Yahoo email degenerates further in the name of progress

The New Neo Posted on by

I know, I know—you’re going to tell me to change email addresses if I don’t like the latest iteration of Yahoo email. But it’s a royal pain to do so, and I’ve had my Yahoo email for so so long.

Also, I’ve got other email addresses (Gmail, for example) and they’ve got their own problems and are no better, just different. With every “improvement” in recent years, each email format has gotten worse. Your mileage may differ, but that’s been my observation. I’m not going to bore you by listing my complaints, but I’ve had a particular beef with the trendy never-ending scroll that long ago replaced pages on Yahoo, and slows loading down to a crawl as well as jumping around.

But much worse is the fact that, after a period of allowing consumers to keep the old format if they wish, there’s a forced change to the new. That forced change is usually preceded by some weeks or months when every single time a person goes to the site he/she is presented with a pop-up asking if the person wants to change to the new, improved email. They’re hoping you say “yes” just out of sheer exhaustion—just to get that pop-up to stop—or that one time you’ll slip up and carelessly and unintentionally activate the new format from which there’s no turning back.

This is the way they currently do it on Yahoo email. The pop-up reads:

It’s time to upgrade your inbox
This version of Yahoo Mail will no longer be available. We encourage you to upgrade to the newest version of Yahoo Mail now.

In other words: we’ll get you sooner or later, so you might as well surrender now and it will be easier for you in the long run. Resistance is futile.

This is followed by the “choice” between two tabs:

Upgrade now / Automatically upgrade next time

Where’s the “never never never upgrade” tab? Yes, I know; that’s not one of your choices.

But each time you see the pop-up, if you keep your wits about you and don’t absent-mindedly click on one of those two ever-so-helpful tabs, you can click on that little “x” in the upper corner and make that little sucker go away. But it’s surprisingly difficult to avoid the blandishments of the tabs, because we do so many things online almost automatically, and the people who design these things know all about how to gently coax you into doing what they want you to do.

So far I’ve stuck to my guns and clicked on that little “x.” But someday that “x” will disappear and the message will just say, “Welcome to the new and improved Yahoo email…” [emphasis mine]”:

Mirrors on the ceiling
The pink champagne on ice
And she said: “We are all just prisoners here
Of our own device”
And in the master’s chambers
They gathered for the feast
They stab it with their steely knives
But they just can’t kill the beast
Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door
I had to find the passage back
To the place I was before
“Relax,” said the night man
“We are programmed to receive
You can check out any time you like
But you can never leave!”

Note the use of terms such as “device” and “programmed.” Prescient?

Anti-EU forces triumphant in the EU elections

The New Neo Posted on by

Europeans seem to have gotten tired of being told what to do by a centralized EU that gives them virtually no say. It’s a trend:

The overall result in the European (EU) Parliamentary Election reflects massive gains for conservative nationalists in Italy, Greece, France, Poland, Hungary, Austria, U.K. and others…

In the comments to that article, a Canadian commenter writes “Trump is changing the world.” Trump’s election was a reflection of the same movement, a forerunner of sorts, even though it had little to nothing to do with the EU. And I believe his presidency has also had some effect (not sure exactly how much, but some) on other countries, because it has helped others to see it’s possible to give their leftist controllers the boot.

The leaders of the EU went too far left too fast, ignoring the nationalist feelings that still exist and the threats people feel at the hands of the EU. In their ivory towers (or whatever the more apt metaphor would be) the leaders couldn’t hear the rabble down below, muttering in frustration.

There are plenty of articles giving some of the details of the election results in various countries: this and this, for example.

As for Boris Johnson—the front-runner to become the next Prime Minister of the UK after Theresa May steps down—he seems to be quite a character and colorful public figure. Although he’s rather different from Trump, in this photo he has a Trumpish air in the physical sense. Kind of a big guy with a long tie.

And strangely enough, Johnson is another New Yorker:

Johnson — full name Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson — is among that rare club of politicians instantly recognizable by one name only — “Boris.”

