Philosophy instructor, recreational writer, humorless vegetarian.
713 stories
·
6 followers

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal - Eat

2 Shares


Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
If the comic was too long, please run an AI summary.


Today's News:

Can we settle space, should we settle space, and have we really thought this through?

The Weinersmiths investigate perhaps the biggest questions humanity has: whether and how to become multiplanetary.

A City on Mars - Now available in Paperback!



Read the whole story
istoner
3 hours ago
reply
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete

A billion people would be plenty to sustain civilisation …

1 Comment and 2 Shares

… as long as they are healthy, well fed and well educated

Much of the panic about falling birth rates can be dispelled once we realise that (barring catastrophe) there will almost certainly be more people alive in 2100 than there were in 2000. But what about the distant future? Dean Spears, co-author of After the Spike has kindly provided me with projections showing that with likely declines in fertility the world population will decline by half each century after 2100, reaching one billion around 2400. Would that be too few to sustain a modern civilisation ?

We can answer this pretty easily from past experience. In the second half of 20th century, the modern economy consisted of the member countries of the Organization For Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Originally including the countries of Western Europe and North America, and soon extended to include Australia and Japan, the OECD countries were responsible for the great majority of the global industrial economy, including manufacturing, modern services, and technological innovation.

Except for some purchases of raw materials from the “Global South”, produced by a relatively small part of the labour force, the OECD, taken as a whole, was self-sufficient in nearly everything required for a modern economy. So, the population of the OECD in the second half of last century provides an upper bound to the number of humans needed to sustain such an economy. That number did not reach one billion until 1980.

Things have changed since then with the modernization of much of Asia and the rise of China as the new “workshop of the world” in manufacturing. But the history is still relevant.

We can also look at the US> Even today, trade accounts for only around 20 per cent of US economic output. Given a US population of 400 million, it is reasonable to suppose that the production of goods and services elsewhere for export to the US might account for another 100 million people. Most of the needs of these people could be met from within the US economy, but let’s suppose that they employ another 100 million in their own countries. That’s still only about 600 million people who, between them, produce all the food they need, the manufactures that characterised the indsustrial economy of the 19th and 20th century, most of the information technology the world relies on, and a steady flow of technological and scientific innovation.

At the lower end of the scale, Charlis Stross has estimated a minimum requirement of 100 million people, a number that might increase in a society even more technologically complex than our own. But since current demographic trends won’t produce that number for nearly a millennium, we probably don’t need to worry (unless we want to colonise space, the context of Stross’ estimate)

In summary is no reason to think a billion people would be too few to sustain a technological economy. But would a world of a billion people look like?

It’s foolish to try to say much in detail about life hundreds of years from now. What could a contemporary of Shakespeare have to say about the London of today? But London and other cities existed long before Shakespeare and seem likely to continue far into the future (if we can get there). And many of the services cities have always provided will be needed as long as people are people. So, it might be worth imagining how a world population of one billion might be distributed across cities, towns and rural areas.

Australia, with 5 per cent of the world’s land mass and a current population of 25 million, provides a convenient illustration. A billion people would populate 40 Australias, with twice Australia’s current population density. However, around half of Australia is desert or semi-arid (estimates range from 18 to 70 per cent, depending on the classification, and not many people live there. So, the population density of a billion-person world would look pretty much like that of urban and regional Australia today.

Opinions in Australia (as elsewhere in the world) are pretty sharply divided as to whether a bigger population would be a good thing, but it’s unusual for anyone to suggest that we are spread too thinly. On the contrary, congestion, sprawl and the conflict between environmental preservation and housing are seen as the price to be paid for a larger population.

A billion person world could not support mega-cities with the current populations of Tokyo and Delhi. But it could easily include a city the size of London, New York, Rio, or Seoul (around 10 million each) on every continent, and dozens the size of Sydney, Barcelona, Montreal, Nairobi, Santiago or Singapore (around 5 million each). Such a collection of cities would meet the needs of even the most avid lovers of urban life in its various forms. Meanwhile, there would be plenty of space for those who prefer the county

With only a billion people we wouldn’t need all the space in the world. The project of rewilding half the world, now a utopian dream, could be fulfilled, while leaving more than enough room for farming and forestry, as well as whatever rural arcadias followers of the simple life could imagine and implement.

