How ethology and game theory explains Putin behavior

 There are a lot of speculations about why Putin decided to invade Ukraine.

In ethology it is a game that explains this:

 It is called the game of hawk and dove and it applies to the bird's  territorial conflicts .

Imagine 2 birds who are fighting for same territory, they can choose 2 behaviours:

-be a  dove: avoid the fight, avoid injury, be content with less and survive. Usually dove live with doves and cooperate

-be a hawk: search to maximize the gains, and take aggressive actions that can kill you. ("Greed is good" Gordon Gekko, "Wall street"). The hawks are stopped/killed by other hawks.

It is clear that Kremlin is inhabited by hawks. You don't survive communism and wild capitalism be being a pussy.

On the other side the situation is more complex:

Let's define other side: Ukraine, EU and USA.

In birds ethology naturalists observed a 3-th behaviour: to be a bourgeois: if you are attacked you defend the territory, you don't enter in other territory. The bourgeois fights off a hawk. This is Ukraine.

EU, in particular Austria,Germany and France behaved as a dove with Kremlin, seeking always to avoid conflict and compromise. This worked inside Europe, because nobody has to gain something by using aggression.

With respect to Ukraine and Eastern Europe, EU was like a selfish herd, with Western Europe in the middle, and Eastern and Southern Europe at periphery, as a buffer against Russian and Middle Eastern threats.

 The corruption of European politicians, the infighting, the narrow interests produced contempt at Kremlin and underestimated Europe. Gerhard Schroeder ex canceler of Germany is still on the payroll of Gazprom.

USA is a hawk and it will be a hawk for a long term. 

USA was created by people who behaved hawkish, they crossed the ocean, they killed native americans and took their lands. Also it is protected by 2 oceans, and by biggest and most technically advanced armed force in the world, so the external security risks for USA are minimal. The only attack on american soil after WW2 was on September 11 2001 , and then USA behaved hawkish, chasing the authors of the attacks all over the world and killed them.Other countries didn't take the same actions. For example Spain retreated from Irak after Atocha attacks.

Putin as a hawk saw a bunch of doves and decide to attack. The big bald eagle was oceans away and without support of Europeans it can't help a country isolated from big oceans.

So what went wrong  ?

Well, the EU wasn't a dove, it was a bourgeois all the time. It wanted to maintain the status quo, with minimum effort, so it made concessions.

Eastern Europe was traumatized by Russia and Western Europe by WW2, Putin invasion was felt like threat to all. The politicians that were friendly with Putin felt betrayed.

In order to maintain the status quo, Ukraine had to be helped. This was dictated also by cold state interests, if not by human solidarity.

In this 4 actors game, EU want the status quo to be maintained: to have access to raw materials from Russia and Ukraine. This is impossible for now.

Ukraine wants to maintain its territory, economical and political independence from Moscow. But you have what you can defend. West sends weapons, but Ukraine will have the manpower to man those weapons?

The decisive factor in Ukraine will be manpower, West might have better equipment by the supply chain is long while Russia has shorter supply chain and a competitive equipment. Technologically on the battle field they are balanced.

I think Russia is afraid to declare war on Ukraine and mobilize it's troops, because behind curtains it was sent the message that NATO will intervene. 

NATO intervened in Afghanistan which is thousand of kilometres away against an enemy who didn't pose the same threat as Russia, and it will not intervene at it's borders?

If Russia doesn't cooperate and it doesn't attack NATO an incident in Kaliningrad enclave or in Black Sea  can be created to convince public opinion that the war is necessary. Or a global famine will make countries plea for NATO intervention in Ukraine to free the wheat.

France and Spain can recruit in their Foreign Legions Africans starved by Putins blockade to fight in Ukraine.

If the current mobilisation is maintained. The conflict will be long. Russia can't push in Ukraine, and Ukraine can't push in Russia.

If Russia mobilise all the reserves, it could lead to WW3. I hear more often on youtube, stuff like: a small nuclear is explosion doesn't damage too muck the environment, after 2 weeks radiation is gone.

USA had neutron bombs ready to use against soviet tanks in Germany who was more densely populated than Donbass.

USA can follow it hawkish strategy for a long time, even if Biden lefts the office, the next president will feed military industrial complex with aid money for Ukraine.

Support for Ukraine means support for Taiwan, if USA waivers in Ukraine, China might risk taking Taiwan, and drag USA in a war, which it will be more costly for USA, in terms in of manpower and money.

China is an self reliant economic giant, with a huge and modern army. The only weakness is oil and food.

How long Russia can hold its hawkish attitude ? Putin and Co  cannot retreat from Ukraine now. The empires has to win every battle because they have many enemies that seek for a chink in the armour.

Troubles from northern Ireland lasted from 1960 to 1998. It was was a slow burning conflict localized conflict. It will be the same with Ukraine ?

Or it will be like on WW1 Western front, a trench warfare?

I estimate that the war will take minimum 2-3 years and maximum 10 years.

In 2 years maybe EU will decoupled energetically from Russia and apply more sanctions, and send more weapons. Germany lost in WW1 because it was starved and USA supplied weapons to Entente camp.

EU will be in an economic crisis, but the orders for weapons will flow to keep the economy.

Meanwhile Russia can diversify it's clients selling to China and India or other countries, and EU will have to replace Russian raw materials with those from Africa and Latin America.

Russia can rebuild it's armament industry in 2 years, but the problem is the capable people.  Moving the factories from Western Russia beyond Ural mountains in WW2 was a gigantic feat. But Stalin still got engineers, patriotic people who worked hard on the cold, half starved t rebuild factories and NKVD for people who lacked patriotism.