Born in New York’s Upper East Side [to British parents], he held U.S. citizenship until 2006. He was educated at Eton — Britain’s most prestigious private school — and Oxford University, before starting a career in journalism in the 1980s.

Here’s what Wiki has to say about him:

Johnson is a controversial figure in British politics and journalism. Supporters have praised him as an entertaining, humorous, and popular figure with appeal beyond traditional Conservative voters. Conversely, he has been criticised by figures on both the left and right, who accused him of elitism, cronyism, dishonesty, laziness, and using racist and homophobic language. Johnson is the subject of several biographies and a number of fictionalised portrayals.

There are quite a few familiar descriptors there, several words that have come to be applied to almost anyone slightly on the right with any pizazz. Controversial. Dishonest, lazy, racist.

This election should send shock waves through the left and the EU, as well as the Tories who supported May’s broken promises. But I don’t think any of those parties can regroup or change effectively, despite the wakeup call.

Memorial Day: If you’re reading this…

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve posted this song before, but I think it bears repeating, especially on Memorial Day.

It’s Tim McGraw’s extraordinarily moving song “If You’re Reading This:”

If you’re readin’ this
My momma’s sittin’ there
Looks like I only got a one way ticket over here.
I sure wish I could give you one more kiss
War was just a game we played when we were kids
Well I’m layin’ down my gun
I’m hanging up my boots
I’m up here with God and we’re both watchin’ over you

So lay me down
In that open field out on the edge of town
And know my soul
Is where my momma always prayed that it would go.
If you’re readin’ this I’m already home.

If you’re readin’ this
Half way around the world
I won’t be there to see the birth of our little girl
I hope she looks like you
I hope she fights like me
And stands up for the innocent and the weak
I’m layin’ down my gun,
I’m hanging up my boots
Tell dad I don’t regret that I followed in his shoes…

The first time I ever heard the song I got the chills as the lyrics unfolded and I realized what it was about, and then again and again as the heartstrings were jerked harder and harder as the song went on.

I say “the heartstrings were jerked,” which sounds as though I’m being critical and the song is manipulative. Well, it’s manipulative in the sense that it means to affect the listener emotionally, and it means to sell songs. But I see nothing wrong with that, if the emotion is sincere and deep. Most of us do, or should, feel a very strong gratitude to the young men and women who sacrificed their lives to defend liberty here and abroad, and a very strong sorrow that it was necessary. On Memorial Day, we thank them.

For Memorial Day: on nationalism

The New Neo Posted on by

[NOTE: This is a slightly edited version of an older post. It seems to me that it’s only become more relevant over time, rather than less.]

The story “The Man Without a Country” used to be standard reading matter for seventh graders. In fact, it was the first “real” book—as opposed to those tedious Dick and Jane readers—that I was assigned to read in school.

The plot was exciting compared to Dick and Jane and the rest, since it dealt with an actual story with some actual drama to it. It struck me as terribly sad—and unfair, too—that Philip Nolan was forced to wander the world, exiled, for one moment of cursing the United States. “The Man Without a Country” was the sort of paean to patriotism that I would guess is rarely or never assigned nowadays to students.

Patriotism has gotten a bad name during the last few decades.

I think part of this feeling began (at least in this country) with the Vietnam era and the influence of the left. But patriotism and nationalism seem to have been rejected by a large segment of Europeans even earlier, as a result of the devastation both sentiments were seen to have wrought on that continent during WWI and WWII. Of course, WWII in Europe was a result mainly of German nationalism run amok, but it seemed to have given nationalism as a whole a very bad name.

Here’s author Thomas Mann on the subject, writing in 1947 in the introduction to the American edition of Herman Hesse’s Demian:

If today, when national individualism lies dying, when no single problem can any longer be solved from a purely national point of view, when everything connected with the “fatherland” has become stifling provincialism and no spirit that does not represent the European tradition as a whole any longer merits consideration…

A strong statement of the post-WWII idea of nationalism as a dangerous force, mercifully dead or dying, to be replaced (hopefully) by a pan-national (or, rather, anational) Europeanism. Mann was a German exile from his own country who had learned to his bitter regret the excesses to which unbridled and amoral nationalism can lead. His was an understandable and common response at the time, one that many decades later helped lead to the formation of the EU. The waning but still relatively strong nationalism of the US is seen by those who agree with him as a relic of those dangerous days of nationalism gone mad without any curb of morality or consideration for others.

