The Fermi Paradox: Where Are All Those Aliens?

Last week NASA’s independent study team released its highly anticipated report on UFOs.  A couple of takeaways: First, the term “UFO” has been replaced  in fed-speak by “UAP” (unidentified anomalous phenomena). Second, no hard evidence has emerged demonstrating an extra-terrestrial origin for UAPs, but, third, there is much that remains unexplained.

Believers in aliens are undeterred. Earlier this summer, former military intelligence officer David Grusch had made sensational claims in a congressional hearing that the U.S. government is concealing the fact that they are in possession of a “non-human spacecraft.”  The NASA director himself, Bill Nelson, holds that it is likely that intelligent life exists in other corners of the universe, given the staggering number of all the stars which likely have planets with water and moderate temperatures.

A famous conversation took place in 1950 amongst a group of top scientists at Los Alamos (think: Manhattan Project) over lunch. They had been chatting about the recent UFO reports and the possibility of faster-than-light travel. Suddenly Enrico Fermi blurted out something like, “But where is everybody?”

His point was that if (as many scientists believe) there is a reasonable chance that technically-advanced life-forms can evolve on other planets, then given the number of stars (~ 300 million) in our Milky Way galaxy and the time it has existed, it should have been all colonized many times over by now. Interstellar distances are large, but 13 billion years is a long time.  Earth should have received multiple visits from aliens. Yet, there is no evidence that this has occurred, not even one old alien probe circling the Sun. This apparent discrepancy is known as the Fermi paradox.

A variety of explanations have been advanced to explain it. To keep this post short, I will just list a few of these factors, pulled from a Wikipedia article:

Extraterrestrial life is rare or non-existent

Those who think that intelligent extraterrestrial life is (nearly) impossible argue that the conditions needed for the evolution of life—or at least the evolution of biological complexity—are rare or even unique to Earth.

It is possible that even if complex life is common, intelligence (and consequently civilizations) is not.

Periodic extinction by natural events [e.g., asteroid impacts or gamma ray bursts]

 Intelligent alien species have not developed advanced technologies [ e.g., if most planets which contain water are totally covered by water, many planets may harbor intelligent aquatic creatures like our dolphins and whales, but they would be unlikely to develop starship technology].

It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself [Sigh]

It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy other technically-advanced species [A prudent strategy to minimize threats; the result being a reduction in the number of starship civilizations].

And there are many other explanations proposed, including the “zoo hypothesis,” i.e., alien life intentionally avoids communication with Earth to allow for natural evolution and sociocultural development, and avoiding interplanetary contamination, similar to people observing animals at a zoo.

As a chemical engineer and amateur reader of the literature on the origins of life, I’d put my money on the first factor. We have reasonable evidence for tracing the evolution of today’s complex life-forms back to the original cells, but I think the odds for spontaneous generation of those RNA/DNA-replicating cells are infinitesimally  low.  Hopeful biochemists wave their hands like windmills proposing pathways for life to arise from non-living chemicals, but I have not seen anything that seems to pass the sniff test. It is a long way from a chemical soup to a self-replicating complex system. I would be surprised to find bacteria, much less star-travelling aliens, on many other planets in the galaxy.

Maybe that’s just me. But Joy Buchanan’s recent poll of authors on this blog suggest that we are collectively a skeptical lot.

Generative AI Nano-Tutorial

Everyone who has not been living under a rock this year has heard the buzz around ChatGPT and generative AI. However, not everyone may have clear definitions in mind, or understanding of how this stuff works.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been around in one form or another for decades. Computers have long been used to analyze information and come up with actionable answers. Classically, computer output has been in the form of numbers or graphical representation of numbers. Or perhaps in the form of chess moves, beating all human opponents since about 2000.

Generative AI is able to “generate” a variety of novel content, such as images, video, music, speech, text, software code and product designs, with quality which is difficult to distinguish from human-produced content. This mimicry of human content creation is enabled by having the AI programs analyze reams and reams of existing content (“training data”), using enormous computing power.

I wanted to excerpt here a fine article I just saw which is informative on this subject. Among other things, it lists some examples of gen-AI products, and describes the “transformer” model that underpins many of these products. I skipped the section of the article that discusses the potential dangers of gen-AI (e.g., problems with false “hallucinations”), since that topic has been treated already in this blog.

Between this article and the Wikipedia article on Generative artificial intelligence , you should be able to hold your own, or at least ask intelligent questions, when the subject next comes up in your professional life (which it likely will, sooner or later).

One technical point for data nerds is the distinction between “generative” and “discriminative” approaches in modeling. This is not treated in the article below, but see here.

All text below the line of asterisks is from Generative AI Defined: How it Works, Benefits and Dangers, by Owen Hughes, Aug 7, 2023.

*******************************************************

What is generative AI in simple terms?

Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that broadly describes machine learning systems capable of generating text, images, code or other types of content, often in response to a prompt entered by a user.

Generative AI models are increasingly being incorporated into online tools and chatbots that allow users to type questions or instructions into an input field, upon which the AI model will generate a human-like response.

How does generative AI work?

Generative AI models use a complex computing process known as deep learning to analyze common patterns and arrangements in large sets of data and then use this information to create new, convincing outputs. The models do this by incorporating machine learning techniques known as neural networks, which are loosely inspired by the way the human brain processes and interprets information and then learns from it over time.

