Item the 1st – Everyone has heard the phrase “Correlation does not equal causation!”, often in an effort to minimize some observation that goes against the speakers take on what the implication of the causation part of the phrase would mean for their preferred policy. Now of course the statement “Correlation does not equal causation” is almost tautologically true. There’s the well know illustration of the correlated increase in ice cream consumption and drowning deaths. “Spurious” correlations abound. In the former case, the correlated data are linked by a third variable. In the later, the correlated data are just coincidentally linked for the time or spatial period selected by the presenter.
In my mind, the problem lies not with the statement “correlation does not equal causation” which is undoubtedly true, but rather in the fashion is is used by most people who invoke it. The correct response to a correlation is to say that simply observing the correlation does not let us unequivocally infer causation. However, is there a hypothesis that can plausibly link them or can we identify a set of other variables that may provide the link between them? Can those hypotheses be predicatively tested? In other words, correlation does not EQUAL causation is a first step – you CAN NOT infer a casual relationship, but it provides a clue as to where you might start sciencing away/thinking about the relationship. However, that’s not how it’s generally applied; it is usually deployed to dismiss a correlation as irrelevant and shutdown certain lines of inquiry, not prompt additional inquiry. “Correlation does not equal causation”is usually deployed in general discussion as a shorthand for “Go away with your inconvenient data and lets not talk about this ever again!”
As a sort of an aside, this touches on the question of p-values and statistical significance. If you follow the link above (and look at other fake spurious correlation AI ‘papers’ at the site), it becomes clear that you can generate very convincing p-values and statistical significance arguments for just about anything. I think that’s a side effect of poorly trained scientist that want a formula to plug things into and get an answer (black box MCMC codes or statistical analysis packages), either without thinking carefully or actually understanding the formula you are plugging into. That’s true whether you’re a frequentist butthole or a Bayesian. It’s not the approach, it’s the approachee.
Item the 2nd – Somewhat related is Occam’s Razor. We’re all familiar with this construction, loosely stated as something like “When you are faced with different explanations of some phenomena, the simplest one is usually the best, or more strongly, correct one.” Simple beats complex. But I think that, much like correlation vs causation, this ‘principle’ gets misapplied. There is no a priori reason to favor a simple explanation (let’s not even get into what ‘simple’ means) over a complex one – nature can be pretty damn complex. It is convenient as a means of investigation – add only as much complexity to your ‘model’/thought process as is necessary to explain the phenomena. But do not make the mistake of assuming that that explanation is correct only because it is ‘more simple’ (for some definition of simple) than some other explanation. I think Occam’s Razor, much like correlation and causation, is misapplied, both in common usage as well scientific inquiry – the simplicity of an argument is NOT a piece of evidence that the argument is correct. Indeed, often times the definition of ‘simple’ adapts so that the explanation one arrives at is defined as simple (pax string ‘theory’ and QM). Walk the razors edge indeed.
Item the 3rd – I usually park about 1/2 a mile to a mile from my orifice. I mean office. Depending on the day and circumstances, the walk to the office occurs sometime between 5:30 and 6:30 and generally around 16:00 on the way back. Walking in is very calm and quiet, and provides an opportunity to think about what I need to get done today, or just … random thoughts. There is also a particular traffic light on the walk. It’s an uncomplicated intersection with very good, long range visibility in all directions. It is also, especially in the morning, a very, very low traffic intersection. Nevertheless, I will often see a car sit and wait at a red light for up to a minute for the light to ‘allow’ them to go through the intersection. Later in the morning, one can see the same with pedestrians – push the button and wait. In the former case, probably 90% of the time, the later, maybe 50%. In the afternoon, the intersection is busier, but usually not markedly so – one still sees probably 80% plus push-the-button-and-wait pedestrians. I emphasize that you have 1/8 of mile of clear visibility in all directions, minimum. Now I understand Chesterton’s Fence – but the notional rationale behind the light is known here – move traffic safely and efficiently. There is no reason other than deference to authority to wait at this particular light in most situations. Not just deference to authority, but to the authority of an unthinking light. This sort of behavior has an obvious evolutionary advantage in the small groups and bands we evolved in. Whether it remains beneficial when scaled to the larger, impersonal, societal rule making we currently inhabit is, to me, an open question. In the specific case above, it manifestly does not – I can’t help but look at a group of people staring at the light (rather than their surroundings and seeing not a single vehicle for 1/8 of mile in any direction) waiting for permission to cross, and think “we’re fucked”. It’s a small thing here, but implies a very large cross section for bad actors to manipulate and control masses for nefarious purposes.