But the US is not Nazi Germany or anything like it, however much the far left may try to make that analogy. There’s a place for nationalism, and for love of country. Not a nationalism that ignores or tramples on human rights (like that of the Nazis), but one that embraces and strives for and tries to preserve them here and abroad, keeping in mind that—human nature being what it is—no nation on earth can be perfect or anywhere near perfect. The US is far from perfect, but it is a very good country nevertheless, always working to be better, with a nationalism that recognizes that sometimes liberty must be fought for, and that the struggle involves some sacrifice.

So, I’ll echo the verse that figured so prominently in “The Man Without a Country,” and say (corny, but true): …this is my own, my native land. And I’ll also echo Francis Scott Key and add: …the star-spangled banner, O long may it wave, O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

flag

How to do an entrechat quatre

The New Neo Posted on by

In the dance of the little swans thread, commenter “Paul in Boston” asked:

What’s the step where they all jump in the air together and “clap” their feet 4 times. How do they do that?

I’ll let these pictures (videos) take the place of a thousand words. I’ll just add that although the entrechat quatre (that’s what it’s called) is plenty difficult, as is just about everything in ballet, it’s one of the rare ballet steps that’s not quite as difficult as it looks. In other words, I used to be able to do an acceptable entrechat quatre or even a series of them, although you wouldn’t want to have paid money to see me do it.

Here’s a regular speed and slow motion demo:

And here are some mighty impressive ones, male and female versions. The man is actually doing a more complex jump with an extra beat (or actually two, since each leg beating is counted separately) to make a step called the entrechat six. Both of these clips (widely separated in time) are from the ballet “Giselle,” in which spirits known as Wilis are trying to dance the prince to death, and the loving spirit of his betrayed love Giselle is trying to save him:

5G could be Nineteen Eighty-Four on steroids

The New Neo Posted on by

Richard Fernandez has a scary article about the threats posed by 5G: “Whoever Controls 5G Will Be Able to Surveil and Control the Planet. Will It Be the U.S. or China?”

That’s a title that grabs attention. It’s based in part on this article appearing in the NY Times:

At the click of a mouse … the police [in a part of China] can pull up live video from any surveillance camera … passing through one of the thousands of checkpoints in the city.

To demonstrate, she showed how the system could retrieve the photo, home address and official identification number of a woman who had been stopped at a checkpoint on a major highway. The system sifted through billions of records, then displayed details of her education, family ties, links to an earlier case and recent visits to a hotel and an internet cafe.

Fernandez writes:

The combination of ubiquitous sensors and database fusion has allowed the Communist Party to create “virtual cages” for millions of people. It’s easy with Internet of Things technology to turn off an individual’s credit card, phone, car, refrigerator, etc., should he stray into a proscribed zone.

The Times notes the nightmare, saying that “it is also a vision that some of President Trump’s aides have begun citing in a push for tougher action against Chinese companies in the intensifying trade war. Beyond concerns about market barriers, theft and national security, they argue that China is using technology to strengthen authoritarianism at home and abroad — and that the United States must stop it.”

It’s interesting that the Times seems to be reporting on this without being critical of Trump. It’s also interesting that the article seems to emphasize the fact that it’s being used right now to clamp down on a particular ethnic minority in China (members of which happen to be Muslim), rather than the terrifying capacity of the system itself:

A New York Times investigation drawing on government and company records as well as interviews with industry insiders found that China is in effect hard-wiring Xinjiang for segregated surveillance, using an army of security personnel to compel ethnic minorities to submit to monitoring and data collection while generally ignoring the majority Han Chinese, who make up 36 percent of Xinjiang’s population.