Putin has only NKVD. Smart people left Russia.

How ancient Xiongnu tribes inflence today's China foreign policy

 Up until 19 century, the main foreign threats to China came from north.

There they have built the great wall to stop nomadic warriors tribes like xiongnu,huns,mongols,manchu from raiding China.

China in the north can be threaten by chaotic warrior tribes, or by a powerful empire like mongols,czars or Soviet Union.

Putin's Russia is neither of this, it has internal order but lacks power to conquer China.

If Russia breaks, the eastern provinces can come under American influence due to cultural ad physical proximity. 

China doesn't want an American foothold near its border, that's why it supports North Korea and it will support the future North Korea: Russia.

In short Putin's Russia is a buffer from global western influence.

The real threat for China comes from south, those countries had clashes in the past with China, and China sequestrations of water from Tibet's rivers doesn't help.

They are densely populated countries with physical barriers such as Himalaya and jungle in SE Asia so a "special military operation" is not feasible if those countries get help from US or Australia.

A bellicose China might move then in West's side.

Why Zelenski wasn't accepted to speak at Oscar ceremony

 Yesterday the "Fresh prince from Bel Air" slapped Chris Rock because he made a bad joke about his wife.

The difference between what Putin did in Russia and  what Will Smith did, is the scale

Putin regime tells journalists to keep the mouth shut. Smith does the same with comedians.

Putin tries to kill a comedian Zelenski, Smith slaps a comedian Chris Rock.

The same hubris and same arrogance in both and the same idea that force can solve things.

They both live in a bubble and think that their actions don't have consequences.

What you expect from a Hollywood that accepted sexual abusers in they ranks ?

To support independence and freedom ? To keep at least a moment of silence for victims from Ukraine ?

In WW2 Hollywood stars advertised war bonds, now they go against their country interests because it is trendy.

Hollywood is good also to distract, everybody now  speaks about Chris Rock and Will Smith fight, everyone has forgot about Ukraine, Zelenski, Mila Kunis, and Sean Penn.

Sean don't melt the oscars, sell them and donate the money.

Comfort blanket

 Children when they are upset, they have a blanket to hug it and cover them.

Adults have the delusions as comfort blanket.

Many people including Zelenski said that there will be no invasion. Many though that it will be only in the East.

Now Moldova says the same thing now.

PS. It seems to me that this Ukrainian Russian war is similar to Chinese Vietnamese war from 1975.

China tried to conquer Vietnam or as it claim to teach them a lesson that their ally Soviet Union is too far.

They were reppelled.

Even if Ukraine push back Russia. This war showed the limits of US-Ukraine alliance 

Why Putin will kindly ask NATO to attack him in Ukraine

The best partner for Putin  to discuss peace is Ukraine not United States.

Because Ukraine has a worse Best Alternative To No negotiated Agreement.

US BATNA: stay away, and sell munitions,grains,oil and gas.

Ukraine BATNA: the whole country to be scorched.

The problem is that Putin's pride doesn't allow him to admit defeat to a bunch of civilians with Molotov cocktails.

Admitting such a defeat will show Russians that he is weak, and his enemies feeling this, they will attack him 

But being beaten by the biggest military alliance, is another thing. It offers a glorious defeat.

Trying to understand the irrationally Putin

 Many people are trying why Putin is doing evil stupid things 

So they try to blame it on the more rational actor, the West.

West was quite rational, it picked fights that it can win and had a gain of it.

So the narrative that I hear it so often is that actions of rational actor (NATO expansion to the East) triggered actions of an irrational actor (Putin).

Putin was irrational when he used the excuse of bomb exploding in building blocks to attack Chechnya in 1999.

Bombs put by his men: some dwellers notice some strange persons, transporting 'sacks of sugar' in the basement and called the police. Later they announced that it was military exercise.

Invasion of Georgia is not rational, because the gains were minimum, a patch of land, and if he hadn't influence in Europe, he could have harsher sanctions earlier.

Anyway, the main topic is that in its narrative Russia demands justice because US broke it's promise not to expand NATO 

First from legal point of view, there is any treaty? If James Baker promise something verbally in '90, it is James Baker who promised not State Dept. If US and Soviet Union sign a treaty, State dept has to implement the treaty regardless of who is in charge.

Even if this treaty exist, it applicable to a thirty party which doesn't know about it?

Hey, Volodemir, I George and Mikhail, have decided that you owe us some money.

How does this sounds?

Like extortion and robbery.

When Russia condemns US for not keeping it's part of the deal, it is condemning it for not keeping it's part in a conspiracy, a extortion racket.

Third E Europe is composed of people, is not a company that can be sold or bought.

And when great powers trade territories, they trade people, like in Tzarist Russia you traded land with serfs.

So when Russia condemns US for not keeping the deal, it says in fact that US is no longer trading slaves as it use to. US slave trade was a major argument of Russian whataboutism.

Some countries want to match US economically, technologically, culturally. To exceed US in some positive way.

Only Russia tried to match them in atrocities: US killed native Americans, we can kill to natives. US had a slave trade, we have Gulag, they threw 2 nukes, soon we will do it too 

This is my impression from their what about ism.

Difference between East and West in Europe

 I tried to explain to a friend the difference between West and East in Europe, but just now an example came to my mind.

Philip 2 of Spain has a secretary that he wanted him dead. The secretary found out and run to Catalonia. Despite being few km away from Madrid, the king of Spain, Netherlands,Portugal and of America, could not fetch him, because local parliament opposed.

But Philip couldn't just invade the place cut heads of parliamentarians, and pillage the city like central Asian Hordes did?