Bonus Item the 4th – Comment at will on any topic, expressed or implied or neither. Wait 30 seconds. Wait 30 minutes. Make sense, don’t make sense. Don’t comment at all. First or don’t first. Or “First” while reading and/or commenting, just try to keep the keyboard clean when you finish. Oh and I never see any sidebar controls, so I apologize if I create extra work for the schedulers…
Don’t you tell me what to do!
Don’t you tell me what to do!
I apologize. You are of course free to continue to let your keyboard… ferment… for as long as tickles your fancy.
I have other things to tickle my fancy with. My keyboard is merely for typing. 😀
Please tell me that’s not a picture of your crotch with panties.
I would hope that Glibs are better with the manscaping than that…
Don’t panty shame him.
Right?!?! I thought we were very inclusive of all (most) kinks around here. I didn’t think the line would be drawn at a nice tight pair of soft silk panties…
Easy. Trying to look innocent and utterly lacking in contrition makes me angry.
Trying to look innocent and utterly lacking in contrition
Way to anthropomorphize a cute god-damn little puppy dog. Anger leads to the dark side. And so does everything else apparently.
That dog is no puppy. And not little. And dogs have evolved for so long aside humans that they both read human expression well and exploit human reactions to expression and neoteny. These traits were selected for as the adaptations that made them ideal companions.
So, yes that dog trying to pretend to be innocent knows exactly what it is doing.
At least it’s not a Husky, them things could not care less if they destroy things.
Sitting at a red light during the wee hours when there isn’t another car in sight is bad enough, but I’ve seen (been stuck behind) people waiting for an obviously broken light to change. Hey grandma, if he lights been red for three minutes, it ain’t changing, treat it like a stop sign and make your move when the traffic allows.
Human nature being what it is and all, I think waiting at (unbroken) lights even when there is no cross traffic beats the alternative, which is treating lights as suggestions (for other drivers, of course).
And they are certainly better than roundabouts.
Having driven in NYC, all lights, lines and limits are suggestions.
“Correlation does not equal causation”is usually deployed in general discussion as a shorthand for “Go away with your inconvenient data and lets not talk about this ever again!”
“Shut up,” they explained.
Correlation suggests causation. Lack of correlation refutes causation.
Those aren’t catchy enough to become argumentative tropes, though.
Maybe it’s more accurate to say “correlation does not always equal causation”.
“In the former case, the correlated data are linked by a third variable.”
For me it’s fun to figure these out. My wife likes to cite a study that says good grip strength (measured by dead hang) it closely correlated with longevity. My hypothesis is that if you can dead hang for a long time, you’re probably going to the gym regularly, and you’re not overweight.
Or you’re an orangutan.
good grip strength (measured by dead hang) it closely correlated with longevity.
My wife the PT says it’s because good grip strength allows you to do basic things that promote longevity (turn door knobs, open jars, catch yourself when you unbalance, etc).
Also makes sense.
Ⓨⓞⓤ’ⓡⓔ ⓝⓞⓣ ⓜⓨ ⓢⓤⓟⓔⓡⓥⓘⓢⓞⓡ.
Compliance with the traffic light is More beneficial in the larger more anonymous society we have not because A: if decault complacency is following a neutral control device, you will get fewer accidents. Especially when not expecting other people. While the average case, nothing will happen, the severity of when something does happen is so high that it is not worth the few moments of not waiting. I’m not talking about the tickets, I’m talking about the equally complacent other driver – who will not look, even with an eighth of a mile visibility, because they’re in the early morning zone out and “nobody is ever coming the other way at that light.” Habitually stopping for the red reduces the number of such incidents.
If you think people will look, I’ve got a whole playlist of “Idiots in Cars” that proves that even with habitual compliance, people don’t look.