It is a virtual cage that complements the indoctrination camps in Xinjiang where the authorities have detained a million or more Uighurs and other Muslims in a push to transform them into secular citizens who will never challenge the ruling Communist Party. The program helps identify people to be sent to the camps or investigated, and keeps tabs on them when they are released.

More advanced technology plus totalitarian control equals nightmare. The concept of the telescreen was comparatively primitive in the technological sense, but Orwell understood the impulse and the possibilities all too well.

More from the Times:

Human Rights Watch, which obtained and analyzed the app [used as part of the surveillance], said it helped the authorities spot behavior that they consider suspicious, including extended travel abroad or the use of an “unusual” amount of electricity.

The app, which the Times examined, also allows police officers to flag people they believe have stopped using a smartphone, have begun avoiding the use of the front door in coming and going from home, or have refueled someone else’s car.

The police use the app at checkpoints that serve as virtual “fences” across Xinjiang. If someone is tagged as a potential threat, the system can be set to trigger an alarm every time he or she tries to leave the neighborhood or enters a public place…

On a recent visit to one checkpoint in Kashgar, a line of passengers and drivers, nearly all Uighur, got out of their vehicles, trudged through automated gates made by C.E.T.C. and swiped their identity cards.

“Head up,” the machines chimed as they photographed the motorists and armed guards looked on.

There are smaller checkpoints at banks, parks, schools, gas stations and mosques, all recording information from identity cards in the mass surveillance database.

Identification cards are also needed to buy knives, gasoline, phones, computers and even sugar. The purchases are entered into a police database used to flag suspicious behavior or individuals…

Much more at the link.

Fernandez adds:

Whoever controls 5G will be able to surveil and control the planet. Those in charge of the network could be omniscient and potentially omnipotent over unprotected man-made systems. To guard against China ruling this kingdom, the Trump administration has banned U.S. companies, most notably Google, from selling technology to Chinese giant Huawei.

The urgency of the challenge was underscored by The Hill’s comparison of the situation to Apollo. “We are in another innovation race right now. The race to 5G [is] a contest that could have more far-reaching effects than the race to the moon. The Trump administration deserves credit for articulating a policy that aims to see America win the race to 5G.” Steve Bannon had an even more extreme formulation: “It is a massive national security issue to the West. The executive order is 10 times more important than walking away from the trade deal. It [Huawei] is a major national security threat, not just to the US but to the rest of the world. We are going to shut it down.”

The technical aspect of this is not something I understand. But I think I get the principle.

[NOTE: I believe this story may be related:

How do you kill a company? The answer, in the context of Chinese electronics giant Huawei, appears to be deprivation, removing ready access to the elements that distinguish smartphones from very expensive chunks of anodized aluminum and glass. The latest blow: Chip designer ARM has reportedly severed ties with the company. Huawei could arguably survive without Google. Without ARM? Not so much.

It’s important to clarify that nothing at this point is certain, or permanent. The BBC first reported ARM’s move Wednesday morning, citing an internal memo that noted ARM’s use of “US origin technology,” which makes it subject to a sweeping ban put in place by the Trump administration. ARM finally confirmed the ban Wednesday afternoon.]

Two more deaths on Mount Everest

The New Neo Posted on by

There have actually been seven deaths on Mount Everest this week, but this article discusses the two most recent ones. Both were of climbers who were 55 years old, although I have no idea (and the article does not explain) whether their age was a factor. Most of the people who try to climb Everest are very very fit, but “fit” is a relative term when:

At the summit itself, conditions quickly become intolerable for climbers. At 8,848 meters (29,029 feet), the air itself contains only one-third of the oxygen found at sea level. Additionally, the human body begins to rapidly deteriorate at such an altitude — especially without proper supplemental oxygen supplies.

I freely admit that I don’t understand the high-altitude climbing mentality, although I’ve read tons about it and am familiar with a great many of the explanations. I just don’t share any element of it. I’m sure the thrill (and the view) is a spectacular and nearly-indescribable and unmatchable thing, but the risks are so great and the physical anguish so terrible that the desire to actually do it (rather than just imagine it) is somewhat opaque to me.