To give an example, by feeding a generative AI model vast amounts of fiction writing, over time the model would be capable of identifying and reproducing the elements of a story, such as plot structure, characters, themes, narrative devices and so on.

……

Examples of generative AI

…There are a variety of generative AI tools out there, though text and image generation models are arguably the most well-known. Generative AI models typically rely on a user feeding it a prompt that guides it towards producing a desired output, be it text, an image, a video or a piece of music, though this isn’t always the case.

Examples of generative AI models include:

  • ChatGPT: An AI language model developed by OpenAI that can answer questions and generate human-like responses from text prompts.
  • DALL-E 2: Another AI model by OpenAI that can create images and artwork from text prompts.
  • Google Bard: Google’s generative AI chatbot and rival to ChatGPT. It’s trained on the PaLM large language model and can answer questions and generate text from prompts.
  • Midjourney: Developed by San Francisco-based research lab Midjourney Inc., this gen AI model interprets text prompts to produce images and artwork, similar to DALL-E 2.
  • GitHub Copilot: An AI-powered coding tool that suggests code completions within the Visual Studio, Neovim and JetBrains development environments.
  • Llama 2: Meta’s open-source large language model can be used to create conversational AI models for chatbots and virtual assistants, similar to GPT-4.
  • xAI: After funding OpenAI, Elon Musk left the project in July 2023 and announced this new generative AI venture. Little is currently known about it.

Types of generative AI models

There are various types of generative AI models, each designed for specific challenges and tasks. These can broadly be categorized into the following types.

Transformer-based models

Transformer-based models are trained on large sets of data to understand the relationships between sequential information, such as words and sentences. Underpinned by deep learning, these AI models tend to be adept at NLP [natural language processing] and understanding the structure and context of language, making them well suited for text-generation tasks. ChatGPT-3 and Google Bard are examples of transformer-based generative AI models.

Generative adversarial networks

GANs are made up of two neural networks known as a generator and a discriminator, which essentially work against each other to create authentic-looking data. As the name implies, the generator’s role is to generate convincing output such as an image based on a prompt, while the discriminator works to evaluate the authenticity of said image. Over time, each component gets better at their respective roles, resulting in more convincing outputs. Both DALL-E and Midjourney are examples of GAN-based generative AI models…

Multimodal models

Multimodal models can understand and process multiple types of data simultaneously, such as text, images and audio, allowing them to create more sophisticated outputs. An example might be an AI model capable of generating an image based on a text prompt, as well as a text description of an image prompt. DALL-E 2 and OpenAI’s GPT-4 are examples of multimodal models.

What is ChatGPT?

ChatGPT is an AI chatbot developed by OpenAI. It’s a large language model that uses transformer architecture — specifically, the “generative pretrained transformer”, hence GPT — to understand and generate human-like text.

What is Google Bard?

Google Bard is another example of an LLM based on transformer architecture. Similar to ChatGPT, Bard is a generative AI chatbot that generates responses to user prompts.

Google launched Bard in the U.S. in March 2023 in response to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Microsoft’s Copilot AI tool. In July 2023, Google Bard was launched in Europe and Brazil.

…….

Benefits of generative AI

For businesses, efficiency is arguably the most compelling benefit of generative AI because it can enable enterprises to automate specific tasks and focus their time, energy and resources on more important strategic objectives. This can result in lower labor costs, greater operational efficiency and new insights into how well certain business processes are — or are not — performing.

For professionals and content creators, generative AI tools can help with idea creation, content planning and scheduling, search engine optimization, marketing, audience engagement, research and editing and potentially more. Again, the key proposed advantage is efficiency because generative AI tools can help users reduce the time they spend on certain tasks so they can invest their energy elsewhere. That said, manual oversight and scrutiny of generative AI models remains highly important.

Use cases of generative AI

Generative AI has found a foothold in a number of industry sectors and is rapidly expanding throughout commercial and consumer markets. McKinsey estimates that, by 2030, activities that currently account for around 30% of U.S. work hours could be automated, prompted by the acceleration of generative AI.

In customer support, AI-driven chatbots and virtual assistants help businesses reduce response times and quickly deal with common customer queries, reducing the burden on staff. In software development, generative AI tools help developers code more cleanly and efficiently by reviewing code, highlighting bugs and suggesting potential fixes before they become bigger issues. Meanwhile, writers can use generative AI tools to plan, draft and review essays, articles and other written work — though often with mixed results.

The use of generative AI varies from industry to industry and is more established in some than in others. Current and proposed use cases include the following:

  • Healthcare: Generative AI is being explored as a tool for accelerating drug discovery, while tools such as AWS HealthScribe allow clinicians to transcribe patient consultations and upload important information into their electronic health record.
  • Digital marketing: Advertisers, salespeople and commerce teams can use generative AI to craft personalized campaigns and adapt content to consumers’ preferences, especially when combined with customer relationship management data.
  • Education: Some educational tools are beginning to incorporate generative AI to develop customized learning materials that cater to students’ individual learning styles.
  • Finance: Generative AI is one of the many tools within complex financial systems to analyze market patterns and anticipate stock market trends, and it’s used alongside other forecasting methods to assist financial analysts.
  • Environment: In environmental science, researchers use generative AI models to predict weather patterns and simulate the effects of climate change

….

Generative AI vs. machine learning

As described earlier, generative AI is a subfield of artificial intelligence. Generative AI models use machine learning techniques to process and generate data. Broadly, AI refers to the concept of computers capable of performing tasks that would otherwise require human intelligence, such as decision making and NLP.