Lastly, the offloading of cognitive effort needed to evaluate the potential for oncoming traffic were the control mechanism not there saves energy for when thinking is required elsewhere. People only have so much ability to think and every little decision, even one related to traffic, makes the rest of them harder as the day goes on.
I think you are mis-understanding my point or being deliberately obtuse. Of course habitually stopping for a red reduces incidents. Which is why, at all intersections, I will come to (nearly…) complete stop at a red to evaluate the situation. In many circumstances, even if I evaluate proceeding to be nearly minimal risk, I will wait (later in the day, more pedestrians around, etc).
However, blind adherence to the light regardless of circumstances does reduce incidences or make, to me, any sense. It merely takes advantage of the usefulness of the construct to remove the need/ability to think. I will offload the cognitive effort needed to evaluate (circumstances around the light) in almost all circumstances – though not really, I will still be continually evaluating situations as I drive; I’m controlling a high kinetic energy object around other people, continual evaluation should be the norm. However, I will not sit at a light at 5:30 in the morning with not another soul in sight simply because the light ‘tells’ me to. I will not, as a pedestrian, sit there at “red hand” for minutes at a time when I can easily evaluate the circumstances – doesn’t mean I’m just going to blindly walk through an intersection, but once I’ve (easily) evaluated that it’s completely safe to do so, I will.
You may look, or even think you look every time at 5:30am, but the dangers of complacency and the wasting of cognitive cycles are worse than just waiting the light.
but the dangers of complacency and the wasting of cognitive cycles are worse than just waiting the light.
You may believe so, but you are wrong.
One can acknowledge the value of traffic lights and conformity to prescribed rules that are very useful in most situations while being able to retain your rational faculty to evaluate when they are not appropriate in a given situation. If you are ‘wasting … cognitive cycles’ by evaluating the conditions at an intersection, you are probably not focusing at all sufficiently on the task of operating your vehicle.
At 5:30 am? You bet I’m not – I’m sleep-driving.
We’ve all seen this process in other domains. Offloading one’s arithmetic skills to the pocket calculator allows those skills to wither and die. Offloading one’s programming skills to ChatGPT? Same results. Offloading one’s moral hygiene to a political party? I’m sure that you see where I’m going here…
Edge cases make bad law. You guys are kind of arguing past each other. There are factually situations where you have no choice but to go through a broken red light. There are factually places where a light is useful during some hours and pointless during others. It is factually true that cultivating the habit of driving through a red light after a cursory check has the potential to be dangerous because our eyes see what they expect to see. The devil is in the details and I think taking PutridMeat with ordinary fair reading of his words, he’s saying that after examining the surroundings with a higher degree of care than if the light were green he is willing to proceed through a light which in the time and place is not providing any benefit to traffic safety, not “I think this light is stpid and therefore drive through it at speed as though it were green”.
I think a lot of our left turn red arrows around here (Suffolk VA) are stupid.
I used to ignore them, but there are too many cameras now, so I sit there like an idiot!
Traffic stupidity is one of those things that grind my gears.
Don’t get me started on the retardation that is an HOV lane.
I can’t help but look at a group of people staring at the light (rather than their surroundings and seeing not a single vehicle for 1/8 of mile in any direction) waiting for permission to cross, and think “we’re fucked”.
What is the fair reading here?
How about, HOV lanes that double as toll express lanes, and change the rules every few miles following no pattern I can discern? I’m talking about you Utah, between Provo and Ogden you’ve created a bizarre traffic pattern.
When walking, the lights are meaningless to me unless it is a high traffic area.
I go when it’s safe, not when a light says I can.
When walking, the lights are meaningless to me unless it is a high traffic area.
I go when it’s safe, not when a light says I can.
Yes, that is exactly what I was going for. And Jarflax’s summary above is pretty close to my attitude too.
As to “we’re fucked”, perhaps a bit of THE Hyperbole (or anti- as the case may be). I don’t think it (blind conformity to the rules) is something you can really change. It’s ingrained into us as a result of our (very successful) evolutionary path. It’s more a statement of you can never achieve a really free society, only degrees. Eternal vigilance, blood of patriots and tyrants, etc. It’s a journey, never a destination. There are far too many humans with that conformity built in to a degree that it overwhelms other considerations and it is subject to manipulation and being taken advantage by others. I don’t blame them – well not intellectually, but in the moment I do – as it’s inherent in human being to one degree or another. It’s more a rumination on why liberty is never a set-it-and-forget-it proposition, as much as I wish it were so.