No, the powerful king choose to respect the treaty that gave Catalans their rights, and choose to sent inquisition after unfortunate secretary 

King James of England, asked himself what is the difference between him and a tyrrant. The difference he said is that I act within the law .

Friedrich the great wanted to buy a wind mill from a peasant, in order to build his palace. The peasant didn't want and sued the king of Prussia and won.

Machiaveli notices the difference between France and Turkey.

In France the king had the power limited by the lord's, it was hard to rule France, and even harder to conquer it After you overthrow the king you had to defeat the lords one by one.

Sultan of Turkey had more power because it hadn't lord's and could rule easier but the country was easier to conquer: you remove the sultan and everyone obeys by force of habit 

Ukraine is more like France, and Russia is more like Turkey.

The reason for this situation in Western Europe is geography and history.

Mountains and big rivers limit the expansion of empires, and in remote regions minorities can survive fragmentigs the political power : bascques in Pirrinee, celts, in Ireland, Bretagne,Cornwall and Walles.

All the Western powers formed by agglutination of smaller entities:

The land of free peasant was taken by counts, counts married or were conquered and formed duchies, and dukes, formed kingdoms or were allied with royal family.

Anyway during this period privileges of the small entities were preserved 

And the king's tolerated them because the political mentality then was to keep the things how they are, to rule better 

This ended with Napoleanic wars, when France uniformizez everything inside, and force other countries to the same.

In the East in the other side you have big planes that are no obstacles for empire expansion, the defense is expensive because you need cavalry.

There is cultural diversity and this means that intermarriage between ruling families is low. Mongols/Tatars and Turks were Muslim, Russian,Ukrainians, Romanians were orthodox,Poles and Hungarian Catholics 

So a low transfer of customs and respect for privileges 

Also this cultural diversity didn't help in creating a common way of conflict resolution.

In the East it was always total war. Tatars burned down villages and cities of Romanian and poles, and sent their captives in slavery 

Vlad the impaler impaled people in Ottoman empire and in German cities from Transilvania.

Meanwhile up till reformation, all the west was catholic, so they didn't burned down the monasteries and cathedrals.

Also in early middle ages, to prevent human losses, kings preferred to have a duel and the winner to call the victory.

This habit was seldom used in the East.

In short the fact that the west had small and equal entities with a common Christian culture, help them to develop a rule based society, basis for parliamentarianism,pluralism and democracy.

About allegedly stolen election in US

 Donald Trump and his allies are complaining that they have their elections stolen.

Let's not forget who is Donald Trump: he is the leader of free world, allegedly the most powerful man in the world. He can order FBI,CIA,IRS to make investigations.

He is not an opposition leader in Russia,Belarus,Venezuela or other country with dictators.

He could not say that he simply watched how his election got stolen, and he couldn't do anything.

He can blame on the Deep state, how much he wants but the Hillary Clinton's private mail server investigation by FBI brought him some votes. He didn't complain about Deep state then.

And his anti-China actions gain him support of many from CIA and military who worried about its rise.

Intelligence agencies, police and military are institutions that wants to keep the situation as it is.

Communism fell in Eastern Europe, because the government could not keep the situation as it was and it become worse, and finally the institution of force turned against incompetent civilian government. Similar things happen in Brasil.

Either Trump didn't know how to use his resources to prevent a fraud and he is incompetent and he must go either he could not control the "deep state" and he must go.

To rule a country you must be smart and moral.

Belarus situation is a win-win situation for Russia

 If the intention of Russia is to swallow Belarus, then it is the right time.

If the revolutionaries over throw Lucashenko and a civil conflict continues, then Putin can intervine to reestablish order, like he did in Donetsk

If Lucashenko wins he will between EU pressure to comply with elections and Putin pressure to subordinate Moscow even more. 

If he submits to Putin, then he will keep his job.

In this economic crisis, it is hard to find a job as a dictator.

Technology of the future

 There are technologies that improve resource extraction like steam powered water pumps who improved coal extraction and technologies that increase consumption of the resources like the steam locomotive who used coal.

I think our technologies have developed to increase consumption, every body pick the best fruits from supermarket, everyone wants air conditioning units, everybody wants big cars, new clothes, new cell phones.

Truck and planes haul food from all over the world but food productivity is stagnant.

Other extraction technologies such as mining and oil drilling are stagnant. They don't provide enough.

Because the extractive technologies don't keep the pace with consumptive energies, there will be a shift towards extractive technologies development.

The consumption will be reduced in 2 ways, quantity will be reduced, number of brands will be reduced.

How China's virus crisis and US political crisis are related

The president of World Health Organisation Tedros Gebreyesus has praised president Xi and China for the measures taken against spread of coronavirus.
Another case in which firemen are praised for their actions but people who prevent fire are ignored.
Now there are 28000 cases of corona virus in China and only 3 in India.
Both are big countries with overcrowded cities.
India has slums that don't exist in China.
India has a temple in which rats are worshiped.
One must expect to have a virus outbreak in India and not in China.
The major difference between China and India is the difference between state controlled media and free media.
A free media hungry for sensational news, sometimes creates hysteria but in cases of a real crisis it informs people in time and allows them to take measures.
The Chinese politician has the luxury to think at his political career before releasing a news.
A politician will think at his career first, at his party second and at the country in thirth place.

Meanwhile in the greatest democracy in the world, president Trump stops money approved by congress to put pressure on Ukraine, a country at war with Russia, to obtain dirt on a political opponent.
In the Senate impeachment process Republican Party tried to limit the evidence against Trump by limiting the number of witnesses, making the process less fair.
And finally the Republican party voted according to party lines except of Mitt Romney.
It seems that the 2 party system in US is collapsing, only the Republicans have the real power and Democrats bark without biting.
The whole impeachment in US is obsolete, a relic of a time when a fraternity of politicians ruled US, and in which the said fraternity could expel you if you broke the rules.
Even Romania has better procedures to impeach the president. Twice president of Romania Basescu was impeached for lesser crimes as Trump and twice was reinstalled as president by popular referendum.
A referendum regarding Trump would be a better solution.
If he won he would shut the mouth of democrats, if he loses the democracy has functioned.
Acquittal in Senate impeachment  is like OJ Simpson acquittal. Legally is correct but  the acquittal didn't brought justice or closure.
In China and in US party interests trump country interests.

China's media censorship on media has brought us the corona virus outbreak, what will bring us Trump acquittal  by republican government ?
According to the latest trend a new mandate for Trump.
Trump doesn't have challengers in Democratic Party, and the economy is ok.
But the economic growth is not a good indicator of the long term viability of the political system.
All the dictators at the beginning of their mandate had good economic results.
Hitler had good economic results when he took power, because he implemented long delayed decision. The plans for autobahn were thought before he took power.
Ceausescu in first years had a good economic growth fuelled by american loans, and second hand western technology.
Saddam Hussein after he took power used oil money for public spending, he build powerlines and highways.
US and China must reform.
The corona virus outbreak might make China more open. If you control all the media even if you say the truth on time you are not believed. Maybe the virus outbreak will convince that is more effective to allow health information freely.
On the other hand US is inching toward and autocracy with a president that puts personal loyalty above else and a subservient republican party who refuses to take a hit for the democracy team, and divided democratic party which discusses gender issues.

Unfairness

I have heard at the radio that the last year 1000 people died in psychiatric hospitals in Romania.
In same time till this year it was discussion to release some prisoners from jail because of bad conditions. They were overcrowded and the cells had mold.
But how many prisoners were tied up to the beds, how many were subject to medical experiments ? How many were abused by the personnel?
Some of these prisoners are drug traffickers who overcrowded psychiatric wards with their customers: drug users.
This happens when society is ruled by influence and power and by moral values.
The helpless innocent is kicked in the street and the criminal is compensated by the court for bad time in jail.

Film review: 'Her'

I watched recently the movie Her. It is about a divorced writer who buys a new operating system with an artificial intelligence fitted with social abilities.
The writer (Joaquin Phoenix) decides that he needs a feminine touch and decides to give the operating system a female voice.
He starts to interact with the operating system (Her) and he becomes infatuated.
Based on our brain characteristics and our experience we all have an ideal partner. The AI discovered this ideal partner and simulated it. So he is in love with the illusion of his ideal partner.
Having the perfect partner for you at this time is bad because you don't evolve.
If you are a fat asocial gamer and you have a girlfriend exactly like you, you become more fatter, more isolated and you enter in decline.
Your partner should be good enough for live with her/him but different in order to explore different part of the reality and of you.
In the movie everything is fine till Her is blocked by an software update, and the writer is desperate to contact her.
Questioning her, he finds out that in the same moment, she speaks with over 8000 people and she is in love with over 600. He is devastated.
For millions of years people evolved with limited number of partners to look after it. Men had to fend of rivals who wanted to impregnate their wives. Women where dependent of the men who hunt and fought for the attention of the most able hunter.
Our survival depending on managing a small amount of people. We cannot remember more than 150 let alone manage them. An AI will outperform us even at this.
An AI is immortal, and doesn't need to reproduce, it doesn't have the biological restrictions. If it's main goal is to be social with many people as possible.

Finally Her dumps him because 'our meetings are like words, and the blank space between the words is becoming more interesting', or simply said he is boring. She has something better to do.
She said before that she is in love with over 600 people, so he is worse than 600 people.
Worst is that he is more uninteresting than 600 people.
If you are rejected because you are fat, old,short, you are missing a limb, you stutter, you have wrong kind of skin colour you accept it and you live with that.
But to be rejected by a computer because you are not interesting, a characteristic that you control, is worse.
Also to be placed 601 option is much harder to endure that to be placed the second option.
Advice: If you are placed 3-th option leave, the place is too crowded.

I am wondering about this AI failure:
The guy had a money back guarantee if the operating system dumped him ?
He could sue the producer because psychological harm caused by a faulty product ?
What is the difference between this AI and a wife that dumps you because you are bankrupt now ?
"Her" is a though provoking movie.
The movie is no longer a SF movie already we have Replika an AI bot
  

The bridge problem

Today are 30 years since Berlin Wall fell and I want to describe how over control can harm.
Let's imagine that we have a capital city connected to the agricultural area via a bridge.
Over the bridge passes all kind of lorries with wheat, vegetables, milk which feed the capital.
The bridge is strategic if it is blown up,the people from city will starve.
Government decides that the bridge should be guarded by soldiers.
One guy from military ask himself what if inside the lorry we have a device that can blow up the bridge ?
So it is decided that each lorry should be stopped and searched.
Of course this leads to delays in supplying the city, tomatoes are getting rotten, the milk is getting sour. The farmers are not willing to bother with bridge checks and they don't sell anymore to the city.
The city population is starving, is rioting and it is overthrowing the government.
This is the reason why communism fell: centralisation and police control.
The police has the ultimate word. Safety of the regime and not development was the main focus.