Machine learning is the foundational component of AI and refers to the application of computer algorithms to data for the purposes of teaching a computer to perform a specific task. Machine learning is the process that enables AI systems to make informed decisions or predictions based on the patterns they have learned.

( Again, to make sure credit goes where it is due, the text below the line of asterisks above was excerpted from Generative AI Defined: How it Works, Benefits and Dangers, by Owen Hughes).

Is Long Covid Really a Thing?

We seem to be somewhat exhausted by all the dire predictions around Covid, now that life has largely gotten back to the normal. Shops and theaters are open, and people are once more crowding aboard those floating petri dishes called cruise ships. The most vulnerable segments of the population have mainly been vaccinated, and each new strain of the disease seems less harmful. All the anti-vaxxers I know have had Covid at least once and hence have some level of immunity, or else they caved and got vaccinated after seeing a close friend or relative die back in the winter of 2021-22. One enduring benefit of Covid is much more availability to work from home.

One of the direst prognostications was that the world would suffer a more or less permanent step down in standards of living due to “long Covid.”  According to this narrative, untold numbers of healthy young or middle-aged people would remain debilitated indefinitely due to the ongoing after-effects of a Covid infection: struck down in their prime, never to rise again.

A recent review of the field in Nature concluded, “The oncoming burden of long COVID faced by patients, health-care providers, governments and economies is so large as to be unfathomable”. Ouch. The federal government has provided $1.15 billion for research into the problem of long COVID and its mitigation.

Just the Facts

A couple of facts stand out: First, in many cases, scans of internal organs have shown changes in victims’ hearts and lungs and brains, following a severe Covid infection. Second, many people have reported symptoms such as weakness, fatigue and general malaise, impaired concentration and breathlessness, weeks after the primary symptoms of the disease have resolved.

How big a problem is this? I cannot, in the scope of a short blog post, adequately canvass all the data and literature. I will just cite a few numbers and charts, and let the professional data analysts dig into the fine points.

One meta-analysis found that a full “41.7% of COVID-19 survivors experienced at least one unresolved symptom and 14.1% were unable to return to work at 2-year after SARS-CoV-2 infection.” [That number seems much higher than my personal observations would suggest]. A CDC survey found that as of July 26-Aug 7, 2023, about 5.8 % of all Americans (which is 10.4% of Americans who ever had Covid) report experiencing some effects of long Covid, with 1.5% of all American adults experiencing significant activity limitations as result of long Covid. These numbers show a modest downward trend with time.

The chart below depicts the incidence of long Covid in England, again showing a modest downward trend in the latest year:

Weekly estimates of prevalence of COVID-19 and long COVID in England. Source.

Correlation versus Causation

So: we have many people experience severe symptoms from Covid, but most resolve within a few months at most. That leaves a small but nontrivial minority of Covid victims reporting problems long after that window. A significant question is whether Covid of itself caused those long-term symptoms, or just precipitated some problem that was bound to show up anyway.

I have read poignant anecdotes of perfectly healthy young people who suffer from brain fog two years later. But I have lived long enough to be wary of generalizing from poignant anecdotes. After all, the whole anti-vaccination movement has been fueled by poignant anecdotes of, say,  perfectly normal two-year-olds going autistic shortly after getting their vaccine shots.

The 2023 metastudy referred to earlier found that long Covid sufferers tended to be older, and had pre-existing medical comorbidities.  Similarly, we have known since 2020 that the cohorts most likely to die from Covid were older folks (such as me!), many of whom were bound to die anyway.  

In this light, the data brought forth by James Baily in his recent article on this blog, Long Covid is Real in the Claims Data… But so is “Early Covid”?, is most interesting. He noted that on average people use more health care for at least 6 months post-Covid compared to their pre-Covid baseline, which is consistent with some measure of long Covid. However, those same individuals also spent significantly more on healthcare 1-2 months before their Covid diagnosis. This seems consistent with the notion that some of what gets blamed on Covid would have occurred sooner or later anyway.

A Nuanced View of Long Covid

An article in Slate by Jeff Wise has dug deeper into the data. He noted that the survey-based datasets that have been largely used to estimate the effects of long Covid tend to be biased: those who feel ongoing symptoms are more likely to complete the surveys, giving rise to some of the largish numbers I have shared above. Newer, better-controlled retrospective cohort studies tend to show much lower ongoing incidence of symptoms, especially compared to control groups who had not had Covid. The feared tidal wave of mass disabilities never arrived:

“The best available figures, then, suggest two things: first, that a significant number of patients do experience significant and potentially burdensome symptoms for several months after a SARS-CoV-2 infection, most of which resolve in less than a year; and second, that a very small percentage experience symptoms that last longer. ”

Further, “Another insight that emerges from the cohort studies into long COVID is that it is not so easy to prove causality between a particular infection and a symptom. Almost all the symptoms associated with long COVID can also be triggered by all sorts of things, from other viruses to even the basic reality of living through a pandemic.”

Finally:

It looks more as if people who complain of long COVID are suffering from a collection of different effects. “I think there’s quite a heterogeneous group of people all sailing under the one flag,” said Alan Carson, a neuropsychiatrist at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland. Some patients may be experiencing the lingering aftereffects that occur in the wake of many diseases; some patients with chronic comorbidities might be experiencing the onset of new symptoms or the continuation of old ones; others might be affected by the sorts of mood disorders and psychiatric symptoms you’d expect to find in a population undergoing the stress of a global pandemic.

