hypocrisy haiku and limerick - poems 39 and 40

drab hypocrisy

lubricates the social gears

of dark winter nights

a fine upstanding young hypocrite

took a sip from a glass with filth in it

he made not a sound

as he swallowed it down

and then praised the host for his grace and wit

origami haiku and limerick - poems 37 and 38

ori means to fold

miura is the magic

of spring satellites

an astrophysicist Japanese

found a way to stack with ease

his name is Miura

and today it's true you're a

bit smarter for reading this piece

bamboo haiku and limerick - poems 35 and 36

from summer monsoons

the great green bamboo shoots bloom 

their fate: panda lunch

there is plant called wong chuk

famous for being hard to pluck

but once cut and aged

it is fit for a sage

a brings a yamabushi good luck

Houthis Counter US Strikes with Sarcasm

SANA'A - In a statement broadcast on the Houthi-controlled Al-Masirah network, spokesman Mohamed Ahmed Mahmoud Hamid said "Oh, you really got us now, you dastardly Yankees, for you blew up our *other* helicopter that we weren't using. I guess we'd better surrender now." He then paused to puff on a hookah and blow smoke rings for several minutes. "Do you fools have any idea how long we have been at war? By Allah, we've been fighting each other off an on for 60 years, and that started before the Saudis started bombing us 14 years ago. By my count, we've outlasted your last three presidents. And if you somehow win, oh wow, big deal. We're the poorest country in the Middle East, you know."

In response, State Department Spokesperson Joanna Gambolputty criticized Hamid's remarks as "inflammatory and counterproductive" adding that she had been repeatedly assured that Yemen "was, like, getting a ton of food, medicine, or whatever from USAID". Gambolputty went out to add that "the situation would not have deteriorated without certain dangerous and unprecedented budget cuts. If America can't be the world's food pantry and piggy bank, who will? This is not the time to be leading from behind in the field of handing out money, food, or whatever to countries most Americans don't know anything about." On X, Elon Musk quoted this statement and responded with several poop and flame emojis.  

Meanwhile, Israel has announced a new policy of only targeting terrorist groups that start with the letter H. According to IDF Major General Bagel Shmeir, "We can now credibly claim to have de-escalated the situation and now have a free hand to bomb Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in Syria if need be. It makes sense since we have already bombed Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis. Just to be clear, however, we retain the right to bomb any country for any length of time regardless of what letter its name starts with. This means you, Iran." Shmeir went on to announce a new program whereby Americans many purchase the debris resulting from the interception of rockets and missiles aimed at Israel. "It's our personal way of thanking the American people for their decades of loyal support. By your genuine shrapnel souvenir today!"

Antiwar activists gathered in front of the Pentagon to protest the latest strikes. At the protest was Joanna Gambolputty, who was fired while this article was being written. Sporting new dreadlocks and a tie-dye t-shirt, Gambolputty led fellow protestors in chants while other recently fired government employees attempted to demolish the Pentagon by calling it racist. Later, the protestors sang Kumbayah and burned MAGA hats until they were dispersed by the arrival of food trucks serving cuisine of various nationalities. Of the protests, President Trump posted on X that "Thanks for supporting local businesses. Now please go home and take a shower. MAGA!"

Read Futility Closet - It has the translation of Kipling's Runes in his Just So Stories

Behold:

Byplay - Futility Closet

In the rough draft of the Bill of Rights, the right to keep and bear arms was the 5th.

That version is:

***

A well-regulated militia, being composed of the body of the people, being the bell security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no one religiously serupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.

***

https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/bor 

So they cleared up the whole conscientious objector thing too way back then.

The second proposed amendment was:

***

No law varying the compensation to the members of Congress shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

***

That one got shelved for a while. It was ratified as the 27th amendment in 1992!

***

 The proposed congressional pay amendment was largely forgotten until 1982, when Gregory Watson, a 19-year-old student at the University of Texas at Austin, wrote a paper for a government class in which he claimed that the amendment could still be ratified. He later launched a nationwide campaign to complete its ratification.[2][3] The amendment eventually became part of the United States Constitution, effective May 5, 1992

***

Planet of the Kindergartners

This is an idea that's been slowly coalescing in my mind for a while. Basically, I think that the vast majority of people are stuck at the emotional and intellectual level of 6-year-olds. Take a look at the headlines. Almost all the top stories are about something someone said that made someone else upset. Childish insults have been a staple of adult discourse since the invention of writing. These attacks ads from the election of 1800 are a good example:

Attack Ads, Circa 1800

Trump and his opponents taunt each other constantly. It's pathetic, and it will probably never change. 

It seems we are trapped on the Planet of the Kindergartners.

sardine haiku and limerick - poems 33 and 34

a sea food bargain

Mediterranean fish

is not just for Lent

they famously gather in great shoals

as they dodge the fisherman patrols

but once in the net

their fate it is set

and the sardines become food for the proles

On Anger

I think just about everyone has been told at some point to control their emotions. That advice is misguided. We can't control your emotions because they're like reflexes or sensations. Emotions are the mental equivalent of sweating or shivering. What we can control are our reactions, specifically what we choose to think, say, and do in response to our emotions. 

It's better to think of anger as a tool meant to prepare the body for a physical confrontation. It is the fight in the fight or flight response. So anger like other emotions is useful, but it is not the most important one. Fear is the most useful emotion as its purpose is to prevent people from getting hurt or killed. It can be said that another purpose of anger is to induce fear in another and thus prevent or halt an altercation. 

If we go through the other three of the five basic emotions, disgust protects us from disease, sadness cues empathy in others, and joy is the reward of doing things that fit a person's particular physical and mental nature. Joy is often found by accident, so rather than chasing it, it's better to stumble upon in it while wandering. 

Of all the emotions, anger seems to have the strongest link to memory, though fear is a close second. This explains the prevalence of PTSD among people who have experienced extreme danger and thus the resulting anger and fear. From a survival standpoint, it makes sense that bad memories would be more vivid and lasting as avoiding harm is more important than gaining pleasure. 

A challenge for people who are slow to show anger is that sometimes that is viewed as a sign of weakness and thus an invitation for increasing provocations. Anger must be expressed properly. It is better to vent than explode. 

Nixon: land-based ICBMs are the only missiles with first-strike capability

At the 3:35 mark of this video:

A Lesson In Negotiating With Russians - YouTube

He also says that land-based missiles are the key to any nuclear strategy.

It's such a revealing statement and yet it's attracted very little attention. 

math haiku and limerick - poems 31 and 32

six-sided snowflake

symmetry of rotation

stacks of cannonballs

Kepler was once given a task

that was like a question he'd asked

how well can I fit

the ammo on a ship

"hexagonal close packing", he gasped

How I'd like to teach

I'd strongly prefer to have only two graded assignments per semester or quarter with the higher of the two being the student's final grade for that period. That way if they do badly on one it doesn't hurt their final grade. In fact, if they get an A on the midterm, they wouldn't even need to show up for the final or indeed the classes the second half the semester/quarter. Fewer assignments mean less grading and also less need for make-up assignments. I like to keep things as simple as possible. Unfortunately, many teachers judge themselves and are judged by the amount of paper they compel their students to shuffle, with more = better. 

Homework is best left optional in my view. Too many students don't do it, put in minimal effort, cheat, copy, or try to do it at the beginning of class just before it is checked. High school students are especially prone to such acts. The students who want to excel will do it of their own accord, and the rest will avoid it like the plague. I have no interest in being a disciplinarian or a taskmaster, hence my reluctance to assign it. Of course, in most schools, homework is required by the administration whether the teachers like it or not. 

The exams I'd prefer to give would take an hour and would involve solving one somewhat challenging problem, perhaps one involving a proof. Since that would take a dozen or more steps, there would be plenty of chances for partial credit. Thus, a student who paid attention and made an honest effort would be very likely to get a passing grade, though maybe only a C or a D. Only good students who get the right answer deserve an A or a B in my view. Basically, a fair class should be easy to pass, but hard to get a good grade in. 

In the long run, grades don't matter much. Scores on tests like the ASVAB and SAT matter way more, as does passing licensing exams like the Fundamentals of Engineering test I took shortly before graduating college. Cs get degrees as the old saying goes, and anyone who can chew gum without crapping their pants can get a high school diploma in the US.  

Fortune and fame aren't worth it

The most famous people in history at least until the mid-20th century were all politicians, generals, along with a sprinkling of rich people, artists, and intellectuals. There weren't really famous people from any other category before then. Today, the most famous people are politicians, rich people, actors, musicians, and athletes. At least we have some more variety now. 

And what does all that fame get them? Mainly criticism and a lack of privacy. You have a lot more freedom as non-celebrity as only a small group of people even know what you say and do, much less care about it. In any case, fortune and fame often go together. It's hard to get one without ending up with a lot of the other. Money and power always find each other, hence the intense competition to succeed in politics. 

When I was younger, I had dreams of somehow making it into the history books and thus achieve a sort of immortality. It took a long time for me to realize how foolish I'd been. Pursuing excellence is good, but it's best not to go much further than that. It takes wisdom to understand that having enough is better than having too much. It's best to make peace with the fact that we will all be forgotten within a century or so of our demise unless we were exceptionally prominent in the areas historians judge as important.

A wise ancient Roman said: if glory comes after death, then I am in no hurry.

The lives of lottery winners before and after winning shows that sudden riches are quickly lost, and this is true as well for highly paid athletes and celebrities. A better goal is to become what I call comfortably poor. By that I mean, having enough money to pay for all your needs with little to no income. Of course, this is easier when you live frugally. That mainly entails not having expensive habits or tastes.

In the end, the only thing really worth having besides health is freedom.  

Thucydides said: the key to happiness is freedom and the key to freedom is courage. That might be the wisest thing anyone's ever said. 

On working dead-end jobs

There are many kinds of dead-end jobs. For me, the key aspect is a job that you do not enjoy any part of. I suspect many people consider their jobs dead-end even if they are relatively easy with good pay and benefits. 

If you need the money, it's best to work if you can, especially if others are dependent on you. Otherwise, why work a job you hate? Life is short and should be enjoyed. At least that's the way I see it.

By my own definition above, I've spent most of my working life in dead-end jobs. I don't want to do it again if I can avoid it. Fortunately, I believe I can somehow make a living in a comfortable way. 

A journey of thousand miles begins with one step, and it doesn't matter how slowly you move as long as you don't stop. It's best to keep such thoughts in mind when heading into new territory. 

We in the 21st century are lucky in that we are not condemned as our ancestors were to a lifetime of a drudgery on a farm. Why not make the most of that freedom? 

It can be hard to escape a dead-end job, but it is always worth it. Living frugally is an excellent defense besides having many other benefits. 

Aristotle's Wheel Paradox vs. Coin Rotation Paradox

Compare & Contrast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle%27s_wheel_paradox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coin_rotation_paradox

Put another way: movement along a curved path is not the same as linear motion. Also, coupled rotation requires either a differential mechanism or slippage.

Teaching the test?

The above phrase is often meant as a pejorative, though the superior alternative is rarely elaborated upon. One such method from Hungary can be found here: 

https://bsmeducation.com/about/wolves-and-sheep/

The work of Paul Lockhart in this area is also worth reading. His basic thesis is that actual mathematicians rarely care about the practical applications of their ideas, and so the proper way to teach math is to treat it like art or music. That is, it is an expression of creativity with a strong aspect of play.

Common standardized tests like the SAT have a math section with about 60 questions with about 2.5 minutes max per question. Each question is about a different topic, so a well-prepared student will have been taught about each of those topics at some point.

These critical topics include: Pythagorean theorem, quadratic formula, binomial theorem, similar triangles, order of operations, solving simultaneous equations by elimination, etc. There are not that many topics and it would be easy enough for a competent teacher to cover them all in a school year. 