Read the whole story
istoner
3 days ago
reply
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
DGA51
3 days ago
reply
Assuming the planet doesn't overheat.
Central Pennsyltucky

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal - Canon

1 Comment and 4 Shares


Click here to go see the bonus panel!

Hovertext:
I don't know if we need any kind of formal Canon of unread texts. I just think it'd be nice if we all failed to read the same cultural touchstones, you know?


Today's News:
Read the whole story
istoner
9 days ago
reply
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
jlvanderzwan
8 days ago
reply
Sayre's Law totally applies here, right??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre%27s_law

“Fifth Philosopher’s Song”

2 Shares

A million million spermatozoa,
All of them alive;
Out of their cataclysm but one poor Noah
Dare hope to survive.

And among that billion minus one
Might have chanced to be
Shakespeare, another Newton, a new Donne —
But the One was Me.

Shame to have ousted your betters thus,
Taking ark while the others remained outside!
Better for all of us, froward Homunculus,
If you’d quietly died!

— Aldous Huxley

Read the whole story
istoner
10 days ago
reply
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete

2025 Great River Shakespeare Festival in Winona

1 Comment
It's summer, and that means it's time for my favorite theater vacay in Minnesota - Great River Shakespeare Festival in lovely riverside Winona. For over 20 years, GRSF has been producing excellent theater, primarily but not exclusively Shakespeare, within a festival that includes community engagement events, making it all feel like a fun, welcoming, theater camp. With two shows performing in rep with an acting company of nine, you could make the two-hour drive down along the river and see both shows in one day (Friday or Saturday), or stay in Winona one night and get back home to continue your weekend, or stay several nights and enjoy all of the nature and activities that are to be found in Winona. This was my 7th year attending the festival and it was once again a fun, relaxing, engaging weekend. Now in the post-season pre-Fringe lull in #TCTheater is a great time to get out of town, enjoy summer in Minnesota, and experience theater in the festival setting! Shows continue for two more week/ends, so make your plans now!

This season's Shakespearean offerings are an excellent pair of plays that at first glance seem totally disparate - the Romeo and Juliet and The Comedy of Errors. But as Board Chair Kris Blanchard notes in the program, "Both productions show a disjointed community - one that is harshly and violently divided, and another that has closed itself off to visitors. One community is only brought back together through tragedy; the other through hilarity." Unfortunately, the ideas of division and exclusion are extremely relevant and relatable right now, and it feels healing and hopeful to watch these two examples of a way out and through to more connection, acknowledging our shared humanity.

Juliet (Serena Phillip) and the grieving nurse
(Stephanie Lambourn, photo by Dan Norman)
Romeo and Juliet
I've seen Romeo and Juliet a million times, but ever like this. Director H. Adam Harris (formerly based in the Twin Cities and now the Artistic & Audience Engagement Associate at South Coast Repertory in California) has imagined it as a memory play, taking clues from the text itself. The prologue of the play announces the ending, and since Juliet's nurse, typically played as a comic character, states early in the play that she lost a child around Juliet's age (something I had forgotten or not even really noticed before), he chose to place the story within her memory. This works incredibly well, with aid from the lighting and sound design that clue us in to certain moments. The nurse (beautifully played by Stephanie Lambourn, returning to GRSF after years away) is often on stage watching the action, reacting to it with pleasure or despair, and at key moments pauses, her face etched in grief, or repeats lines to greater meaning. In many ways, this is the nurse's story, although of course the young lovers' story still looms large and is very affecting, with excellent and endearing performances by Alessandro Yokoyama and Serena Phillip. But seen through the eyes of a loved one, losing another child and being reminded of the first loss, the tragic and senseless deaths hit a deeper chord. To see a 400+ year old play that you've seen so many times you could recite some of the lines, and find something new there, is a delightful surprise.