Another Slate article from last month gently debunks alarmism stemming from a Nature Medicine study of U.S. veterans who showed increased susceptibility to disease even two years after contracting Covid.

 There is often great difficulty in discerning the actual organic, biochemical basis for the reported symptoms. This makes it hard to come up with a pill or a shot that might adjust the body’s metabolic pathways in order to cure them. Thus, simply treating the symptoms as such may offer the best near-term relief. To that end, a team of French researchers had the audacity to propose that much of the fatigue and brain fog associated with long Covid may be largely in our heads. In an article in the Journal of Psychosomatic Research  Why the hypothesis of psychological mechanisms in long COVID is worth considering , Lemogne, et al. noted strong links between a patient’s prior expectations of symptom severity and the actual reported outcomes. The intent of the researchers is not to belittle the reported distress of long Covid sufferers, but to point towards established therapeutic methods to help treat disorders with at least a partial psychosomatic basis:

Many potential psychological mechanisms of long COVID are modifiable factors that could thus be targeted by already validated therapeutic interventions. Beside the treatment of a comorbid psychiatric condition, which may be associated with fatigue, cognitive impairment or aberrant activation of the autonomous nervous system, therapeutic interventions may build on those used in the treatment of ‘functional somatic disorders’, defined as the presence of debilitating and persistent symptoms that are not fully explained by damage of the organs they point. These disorders are common after an acute medical event, particularly in women, and include psychological risk factors, such as anxiety, depression, and dysfunctional beliefs that can lead to deleterious, yet modifiable health behaviors. Addressing these factors in the management of long COVID may provide an opportunity for patient empowerment.

In sum: A significant number of those who contract COVID suffer ongoing symptoms for a number of months afterward. Over a billion dollars of research has been directed at the problem. The severity of these symptoms tends to decline with time, in the vast majority of cases resolving by twelve months. This leaves some individuals still suffering fatigue and brain fog over a year later. Studies are ongoing to discern the organic basis of these complaints, and the exact role that COVID may have played, in the light of the fact that complaints of enduring fatigue and brain fog were not uncommon before the pandemic. We hope that following the science will bring more relief here.

Circling back to our original interest in the economic impact of long COIVD, early studies indicated that a large fraction of the population might continue to be debilitated, to the point of being unable to work, with significant effects on the workforce and GDP. Actual data (e.g., on disability claims) indicate that these problems have not actually materialized.

Collapsible Boats You Can Store in Your Apartment: ORU Folding Kayaks and MyCanoe Canoes

My wife and I were sitting on a bench near a local lake, having a picnic dinner. On a little grassy spot nearby I noticed a young woman put down a large bag, and then slide out some large, odd-looking plastic pieces. Then she unfolded something, and, oh my goodness, she had brought a fold-up kayak in that bag:

A friend joined her with sliding some joiner tubular pieces over the seams on top to zip these seams together:

The whole assembly took less than ten minutes. The resulting kayak was very light to carry:

And away she paddled:

I had drifted over to talk to her as she was assembling the kayak, and she said she just stored the boat in its bag in a closet in her apartment. Also, that it was great  fun to use.

This was one of a selection of foldable kayaks sole by ORU. They make smaller, lighter, cheaper models for paddling on still water, and heavier-duty kayaks for ocean waves and white-water rivers. These kayaks get generally very high reviews. They are a bit pricy, and may not stand up for long scraping over rocks. But they are  clearly  full-blown, worth-paddling kayaks with rigid sides and clean lines.

This resonated with me, because maybe twenty years ago, I got a pair of inflatable kayaks that we could store in the basement and pull out and inflate at the lake. Paddling them was an awful experience. Although we inflated them to spec, they sagged in the middle, with the two ends sticking up in the air and catching the wind. It was like paddling a bathtub which was being constantly carried downwind.

I also found through that experience that kayaking was very uncomfortable for me. But I do like canoeing. So, after seeing how great the folding kayak was, I looked online and found a similar collapsible canoe, made by MyCanoe.  The design is a little harder to execute, because with a canoe you have an open top, whereas with a kayak you can seal up the top and get the whole boat to be something of a nice structural tubular structure. But the MyCanoe seems to work OK, and has the same advantages of being lightweight (19 lb for one-person Solo, 43lb for two-person Duo) and of folding into a small package for transport and storage. There is an oar-lock accessory so you can row it with two oars, as an alternative to paddling. The Solo is pretty short and wide, so it is very maneuverable , but I would be surprised if it tracks well in a straight line when you just want to paddle from point A to point B using one paddle.

You can find plenty of demos and reviews on YouTube for these folding kayaks and canoes. And there are other collapsible kayaks out there, per this review, but some of them are heavier and more involved to assemble.

Anyway, these folding craft are a pretty classy, free-enterprise technology solution for folks who like to get out on the water, but don’t have a garage or backyard to store a regular kayak or canoe, much less a trailer for a motorboat or a sailboat.

Help! My Celery is Too Stringy to Eat!

For maybe three purchases of celery, bought in 2023 from different stores, the fibers or strings in them were so tough that we could not chew them to point of chopping them into small enough pieces to comfortably swallow. We would chew away for several minutes, masticating and swallowing most of what we bit off from the stalk, but this left a tangle of intact strings in our mouths, to be spit out. Prior to 2023, we never recall having a batch of celery that was simply inedible like this. For at least one batch we were so disgusted that we just threw it out.