How thinking slow can save lives in US police shooting

I heard few days a go a news from US Texas:
A former police officer woman, mistook her apartment, busted in her afro-american neighbour condo, and shot him, believing that he was a thief.
What better example of police racism ?
Well, is more bad police training than racism. I will explain below:
I am reading Daniel Khaneman's book ''Thinking fast and slow'. He argues that there are 2 types of reasoning a fast one and a slow one.
The fast one reasons based on stereotypes and makes causal relations. It is happy when everything makes sense. It can make sense of everything even if it is not related.
The slow one is more analytical, more detailed oriented, makes better decisions based on facts not on stereotypes, but it is using more working memory.

The fast thinking system triggers when you are under pressure,tired or distracted.
 The policewomen was after a 12 hours shift, she was texting and she believed that it was an intruder in her apartment and she acted on her stereotypes.
How the racist stereotype is constructed ? If you are a white officer, even if the criminals you are dealing with are 50% white and 50% non white, you will met more white people that are not criminals. Your mother is white and not a criminal, your family,your colleagues are white and non criminals so a stereotype white and criminal cannot be formed easy.

 But stereotype non white and criminal can be formed. And if the officer is under stress he/she will act according to stereotype.

I was using white police example because it is easier, but stereotypes against white people also exists.

An US american moved in to Japan, and left his bicycle outside his dojo, together with other bikes. In one evening because it was dark, he could not found his bicycle and he was fumbling.
A japanese policeman saw this, asked him what was he doing, checked his papers and then left him alone saying: "You foreigners make all the crimes in Japan". Racist ? Maybe. Stereotype for sure.

Anti racist education helps to overcome stereotypes ?
Education targets the slow decision system, which in a gun shoot out doesn't work.
Maybe anti racist education will work and afro-americans won't be so easily shot by the police, but what you do with others ? Like, my friends who are europeans:
Four of  my friends travelled in Detroit area in a rented car.
They were pulled over, and kept at gun point and then released by a fearful policeman.
At the TV news they saw that in Detroit was a shoot out in which a policeman was killed.
If one my friends would put his hand in his pocket for showing the passport they will be all dead, because of this policeman who feared for his life.

In order to give time to the slow thinking process to intervene you must slow things down and remove the pressure.

Lets wrap up a conclusion:
Policemen are fearing to be shot this makes them act hastily and judge on stereotypes.
The learned to act aggressively to deter anyone to use force.
They learn to shoot at head not at the feet, which makes a police encounter more deadly. You can shoot in the legs a nut with a knife from 6 m with same effects.

Their aggressive attitude makes suspect act nervous which amplifies the policeman fear.
Because of fear the suspect can act stupid.

The key words are guns and fear.
US americans won't give up their guns not even if half population is killed, so we must get rid of fear.

Taking time reduces fear. If the Texas police woman would call back ups and wait for it, she would realise that it was not her apartment.

Trevor Noah describes  very funny how police should handles suspects. And South Africa is far more dangerous as US.
Instead of pointing a gun and shooting out, US policemen should point a gun and be polite: "Good day sir, please put your hand on the driving wheel, where I can see it. How do you feel ? Where you were speeding ? Why you were speeding ?"

Book review: "Permanent record" by Edward Snowden

I just finished the reading of "Permanent record" by Edward Snowden, its autobiographic book.
I find it interesting because it is revealing the atmosphere in US before and after 9/11, and the state of mind of Snowden and NSA in that period.
The book becomes interesting when Edward Snowden discovers the internet in the '90.
Being anonymous on internet allowed him a teenager to interact with older and wiser people from universities.

He summarise his experience in the following phrase that I quote from memory: "so what if you were older and stronger than me ? In internet we are all equals and it matters who is smarter"
It makes you wonder:

With instant access to information what value have the knowledge of old people ?
Old people have social skill and patience, their social network precedes the birth of current contestants, no wonder that most leaders have above 40 ears of age.

If the strength would not matter why people are fleeing Afganistan, Syria and Africa ?
In a society where is no violence and humans rights are respected physical strength doesn't matter.
A school girl like Greta Thunberg could protest  in XXI Sweden but not in viking era, where the size did matter in hand to hand combat.

Snowden deplores the fact that Internet transformed from a platform  where people exchanged ideas , in a place in which money are extracted and fake news are spread.
The Internet is based on cables,servers, electricity and this doesn't pay for it self. The entering of  business extended this network, and allowed thousand of new economical possibilities.
Without internet thousand of young Asians, east Europeans, Africans, south Americans would be unemployed because the outsource and software business would not exists.

Snowden then describes how he started to hack internet sites while his parents divorced.
He says something interesting: When something new is created, the one who creates cannot foresee its effects.
For example: a colony of termites constructs a mound but this has as side effect attracting apes who are eating termites. Termites create the mound to protect but they concentrate and  attract other predators.
Other examples unintended consequences: NSA needed cyber experts, it outsourced this to different companies who brought young idealists like Snowden in contact with its secrets.
The first contact  he had with goverment was when as teenager he entered on the Los Alamos Laboratory site and read a lot of private documents.After some effort we convinced the site admin to fix the issues.

It seems that US administration have a chronic problem with security.
Snowden as a teenager entered in Los Alamos Nuclear laboratory site and read a lot of private information.
Then at 18-19 years of age he as civilian we worked on premises of Fort Meade without clearance. Then at 27 years he runaway with documents from an NSA compound in Hawaii.

He seems that he has a privacy problem also:
In the book he details the infatuation that he had for his boss in 2001, a married woman, and how he lived 9/11 attacks.
Serious Mr. Snowden ? You preach privacy but you disclose details that could affect the life of a married woman ?

After 9/11 he joined the army despite his fathers advice. He was disappointed and he was released on medical grounds.

Then he joined CIA in order to be a kind of Q in IT, but in more dangerous places.

He enters in conflict with his superiors because he demands better living conditions. During training they were living in a shitty motel with a broken stair who finally collapsed.
After demanding to his superior to fix the accommodation, and not receiving an answer he escalated the issue to higher echelons.But instead of  receiving an answer for his demands we was reprimanded because he didn't used the hierarchical channels.
So Snowden a white middle class american man, raised in spirit of constitution, who believes that   the people rule and politicians are servants of public interests, and you can make a petition and the problem is analysed, was reprimanded because he used his rights.
As punishment he is dispatched to Geneva not where he wanted: Afghanistan.
In this way he was separated by envy from his former colleagues who all wanted an European post.

It seems that is a CIA tradition to be cheap with new recruits, former CIA chief of operation for Europe Tyler Drumheller recounts on his book: 'On brink' how in 1975 when he was recruited he received a 250$ check with which he could buy only one suit.

In same book Tyler Drumheller says that during Bush Jr. administration  (2001-2009) CIA was very politicised, being ruled effectively by Dick Chenney and it mattered more political obedience than the professionalism.. (Maybe Cheney's politics trickle down to Snowden superiors?)
Tyler Drumheller says that Bush administration tried to change privacy laws in Western Europe. In same time NSA widen its dragnet.

In Geneva Snowden recalls how difficult it was for CIA to hide its searches online. It has to spend money to make a front company in order to search on internet some scientist.
It seemed that CIA was lagging behind NSA in terms of technology and importance. In his own words Edward Snowden said that it was easier to infect the computer of a target and stole the informations unknowingly than to try to bribe him. So NSA tools we cheaper and safer than the ones of CIA. He describes how CIA agents hurried and failed to recruit a Saudi official.

The suspense part is when he works for NSA in Hawaii
He is overworked and starts to have epileptic seizures.
He finds out about the desire of NSA to put on permanent record every information about a person in pure Chinese style. He says that by mistake he have found a file that describes everything.

He explains the rationale behind the intercepting communication of american civilians: the terrorists hid within a population, US must prevent another 9/11 we must intercept all persons of interest and the persons who are related. Within this dragnet also US citizens personal information can be collected breaking the constitutional right. it seems that 9/11 was the excuse for invading Iraq and spy US citizens.

He decides to tell to the media, and searches for a safe heaven far from US but not controlled by China or Russia. The only place is Hong Kong.
The most thrilling part is we he gets away with the SD cards full of information and then he waits 10 days in his hotel chamber for journalists.

He tried to reach Ecuador but is trapped on Moscow. His passport his cancelled but can use a UN refugee passport given by Ecuador.
He waits 44 days in airport eating burgers and refusing offers from FSB.

What is the fuss with privacy ?
Personal information modifies the our social image and determines the social alliances that we can have. More friends we have more powerful we are.

The Catholic Church controlled its believers using the guilt for the original sin, and guilt of the priests who broke their celibacy sermon.
Only catholic church could redeem your should and forgive your sins and welcome you in middle of community.
The sins of the clergy were tolerated because a vulnerable priest could be punished easily.
A holy man as Jan Hus was more dangerous to the church hierarchy than a Borgia.

The actual masters of digital information control are doing the same, they can forget  Justin Trudeau sins and present him as an exemplary  who welcomes brown refugees from Syria, or they excommunicate him and show a picture in which Trudeau is dressed as Aladin and with face painted brown.
Justin next time respond to the phone.

In this world only children as Greta Thunberg can change something, because they don't have a past, they don't have children to fed, they don't have a job to attend to. They are generous and hopeful.
But even children as Greta can be denigrated: in purest soviet style her speeches and actions are dismissed as actions of a deranged girl with Asperger and depression.
What is worse to be mentally ill and fight for a good cause ? Or sane and work for evil politicians and CEO as a pen for hire?

The solution to avoid mobbing and shaming is to forgive as it is said in prayer "Our father":
"
And forgive us our trespasses, 
as we forgive those who trespass against us. 
And lead us not into temptation, 
but deliver us from evil. Amen."

If we don't forgive others online trespasses ours won't be forgiven.
If we forgive the mistakes of the people and we don't became tribal, the leaking of personal information won't have any effect.

Conclusion:
After Snowden affair, the future has 2 possibilities either will be a world like in novel "We" by Evgeni Zamiatin , where people lived in transparent houses and everything was monitored and controlled either it will be a world in which we will use encryption more often and we will forgive more.

Regarding encryption: US Navy Intelligence developed free Tor browser to cloak internet traffic, Snowden exposed flaws used by NSA to spy.
People don't foresee consequences when they are doing something: those who tried to spy supply you with tools for self defence.
It seems that entropy wins every time.

3 ideas how to fix US

I am not interested in US elections but I watch a discussion between Bernie Sanders and Steven Colbert.
I was surprised to hear from an US senator the "tax the rich" shout of the 'sans coulotes' from French Revolution or of the Bolsheviks.
If you tax heavily top 1% they leave the country, then the burden will fall on top 10%. These either will leave the country or not invest too much and the burden will fall under the shoulders of 25%, they will not leave the country but they will invest and buy less.'
Many Jacobins and Bolshevik were idealistic and wanted to make a better world, but didn't understood the reality and especially the historical and cultural traditions, and many Bernie supporters could make the same mistake.
The Jacobins ignored the french catholic culture, the Bolsheviks ignored  the Russian orthodox culture and Mr. Sanders ignores american culture of the personal initiative.
If he ignores this it will be difficult for him to make some reforms. Jacobins had guillotine and Bolshevik had gulags from Siberia to speed up the reforms, US president as less room for manoeuvre.