Antipholus (William Sturdivant) and Dromio
(Emily Fury Daly, photo by Dan Norman)
The Comedy of Errors
Shakespeare's screwball comedy is a great antidote to his greatest tragedy. Containing many of his favorite tropes - identical twins, mistaken identities, shipwrecks, sudden reunions - it is one of only two Shakespeare plays that take place entirely in one day (as we learned in the pre-show - more on that later). Two sets of identical twins, one servants to the other, were separated at a young age, and on this day find themselves in the same place - Ephesus, where one master/servant pair lives. The other pair (also with identical names, Antipholus and Dromio) arrives from the hated Syracuse (people who are forbidden from entering Ephesus, with a lot rhetoric and othering that sounds familiar), and hijinks ensue as everyone in town, including Antipholus' wife, and the twins themselves, mistakes one for the other. Adding to the fun, each set of twins is played by one actor - William Sturdivant as Antipholus and Emily Fury Daly as Dromio - literally running all over the stage, changing hats and jackets to switch from one twin to the other, and sometimes acting opposite a ball on a stick as their twin. Directed by GRSF's Artistic Director Doug Scholz-Carlson, who introduces the show with a couple of cast members, explaining the conceit and having fun with the idea of casting the 20-some characters with just nine actors (which also allows for a clever use of Max Headroom, and a bucket on a stick), it's a madcap silly romp of a comedy.

R&J (Alessandro Yokoyama and Serena Phillip)
(photo by Dan Norman)
GRSF currently performs in the DuFresne Performing Arts Center on the campus of Winona State University, but next year they will be moving to the Historic Masonic Temple just a couple blocks away. This will allow them to have a year-round space, with everything under one roof. For their final year at the DuFresne, they have moved the audience back to the seats, after a couple of years of having risers on the stage creating a more intimate thrust performance space. Both shows perform on the same set (designed by Leah Ramillano), with wooden slats framing the proscenium, and a platform creating multiple performance levels. But the two shows look and feel different thanks to differences in lighting, sound, and props. The Comedy of Errors has an '80s aesthetic, allowing for some fun with neon colors, shoulder pads, and big hair. Costume designer John Merrit has created both these wild '80s look, and the retro/modern costumes for Romeo and Juliet, combining corsets with denim for a uniquely gorgeous look. (Lighting design by Avery Reagan, sound design by Matthew Tibbs, props design by Karl Gfall.)

This small but mighty nine-person company really works well together; most perform multiple roles in both shows. In addition to those mentioned above, the company also includes longtime GRSF company member Michael Fitzpatrick as Lord Capulet and the Antipholuses' father, Gavin Mueller as the friar and a merchant, and Diana Coates and Eliana Row as Antipohlus' wife Adriana and her sister, and Romeo's pals Mercutio and Benvolio (among others). The casting of the various roles in the two plays is very well done, with actors having main roles in one show playing smaller parts in the other. Sometimes parallels can be drawn between an actor's roles in the two plays, such as Stephanie Lambourn playing a mother who lost her child in both plays.

Another important part of the company are the six understudies, a group of MFA students from University of Tennessee Knoxville spending the summer in Winona. In addition to understudying all roles in both plays, they also perform the pre-show "Green Show" (outside on the lawn, weather and sprinklers permitting), which is kind of a mash-up up many Shakespeare plays around the theme of the play we're about to see. They also provide useful handouts with character relationships, and tell us a bit about the play. As if that's not enough to keep them busy, they're also doing their own play, Two Gentleman of Verona, performing at various locations in the area.

In addition to the plays, GRSF also has activities and camps for kids, ice cream socials after Friday and Saturday night shows, Thursday evening post-show discussions, and company conversations at Blooming Grounds Coffee every Sunday at 11am, which you can also watch on Facebook. The leadership team (Artistic Director Doug Scholz-Carlson, Managing Director Aaron Young, and Co-Associate Artistic Director Melissa Maxwell) introduces every performance and are available for questions, comments, and discussions before and after the show. All of the above contributes to the welcoming community feel of the festival.