I tried steaming a couple of stalks for a minute or so in microwave. This turned most of the celery into unappealing mush, whilst doing the stalks no apparent harm.

For the most recent bunch of unchewable celery, I finally got wise and harnessed the vast power of the internet to solve this problem. I did not have to invoke ChatGPT, so I was perhaps spared an AI hallucination regarding string theory. A simple DuckDuckGo search (this search engine respects your privacy, unlike You Know Who) found there are at least three reasonable ways to strip the offending strings out of a celery stalk. This article from Kitchen Ambitions does a great job describing these three ways:

( 1 ) Carefully snap the stalks in half the correct way (it is obvious when you think about it; or see the article), leaving the two halves connected by the strings. Then you can peel the strings down the lengths of the stalks. This is the easiest and cleanest way. I found I usually had to do a second round of snapping and peeling to get the rest of the strings.

Or

( 2 ) At one end of the stalk, use sharp knife to tease up the ends of several strings at a time, and peel them down the length of the stalk.

Or

( 3 ) A brute force approach is to use a vegetable/carrot peeler. This does work, but removes more of good celery along with the strings.

Hurray for economical life hacks – – the internet knows everything.

New EG.5  Variant Spreading: Start of New Covid Surge?

The spread of highly-contagious and sometimes fatal Covid-19, and the responses to it (lockdowns and then trillions of dollars of federal giveaway money to mitigate the effects of the lockdowns and now huge interest rate hikes to counter the inflation caused by that giveaway money) have been arguably the most economically momentous events of this decade so far. Thus, it behooves us to keep an ongoing eye on this beast, since it seems to keep coming back in waves.

We all know that Covid is spread by little “aerosol”  droplets coming out the infected people’s mouths and noses. Those aerosols are mainly generated by speaking and singing. So being in a room full of talking or singing people (e.g., a happy convention or bar, or a hymn-singing church) can be a super-spreader situation.

I have reasons to try to avoid respiratory diseases, and so I attended church on-line or outdoors for most of the past three years. The Covid numbers finally got low enough this spring that I started attending inside, and even going unmasked the past two months.

Alas, Covid cases and hospitalizations are back on the rise, it seems due to the new Eris or EG.5 subvariant. Like the infamous omicron variant of a year ago, it is very transmissible and resistant to existing vaccines, but is not as deadly as the original strain. Much of the population has some immunity due to vaccines and/or prior exposure. Also, antivirals like Paxlovid are widely available to help mitigate symptoms. Still, a case of Covid often makes for an uncomfortable and disruptive  week or two, and can still be fatal or debilitating.

So, I have done a quick amateur scan of the internet, trying to get a fix on what to expect. One thing that stands out is that actual case numbers are far higher than officially reported, for a couple of reasons. One is that the rigorous, systematic reporting of cases has fallen off, since Covid was deemed no longer an emergency. Also, with the end of free test kits and the generally more lax public attitude (we just want to be done with this), there is far less testing done than in 2022. (In communities with systematic testing, it turns out that the best way to track Covid is by analyzing wastewater).

Will the Latest Vaccines Save Us?

The vaccine story seems somewhat mixed. The latest booster vaccine, to be available around October, will target the XBB.1.5 subvariant, which is what was mainly circulating earlier this year. However, it is expected that since EB.5 is closely related to XBB.1.5 (both of these are of the general omicron family), the booster will confer some immunity to EB.5. That is the good news.

The bad news is that the public’s uptake of boosters in general is well under 50%, so we may expect EB.5 or whatever the next subvariant is to continue to circulate, and probably surge during the colder months when respiratory diseases tend to spread. Also, vaccines do not really stop you from getting Covid, they mainly act to mitigate the symptoms by helping your body’s defenses to react faster.

Starting next week, I will resume wearing an effective KN-95 or my preferred KF-94 mask at church and other venues where a lot of people are talking or singing.

Perma-Bear Jeffrey Snider: The Job Market Is Rolling Over, the Slide Into Recession Is Inevitable  

A stopped clock is occasionally right. And so are perma-bears, those commentators or analysts who continually predict that GDP and stocks will plunge – perhaps in the next quarter, but more often say six months from now. (And that deadline keeps getting pushed back every six months).

When I was first getting started investing, I was overly influenced by these seemingly cautious and sober souls, and I consequently lost out considerably compared to my colleagues who blithely stayed fully invested. So I hold my native pessimism in check when investing, and stay mainly in the market, but with a little cash in reserve just in case The Big One hits.

All that said, I do try to sample various points of view. If I have been mainly seeing positive chatter, I turn to my favorite perma-bear, an analyst named Jeffrey Snider. His YouTube channel is called Eurodollar University, and he runs a subscription service as well.

Jeff seems like a genuinely nice guy, who believes that his dire readings of the macroeconomic tea leaves are helping folks avoid disaster. His demeanor is more like an earnest teacher, not a huckster trying to sell something. I should add that he offers meaningful insights on the Eurodollar scene, which is globally significant and which most analysts do not understand or even recognize.