“I go when it’s safe, not when a light says I can.”
Same here, but in the other direction. If I’m first in line when the light turns green, I double check the cross traffic and the oncoming traffic for left turns. Because in Tucson at least, there are a lot of red light “beaters” who try to zoom through right as the light turns.
What I don’t do is run red lights even when there isn’t cross traffic. I think I can spare the 20 seconds of additional drive time.
there are a lot of red light “beaters” who try to zoom through right as the light turns.
Worse are those who zoom past the light turning because the stupid municipality has decided that the way to tame red-light running is to make it 5 seconds of dual red. Congratulations idiots, you’ve not solved red light running, you’ve just trained everybody to consider a newly red light as “drive real fast” like yellow used to be. Your interchangeable pawns who only do what you think they should actually learn and adapt. SURPRISE!
I should also clarify – I don’t go running red lights or crossing against reds all higgly piggly as some seem to have the impression. But in some circumstances – like the one identified above – I most certainly will and trust my own evaluation of the situation above that of the light. 99% plus of the time, I’m perfectly fine with how things work (except those damn dual reds) and the trade off of independent evaluation vs. offloading the evaluation falls in favor of offloading.
And I thought the Philosophy of Causation and Razors would be the most interest generating parts of this edition.
That reminds me: what seems simpler often looks that way because of unstated/unexamined assumptions. Start to unpack those, and often things don’t look so simple any more.
People sit at red lights when there is no traffic because they know that they will lose their driver’s license if they get caught doing that.
And the economic penalties of increased insurance cost as well as the fine.
By what cop? They are toobusy with homeless folks to bother.
Perhaps in the places with traffic cameras, I routinely run reds in the wee hours after checking that there is not another car in sight. I guess a cop might be hiding behind some bushes nearby but so far I’ve never been busted, also I may be wrong but I’d imagine running a red isn’t a ‘lose your license’ offense, more of a “give us a hundred bucks” kinda offense.
I’ve never lived in a place with a low enough population density to be on a light controlled road with zero visible traffic and clear long enough lines of sight to determine no cops in the area. Lots of trees and corners.
When the population thins enough there generally aren’t lights.
I’m convinced the intersection in this example is fictional for the purposes of discussion.
Any intersection with that little traffic gets stop signs.
I’m convinced the intersection in this example is fictional for the purposes of discussion.
And you would be 100% wrong. There is nothing ‘fictional’ about any of the scenarios I laid out above.
The locality should replace that light with stop signs, it’ll save on electricity.
That’s fair, there are only a handful of lights that I run, and my city does a decent job controlling the lights (most flash yellow one way and red the other from 1-6am) so there aren’t that many opportunities to get my Judas Priest on. But there are three in particular that signal all night with 1/4 mile visibility and few good places for a hide-a-cop situation.
UCS:
Lots and lots of four way stop lights here that are needed during the day, but superfluous at night. Very few of them here switch over to going blinking lights.
@Mr Ilium – Whycome no nightlife?
UCS:
The nightlife is in the city, where you don’t have to deal with the fallout.
Now get rid of zoning, and there may very well be night clubs in the middle of the residential block, but I doubt it.
UCS: You want to be in Cleveland after dark?
@Ted – I would assume the Clevelanders are adapted to their situation and don’t simply huddle indoors in fear of the dark.
True – part of the evaluation process is to see whether there are any hidden bacon-mobiles. But simply because mindless conformists and blind rule followers can F-up your life doesn’t mean I can’t evaluate them as such. If there are pork-choppers in the vicinity, I will likely stay put, especially considering that a vehicle that close by changes the calculus significantly anyway. But just as lying to the SS about harboring Anne Frank doesn’t imply any concession to the morality or ethics of their enforcement, staying put at a red light in the presence of police doesn’t imply any concession to the correctness of their likely action.
I’ve seen how the cops can pounce in the Harold and Kumar documentary.