Plus, it’s gotten very very crowded, and the article contends that was a factor in the deaths on Wednesday. For example, this purports to be an actual photo of the summit line that day, which shows 320 people waiting on a ridge leading to the summit:

RIP.

How marijuana legalization affected the outlaw growers of Humboldt County

The New Neo Posted on by

The New Yorker has an interesting article about the changes in the economy and society (I almost wrote “culture” there, but realized that the word has a double meaning in this context) of Humboldt County, California as a result of the state’s legalization of pot-growing. Illegal marijuana-growing used to be a big big deal there, with much of the population involved, so this isn’t some fringe thing.

It’s not just the legalization that has caused changes; as the article indicates, they’re been changing for quite some time as legalization and the regulation that goes with it happened by stages over several decades, and as the older hippie Boomer population of growers died out or retired, to be replaced by a younger group with different motives and a different profit mentality.

Here’s a quote:

For multiple generations, the people of Humboldt thought that they had found a back door out of the mainstream economy. While small towns and family farms across America saw economic decline, Garberville held on to its main street, its independent businesses, and its reputation as a haven for people who did not fit in. Cannabis allowed the community to sustain the illusion that it was a place apart, but the conceit is now ending. You could blame the correction that has been playing out on the first generation, for naïveté; or on the second generation, for pursuit of profit; or on the county, for demanding changes; or on the state government, for not protecting small farmers. But Humboldt can no longer claim its independence, and it will now have to see if it can hold on to its values.

Interesting that the author doesn’t seem to think that one of those values would be this: “It’s perfectly fine for me to break the law and grow an illegal drug because I’ve decided that I’m above the law and my motives are good and pot is good.” Several of the assumptions in that statement of values can be challenged, but there doesn’t seem to be much in the article (or in the illegal growers’ minds) challenging it. The piece focuses on the difficulties faced now that legalization has lowered the price that can be charged for the product, as well as fostering the growth of bigger companies compared to the more home-grown traditional farms. The message is to adapt or perish as a business.

The only part of the article I noticed that seemed to me to deal with some of the fallout of the earlier system is this one:

The community also faced the kinds of problems that are bound to occur in an isolated county where people kept their savings in cash, drugs were easily accessible, and nobody called the cops when things went wrong. Gellman lost friends to drunk driving on Humboldt County’s winding mountain roads. Two friends were murdered during pot deals gone bad. He lost friends to suicide, and later, as the heroin and meth problems that have affected rural areas around the country reached Humboldt, to drug overdoses. At the age of thirty-nine, he has a dozen laminated portraits in his home, memorials to friends who died. “There were a lot of deaths,” he said. “But I think it’s just because we know so many people. We have so many friends.”

An exercise in rationalization. No; it’s not just that you have so many friends. It’s that something was very very wrong.

However, I will add this: I’m almost certain that it wasn’t just illegal pot-growing that was responsible. I’m basing this on a community I knew when I was a teenager. I had a boyfriend for a while who was one of those “Rebel Without a Cause” types and who lived in a small town in a state in the northeast. On one of my visits to that town, he took me to the cemetery where he viewed the graves of a number of his friends who’d already died in various self-destructive ways, among which drinking and driving featured prominently. At the age of nineteen he already knew a lot of dead people, and this was a long long long time ago.

Something was very very wrong, and I didn’t know what it was, but I could feel it all around me. It wasn’t simply the economy; the town was located in proximity to a factory that was still bustling at the time and employed a lot of local people. No, it was something more difficult to define: a general aimlessness, a cultural anomie that even I, as a visitor, could sense.

Swans, little and big

The New Neo Posted on by

The dance of the little swans (“cygnets”) from the ballet “Swan Lake” is famous for its precision. It’s not one of those great moments in ballet artistry, but it’s a triumph of technique and synchrony among the four swans who perform the variation.

