental components to nuclear weapons.
a fusion reactor would have the lowest water efficiency of any type of thermal power plant, whether fossil or nuclear.

To sum up, fusion reactors face some unique problems: a lack of natural fuel supply (tritium), and large and irreducible electrical energy drains to offset. Because 80 percent of the energy in any reactor fueled by deuterium and tritium appears in the form of neutron streams, it is inescapable that such reactors share many of the drawbacks of fission reactors—including the production of large masses of radioactive waste and serious radiation damage to reactor components. These problems are endemic to any type of fusion reactor fueled with deuterium-tritium, so abandoning tokamaks for some other confinement concept can provide no relief.

Source: Fusion reactors: Not what they’re cracked up to be | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists by Daniel Jassby

His Holiness Pope Francis: Why the only future worth building includes everyone | TED Talk | TED.com

First and foremost, I would love it if this meeting could help to remind us that we all need each other, none of us is an island, an autonomous and independent “I,” separated from the other, and we can only build the future by standing together, including everyone.

How wonderful would it be if the growth of scientific and technological innovation would come along with more equality and social inclusion. … How wonderful would it be if solidarity, this beautiful and, at times, inconvenient word, were not simply reduced to social work, and became, instead, the default attitude in political, economic and scientific choices, as well as in the relationships among individuals, peoples and countries.

allow me to say it loud and clear: the more powerful you are, the more your actions will have an impact on people, the more responsible you are to act humbly.

The future of humankind isn’t exclusively in the hands of politicians, of great leaders, of big companies. Yes, they do hold an enormous responsibility. But the future is, most of all, in the hands of those people who recognize the other as a “you” and themselves as part of an “us.” We all need each other.

Source: His Holiness Pope Francis: Why the only future worth building includes everyone