But Jeff’s bias is nearly always toward the negative, and it is something of a good-natured joke among his viewers. Typical comments: “ The market can remain irrational longer than Jeff can stay pessimistic” and “Jeff is the best on Youtube. I watch his videos every night right before I go to bed. In less than 5 minutes, I’m in a semi-conscious coma. Its better than any sleeping pill. That smooth soothing voice extoling the virtues of a collapsing economy works wonders. A++”.

Well, what is the bear-meister saying now? He claims that the seemingly red-hot employment numbers that have been reported in recent months are less hot than they appear. I will paste in a few snips from his recent YouTube, It Just Happened…The JOB MARKET JUST BROKE!! .

One point he makes is that there has been a persistent, inaccurate bias to the upside in the payroll numbers reported by the BLS. These big numbers are what gets reported; what does not get reported so much is, month after month, these monster payroll increases are quietly revised downwards, often by substantial amounts:

Even with the adjustments, these still seem like large increases in employment. Undaunted, Jeff pokes holes in the hot labor market scenario by claiming that full time employment is actually stagnant; it is the rise in part-time workers that creates the seemingly large army of the newly employed. The fact that total hours worked has plateaued seems to support his case here:

Another factor is worker hoarding. Employers were so burned trying to scramble for workers during the 2022 reopening-from-Covid that they are keeping their workers on payroll (even part-time), just in case the economy picks up and they need to pull them in full-time. A case in point is manufacturing. New orders are down considerably this year, and headed even lower, yet manufacturers have not cut their workforces appreciably:

If orders stay low for a long enough time, however, the manufacturers will have no choice but to start massive layoffs.

As another indicator of labor market softness, temporary workers may be a leading indicator of employment trends. They are not such a core part of a company, so there is less hoarding of them. And temporary help services have been in a steady decline this year, which is consistent with a cooler economy:

Sell Everything??

As I said, it is worth considering all sides. I think the specific points mentioned above are all valid ones. I would add that if students actually start payments on all those loans which taxpayers and the Fed have subsidized for the past three years, that will finally put a crimp in the spending. Also, the surprise downgrade of U.S. federal debt by the Fitch rating agency , and resulting jump in interest rates, has finally gotten people talking about out-of-control government spending, for one week anyway.   Also, the great China-reopening that was supposed to jump-start the global economy seems to be pretty flat.

However, a couple of counter-points to the bearish narrative:

First, even if manufacturing is rolling over, in the U.S.  it is fairly small relative to services. At least in some geographical areas, my anecdotal reports say that it is still a challenge to get good workers to do services.

Second, the tidal wave of cash from pandemic giveaways that washed into our collective bank accounts is still not depleted. Consumer confidence is high, and we are spending freely. This economy is a big, big ship, and it is still steaming full ahead, brushing aside high interest rates and yield curve inversions. The  recession seems to continually recede. There will inevitably be a downturn someday, of course, but absent some geopolitical event, I think it may take some time for it to arrive.

And finally, even if the long-awaited recession does arrive, it may not necessarily be so bad for stocks. Since the 2008-2009 Great Financial Crisis, the Fed has taken a very active role in supporting the markets. Wall Street has been conditioned to expect the Fed to flood the system with money if a serious downturn occurs. Also, the Street is betting that there will be enough howls of pain over the high interest being paid on the federal debt that unbearable pressure will be brought on the Fed to loosen up; the vaunted independence of that institution will be put to the test, with Congressional threats to alter their charter if they don’t cave to pressure. And so, “[economic] bad news is [investing] good news”, in contrast to the pre-2008 world. Furthermore, federal deficit spending ramps up during recessions, and as noted in The Kalecki Profit Equation: Why Government Deficit Spending (Typically) MUST Boost Corporate Earnings , this deficit spending tends to boost earnings.

And so even if Jeff Snider is correct that the economy is rolling over and will soon slide downward, this may not give investors a very useful signal. As another one of his YouTube viewers has commented, “This channel is a masterclass in learning that knowledge about the macro environment does not provide an edge in markets.” 

Solar Cookers: Save Money, Save Lives, Save the Planet by Cooking with the Sun’s Rays

The Case for Solar Cooking

We all know we ought to reduce our CO2 generation to mitigate global warming and to conserve limited fuel reserves. Without descending into a tussle over exactly how man-made it is or whether it is part of a natural cycle which may turn soon to plunge us into yet another ice age, it does seem clear that the earth is experiencing a warming trend with possible serious consequences, and it is obvious that fossil fuel reserves (oil, natural gas, coal) are finite.

Although domestic cooking in developed countries comprises only a tiny fraction of total energy consumption, this is not true in some regions. Some 2 billion people still cook over fires of wood, charcoal, or animal dung. It is usually the women doing the cooking over these fires, inhaling smoke with all its consequences. Also, it is again women who largely end up gathering the fuel. All this gathering and fire-tending consumes time which takes away from other tasks like raising food. Also, women are often assaulted in the forests while they are foraging for wood.

It is possible to construct devices which capture enough of the sun’s rays to cook food (more technical details below). Many NGOs try to help people in poor, mainly sunny/tropical regions and in refugee camps to purchase or construct solar cookers. It is possible to set up cottage industries for locally making and selling these devices at low cost. It is just a win-win-win.  Solar Cookers International specializes in this work, and has developed and shared some of the most useful technology here. They claim some four million solar cookers are in use, and present figures for how much CO2 emissions and money for fuel are saved.