Usually dancers who are small in stature are chosen, and that’s because they’re supposed to be young swans, and also because the choreography features quick, sharp movements and small allegro jumps which tend to be easier for more compact dancers.

There’s also a variation for “big” swans—the taller dancers. This dance employs sweeping movements and allows the dancers to separate rather than remain in a tight Rockettes-line formation as in the dance of the little swans. The larger movements suit the larger dancers just as the smaller movement suit the smaller ones.

The choreography is standard for the small swan variation, although people sometimes like to mess with the large variation. But the small swans’ dance has remained essentially the same for the nearly 125 years since it was choreographed by Lev Ivanov in 1895. Ivanov did the “white” acts of “Swan Lake,” and he was an absolute master.

On the danse des petits cygnes (dance of the little swans):

It is very challenging because all dancers must look the same.

Lev Ivanov’s choreography…was meant to imitate the way cygnets huddle and move together for protection. Four dancers enter the stage in a line and move across with their arms crossed in front of one another, grasping the next dancers’ hands…At the very end, they break their chain and try to “fly”, only to drop to the ground.

I never performed the role, but I had to learn it. The fun aspects were somewhat overshadowed by the fact that, about halfway through, one’s legs seem to turn to lead, and yet one must plow on. At first, it’s nearly impossible, even if the dancer is in very good shape. It is one of the most exhausting variations in the world of ballet—and that’s saying something—even though it must look as though it’s just tossed off lightly.

He’s a good rendition. This one is by the Paris Opera Ballet (pay particular attention to the step known as pas de chat, occurring from 1:01 to 1:11) [NOTE: If you see an annoying banner ad pop up, just click on the “x” and it will disappear]:

And here’s one by the Mariinsky Ballet, which is similarly on the fast side (some productions cheat a bit and slow it down) and emphasizes movement across the stage on the diagonal:

Here’s the dance of the big swans by the Mariinsky as well:

And here are some very young dancers in rehearsal on the first day of learning the dance of the little swans. You can see how difficult it is. They don’t really have the technique yet, nor the stamina, but they’re game and their teacher is energetic and kind:

MS-13 gang members murder 14-year-old girl

The New Neo Posted on by

The alleged killers had been in detention in Maryland, but that state doesn’t have a policy of cooperation with ICE’s requests to turn illegal immigrant offenders over for possible deportation.

Thus we have this:

Last week, police arrested two teenagers, Josue Fuentes-Ponce and Joel Escobar, and charged them with the murder of 14 year-old Ariana Funes-Diaz. She was killed in a tunnel, beaten with a baseball bat and slashed with a machete. She was found naked. Reportedly, the killers, members of MS-13, ordered her to strip before they murdered her.

According to authorities, Fuentes-Ponce and Escobar killed the girl because they were worried she would report them to police. She had lured a man to Northwest Washington, D.C., where he was beaten, robbed, and interrogated about his gang affiliations.

The girl had apparently been an accomplice to a previous crime of the pair, although whether she did this of her own free will or whether she was coerced and/or threatened if she didn’t cooperate is unknown (at least, unknown by me). No matter, because that is no excuse whatsoever for her murder.

Maryland officials admit that holding these two criminal illegal immigrants would have violated state guidelines. In other words, it is Maryland state policy not to cooperate with ICE in keeping the public safe from vicious illegal immigrants like Fuentes-Ponce and Escobar.

And Maryland is hardly alone in its resistance to immigration enforcement.

The two had been arrested and imprisoned for a previous robbery.

This is an excellent example of the principle of the slippery slope. Unless I’m mistaken, even those advocating leniency for illegal immigrants weren’t always advocating that we refrain from deporting criminal illegal aliens. As best I can recall, there was consensus on the idea that at least that particular crowd of offenders who had also come to this country illegally should be deported. I’m not sure when that idea became passe among Democrats, but my sense is that the protection from ICE’s clutches even of criminal illegal aliens became more mainstream during the Obama administration, although Obama himself wasn’t pushing it,