Ideally, students should be presented with unfamiliar problems and given a chance to use their creativity to figure them out on their own. Part of the joy of learning comes from discovery and the aspect of play. 

Instead, what usually happens, at least in most American classrooms, is that the teacher shows the students exactly how to do each problem and then assigns a few dozen nearly identical practice problems. I've heard this method called "drill and kill", and it seems an appropriately dour name. 

Part of the problem is that many math teachers themselves are not particularly good at nor interested in math. Far too many of them see math as formulas and algorithms to be memorized and regurgitated. The problem with that philosophy is that it leads to students who think they are good at math but actually are only good at following instructions. 

Bottom line, "drill and kill" has got to go and the cornerstone of "teaching the test" should be always letting the students try the problem first before the teacher explains the solution. It's also important to remember the Pareto principle in that only a relatively small number of concepts are going to be asked about on standardized tests. 

Should You Join the Army?

The following comments are broadly true of the US military, but since the Army is the only branch I have firsthand experience with, the usual caveats apply. So take what comes below with as much salt as you like. 

Here are good reasons for joining the Army: job training, money, always wanted to do it

And here are bad reasons for joining: travel, adventure, bragging rights

You can get excitement, a challenge, etc without agreeing to a multi-year commitment that might get you hurt or killed. Even being stuck in a miserable situation is something worth avoiding. 

Popular entertainment often imply that the hardest parts of military life are combat (something relatively few experience) or the physical rigors of training (heavy exercise, lack of sleep, and so on). I was almost 31 when I joined, so my perspective on hardship was different.

There are many hoops to jump through in the Army, and no matter how many you get through, there always seems to be another one. That gets tiresome. 

I expected petty harassment at basic training, so it didn't bother me. Then there was another round at DLI (Defense Language Institute), and more rounds at AIT (Advanced Individual Training) and BLC Basic Leader Course). All that happened by my third year in the Army. By that time, my patience for Army reindeer games was just about gone. 

Despite all that, I'm glad I joined. Learning Arabic and meeting the Army's physical fitness standards is something I took a lot of pride in. And the money was pretty good too. The job I had at NSA through the Army also made the journey worthwhile. I got to see something very few people know much about.

The fun GI Joe stuff of basic training only lasts a few weeks unless you do a combat arms MOS (job) like infantry, armor, or artillery. Like other soldiers, those guys spend most of their time doing boring stuff like watching PowerPoint presentations or doing boring online classes. 

Bottom line, if you join the military, be prepared to suffer. And remember that if you have a why, you can make do with any how. 

Navy SEALs have never been on the winning side of a war

Green Berets and other so-called special forces units have never been on the winning side of a war either. Yes, they're extremely brave and physically fit. That is irrelevant. Apache warriors were more physically fit and better fighters man for man than the 19th century US Army. The Apaches lost after several wars. So what does that tell you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Wars

And that's why the Army name an attack helicopter after them. 

My favorite disgruntled Vietnam vet explains it well: 

https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-blog-about-military-matters/65802307-elite-military-units-army-rangers

From my own experience, I'll add that many Army instructors get stuck doing that as a punishment because they are so annoying and incompetent. They would be a cancer to morale if they were assigned elsewhere, especially to higher leadership roles. They would get themselves and their subordinates killed in combat. 

Army NCOs in general are overgrown juvenile delinquents who take pleasure in tormenting their underlings. The only remedy is to treat them with the contempt and disdain they deserve. Then and only then will they treat you with respect. At least that was my experience.

I like what the Army tries to be, but not what it is. It was the worst job I ever loved. 

Interesting formula involving intersecting chords

If two chords intersect forming segments of length A and B for the first and C and D for the second, then A times B = C times D. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersecting_chords_theorem

This theorem also implies an essential property of cyclic quadrilaterals. The proof of the theorem furthermore implies that all cyclic quadrilaterals are formed by 2 pairs of similar triangles.

For further reference, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmagupta%27s_formula