Why is this relevant to us in the West? Well, if we care to help the lot of the less-fortunate, we can give money to support these solar cooking initiatives. As noted, they can help the well-being of people, especially women, in many ways. A less-obvious  impact of us using solar cookers in our own homes is that folks in other lands are aware of our life-styles. It turns out that a non-trivial barrier to wide-spread adoption of solar cooking is that they are suspicious of Western aid workers promoting a method of cooking that no one back in the developed countries uses. If solar cooking could be more visible in our lifestyles it would have a significant effect in lands where it is really needed.

And getting around to our more personal motivations – it is kind of intriguing and rewarding to cook directly from the sun. On a hot day, it can mean cooking a casserole without heating the oven/kitchen. You can do great projects with kids (your own or others), designing and making and using solar ovens. And of course, you can signal your virtue by reducing your CO2 footprint.

If you find yourself in some situation when you have no other means to cook, a solar cooker could be a life-saver. To temper this reality, however, in most  temperate regions there will be many days without sufficient sunshine to make these work. Also, they are often much slower to heat up and cook than conventional stoves, so you need to plan ahead. That said, if you have a sunny morning or afternoon, you can put your pot of rice or whatever out to cook in the sun, go about your business, and come back in 2-3 hours, knowing your “solar crock pot” will have simmered your dish without burning it.

Types of Solar Cookers

I find the technical details here fascinating, but I will skip the juicies here and just briefly describe how these things are made and how they work. In all cases, there are some mirrored reflecting surfaces which concentrate the sun’s rays onto a cooking pot. For reflecting surfaces, one can glue aluminum foil onto cardboard. However, the foil grows dull with time, so it is better to use some kind of aluminized plastic surface, such as car windshield reflectors, mirrored craft adhesive sheeting, or even the insides of potato chip bags. Usually, the pot is in some kind of enclosure which is transparent to let the sunlight in but traps heat around the pot.  

There are a number of configurations that work. A description of various designs, with illustrations, is here  and here.

Perhaps the most minimalistic solar cooker is the panel cooker. Here, the pot is enclosed in a clear  oven bag or within two glass bowls. Segmented or curved reflective panels are arranged to reflect the sun on the pot from multiple angles. Solar Cookers International’s Cookit ($50) is said to be the most widely produced solar cooker, and it is of this design. There are many DIY designs floating around, including ones made from bent car windshield sun screens. A high-end, high-performance panel solar cooker is the Haines 2 ($100). These panel cookers lose effectiveness in cold, windy conditions, due to excessive heat loss.

Another design that people make a lot at home (see the internet) is a box solar cooker. Typically, you use a smaller cardboard box within a larger box, with the spaces between the two boxes filled with some kind on insulation (e.g., crumpled newspaper). A hinged glass lid and some reflecting panels on top of the box complete the device. A very expensive ($450) but very effective box-type solar cooker is the All-American Sun-Oven. This can function year-round, but takes up a lot of space in storage.

In tropical regions with the sun high overhead, there is some use of a plain, large parabolic mirror which can focus a very hot spot of sunlight onto the bottom of a pot or pan suspended above the mirror.

A more recent, high-tech approach is the line of solar cookers from Go-Sun. These feature smallish parabolic reflectors that focus the rays on a long, skinny cooking tube inserted in a double-walled glass tube with vacuum insulation. These cookers have only medium size capacity, but cook food really hot, really fast (e.g., can bake biscuits) and are not affected by cold weather. So, they are the most convenient and versatile cookers in many ways, although they do best with relatively solid foods like hot dogs or breads or cut-up meat or vegetables, not with liquidy loads like stew or soup or simmering beans. (Full disclosure: I caved in to my itch for one of these things, and have put it on my birthday list).

What Should a Businessman Be Willing to Die For?

The late Dallas Willard, a professor at USC, wrote on a variety of subjects touching on moral philosophy. In 2006 he addressed the topic, “The Business of Business”. He noted that the spontaneous, obvious answer today to the question, “What is business (manufacturing, commerce) for?”  would be: “The business of business is to make money for those who are engaged in it.”

But there is a tension here. Willard notes that that is NOT how businessmen/professionals present their raison d’etre : 

“No business or other profession that advertises its ‘services’ announces to the public that it is there for the purpose of enriching itself or those involved in it. With one accord they all say their purpose is service, not serve-us. I have never met “professionals” who would tell their clients that they were there just for their own self-interest.”

This ambiguity in the role of businessmen/women (or “merchants”, as they used to be called) is not new. Willard reaches back to the writings of John Ruskin who remarked in 1860, “The fact is that people never have had clearly explained to them the true functions of a merchant with respect to other people.” Ruskin went on to place what we today call “business” among the  “Five great intellectual professions” necessary to the life of “every civilized nation.” With respect to the nation:

“The Soldier’s profession is to defend it.

The Pastor’s to teach it.

The Physician’s, to keep it in health.

The Lawyer’s to enforce justice in it

The Merchant’s to provide for it.”

Ruskin added: “And the duty of all these men is, on due occasion, to die for it.” The soldier to die “rather than leave his post in battle,” the physician “rather than leave his post in plague,” the pastor “rather than teach falsehood,” the lawyer “rather than countenance injustice.” (Indeed!)

But what of the merchant? What is it that the merchant (businessman) would die for rather than do?