If you're a #TCTheater fan, Great River Shakespeare Festival is something you must experience at least once, as Minnesota's only professional Shakespeare festival (that I know of). It's a lovely two-hour drive along the river with fun stops along the way (Red Wing, Lake City, the Laura Ingalls Wilder Museum and sites in Pepin). Once you get there, there are many hotels and AirBnBs in the area, and if you're a Bed & Breakfast person like I am, I highly recommend the Carriage House B&B across the street from campus - a location that can't be beat, with unique and comfortable rooms and delicious breakfasts that will fuel you for the day. Other fun activities in Winona include the excellent Minnesota Marine Art Museum, several Minnesota State Parks in the area, a beautiful hike up to the Sugar Loaf overlooking the town, kayaking on Lake Winona, biking on area trails, taking a cruise on the river, and multiple shops and restaurants.

the view of Winona from Sugar Loaf Bluff
(photo credit: @cherryandspoon Instagram)
Read the whole story
istoner
10 days ago
reply
I went the week before, our first trip to GRSF. Amtrak service was super convenient from St Paul. Comedy of Errors, with a couple of important insertions from Sir Thomas More, was especially good. Very likely to make this an annual summer trip
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete

Anti-PC Grok as Corpus Linguistics

1 Share


As you may have heard, Elon Musk's AI chatbot Grok went full-blast Nazi today, culminating in it calling itself "MechaHitler" and praising its namesake as someone who would have "crushed" leftist "anti-white hate." (Ironically, or not, the "leftist" account it was referring to was itself almost certainly a neo-Nazi account pretending to be Jewish).

What caused this, er, "malfunction"? Well according to Grok, Musk "built me this way from the start." But the more immediate answer appears to be an update Musk pushed urging the bot to be less "politically correct" -- an instruction Grok interpreted as, well, a mandate to indulge in Nazism.

This raises an interesting implication. Many legal scholars (particularly textualists and originalists) have recently become enamored with a "corpus linguistics" as an analytical tool for understanding the meaning of legal texts. Corpus linguistics tries to discern what words or phrases mean by taking a large body of relevant works (the corpus) and figuring out how the words were actually used in context. If originalism is about the "ordinary public meaning" of the words in legal texts at the time they were enacted, corpus linguistics offers an alternative to cherry-picking usages from a few high-profile sources (such as the Federalist Papers), sources which are likely polemical, may not actually be representative of common usages, and are highly prone to selection bias. Instead, we can identify patterns across large bodies of training text to figure out how the relevant public generally uses the term (which may be quite different from how a particular politician deploys it in a speech).

Now take that insight and apply it to the term "politically correct". This is, of course, a contested term, and critics often contend it (or more accurately, opposition to it) is a dog whistle for far-right racist, antisemitic, and otherwise bigoted ideologies. Those who label themselves "not-PC" typically contest that reading, at least in circumstances where owning up to it would risk significant consequences. So is someone calling themselves "un-PC" a signifier of bigotry or not? This could have significant legal stakes -- imagine a piece of legislation which had a disparate impact on a racial minority community and which its proponents justified as a stand against "political correctness". When seeking to determine whether the law was motivated by discriminatory intent, a judge might need to ask whether opposition to political correctness should be understood as a confession of racial animus.

Under normal circumstances, one suspects that inquiry will resolve on ideological lines -- those hostile to the law and suspicious of "anti-PC" talk inferring racial animus, those sympathetic to the law or anti-PC politics rejecting the notion. And no doubt, both sides could muster examples where "PC" was used in a manner that supports their priors. 

But corpus linguistics suggests shifting away from an individual speaker's idiosyncratic and self-serving disavowals and instead ask "what is the ordinary public meaning of 'not politically correct?'" And it would answer that question by taking a large body of texts and seeing how, in practice, terms like "politically correct" or "not PC" are used. 

Returning to Grok, what Grok's journey from "don't be PC" to "MechaHitler" kind of just demonstrated is that, at least with respect to the corpus it was trained upon, the ordinary usage of "not PC" is exactly what critics say it is -- a correlate of raging bigotry and ethnic hatred.

I don't want to overstate the case -- a lot depends on what exact corpus Grok uses to train itself and whether it properly corresponds to the relevant public. Nonetheless, I do think this inadvertent experiment is substantial evidence that, when you hear someone describe themselves as "not-PC", it is reasonable to hear that as meaning they're a racist -- because that's what "not-PC" ordinarily means. And if your conservative/originalist friends object, tell them that corpus linguistics backs you up.

Read the whole story
istoner
21 days ago
reply
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories