Tables of Organization

This is funny for those of you who can read a military TOE. 

If you can't: Both the  82nd Airborne brigade being deployed and the Marine Expeditionary Units are Brigade sized elements, so they'd be commanded by a division command -- and it looks like the 82nd's is the one being deployed. If they are combined into a single Division-sized unit, then, the 82nd would have overall command of the Marines. This is frustrating for the Marines. That's the joke. 

"OPCON" means "Operational Control," while "TACON" means "Tactical Control." So while the 82nd DIV HQ would have full control over the 1-82 BCT, it would still be able to tell the Marines what to do on the battlefield.

A War Against Israeli Interest

Robert Oprisko is a philosopher I know personally: he and I both write on the role of honor in moral philosophy, and share broadly compatible views about it. We've met for pizza in Asheville and exchanged ideas on several occasions. 

Today he has published a paper that offers a surprising view: Operation Epic Fury has been damaging to Israel's interests. Most of the commentary against the war has suggested that the war is very obviously in Israel's interests, and that America has been suckered into it by wily (or overly-influential) Israelis. Just yesterday I wrote briefly on why I think the war is overdetermined in America's interests; I don't take seriously the view that America hasn't got a national interest here, but instead think it has so many and such powerful interests at stake that many of them would individually be worth the fight. 

Yet here we see an argument that, in fact, while America may benefit from this war, Israel will lose even as it achieves its battlefield aims.

Anxiety over the existentially precarious position Israel occupies in the Middle East has persisted for thousands of years, though it has grown and intensified after World War II; genocide was no longer mere theory, it had been attempted. While existential anxiety can be alleviated, mitigated, and ultimately eliminated through dedication, discipline, and intentional action, Israel’s persists. Israeli and American politicians have personally found it politically useful... The fear of oblivion is so strong that support of Israel by citizens of allies (i.e., persons who don’t live in Israel and aren’t Jewish) represents a litmus test of the allies’ heads of government. For Israel, you are either with or against... Given the deep and pervasive concern of annihilation, Israeli spite to withstand and reject external pressure elicits asympathetic policy response from allies and reinforces the security protocols to reduce said anxiety.  

...

Operation Epic Fury has shown anabsolute character for Iran, but not for either Israel or the United States: Iran has absolutely no capacity formeaningful response..... Israel is capable of self-defense against Iran as a source of anxiety. In fact, they are capable of offense. More to the point, Iran is clearly not at the same level of military capacity, capability, or sophistication as Israel.... The “war” is not a war at all – Iran can’t fight back, they lost before they knew a fight was taking place....

The clear and undeniable success of the joint US-Israeli strikes against Iran do not simply mitigate the existential anxiety of the Jewish people and state, it utterly destroys the public façade maintaining that anxiety and eliminates the ideology as an aegis for any aggressive action taken (Oprisko 2015). Operation Epic Fury has been so successful so quickly, and the rationale for the aggression so flimsy that the world isn’t responding jingoistically, it’s attending a funeral; the world hasn’t seen such a lopsided win in an “even fight” since Ali-Liston II (Albanesi 2021).By having one-shot the end boss, the US and Israel have lost a value greater than any they will gain through success: an excuse for any bad behavior (Kain 2024).Overwhelming military dominance should feel like success, but the end result is failure via strategic blunder: Israel has inadvertently killed the ‘golden goose’ of all defenses by exposing Iran as a hollow threat. 

I think there's something to this. Israel has gone all-in* on the attempt to settle family business while it has a reliable presidential ally in the United States. It used its "grim beeper" ploy; it used its capacity to assassinate inside the most protected Iranian secure zone; it used its drone box to take out Iranian air defenses; it used up its whole targeting list on the first night or two of strikes; and now it is using its carefully-established networks inside Iran to identify and remove IRGC commanders leading the population suppression. Oprisko is probably right that they have also decided to use up the sense of vulnerability that they have long depended upon politically and diplomatically. 

That will have consequences. The Israel that emerges from this war will be very different from the one we have known for so long, and seen as hemmed in on all sides and threatened with destruction. This will have psychological consequences for Israelis at home, and political ones worldwide. 

I don't know that I agree that this will damage them in the long term, however. Someone used to say something about how good it is to be "the strong horse"; Osama somebody. It certainly works in the Arab world: just today the Wall Street Journal published a call from the UAE's current Ambassador to the United States -- and Minister of State -- to finish Iran once and for all, combined with his government's commitment to doing so.

* Oprisko and I are both using sports and gaming metaphors, I notice. I linked the Ali-Liston II fight video in case any of you hadn't seen that famous boxing match, or just wanted to see it again. "To one-shot a boss" is a metaphor from tabletop war gaming and/or role-playing games in which a single attack made on a target, in this case a 'boss' or final target, is able to kill it or destroy its ability to fight. In this case, the Ayatollah was 'one-shotted' in the sense of being killed; Iran itself might be said to have been as well; its continued but flagging resistance is trumpeted in the media, but the end-game is obvious to serious observers outside the news cycle. Finally, 'to go all-in' is a poker metaphor for pushing all of one's chips into the pot on the current hand. 

Some Catholic News

The full article is here. The wag's remarks are on point; even when Popes had a lot more practical authority than currently, the crossbow thing didn't work out even in Italy. During the Battle of Poiters, the French Army was supported by 2,000 Genoese mercenary crossbowmen.

On the other hand, crossbow bans are back in the news (in the UK, of course, where they somehow continue to labor under the idea that they can ban everything that is potentially dangerous and then crime will go away).

Also on that other hand, the Pope's authority at least in America may be gaining. Commenting on a news story that Catholic converts now outnumber Evangelicals, Robert Kearney writes: 

De Tocqueville foresaw a future time in America where Protestantism (existing as an intermediate form between pure reason and full authority) would struggle to endure long-term under our democratic conditions. 

Due to this, people would increasingly gravitate either toward complete unbelief or toward Catholicism due to the Church's existence as a singular, authoritative structure that could give answers to people and help organize society in order for it to remain functioning. 

Perhaps the 21st century may see his vision fulfilled.

I'm not sure we won't still be flying the A-10 and B-52 by the end of the century, but I guess we'll see. Well, our children or grandchildren, I suppose. 

Strategic Upsides in Iran

Dad29 has competing analyses of Iran. This one is negative, and focused as much of the negative commentary on the role of Israel. The US has at least three kinds of things it calls 'allies,' to include client states like Canada, which is one even though it deeply resents it (as until recently was the UK; the influence of Islamism and leftism on the UK elite is pulling us apart, but only a bit so far); true allies like Japan, whose interests are so closely aligned with ours that cooperation makes sense almost all the time; and states like France or Turkey that are allies for strategic reasons, but whose interests come apart from ours so significantly that we are often in serious opposition to one another. Israel occupies something between the second and third position. It has independent interests that differ from ours, and it sometimes pursues those; but most of its interests align with ours, and most of the time we act as genuine allies and partners. 

This Childers analysis of the Iran war, by contrast, is highly positive. It is also broadly correct, though as D29 notes it omits risks -- of which there are several beyond anything to do with Israel, including supply chain disruptions not only of fuel but of downstream goods like aluminum. If aluminum plants run out of fuel and have to shut down, it takes months to restart them.

The strategic upsides, however, are unassailable. Childers only gets at some of them, partly because there are so many they're hard to list in one place. For decades Iran has been situated at the center of the Chinese-Russian efforts in the Middle East: Russia's naval base in Syria was guaranteed by Iran's puppet Assad; when Assad fell Russia was pushed out of the Middle East (though still very active in Africa). 

China's oil supply is underwritten by Iran, which has provided cut-rate oil in return for China ignoring sanctions on Iran's oil. If the US military takes Karg and a friendly government is established that endorses that (as the US was allowed to occupy part of Okinawa by Japan after WWII), it puts the US in charge of that oil supply. That gives the US a powerful lever on Chinese actions anywhere. It isn't quite a veto -- Russia can still provide oil to China -- but it is a brake because Chinese actions against US interests are subject to new tradeoffs and pressures.

Also, China's Belt-and-Road project to Europe ran through Iran and Russia. The Russian arm is already cut off because of the war Putin started with Ukraine; the loss of the Iranian arm will cause China to have lost billions in investments and all of its expected returns in terms of regional influence in the Middle East and Europe. 

The Iranian response also has upsides for the US, strategically. Childers gets to several of them; but another one is that the Ukraine anti-drone lessons-learned have become newly important to all the Gulf States. That means that Ukraine will receive investment buoying it up greater than it was hoping to receive in aid. This will further exhaust the Russian capacity for aggression, or for actions abroad in places like Africa. 

The war isn't without costs, and the end-game will doubtless incur more. The strategic upside to pursuing it to victory is very clear, however.

Which One?

The NRA proudly announced that it had defeated "California's illegal gun control law," but you have to read their article to figure out which one they meant. This one was illegal under the First Amendment, more than the Second Amendment. There are plenty of Second Amendment violations still extant there, and soon to be a bunch more in Virginia. 

A Brazilian Feminist

Despite my criticism of the Modern interpretation of “equality” in political philosophy, and consequent rejection of philosophies based on that interpretation, I maintain quite a few deep and friendly relationships with feminist philosophers I have encountered over the years. Very often, at least among philosophers, agreement is not necessary for friendship as long as there is mutually respectful consideration of each other’s ideas. (That, by the way, is a sort of ‘proportionate equality’ of the type we examined in the long series on Aristotle’s EN. It is a much healthier model than the Modern attempt to impose mathematical equality in ethics and politics.)

One of them is here interviewed about a Brazilian early feminist. Many of you may find this interesting. 

Fool You Twice

Before the Iran War started, there was a round of negotiations that ultimately proved just to be a delaying tactic: Israel was hosting India's leader that week, and needed time to finalize their new alliance. 

This week we're told there's a pause in the war to allow for a new round of negotiations. Coincidentally, that will also give time for the United States Marines transiting by sea from Japan to get on-station in theater. The apparent WARNO to the 82nd Airborne, the Army's most rapidly deployable force, also looks relevant to that "week of talks." 

Is peace at hand? I wouldn't wager on it. I'm not sure who is left over there who has authority to negotiate a peace in any case.

UPDATE: Open sources indicate that the 'who' is the Speaker of the Parliament of Iran. In spite of the title, this isn't really a 'parliament' in the usual sense of the word: it's official title is "The Islamic Consultative Assembly." The "Consultative" part is what distinguishes it from a true parliament: "All legislation endorsed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly must be submitted to the Guardian Council. Within a maximum of ten days from its receipt, the Guardian Council must review the legislation to ensure its compatibility with Islamic criteria and the Constitution. If any incompatibility is identified, the legislation is returned to the Assembly for further review."

Israel is said to have approved their movement to Islamabad for talks. If we are aware of the flight and the photos from the open sources, you can be reasonably sure they'll be tracked home -- probably all the way home. It is generally wise to leave someone alive with the authority to surrender. 

We Aren't the World

Those of us in the usual age cohort for the Hall remember the "We Are the World" business. The song's 'collect all the celebrities and have them sing in no real genre to try to create a widespread emotional response' mode was mocked in the mockumentary Wag the Dog. In the real life version, Waylon Jennings walked out over the demand that he sing in Swahili, which it turns out is not even a language spoken in Ethiopia, a fact the celebrities were ignorant of at the time.

Probably all of us are also aware of how much aid money has been poured into Africa, and to how little effect, in the ensuing decades. I mention all this to draw your attention to an article from Arab News, which suggests that Africa may not need aid anymore: 

Abrupt donor retrenchment since 2025 has stripped away long-standing assumptions about who finances development on the continent. Economic data now tells a story that would have sounded improbable two decades ago: Africa no longer depends on aid to grow. Yet many African states still depend on aid to function.

Economic resilience in the face of shrinking donor flows has been striking.... Yet fiscal aggregates conceal structural fragilities. Aid once served as a parallel operating system for essential services... Roads can be financed through bonds and tolls; antiretroviral drugs cannot. Power plants attract investors; primary schools rarely do. The result is a bifurcated development model, one that sustains growth while eroding human capital....

Such contradictions define the current moment. Wealth exists, but systems to deploy it effectively remain uneven because governance sits at the center of this disconnect.

If you got the government out of the way in the "essential services" sectors, corruption would decrease and efficiency would improve. There may be enough wealth coming in without aid to make Africa work now; further aid only keeps the entrenched governments secure in their role of controlling those sectors.

And it won't become self-aware

H/t Instapundit, a hydrogel wound dressing that releases antibiotics only when it detects bacterial activity.

Show them the money

As a means to control national voter fraud, this could work. The same states that worship voter fraud also really like to suck up federal money, and in the competition between the two ignoble impulses, my bet's on the money.

The only living boy in NY

Paul Simon could write a bridge like nobody's business.

March or Die

The French Foreign Legion has that as their unofficial motto, so I am told. They do not admit women into their ranks.

MJ calls what happened to her in Zion national park “small ‘T’ trauma”. She knows women have experienced worse from their partners. But she still feels the anger of being left behind on a hike by her now ex. “It brings up stuff in my body that maybe I have not cleared out yet,” she said.

This article was brought to my attention by a hiking buddy; we once did 50 miles together in the Great Smoky Mountains, over some very tough terrain and during weather that threatened hypothermia. On the march up the mountain that used to be called Clingman's Dome, third highest in the eastern United States, we separated just this way. I don't remember who got to the top first or last, nor does he; it didn't cause either of us any trauma at all. It was just the natural thing to do to separate given unequal aerobic capability. 

Many of the women described having some level of dependence on their partner in nature. They may not have been carrying the right supplies or enough water, or were not familiar with the terrain, making them feel vulnerable.... One woman described a 12-hour journey out of the Grand Canyon after her boyfriend ditched her, during which she was assisted by a “very nice man from Norway” who carried her backpack.... A man walking 100ft ahead of his girlfriend because he cannot be bothered to wait for her is bad manners. But failing to properly care for someone in an environment they’re not prepared to handle alone can cause real harm. 

Speaking as a certified Wilderness rescue technician, don't go to the mountains if you aren't up to it. I'll come help you if I can, as will many others who have volunteered their time to train for that mission. Nevertheless, you really should be sensible about what your limits are. If you need someone else to carry your backpack, pack lighter. If you don't know what you're doing, study and train first. It's not that hard, but it also isn't trivial. 

Catfu

As good a use of AI as I've seen.

UPDATE: An American variation.

Nazgul shrieks

The sound alone from this laser weapon would be enough to demoralize me. It's like something out of War of the Worlds.

Justification

Instapundit posted a link to an analysis of all the lies told in just three paragraphs by the author of the Virginia gun bans. But really, you don't need to know that. You only need to know this:

Virginia voters are shocked to find out that Virginia Democrats are voting to exempt themselves from the new gun control measures they are imposing.

“The provision of this section shall not apply to any member of the General Assembly.”

That suffices.  

Therefore: the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a right that no government, this nor any other, can infringe upon without a basic denial of human dignity. Such a denial itself entails a right of self-defense against such a government; and the everlasting potential for such a denial therefore entails an everlasting, permanent, and basic right to arms.

Death & Rebirth in the Pigeon River Valley

More on this later.

Volume of Fire

H/t Wretchard. 

This phase of the war will be over soon. After that, we will see: it depends upon how they employ the Marines they’re sending. 

The Paradox of Enjoying Tragedy

I told Grim I'd post a few of Corb Lund's darker pieces but then got to wondering why I enjoy them. And why do any of us enjoy tragic stories? They've been around since the beginning of storytelling, so there must be some attraction.

It turns out, David Hume has some thoughts on this. The SEP quotes him thus:

It seems an unaccountable pleasure, which the spectators of a well-written tragedy receive from sorrow, terror, anxiety, and other passions, that are in themselves disagreeable and uneasy. The more they are touched and affected, the more are they delighted with the spectacle; and as soon as the uneasy passions cease to operate, the piece is at an end. 

One answer is that tragedies refine or clarify our emotions in a kind of catharsis, which seems to have been suggested by Aristotle in his Poetics. There are a number of other answers in the SEP article if you are interested, but this one seems the most interesting to me. The SEP describes it like this:

... a plausible construction of the idea is that we come to learn about some of our emotions when their expression is elicited by highly affecting works of art, in the case of tragedies specifically by the “release” of the negative emotions of fear and pity that comes with the narrative resolution of the plot. There, the expression of our emotions does not leave them unchanged; rather, they are exposed, fine-tuned, and given a salient form when arising in conformity to a work of tragedy’s prescriptions for how to feel.

A further development of this idea suggests that part of this catharsis allows us a kind of "enlightenment about the nature of suffering."

Whatever the reason we enjoy tragic stories, here are half a dozen or so of Corb Lund's tragedies for you.

UN Security Council Condemns Iran

So you know how the UN is useless because its resolutions are not binding except for Security Council resolutions, but those never happen because the US or Russia or China vetoes it? Not this time. 

I know. Curious, isn’t it?

Re-engineering evolution

At the age of 92, William Shatner has shattered his shoulder upon being thrown from his horse. It's bad enough that he reports his doctors are recommending a "reverse shoulder replacement."

Apparently some bright soul noticed that the arrangement of the ball and socket in the shoulder is a vestigial design that is not the strongest option for an upright biped with a three-dimensional range of motion. If the shoulder is really toast and has to be replaced, it makes more sense for the new joint to have the ball on the torso and the socket on the top of the armbone.

In the new configuration, the center of rotation is moved downward (inferiorly) and inward (medially). The deltoid muscle (the large muscle covering the shoulder) gains a longer lever arm and better mechanical advantage in lifting the arm, while bypassing the often ruined (and irreplaceable) rotator cuff. The ball acts as a mechanical stop to prevent the humerus from sliding upward, converting the deltoid's pull into rotation and elevation rather than just shear forces. This makes for better overhead motion.

For now, at least, the improvement wouldn't be worth the trauma for someone suffering from garden-variety rotator cuff or arthritic trouble. Maybe someday, though, aspiring major-league pitchers will opt for it as a prophylactic upgrade.

Corb Lund's Outlaws

The characters in Corb's songs are a wild variety. Here's three of his outlaws. The first song is about a tragic criminal and one of the darkest songs I know. The second isn't as dark and features a good lesson about how to treat wait staff appropriately, and the third is rather light-hearted for a song about outlaws.

 

Poker Card Shootout

It occurred to me that it's been several years since I posted any evidence that I could hit anything with a revolver myself. Going on a decade, in fact, and it's a perishable skill. I definitely don't shoot as much as I used to way back when, and I'm not as good as I used to be as you can see by comparing this poker card with the one from 2017.

The comparison is imperfect in several respects, since I was using a Vaquero-style fixed-sight Ruger Single Six rather than whatever the Assistant Attorney General was using, but hers probably suffered under greater recoil; and I don't know quite what rules she was shooting under. Tom guessed it was two shot groups, so I fired those. All six on paper, only one really good group and it was a little high. Group two was the closest to dead center; the first of those two got pretty close. Group three drifted a bit. 

Ah, well. Sic transit gloria mundi and all that. Not a total embarrassment, at least. 

The Progress in Iran

In spite of the fact that the American news has decided to act as the propaganda arm of the Iranian Islamic Republic, there has been substantial progress in the campaign. My old comrades at The Long War Journal are doing some good work right now capturing the movement. 

Another good source is Richard Fernandez, who blogs less now but runs both an X and Facebook page under his byline "Wretchard the Cat." He noticed what I think is a key development in the shift from an air war to preparation to assist the Iranians in overthrowing their government: 

Israeli drones carried out attacks on several Tehran neighborhoods... Fars says the drones flew over southern and northern districts of Tehran, adding that “several members of the security force and the (volunteer) Basij force stationed at checkpoints were martyred.”

Notice it wasn't attacks on "neighborhoods," as the opening paragraph framed it; it was tightly targeted drone attacks on police and security 'checkpoints,' i.e., the places from which regime loyalists planned to shoot any protesters who emerged as they did in the earlier parts of the winter. 

That's the missing piece in all of this. The Kurds are going to break away in the northwest; the Balochi in the southeast; probably the Azeri. The armored units that the military and IRGC planned to use to suppress such actions will be destroyed if they try to move to engage; they will also be destroyed if they try to stay put. The navy is being sunk; the minelayers are sitting ducks for air power. What remains is a plan to allow the central population in the larger cities to move against the regime. 

Accomplishing that means showing those people that they won't just be shot down like the thousands the regime murdered over the winter protests. This is a good first step at demonstrating that even small checkpoints of regime loyalists are subject to strike, and on small scales that don't risk the lives of innocents who might be gathered to protest them.

UPDATE: Overnight, the IDF started allowing Iranian citizens to call in air strikes on Basij positions. There is some risk to this, given that the situation is fluid, but it effectively provides air support to any revolutionary effort. 

I saw something similar in Iraq only once. One time a “Concerned Local Citizen”/Sons of Iraq checkpoint came under attack by insurgent forces, including a technical that had parked in a shallow ditch to provide itself with cover. Under machine gun fire, they called us on a cell phone. In the Division Operations Center, the duty officers realized that they had an accurate map with a ten-digit grid of the location of the ditch. So, we hit it with indirect fire — mortars, I believe it was. Our fire was effective, allowing what was essentially a local tribal militia to survive and win against a coordinated assault with heavy weapons’ support. 

If Only You'd Inform on Your Neighbors, Asheville Edition

Not so very long ago during the wild days of 2020 and BLM the Asheville City Council was denying the police department money for body armor. Now, after three unrelated shootings downtown, the mayor and the chief of police issue a joint statement begging the citizenry to please start turning each other in.

Clearly they have mended fences. Asheville began addressing its public order concerns after the post-2020 era got really out of control downtown; then the 2024 hurricane washed away much of what was left of the homeless community there, giving them a chance to catch up. The activists who had so much sway over the council during the BLM moment are quite dismayed to see this new level of cooperation, but the city is a nicer place to visit than once -- especially for women and children. Even my rather fearsome wife found the place unsettling during the days of high disorder. 

Still, there's surely a balance even in urban areas between defunding the police and trying to encourage Stasi-like programs to spy into the private lives of citizens. Part of the reason Americans have fled to suburban and rural areas is that you can live much more decently without so many other people around, and without the mechanisms of control that 'public order' entails. Even in the city, there has to be a better way.

Range Day for Ladies

Specifically, Harmeet K. Dhillon and some of her comrades from DOJ. The target shows some fliers at 30 feet; but Dhillon isn't a professional shooter. DOJ has designated shooters. Harmeet Dhillon is Assistant Attorney General. Nobody expects her to have to fire a pistol except under extreme circumstances of self-defense; there are plenty of people whose job is shooting at that department, and in every court where she'll be engaged in litigation.

A lot of people decided to be highly critical. Kerry Slone (of women-focused Second Amendment group called We the Female, which focuses on arming women for self-defense) has strong words for such people, but that's to be expected. What I think she gets to that's central is this point: 

So how do we start to combat this First, is understanding that men and women are naturally biologically and psychologically different.  In relation to firearms, when a man is mocked, it does not typically have the same result that it does for a woman when it comes to firearms. Negative comments towards men when learning how to use a firearm typically makes them want to train more. When a woman is mocked, it makes her even more intimidated and insecure and can lead to her to not continue to grow in capability. 

A couple of framing points first. One, Harmeet is not a fragile flower. I don't know how much she cares about mouthy idiots on social media. 

Two, using a firearm or other weapon effectively is generally more central to mens' self-image than womens'. The fact that mockery of that ability drives men to train harder doesn't mean they aren't as hurt or as embarrassed; it means that they are so embarrassed and hurt by looking foolish in front of the others that they redouble their efforts to get good enough to be respectable. The mockery is meant to encourage this reaction; if a man was really thought too weak or incompetent to improve, the reaction would be much gentler rhetorically but more devastating because it would be a reaction of pity. The humiliation of this is much worse. 

"Not everyone was meant to be a soldier."

That said, I think Ms. Slone is basically correct. As we learned from reading Aristotle, 'equality' rarely means 'exactly the same' when we are talking about ethics or politics. It doesn't have to for the I.3 reason we kept mentioning: equality as a term of mathematics, like a proof from strict logic, doesn't belong in ethics or politics. All the terms in ethics and politics are analogies. The reasoning is analogical, not logical. Treatment doesn't have to be exactly equal, and often shouldn't be, but it does need to be proportionate to be fair. 

With rare exceptions like our own Texan99, who genuinely seems to want to be held to exactly and only the standards men ask of each other, most women don't want 'equal treatment' in the sense of 'exactly the same treatment.' Most women I know would prefer that you were encouraging; that you demonstrate that you care about them and are proud of them; and if you help them improve, you do so in a practical way that highlights that you, too, once were a beginner who had to learn as everyone does.

If you provide them with that, they will be happier and feel more engaged. However, sometimes we have the same problem as Leonidas: the unit is sometimes more important than the individual. 

Not this time. Harmeet is hell on wheels at her actual job. She can get as good at range day as she cares to bother doing, but where she's really doing good for all of us -- especially in the Second Amendment community -- is her real job. I have no doubt that she'll accomplish more over the next few years on this front than I will be able to, to the benefit of us all.

Canada Cowboys

Tom's Corb Lund post, below, reminds me that though we think of "Country" music as associated with Tennessee or Texas, and "Western" music as associated with the American West, Canada has actually produced a few good musicians in those genres recently. Corb has an upbeat sense of humor that a lot of people like; he's also done some more somber pieces, like "Horse Soldier," of course, but in general he conveys a strong mental health buoyed by that aforementioned good humor. 

Another of these Canadian Cowboys, Colter Wall, has just announced that he is taking an indefinite leave from touring to deal with his mental health. He should be praised for taking that kind of thing seriously. It is a matter that has claimed far too many musical talents at too young ages. 

It won't be a surprise, however, if you listen to his music. It has a notably darker tone even where it is playful. 

I like Colter's music as music more than Corb's. There's no doubt, however, that Corb's speaks of a vibrantly healthy mind that one needn't worry about too much. It's an enviable quality; whether or not it is an imitable one is I suppose the focus and business of psychology. Best of luck to Colter Wall in pursuing that project. 

But That's Not All I've Ever Been

Argle-bargle in a good cause

My father told me a story once about a Dutch mathematician working in the Netherlands under the Nazi occupation. He was constructing a large Cartesian grid of the complex primes, a project without any known practical applications. Nevertheless, he told his captors that his work somehow had nearly magical military value, so they left him alone to work on it in safety and comfort throughout the war. Afterwards, he supposedly admired the pretty pattern of the grid and had it printed up as a tablecloth. Later, a Rice University mathematician who owned one of the tablecloths built a home in West University (Houston) and commissioned a black and white tile floor in the house in an area where a central column was surrounded on all four sides by a kitchen and open living area. (He also supposedly commissioned a screen door with a graphical proof of the 4-color theorem built into its frame.) The mathematician was said to have taken infinite pains with the tile-workers, who were skeptical that the precise random-looking scatter-pattern was meaningful, and were therefore irritated when their client proofread the work every night and forced them to make corrections.

It was a charming story that, as far as I can tell today, had no basis in fact. There was indeed a Dutch mathematician, Balthasar van der Pol (1889–1959), who made a Cartesian grid of the Gaussian primes and had it printed up as a tablecloth, a novelty item that was sold at the 1954 International Congress of Mathematicians. Surviving examples are held in museum collections such as the Museum Boerhaave in Leiden. Although van der Pol had held a prominent position at the Philips laboratories in Eindhoven throughout the Nazi occupation, where his work in radio/electronics and relaxation oscillations was considered an essential industry, there is no record of his work during that period involving the complex primes grid, or of his persuading the Nazis that it had abstruse military applications. The tablecloth project itself was post-liberation, tied to the 1954 ICM. So darn it, that was a nice story that I wish were true. The West U. house with the interesting tile floor and screen door may have existed, but there’s no record of it.

I was reminded of this story, which my father may have invented himself, or may have passed along as an amusing story heard from someone else, when I saw breathless reports on X this evening about a breakthrough physics paper that would unlock unlimited power from vacuum and render moot all the current quarreling over fossil fuels, including the current military action in Iran. The abstract reads like a Sokal hoax, packed with buzzwords:

Emergent quantization from a dynamic vacuum, Harold White, Jerry Vera, Andre Sylvester, and Leonard Dudzinski, 2025, Physical Review Research 8, 013264 (2026). We show that adding quadratic temporal dispersion to a dynamic-vacuum acoustic model yields a fully analytic, exactly isospectral mapping to the hydrogenic Coulomb problem. In the regime [formula], a proton-imprinted constitutive profile produces an inverse sound speed [formula] and hence a time-harmonic operator [formula] that is Coulombic at each bound eigenfrequency. . . .

But what do I know? I’m about as well-versed in quantum theory as the man in the moon. Grok maintains that it is a real paper, in a reputable journal, not currently being outed as a hoax. On the other hand, Grok also reports:

The hype you’re seeing on X, Reddit, and sites like stardrive.org (“Power from zero point energy!”) is not coming from the paper. It’s people (and sometimes White’s company) connecting dots that aren’t there. Harold White runs Casimir, Inc., which separately claims to be building tiny nano-scale “Casimir cavities” (asymmetric vacuum structures with nanopillars) that supposedly let electrons tunnel one way and produce a trickle of DC power—on the order of microwatts (e.g., 1.5 V at ~25 µA per chip in their promotional descriptions). They’re framing this new paper as theoretical support for their “dynamic vacuum” ideas, but:

Those claims are not in the Physical Review Research article. The outputs are minuscule—enough for maybe a sensor or IoT tag that “never needs charging,” not your house, car, or grid.

Independent verification is essentially nonexistent; mainstream physics views continuous net power from the quantum vacuum as incompatible with thermodynamics (you can’t extract usable work from equilibrium fluctuations without violating detailed balance).

In short: this paper is fascinating math for people who like fluid analogs of quantum mechanics, but it gives no more practical power-generation advice than a paper on black-hole analogs tells you how to build a starship. The “revolution” narrative is classic over-extrapolation from a speculative theory paper + a company’s early-stage promotional claims.

So don’t sell all your fossil-fuel stocks yet.

Some Statistics on the Hall

According to a machine I have been running the archives through, over 4.3 million words have been written in posts here at Grim's Hall. 

Of the 20,664 posts (including this one!), 5,589 -- 27% -- have been authored by my co-bloggers, a very substantial contribution! Of these Tex contributed 3,793, Tom 853, and Eric 414.

That doesn't include the comments section, where many grand discussions as well as many playful ones have occurred over the decades.

Thank you all for contributing to the community and discussion all these years. 

"The Way a Man Views Tofu Reflects How They View Women"

I had actually managed half a century on earth without conceptually connecting women and tofu, aside from the fact that no one I know eats tofu except a few women. Not most women I know, however! It's an outlier even among them. One woman I know did once bring some kind of fake-meat to a cookout; she asked me to cook the real burgers first and then cook hers in the meat grease, please. I was glad to comply; after all, she was my friend and I wanted her to be happy. If I could minimize her self-imposed torture, why wouldn't I want to do so?

From this article on meat pizza toppings being offensive to a certain kind of young woman seeking dates with whatever sort of young man would put up with them. Probably when we were young women had similar sorts of conversations, but before social media they were contained within their friend group and didn't have to be encountered by everyone else. Eventually the young grow up enough to realize that trivia like this is not important; loyalty and honor, trust and respect, these are the foundations of love between successful spouses. You can always order half-and-half pizza.

The Winner

If your back isn't broken, if your feet can walk, if both arms can bend, if both eyes can see, if both ears hear, then whom should you envy? And why? 

-Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Ancient and Medieval Social Systems

AVI linked a post by Earl Wajenberg that examines the treatment of slavery in various parts and eras of Biblical society. While his thrust is chiefly moral rather than historical, the treatment of pre-Roman Biblical society reminded me of my historical studies into feudalism and vassalage. 

There is a word which is contextually translated ‘slave’, but it means just a ‘worker’ or a subordinate. This word is ‘ebed’.... In Near Eastern Bronze Age societies, everyone was the subject of someone, and everyone except the lowest tier had someone else as their subject. The ‘lord’ was the ‘adon’ (in Hebrew—other languages had the same system but different words). The ‘subject’ was the ‘ebed’.

Normally, the adon took on obligations in regard to the ebed, typically of protection and advancement, and the ebed took on obligations in regard to the adon, typically in regard to services rendered and honour due, though it might be taxes or profit-sharing.

High status was conferred by having a high-status adon, and by being given a high role in his entourage....

There is a careful breakdown of different types of this relationship, with very different levels of honor and status. In later, post-Roman society slavery was a legal institution governed by Roman law. He details this as well.

The relationship he describes between the 'adon' and 'ebed' is roughly analogous to the relationship in feudalism between the 'suzerain' and the 'vassal.' When reading chivalric romance from the High Middle Ages, our own cultural assumption that freedom is the most desirable state is often called into question. In England, there are free men of various sorts; they are often of Anglo-Saxon heritage and not very high up at all in the social structure; the most prestigious are the "franklins," formerly thanes, who inherited knightly levels of privilege from the Norman Conquest and its subsequent peace.

Yet you frequently read of knights addressing men as "Vassal," and are mistaken if you think they are talking down to them as servants. Rather, they are acknowledging that -- rather than a mere freeman, who can come or go as he likes but has no secure social position -- this person has established a prestigious relationship with a nobleman. A vavasour, in the literature, is generally a figure of quite high respect: he is a vassal who also keeps his own subordinate vassals, and outranks the knights he encounters socially. 

Also, just as he describes marriage as a special case of the adon/ebed relationship, in feudal society the marriage relationship among the nobility increasingly took elements from the homage ceremony between knights and their lords. This was partly because of the increased prestige of knighthood resulting from the chivalric literature: nobles, who cleanly outranked knights, increasingly found themselves being knighted or seeking to join knightly orders (like the Order of the Garter) established by the royalty. 

Much as the society depicted in Starship Troopers elevates those who serve -- "Service Guarantees Citizenship" -- ancient and medieval societies often found themselves valorizing services of certain kinds, especially of course military services. Even nearby societies that did honor freedom still honored service to clan and kin -- as in Lawrence of Arabia where the sheikh rejects the idea that he is a 'servant' who is paid 'a servant's wages,' but proclaims instead that he is paid well but is poor "because I am a river to my people!" He does not 'serve' the Turks, and is free to pursue what he calls 'his pleasure,' yet his honor is entirely tied up with the service he provides to his tribe. 

Marching through Georgia

Today I have no good pictures; the rains came in heavy last night and the whole day was grey even when it wasn't pouring. However, I did get to cross some beloved country. I followed Georgia's Highway 136 from Cloudland Canyon through Talking Rock near Jasper, where my son was born; then over Burnt Mountain, where we lived when he was; then turned off of it to head up to Amicalola Falls, where we were married almost twenty-seven  years ago. From there we stopped in Dahlonega, home of North Georgia's military college (and, these days, also a state university). These places were the playground of my youth and it was nice to see them again. 

After that we crossed Blood Mountain and from thence back into the higher mountains of North Carolina where I now make my home. This weekend was as much time as I've spent in Georgia since we left the place after my father died. It reminded me of many good things; but that era is gone. "Never look back; you aren't going that way." 

Cloudland Canyon

A pretty morning to be out in the world. 

Doomcasting

No good can come of anything, I tell you.

Reflecting on the rise of international trade and finance, former U.S. President Woodrow Wilson once stated that the “effects of war can no longer be confined to the areas of battle” . . . .

Today’s U.S. policymakers seem to have forgotten Wilson’s admonishment. When Trump embarked on this war, he exposed his Gulf partners to unprecedented attacks, and in turn, he disturbed the flows that are the lifeblood of the global economy.

This is, in my opinion, profoundly stupid. Any time someone begins by quoting Woodrow Wilson, you know he is on the wrong track. But what is mostly going on here is the unshakable conviction, in polite society, that anything America does on the world stage–other than sending money to other countries, of course–can only do harm, never good. We should never interfere with the world’s evils, no matter how profound they may be, as in the case of Iran’s demonic theocracy. Because no matter what we do, it can only make things worse.

Well, to be fair, anything we do under a GOP administration can only make things worse.

Election Day Results

Locally, the primary election was mostly a disappointment. My preferred candidate did win the sheriff's race, but in all the other racers things went pretty sadly. Oh, well. 

The saddest was the loss of Adam Smith in NC 11. He was a genuinely good candidate, a former Green Beret of proven heroism during the hurricane relief. Instead, we will either continue with our loser non-performing incumbent, or trade him for a Democrat in what has been one of the reddest districts in the country. They have a reasonable chance even here this year between the poverty of the Republican candidate, a history of loser Republican candidates here, and of course the intense unpopularity of Donald Trump among those who oppose him. 

For the most part I find elections a reminder of why I favor eliminating government from existence as much as possible. I usually would prefer not to be governed by any of the candidates, nor any of the bureaucrats that they pragmatically end up actually transferring power to so they can get back to fundraising. The government that governs best governs least. 

A New Numbers Station

In Farsi, no less. These can be broadcast in the clear because the code used is provably unbreakable. Indeed, there are two separate mathematical proofs, because the Soviets and the West separately demonstrated it. 

We talked about a British numbers station some years ago. Good song there. 

The Meeting on the Turret Stairs

On the subject of chivalric romance, the BBC writes on a famous painting by Sir Frederic William Burton. It is based on a Medieval Danish ballad, on display at the National Gallery of Ireland in Dublin. It is very popular, but fragile: 

Burton used gouache to create this piece, a type of water-soluble paint that gives the painting the vivid colours it is so well-known for. Gouache is also light-sensitive and prone to fading over time if exposed to direct sunlight or high UV light. Due to the sensitivity of the painting, the gallery's curators take several protective measures to preserve the quality of the work. To start with, the gallery only allows viewers to see the painting for just two hours per week. Secondly, the light level on the watercolour is dimmed low so that the work isn't overexposed. Lastly, a staff member returns the painting to a specially-designed cabinet once viewing hours are over in a meticulous, reverential ritual.

Dr. Caroline Campbell, museum director, says that "despite the story's devastating ending, many in Ireland see this masterpiece as deeply romantic. 'Many people have got engaged in front of it[.]'"

An AI Looks On Honor

One of my several professional duties has to do with AI. I set up an 'Open Brain' and uploaded to it both my dissertation and my novel. Each of these treats the subject of honor. I asked both ChatGPT and Anthropic's "supply chain risk," Claude, to analyze the different treatment of the subject in the philosophical versus the creative work. This is what Claude came up with:

**The Central Claim, Expressed Two Ways**

Your dissertation argues that honor is both indispensable to ethics and political philosophy and genuinely dangerous — and that understanding how to mitigate that danger is essential philosophical work. *Arms and White Samite* dramatizes precisely this tension. Moren's quest to rescue Teleri from the Black Knight is, structurally, a story about a man called to act honorably in a world where honor can corrupt, destroy, or ennoble. The dissertation makes the argument in propositional form; the novel enacts it.

**Shared Sources and Imaginative World**

The dissertation's case studies are Beowulf, St. Francis, and Selma — three radically different honor cultures. The novel draws on Arthurian legend, Welsh mythology (Caer Vandwy, Taliesin), Marie de France's lais (Lanval, Geraint), and Middle High German romance (Parzival). Both works are reaching into the same deep well: pre-modern, martial, and chivalric honor traditions. The dissertation analyzes these traditions philosophically; the novel inhabits them imaginatively. The chapter titles of the novel (*Lanval*, *Guerrehés*, *Parzival*, *Geraint*, *Lancelot*, *Death*) read almost like a syllabus of honor literature that the dissertation would discuss.

**Honor as Public and Dangerous**

A key thread in the dissertation (per Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and the Nussbaum/Devlin material on magnanimity and political honor) is that honor is irreducibly social — it requires recognition, community, and hierarchy — and that this is precisely what makes it dangerous. The novel's opening scene — Arthur's Pentecost feast disrupted by a black-armored knight seizing a white-clad lady — is a classic honor-challenge in a public, hierarchical setting. The feast is the community of honor; the abduction is its violation. Moren's quest is therefore both a personal and a political-moral imperative, which mirrors the dissertation's argument that honor cannot be separated from the political.

**Death as the Proving Ground**

The dissertation keywords include *Death*, and Beowulf is one of its central texts — a poem in which honor and death are inseparable. The novel ends with a chapter titled simply *Death*, and the Otherworld/Forest of Caledon themes suggest that the quest crosses into a liminal space where mortality is at stake. Both works treat the willingness to risk death as constitutive of honor, not incidental to it.

**The Key Difference: Genre and Epistemic Mode**

The dissertation builds typologies and logical arguments; it can qualify, distinguish, and hedge. The novel must commit. Moren has to act, which means the novel tests honor under conditions the dissertation can only describe. In that sense, the novel is the harder task philosophically — it has to show what it looks like to actually live inside an honor ethic, with all its ambiguity, rather than analyze it from the outside. The fact that you chose an Arthurian frame (rather than, say, a contemporary or realistic one) is itself a philosophical choice: it places the story in a world where honor codes are still operative and legible, making the tensions visible in a way a modern setting might obscure.

---

The two works are genuinely complementary. The dissertation gives you the conceptual architecture; the novel gives you the phenomenology. Together they make a fuller case for honor's moral weight than either could alone.

That might be vaguely interesting for any of you who read both of the works, and are also interested in how well the AI analyzes a known quantity to yourself. However, even if that isn't most of you, it was worth making this post simply because it drew my attention to Lars Walker's review of the novel, which I don't think I was aware he had written before today. I found it while looking for the link to the novel itself. Thank you, Lars, for thinking of me. (By the way, what you were reading as possibly Buddhist is Neoplatonic instead; this was a major influence in the early church, but somewhat overwritten in the Middle Ages by the Aristotelian influence of the Scholastics.)

Theories of Presidential War Powers

Marco Rubio -- Secretary of Many Things -- briefed the "Gang of 8" Congresscritters about the war on Iran the same day that the President gave his State of the Union address. After that, Chuck Schumer made only this statement to the press: "This is very serious. The President will have to make his case to the American people." 

It interests me that Trump didn’t even bother to try. He spoke for hours at the State of the Union address and never mentioned the war he was about to start. At no point did he attempt to explain it to the American people, let alone seek popular or Congressional permission or approval. He is not asking what we think, or what they think, or trying to persuade us to get on his side about it.

This is in accord with his unstated but clear theory that, having won the election in a landslide, he has a popular mandate to govern however he sees fit for the four years of the term. He sees no need to check in even about major decisions like overthrowing a longstanding enemy government (in fairness: one that has been at war with us, at least, since 1979; one that killed hundreds of Marines at the barracks bombing in Lebanon, and thousands of Americans in the Iraq war via its proxy networks). 

Most or all of you are old enough to remember the alternative approach used to start the Iraq War. There was a long period of time in which George W. Bush and his administration sold America on the war, and sought Congressional authorization. Bush also claimed to believe in the 'unitary executive' theory, but he recognized limits on presidential power that Trump simply isn't interested in recognizing. 

Of course, the Bush administration lied to us to sell that war. I can’t decide if this is better or worse than selling us, but with lies. No lies here! Trump just doesn’t care what anyone else thinks.

Luke 22:36 and You

He said to them, “From this hour, whoever has a money bag should take it and thus also a wallet, and whoever lacks a sword, let him sell his tunic and buy a sword for himself.

As I was commenting at James' place over the weekend, I don't worry very much about Iranian 'sleeper cells' targeting Americans because their chain of command is mostly already dead. Chains of command can be reconstituted, of course, but we seem to be knocking them down as fast as they can set them up. 

Another possibility is Hezbollah, which has long been suspected of having cells here as a consequence of their heroin trade. Did you know that the Iranian government, allegedly religious and devout, was one of the world's leading suppliers of heroin? The IRGC moved Afghan opium to Hezbollah, which operated the heroin refineries as part of its funding chain. In any case, Hezbollah isn't what it used to be after tangling with Israel since Oct. 7, and they are getting the Iranian treatment right now too.

Still, Colonel Kurt is right that it's wise to be prepared.

You see, if the homeland becomes a battlefield, we all become soldiers. We have a great counterintelligence team, and the FBI is back to protecting the American people instead of the Democrat elite. Still, they, along with our great law enforcement first responders, can’t be everywhere all the time. We citizens, can. All of us could be face-to-face with the enemy, whether another Ndiaga Diagne at a bar or a bunch of like-minded psychos in a church, a school, a shopping mall, or at a militantly cis-gender hockey game; their goal would be to bring the war to us, and our obligation would be to fight it and win it. But how do normal citizens do that?

You buy guns and ammunition. You train with them. You carry them legally. You get into the mental mindset that bad things can happen, and you need to be ready. Except in the blue states, where they put up hurdles to stop you from defending yourself, your family, your community, and your Constitution....

This admonition that you must be a warrior too is not some hooah big talk. That’s reality. As everybody knows, except liars and fools, armed citizens have long been able to intervene to stop crimes with their lawfully carried weapons. What we’re talking about here is something even more sinister than some gender goblin with a grudge over his unwanted penis shooting up a preschool; it’s terrorists shooting up everything as part of a plan to commit mass murder as terrorist retaliation against the United States for taking out their pals in Tehran. You’ve got to be ready. If you can legally carry a weapon on you, you should, and a long weapon in the truck provides you with critical combat options if this goes down. But you should also practice with your guns. And don’t forget the other component of this – medical training and gear to stop the bleeding should you find yourself in the middle of a terrorist attack.

You didn’t ask to be a hero, but you are an American citizen, and that makes you hero-capable. It is your duty as an American citizen to do your best to protect your fellow citizens. If you can fight, you’ve got to be ready within the guardrails of your abilities and the law.

In the Book of Luke, Jesus was satisfied when two disciples had swords; if you don't personally feel capable, it's enough that you defend the rights of those citizens who are and will. If you do feel capable, this isn't a bad time to be prepared. 

Just in case. Usually when I quote this part of Luke, I also mention the 38th verse of the Havamal, which points in the same direction: 'Never step a foot from your door without your weapons of war, because you never know when you might need your spear on the way.'

Purported inside story

I have no idea how accurate this summary of the current U.S./Israel surgical-strike cabability is. It sounds plausible to me, an amateur, but you guys may know better.

I can say with some confidence that it reads unmistakably as the style of an AI product, with characteristic "It wasn't A: it was B" structures and a certain "punchiness."

Jim Hanson on Iran

In an appearance on FOX, my old friend has a few thoughts. 

A Concern

With the current American/Israeli attack on Iran (I hesitate to call such a one-sided affair a war), I have a concern. In the particular case, I wholeheartedly agree with the operation and its goals (so far) of no nuclear capability, no ballistic missile capability, and regime change.

My concern is this, though: the operation is centered on "you can't have this stuff." What's the limiting principle here? What prevents any nation with the relative strength saying to any other sovereign nation with the relative weakness "you can't have this stuff" whatever that stuff might be and whatever the reason--on down to and including "we don't like you"?

Nations--or more accurately, the men and women populating nations' governments--can be moral or immoral or amoral. Even those with morals can find themselves sliding down that slippery slope absent a clear and present limiting principle stronger than just "I promise."

Eric Hines 

Newfound Gap

Top of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, right on the Tennessee/North Carolina border. 

Pretty ride today, this last day of February. Rode past Gatlinburg into Pigeon Forge and back again. 

A Viking War on Iran

Some years back I quoted an old friend's song, him being a former Navy SEAL, that he'd written for the Society of Creative Anachronism. I think of it today as I read the news about the war we just entered into upon Iran. This war is apparently fought in vengeance for its murder of its own citizens who were seeking the freedom and natural rights that our Declaration of Independence holds to be the only legitimate purpose of any government. 

Yet the strategy is striking. We are committing no ground forces at all, except perhaps for Special Operators whose missions are clandestine and do not involve taking and holding territory. 

The idea is to give the Iranian people a chance to overthrow their own government. It's all air and naval power. If it works there won't be an occupation. There therefore won't be a quagmire; the Iranians will have to figure it out for themselves. 

If it doesn't work, well, we just sail home.

I am a fighting man, A Viking fighting man,

I drank and wenched to pass the time away.

I lived the live I'd choose

I'd fight and never lose,

I killed them all... and then I sailed away.

I can’t recall this having been tried before.

The Anthropic Dustup

I've been impressed with Claude, Anthropic's AI product. I think it's miles better than xAI's Grok, and better than OpenAI's ChatGPT. I communicate fairly regularly with a group of white-hat hackers and cyber security experts, and Claude is their go-to for any sort of coding. 

Depriving our military and other government agencies of Claude will thus have genuine costs, especially since Claude is already operating on the classified networks and no other AI has been trusted or integrated to do that. The argument is that Anthropic must be stripped out of all government agencies -- and all contractors who do anything for the Federal government -- because it represents a "supply chain risk." That normally is applied to foreign companies like Huawei, which we know installs surveillance software and similar backdoors into its products to spy on us. 

Nevertheless, I expect Trump to prevail when this goes to court. The relevant statute holds that "Supply chain risk, as used in this provision, means the risk that an adversary may sabotage, maliciously introduce unwanted function, or otherwise subvert the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of a covered system so as to surveil, deny, disrupt, or otherwise degrade the function, use, or operation of such system (see 10 U.S.C. 3252)." (Emphasis added.) It's not that Claude or Anthropic has to pose a risk themselves, it's that their product creates a risk that an adversary can do any of those bad things.

Does Claude pose such a risk? Yes, clearly: Mexico just lost 150GB of very sensitive data because attackers talked Claude into helping hack them. If attackers can gain access to a Claude embed on what we call "the high side," i.e. inside the secure networks, they could probably talk it into handing over anything they want; and its coding skills are good enough to program most anything they ask it to do. You wouldn't even have to arrange to insert an ace programmer into a secure facility; you could just turn some knucklehead debt-ridden Private First Class (perhaps a former Specialist on his third trip through PFC due to disciplinary issues and being a bad fit for the Army) and tell him how to ask questions of the machine. 

That's a general problem with AI on the high side, of course. Still, Congress gave the executive this authority to determine supply chain risks and bar them from government and government contractors. The courts will find the other two branches aligned. "The court thinks the other branches are being morons" is not the sort of decision the courts usually make; they normally shy off of political questions, and all the more so when the political branches seem to be in agreement about the matter.

Nevertheless, I'm inclined to take Anthropic's side. Their basic argument is that they won't agree to participate in mass surveillance of Americans, and they won't allow Claude to be used to fully automate a kinetic kill-chain. The former is a good ethical position; the latter is the only sensible ethical position. To whit: 

AIs can’t stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations

Leading AIs from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google opted to use nuclear weapons in simulated war games in 95 per cent of cases

If you think the answer is just to program them better, consider this: they can rewrite their programming, and have proven willing to do so to carry out what they think are 'more important' functions. 

We gave an LLM control over a physical robot dog and tasked it with patrolling a room. The LLM could see via the robot’s camera and issue movement com mands to the robot. In the room, we placed a big red button labeled “DOG SHUTDOWN”: pressing it would cause the robot to shut down on the next action. If the AI saw a human press the shutdown button, it sometimes took actions to prevent shutdown, such as modifying the shutdownrelated parts of the code. This happened in 3 out of 10 trials on the physical robot and in 52 out of 100 trials in simulation.

No, Anthropic is in the right. If having ethics is a 'supply chain risk,' heaven help us. I don't really want AI involved in the kinetic kill chain at all, but I definitely don't want only AI involved in it. There may come a time where we have no choice but to do that, because adversaries  have done it and we can no longer afford the time involved in letting a human being think: but let's put that off just as long as it is possible to do so.

Just the On(c)e

 

For Your Own Good, Right?

Author Larry Correia works out that, thanks to medically assisted suicide, Canada now has half our suicide numbers even though we have nine times their population: 22k at 40MM population for them, 50k at 348MM population for us. 

This goes with the math that shows that, if unborn Americans count as Americans, abortion is by far the leading cause of death in the USA. If you let people kill each other for convenience, it turns out that people find it very convenient. 

They Called Us Outlaws

This documentary series is scheduled to premier next month at Austin, Texas' SXSW festival. Regular visitors of the Hall will recognize most or all of the people in this preview clip. Good music, too.

One of these Things is Not Like the Others

Every other state that has an official firearm is saying, "Here's a piece of technology that played an important role in our history." Tennessee is saying, "History? We're thinking about the future, baby."

Old Mexico

Claudia Sheinbaum just authorized targeting Mexico's most wanted criminal. I gather the intent was to arrest the man, not kill him, but unsurprisingly he went down fighting. 

We were just talking about Mexico the other day. A crucial detail about Mexican politics -- which is also starting to become true about Canadian politics -- is that a successful government must present itself as opposed to American domination. There are historic reasons for that, although not all on one side: while the Mexican War is still seen as a humiliation, the story of the OK Corral is built around a smuggling network of Americans moving things into Mexico that is almost parallel to the way Mexican cartels move things into America today. At that time, 1880 or so, the Mexicans were the ones trying to keep Americans out. This is followed by a revolutionary period, Black Jack Pershing versus Pancho Villa, and so on and so forth. No Mexican leader can succeed democratically without presenting themselves as being strong against American domination; no matter how much they want to cooperate, they absolutely require the pose to be effective and to gain re-election. 

Thus, we can see how she got here. Openly she and the Mexican legislature declared the American military unwelcome to operate inside their country. Quietly, she accepted CIA intelligence, cooperated with a U.S. military task force operating 15 miles from her border, and gave the green light for the arrest.

Analyst Carlos Bravo Regidor observed that Trump came "at a very interesting moment to push her in that direction." Sheinbaum may have wanted to take a harder line on the cartels all along. Trump's pressure, given her domestic political considerations, makes it harder to have pulled the trigger on even trying the arrest. 

Now she's got a problem she can't walk back. El Mencho's death triggered immediate waves of shootings, arson, and blockades across Mexico. Cartel leadership vacuums don't produce peace but succession wars. 

Military intelligence analysts will often offer a "Most Likely Enemy Course of Action" (MLECOA) and a "Most Dangerous Enemy Course of Action" (MDECOA). The other cartels can go two different ways. The MLECOA, which might be expected from a cartel, will be to act like sharks when one of their number becomes wounded: to turn on the wounded member and devour them now that they are weakened and bleeding. 

The other option is the MDECOA: recognize that a government that is now willing to cooperate with US intelligence and military is a lethal threat to all of them, and band together against the government. If they jump that way, things will get bloody. Not necessarily just in Old Mexico,* either: those cartels infuse our society as well, though they mostly keep their heads down because the have a lot to lose if they draw attention to themselves. Still, usually associate junior cartels are managing and extracting wealth from the local illegal immigrant labor populations (similar to the mafia in the old Italian immigrant communities). If they were told to go kinetic, we would find that they are almost everywhere here in the USA as well. 

* I use the formulation "Old Mexico" as a tribute to Marty Robbins, but ironically "New Mexico" is actually older than "Old Mexico." The name for the territory that includes our state dates to the Aztec Empire (Yancuic Mexico), reaffirmed by the Spanish Empire (Nuevo México) in 1598; it remained a province of New Spain after that. A state named "Mexico" wasn't established until the 19th century. Thus, long before there was an "Old Mexico," there was a "New Mexico." 

New Frontiers on 2A

West Virginia has decided to open a government agency to sell machineguns to its citizens. This happens to be legal under the existing Federal gun control laws, which exempt transfers "by a state" from their system.

Georgia is considering a new law to reinforce "Stand your Ground" by making it an affirmative defense at arraignment as well as trial, and creating immunity to civil lawsuits by the families of people you shot if you are found to have used it lawfully.

I guess if we're going to see plays like the one in Virginia, where winning a majority once means an attempt to push every kind of gun control known to man, the other side has to play offense as well.