My personal favorite thing while out cycling is watching some idiot stop their car a full car length away from the stop line, where the sensor is, and refuse all signaling to pull up to trigger the light. I’ve left several sitting there when the walk lights came on with four way red lights for cars.
When I used to ride a motorcycle I had an intersection I could never trigger the sensor with just the bike. You learned to run that light.
Switching the engine off and hitting the starter, will often generate enough of a magnetic field to trip the sensor.
Why would the intersection go 4-way red/walk without someone having pushed the button?
Do you go around pushing pedestrian buttons then running the red, Mr Ilium?
Yes. Yes I will in those cases. I’m usually the one who rolled over and pushed the button to trigger the walk signal as well. Me on the bicycle won’t trigger the light, so it’s the safest way to cross. There’s really only one stretch of road I need to do it on, where the median is part of the park system with a multi-use trail on it.
I’ll also roll through stop signs when I see no other cars visible.
Motorcycles won’t usually trigger the light, either. So, you wait a bit, and then go when it is clear.
The more I learn about motorcycles, the more I think of them as “Suicide machines”.
My doctor friend calls them “Donorcycles”. They are very fun.
/calculated risks, UCS.
/I believe riding a motorcycle (and treating other drivers as if they are trying to kill you) makes you a better driver.
I’ve seen people pull across the stop line beyond the sensors and wonder why the light isn’t changing.
There is no reason other than deference to authority to wait at this particular light in most situations.
For me, it’s mostly laziness. Why venture into a philosophical quagmire about the shaky foundations of modern civil society?
Also re traffic lights…
“Smart” traffic lights are in practical daily life indistinguishable from random operation. If you regularly drive a particular route with lights with a set pattern, you can adapt accordingly. As an example, if you know the left turn arrow comes on at the beginning of the green in a particular intersection, you can roll up in a more or less leisurely fashion. If you time it properly, you might not even have to stop at all. If, on the other hand, you must be sitting at the red light to trigger the arrow, you have to rush up in order to be sitting at the red light in order to get the turn.
Barn Find of the day:
https://barnfinds.com/bf-exclusive-1980-pontiac-firebird-formula/?utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Newsletter+(Daily)
Needs a Screaming Chicken on the hood.
Engine: 301 V8
Transmission: Automatic
301 or 305? The smogged 305 was awful and even worse behind a slush box.
Wouldn’t take much to liven it up, but this particular one looks pretty rough.
My limited knowledge was that you could put a new cam in them, but the low compression was always going to be an issue.
Correct. You can almost get it to 1 HP per cubic inch with a new cam, intake, carb, HEI ignition package, and some smog delete. Otherwise you would have to replace the crankshaft and heads to really make it a fun car to drive. And at that point, just buy a crate 350.
My brother stuck a 305 in his Land Cruiser back in high school. Stupid to take the six out of that, all it did was eat components.
Sounds like a high asking price for that.
Also agreed. What a dump. You could get one in running condition for a little more.
I got yer screaming chicken right here.
One time near Wichita Falls TX, I was making a late-night run to What-a-Burger when I got pulled over for going through a flashing yellow too slowly. The cop said she almost hit me.
It took a great of self-control not to make a sarcastic comment like “well, maybe I should be the one pulling *you* over, officer.”
Traffic lights with low traffic in off peak hours should switch to either four way flashing red or flashing yellow on the “primary” street and flashing red on the “secondary” street.
Judging by the panic reactions I see in my fellow drivers, when confronted by a flashing red? I’m not sure that this is a great idea…
??
Don’t know about other states, but around here Flashing red is functionally equivalent to a stop sign last I knew.
You know that, and I know that, but most of the dumbfounded dipshits taking up space in the roads don’t know that and behave accordingly.
But what does lack of correlation say about lack of causation?
A lack of correlation will presumptively refute causation, unless you can isolate and identify a confounding variable which prevents A from causing B when it would otherwise do so.
What if you are investigating the obstinacy and malevolence of machines? In that cases wouldn’t a lack of correlation be a point in support?
🤨
This 28-Year-Old’s Company Makes Millions Buying From Walmart And Selling On Amazon | CNBC Make It.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzrtdUCsYTQ
Hooray for middlemen, the unsung heroes of capitalism.
At least he’s not drop shipping.
I mean, unlike credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, and suchlike, I can actually understand how he makes money.
Credit default swaps are just contracts where Party 1 holds some IOU that it thinks might default (generally this, but in principle Party 1 could just be placing a bet with no actual interest in the loan in question), so it makes a deal with Party 2 that Party 1 will pay Party 2 a small amount of money each period (usually monthly, quarterly or annually) and in exchange Party 2 will agree to pay Party 1 a larger amount of money in the event that the IOU is not honored. In other words they are just fancy insurance policies. In still other words they, like all insurance policies are just bets.
Collateralized debt obligations are lenders pinky promising investors that they will pay the investors the money they receive from an identified stack of loans the lenders already made and want to cash out by finding some
suckerinvestor to buy them, only without going through the hassle of individually selling and transferring the loans to identified investors so they pile them all up and draw up a contract that makes the pinky promise.It’s not exactly the same thing since in this case the loans were actually (if sloppily) transferred, but I once worked with an investor on a deal in which they were buying a tranche of defaulted loans, and investigating the loans was eye opening. Out of 16 loans supposedly live but in default at least 4 had been discharged in bankruptcy, in 2 cases the lender selling the loans had previously sold them to someone else, and recorded allonges, in 6 cases, the lender kind of owned the loans, but owned them in a different trust than was selling them (meaning the documents transferring ownership were incorrect) and in precisely none of the 16 cases could the lender provide full packages of all documents needed to establish the chain of ownership to a court applying strict rules.
Remember that pod-racing bet in The Phantom Menace?
***
Before the Pod Race, Lucas injects an incredibly complicated bet between Qui-Gon and a local alien gambler that states if Anakin loses, the alien gets the pod-racer, but if Qui-Gon wins, he gets the pod racer, Anakin, and a part for his broken ship. The alien then doubles down, and if he wins, he gets the ship, the pod racer, the Anakin, and possibly Qui-Gon too. Qui-Gon comes back at him and doubles his own bet by asking for Anakin’s mom if they win as well. It’s so needlessly confusing, that by the time the race starts, we’re clueless as to what needs to happen. Confusion is NEVER EVER EVER good for your story and is especially bad right before a major sequence.
***
Makes my head hurt, like the rules of contract bridge.
Confusion is not necessarily good for a story, but it can be quite beneficial if you are trying to get someone who also thinks they are clever to overpay, or undercharge, for something in a deal with you. All these complex derivative investments, to some degree or other, involve clever people showing off their cleverness while trying to get an edge. When the clever boys and girls on Wall Street play the game among themselves the complexity adds spice, when lay people get involved it often goes poorly.
To be clear I am a lay person lol. I know just enough to know I don’t know enough to play this game.
Romanian pedestrians do not wait at red lights unless very busy. Neither do Brits, Eyetalians or Spaniards. Germans and AUstrians do. Danes and Dutch more than Romanians but less than Germans.
Neither do Americans getting off commuter rail. They ignore lights, signs, traffic, walk between cars, …
Crossed once like that in Stockholm. Swedes looked at me like I was STEVE SMITH or even a free marketer.
Barn Find of the day:
That MIGHT be a $250 dollar parts car, if the “301” isn’t seized.
Other than glass, what would really be desirable out of that thing?
Nothing. By this point even the plastic bits have degraded.
Ethiopian traffic circle – no lights, no signs, but motorcars, not a single luxury, like Haile Selassie, it’s primitive as can be!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEIn8GJIg0E
suggested music: yakety sax
Damn.
Reminds me of a story Stossel did on his show talking about how intersections without signs and lights were safer, because people actually paid attention instead of letting the light think for them.
Until they grow accustomed to the lack of signage. It’s the novelty that leads to the hightened awareness.
Also, I would like to see that at real speed, instead of sped up.
My best guess is – very slow, since even sped up it’s not up to normal street speeds.
I experienced similar traffic in Moscow in the middle 90s. Private ownership of cars was just beginning to explode. There was no infrastructure to deal with it. And all the drivers were inexperienced.
I remember driving, well passengering, down the wrong side of one of the ring roads in Moscow to avoid traffic more than once. I guess that’s what I get for using the proto-Uber, aka hitchhiking.
People in that crosswalk have won Frogger.
Thank you for this, you mirror my thoughts about Occam and his blade. It’s a great tool for formulating a new hypothesis, change the old one as little as necessary to resolve the problem with the old one. That just makes sense, you’re trying to fine tune understanding after all, and jumping all over the map creating entirely new theories isn’t efficient. It’s nonsense as a general guide to how things work, there is no reason to assume any observed phenomenon results from a single simple cause rather than a complex array of inputs interacting.
***
“THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT. PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT,” Trump posted on Truth Social just after 1 a.m. ET.
Israeli political analyst Akiva Eldar told Al Jazeera that the latest missile strikes from Iran followed a pattern where “every side will do its most to be portrayed as having total victory or at least face-saving.”
“Until the last minute, they will try to improve the balance of power or the balance of damage and say, ‘Look, the last pictures, the last images, the last footage [we] are getting from the enemy is showing that we are doing good,’” Eldar said. Still, the reports of a ceasefire, whenever it may be implemented, he said, may be “the beginning of the light at the end of the tunnel.”
***
So yeah, the Middle East runs on the “you’re a towel!” principle.
Somebody already made a compilation of all the cease fire violations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk6_7DTVN8Q
Occam – the explanation with the fewest assumptions never seemed to me identical with the simplest for some reason
The simplest explanation is magic.
Occam’s razor: sometimes you have to disprove the obvious.
So, yes that dog trying to pretend to be innocent knows exactly what it is doing.
“What do you mean? It was like this when I got here.”
My limited knowledge was that you could put a new cam in them, but the low compression was always going to be an issue.
Don’t forget the terrible cylinder heads.
Heads, carb and exhaust would be a good start.
***
In his own retelling, Trump posted: “Israel & Iran came to me, almost simultaneously, and said, ‘PEACE!’ I knew the time was NOW. The World, and the Middle East, are the real WINNERS! Both Nations will see tremendous LOVE, PEACE, AND PROSPERITY in their futures. They have so much to gain, and yet, so much to lose if they stray from the road of RIGHTEOUSNESS & TRUTH. The future for Israel & Iran is UNLIMITED, & filled with great PROMISE. GOD BLESS YOU BOTH!”
According to Axios, Qatar acted as an intermediary between Iran and the U.S. passing a message from Iran that it did not plan further attacks on the U.S. following its restrained retaliation and a message back from the U.S. that it did not plan to respond to Iran’s symbolic retaliation and was ready to resume negotiations.
***
artist’s depiction from The Simpsons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d2JDrl5IZE
Related. Old Patriot missiles were $1 million each. The latest are $4 mill. The battery is a billon.
How many of these things did Israel fire? I hope the American taxpayers isn’t funding their resupply. Either way Raytheon won this war.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot
Reminded me to put in my monthly report to TxDot of a traffic light that stops me at 6:00 am every morning to allow non-existent cars to leave the Walmart parking lot. It’s been ongoing since at least April last year.
You know . . . .
We could fix all these traffic light problems by just converting to roundabouts.
You bomb-throwing son-of-a-bitch…
Roundabouts for interstates as well!
Go back under your bridge, Mead Troll.
At least I was thinking of you.
I appreciate the thoughtfulness, but there’s a lot going on nad rehashing that same argument should be reserved for later.
I like roundabouts, I cannot lie.
No other stoplights can deny?
I like ’em round and big
They mix a lot.
Baby Got Back
Roundabouts are a surprisingly straight forward way to start a 4 way fight here.
We refuse to Yield on our stances!
Everybody argues at cross-purposes, and it quickly becomes circular.
Giant asteroid could crash into moon in 2032, firing debris towards Earth
TW: – https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jun/23/giant-asteroid-could-crash-moon-2032-firing-debris-earth
Oh no, another possible large meteor! What happens when it throws the moon out of orbit and into deep space and what happens to Moonbase Alpha?
It will pass between the Earth and the Moon.
A great scene from the Expanse. NSFW due to Avasarala cursing wonderfully. Watch out for falling rocks.
https://youtu.be/O4YlnDtJYCo
Global warming caused it, I am sure of it.
Oh, and what if it knocks the moon into a decaying orbit? That would be more fun.
In certain parts of certain cities at stop signs and red lights I tend to slow down, look both ways, then gun it. Examples include:
Exits of the Cross Bronx Express Way
North Philly and around Kensington and Allegany
Baltimore outside of the “nice parts”
Houston anywhere near Sunnyside
Most of these cases are during the nighttime hours, but others apply all day.
That sounds like a “Bat out of hell” defensive driving technique for those regions.
How I drove to class when I started at USC a couple of months after the LA riots.
I’d comment that you are dating yourself, but LA riots are so regular I’m not sure you can get a degree from USC without experiencing one.
92. And I just took out the old Rand McNally and plotted the most direct route – through Compton and Watts. Guys in my class recommended alternate routes that were more survivable.
Someone talk me out of swapping this 15amp breaker for a 20amp…
It’s the AC breaker that loves tripping on hot days.
Don’t burn the house down. Buy an a full 15A extension cord if you have to and go to another outlet.
We’ve discussed if you keep tripping a breaker they will start to nuisance trip more often. You can try a new 15A breaker.
I decided that the extension cord option was the only viable one at the moment. I think the new plug is on the Washer/Dryer cricuit, which is 20A (115V), but also has no load if I’m not doing laundry.
Why?
I mean switch the wiring out as well if it’s only 15 amp rated, but your obviously overloading that circuit now.
It’s not overloaded, the breaker box ambient is too hot. It only happens when the temperature in that corner of the house gets high. The same or heavier AC usage on other days doesn’t do it.
So, what you are saying is that your AC is trying to kill itself because it is depressed that it can’t manage to keep the house cool enough to sustain itself?
Chances are what you really need is a hard start kit for your AC. The problem might still blow your 20 amp breaker.
Where’s Yusef?
https://a.co/d/bBtXIg9
UCS is well aware of why he is having issues, no easy fixs available.
He put gloves on the unit and now it can’t get airflow, didn’t he
Spray some water on it to cool it down. Duh.
No access to running water
If the problem is as UCS suggests above, spraying water on the thing that is overheating is contra-indicated lol.
Mikayla Raines, the force behind the Minnesota-based Save A Fox rescue who found fame on YouTube for her devotion to helping animals, has died by suicide at 29, according to her husband.
In a video published on her rescue’s Facebook page on Monday, her husband, Ethan Raines, announced she died on Saturday.
Ethan Raines said in the video his wife “struggled with autism, with depression, with borderline personality disorder and more,” and was an advocate for autism awareness.
He went on to say she endured a lot of online bullying, most recently from people “she considered close friends.”
https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/mikayla-raines-dies-save-a-fox-rescue/
i think I shared one of these youtubes ones because there was a Finnegan fox and a Finnegan SugarFree character… damn
Aw hell, that sucks. Mikayla seemed like a genuinely nice person…
https://x.com/nicksortor/status/1937570252776231134
The USA hat makes an appearance. 🙂
Oh, calloo callay, what a glorious victory we have achieved!
***
“Technically, it’s probably slightly further away, but politically it’s much more imminent,” said Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute and a former member of the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB), which advises the Secretary of State.
“Iran has been a few months away from a nuclear weapon since about 2007. It’s clear that the thing that keeps them a few months away is not their technical capacity; it’s their political will. And I think whatever loss in technical capacity they have suffered, it is more than compensated for by an increase in political will,” Lewis told The Independent.
***
U! S! A!
We…are the champions, my friends…
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/we-asked-three-experts-on-iran-s-nuclear-program-what-trump-achieved-with-his-strikes-their-answers-were-concerning/ar-AA1HhtH5
Also MSN in a slightly different timeline:
“We talked to 3 experts on Iran’s nuclear program about what Trump achieved with his refusal to stick his malformed penis in the Israel-Iran conflict: Their answers were concerning”
Oh, they will do that in this timeline as well, as soon as it becomes clear the bombing was a one off. Pearls must be clutched, no matter what. Fortunately you can always find a pearl, or just make one up.