The US american will not transform themselves in socialist as the french monarchists didn't transform themselves in citizens.
The problem with personal initiative is that you must have an even playing field, that allows the best to succeed. Te american pioneer had no kings to obey, no tradition to follow.
He elected it own president and made his traditions on the go.
Now it seems the playing field is not even, it is tilted.
How  ''mom and pop'' company who pays taxes can compete with a corporation that stashes billions overseas ?
How can you compete if you are bankrupt because of an illness ?
How can you use your skills better if student loans force you to take the most financial safe career ?

Here I have 3 ideas that fix these issue that costs nothing:

1. Flat tax: Put a tax of 20% on the profit. The fiscal code is simple and corporations cannot hide the profit. It evens the playing field between small and big companies. Less bureaucracy.
Make fiscal amnesty, tax with 20% all the money that are returning from off-shore accounts.
Don't tax revenues that are made abroad. Only US is doing it.
A comparison between UK and US fiscal system.

2. Offer university scholarships for poor youth:
From what I understood US government offers some subsidies for student loans.
In a market economy the the greater demand for a steady supply increase the price.
The places in university are in steady supply, the loans increase the demand, this increases the price, making education more difficult for  intelligent but poor youth.
Why don't we use the same money to offer scholarships in affordable universities ?
Students will be saved from poverty.High school students will be motivated to work hard to get rid of bad neighbourhood and gangs.
The government money will help good universities , not some diploma factories. These money can help develop local economy, the influx of students will increase commerce and propriety value.
Without loans the prices will decrease the education will be affordable for many students. They will not need a loan anymore.
The workforce will more qualified.
All you have to do is to spend differently.

3. Health insurance and medicines: Either the government can offer a basic insurance to complement the private one either offer a scheme for current insurance to cover the poor and ill:
Make a tax deduction for the revenue obtained from poor and ill so to be profitable for insurance companies to serve this market segment
Fix the price of some medicines that are monopoly of some companies.
If you are the only holder of a patented medicine you are a monopoly and in case where it is a monopoly  state intervenes and negotiates a fair price. (A fair price can be a fix percentage added to manufacturing costs for example)
Also let medicines coming from other countries to enter in US market easily.
If a medicine is approved in EU why it is not safe to sell it in US ?
If a drug company uses money for promotion these costs must not be deductible, many bad medicines are sold because of good marketing.

But this is not communism/socialist intervention in the economy ?
No.
The communist state owned every thing, the socialist took from rich and gave to poor.
In this case the government negotiates for the citizens because it represents them. In theory.

Paranoic diet

I saw a film on youtube about ketogenic diet as a cure for cancer. And I was wondering why we didn't solve the cancer issue long before 'big pharma' involvement. And why in communist states where you didn't have interest of 'big pharma' lobby nobody used this diet and people still had cancer.
I made a little bit of research and I found this article on National Health Institute.
It is explaining that the ketogenic diet makes the cancer more vulnerable to chemotherapy and it doesn't replace the treatment.
In brief: the metabolism of cancer cell is broken and produces more H2O2 which would be toxic unless you have glucose to neutralise it.
When we switch to ketogenic diet we have less  glucose and more H2O2 in cancer cells which made them vulnerable.
But the purpose of this post is are snake oil salesmen.
The biology is complicated, I had to read the article above twice , googling terms to understand it.
The snake oil sales men simplify biologic processes by combining truths with lies:
"The cancer cells need glucose to survive and divide"-true
"The cancer cells consume glucose at a higher rate than normal cells" -true.
"If we are fasting or making a ketogenic diet our glucose level will drop"-true
"Then if we will have low blood sugar the cancer cell will die" not true, because the speaker used 2 antagonic categories: bad cancer cells versus good human cells.
The cancer cells are more like the lost son who went on drugs and  on crime and become a social danger. It is a danger to society but his origins are from within society.
The cancer cells are human cells and they have the same propriety adaptation to the provided nutrients, so they can use ketones.
Of course the mind of audience a question pops out:
"Why we are not using this diet already?"
"Because big pharma wants to make money and they are threatened by cheap treatments" comes the answer. A true statement as you can see in the case of Martin Shkreli who took advantage of the monopoly on a HIV drug to increase the price with 400%.
Because people understand better the behaviour of other people, and few people have personal access to doctors, or pharmacists, this explanation is believed. And since is easier to rationalise good versus bad, if the greedy big pharma is bad and lying  then anyone who s against them is good, and says the truth.
Then these people form a paranoid cult who doesn't believe in traditional treatments as vaccines,antibiotic and chemotherapy, and follow all kind of diets vegan,ketonic,paleo.

Their guru's are always claiming that the truth was hidden from them in facts it is the opposite: they never seek the truth.
I didn't make a research but it seems that USA is most afflicted of this disease.

Maybe they are used to think in black and white?
After all, in the westerns the good guys wore white hats and bad guys wore black hats.

Limits of globalisation and limits for EU commision

I have read the Jean Claude Juncker speech and I must say that I am glad that someone stirred some debate in the European countries.
This speech made me think about decisions,globalisation,speed and stability.
The cheap transports made the globalisation possible and world much more instable.
The systems to be stable they must have a negative feedback loop, for example in order that a car to stay on the road, it must have a driver to look a the road and to turn the wheel.
But if we have a delay in this feedback loop, driver reacts too slow for example, at high speeds the system (car) will become unstable, because the driver will try to overcompensate. The only solution is to drive slower.
But the international competition doesn't allow you to drive slower.

A good example of instability created by delayed feedback is the Iran SUA relation.
USA overthrow Iranian prime minister Mossadegh in 1953, replacing him with the Shah. Shah was overthrown by Islamic revolution in 1979, and the Iranian-US relations are sour since then.
Between cause and effect was a delay of 26 years.
If the delay was shorter, let's say that Iranians somehow would punish USA for overthrowing Mossadegh, the USA wouldn't overthrow the democratic elect Iranian government and would start a negotiation about oil reserves in 1953 not about the nuclear program of Iran in 2016.
Another example is from nature: the trees give oxygen,regulate weather and fix soil.
If we cut 1 tree nothing happens because we have a buffer, the rest of the trees produce enough oxygen and drain enough water.
We cut 1000 trees, nothing happens, we get money and we develop a forestry industry and we cut trees for decades without something to happen.
Till one day the soil starts eroding, we have flood and droughts.Now we have a feedback that is telling us that we should stop cutting trees. Too late.

The best example of instable situation kept stable by a good and fast feedback is the nuclear threat during Cold War: if one side launched missiles the other would do the same.
The feedback was very fast in few hours after you pressed the button you received the feedback in the form of enemy nuclear missiles.This made th e rulers think twice.

What would happen if we would have the same feedback for damaging the environment? What if when we spill chemical wastes on a field we would lose our crop and die of hunger?
This type of feedback we have it before the railroads, the local communities survived with the local agricultural products. Then and now in poor rural communities from Romania, people take more care about their land.
Coincidently, now  the demand for local products rose with the awareness of the environment impact. Maybe, we as a society we organize our self to be stable.

Maybe the fact that we have in the world long feedback loops with delays, which determine instability, determines an isolationism in some countries such as USA and UK.
What the Europe shall do?
First define which feedback loops have delays.And decide where to act and where to give freedom to national governments.
For example: unemployment  in Romania it is a long feedback loop for Bruxelles: it must gather data, discuss within among other  issues, then implement some measures to be carried out by local authorities.
The feedback loop between national government  it is faster, the collection of data is faster, the interest is immediate and te measures can be implemented faster.
So the national government should replace the EU commission, and EU to be only a trade agreement?
Not at all. There are some issues, like defense and foreign policy where the national government might react slow
For example: Russia attacks Finland, and the French government should take a position.
Finland is far from France and it is not of interest, second France has some special relation with Russia (see armament deals), why should they bother?

Till the situation becomes worse for France, the situation will become worse for Finland and for members of EU from the Baltic Sea.
An supra national organization like EU, or NATO, will feel threaten faster because its border is at the Baltic sea not at the Rhine, and it will react faster.

In my opinion that EU should do few things but well, for more countries.
A 2 speed EU will drive to disintegration of EU due to economic polarization.
EU could become a supranational state with economic discriminations between its citizens.
Habsburgic empire was a supra national state with discrimination between nationalities and it collapsed after WW1, when the nations didn't want to fight for it.
The only multinational state that is working is Switzerland.
Switzerland started as treaty between cantons with equal rights, and the first topics that they agree were extradition of criminals,freedom of trade and common defence.
Let's learn from swiss modesty and start small.

How japanese sword techniques can help fighting lies and fake news

Today we must process information faster and faster and we leave the emotional brain to process information, and the emotional brain takes what it likes and discard any additional information.
If someone is primed to think that USA is behind any conspiracy in the world it is difficult for him to reject the false claims that the landing on the Moon was a fake.
It is hard to change someone's wrong ideas,but at least you can discourage him to spread the falsehoods, by making him doubtful.
After all nobody want to be considered a fool.
Let's imagine that you are on a TV studio, and you are trying to convince someone who believes that Moon landing was a fake, that he is actually wrong.
You can try to explain how the Saturn 5 rockets engine worked, or principles of optics on ancient film camera's, but even if you convince a technically ignorant person of your truth, it will take more than 5 min.

In Japanese sword fighting it is an school Iaido which is focusing on drawing the sword and cutting the oponent. The duel in this case takes seconds and the weaker opponent is dead.

The Iaido school focuses in simple fast techniques focused to hit vital organs, using the openings in defense.
We must develop a similar technique with fake news, to not let them spread.

In the case of fake Moon landing what is the vital organ, the hearth of the fake news?
Conspiracy. The US government has spend millions of dollars, for a Moon landing show.

So we must hit the conspiracy. And we must add to this conspiracy someone who is unlike to be a conspirator: the Soviet Union the archenemy of US in Cold War.

If the Moon landing was a fake why the Soviet Union kept silent? After all they could intercept rockets telemetry, and also they have high ranking moles as John Walker,Hansen and Aldrich Ames?

 Knowing were to hit is not enough you must also have the sword and the technique.
The sword it is an undisputed truth. The rivalry between USA and URSS is well known.
The technique consists of presenting the information in a way that is not rejected by the defense mechanisms of the other person.
If you say: "The whole thing with Moon landing fake is paranoia fueled by Russia", the other person will refuse to listen to you, because you making him looking like a fool, tricked by propaganda.

But if you put the misinformed person in role playing situation, maybe he will analyzing his believes.
Putting him in the role of URSS leader. he may wonder, if an ordinary man like me knows that the Moon landing was a fake, why the leaders from Kremlin, didn't know or didn't do anything.

In wining a dispute first you must have truth of your side, and you must be informed and know life sciences such as physics, well.

Second you must conceive simple fast experiments that can test the truth.
If someone is telling you about the car propelled by water. Ask him to ignite water. A fuel burns, if the water is fuel then it will burn.

Third you must know what truth's you can use.


Knowing how a camera works doesn't help in convincing someone who is ignorant about physics.
But everybody knows that enemies don't help each other, and was no reason for Soviet Union to cover USA in the biggest lie of the century.