Well, the main function of the merchant or manufacturer in Ruskin’s view is to provide for the community, not simply make money for him/herself:

It is no more his function to get profit for himself out of that provision than it is a clergyman’s function to get his stipend. The stipend is a due and necessary adjunct, but not the object of his life, if he be a true clergyman, any more than his fee (or honorarium) is the object of life to a true physician. Neither is his fee the object of life to a true merchant. All three, if true men, have a work to be done irrespective of fee…. That is to say, he has to understand to their very root the qualities of the thing he deals in, and the means of obtaining or producing it; and he has to apply all his sagacity and energy to the producing or obtaining it in perfect state, and distributing it at the cheapest possible price where it is most needed.

Ruskin also noted that since the merchant has direct control over those who work for him, “…it becomes his duty, not only to be always considering how to produce what he sells in the purest and cheapest forms, but how to make the various employments involved in the production or transference of it most beneficial to the men employed.”

Furthermore, if the enterprise falls on hard times, it is the duty of the CEO (or other top management) to share fully in the hardships suffered by the other employees: “As the captain of a ship is duty-bound to be the last to leave the ship in disaster,…so the manufacturer, in any commercial crisis or distress, is bound to take the suffering of it with his men, and even to take more of it for himself than he allows his men to feel; as a father would in a famine, shipwreck, or battle, sacrifice himself for his son.”

In a similar vein, activist lawyer and later Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in 1912 said at a Brown University commencement address:

The recognized professions…definitely reject the size of financial return as the measure of success. They select as their test, excellence of performance in the broadest sense—and include, among other things, advance in particular occupation and service to the community. These are the basis of all worthy reputations in the recognized professions. In them a large income is the ordinary incident of success; but he who exaggerates the value of the incident is apt to fail of real success…In the field of modern business, so rich in opportunity for the exercise of man’s finest and most varied mental faculties and moral qualities, mere money-making cannot be regarded as the legitimate end.    

Willard drily remarked, “Texts by Ruskin and by Brandeis, along with similar ones, are not popular references in our schools of business today.” My own personal observations are that the nobility of the management and entrepreneurs seems to scale somewhat inversely with the size and age of the enterprise. It gets tricky to start assessing degrees of moral rectitude here, because in classical exchange theory, any voluntary transaction (buying/selling goods, agreement to work for certain wages) brings benefits to both parties, and to society as a whole, quite apart from any conscious intent of altruism.

At large end of the scale, we see CEOs who drive big companies into the ground and then waltz away with multimillion dollar golden parachutes; no sharing of the employees’ hardships at all.

And for many Wall Street dealmakers, it truly is all about the money: float a couple billions in junk bonds, take control of some company, force the company to pay you fees, load the company with your crappy debt, and walk away with a cool billion or so. Or take a short position in a publicly traded company, publish a bogus report (“short attack”) alleging horrible malfeasance at the company, driving share prices down, close out your short position at a huge profit, and move on to the next victim. These seem to be purely predatory actions, taking advantage of the system to make a buck with no clear redeeming social value.

At the other end of the scale, the (often youngish) folks starting a new software firm, the  idealistic couple chucking fast city life to try to make a go of a coffee house or BnB in a small town, the plumber with an associate, all of these I think are very serious about providing the public with a good product/service, and may tend to take care of their employees and also to put a lot of their own personal skin (savings, a lot of extra time) in the game to get these enterprises going. The younger Henry Ford famously fought to pay his employees high wages, over the objections of company shareholders, who wanted more profits to accrue to them. I know personally two men in the greater Trenton, NJ area who (as an expression of their religious values)  intentionally conduct computer-related businesses such that they can provide employment to disadvantaged local young men.

Maybe when an enterprise gets large enough that, to management, its employees and its customers become numbers rather than individual people is the point where the transition to pure greed as the fundamental motive occurs, even if it proves prudent in support of profits to maintain policies and communications which promote the welfare of customers and employees.

Audio Visual Stimulation: Pulses of Light and Sound To Shape Your Brain Waves To Help You Sleep, Relax, Be More Alert, Less Depressed, Etc., Etc.

Many of us desire at times to overcome insomnia, anxiety, brain fog, depression, or some other mental/emotional hindrance. Some common interventions include healthy lifestyle changes like better diet, drink more fluids, and exercise (all of which we should just do anyway), and more expensive therapies such as counseling or doctor-prescribed pharmaceuticals. These all have their places, but (in keeping with an economics blog) I’d like to call attention to another treatment modality which seems quite cost-effective and harmless*.

It has been known for decades that the electrochemical activity in our brains occurs in measurable waves. “Alpha waves” are pretty well known as a state associated with calm attention, and can be attained by meditation. These waves operate at a frequency of about 10 cycles per second, or 10 Hertz (Hz). Deeper meditation and sleep are associated  with slower frequencies, while intense attention and problem-solving thought operate at faster speeds.

Source: Abhang, et al.

Ideally, your brain would automatically generate the right waves for the situation you are in, and for the most part it does. However, for some folks, their brains don’t make the most effective waves much of the time, and even for more normal folks, it can be helpful to tweak it now and then.

Ways To Shape Your Brainwaves

There are three main avenues for you to manipulate your brainwaves. These are indirect methods, neurofeedback/biofeedback, and direct stimulation. Some indirect ways are to practice various types of mindfulness or meditation, which usually move you towards alpha waves, or intense exercise can lead to alpha in the subsequent rest session.

A direct route, which involves training yourself, is to don some sort of device on your head that measures brainwaves or a correlate such as cerebral blood-flow or heartbeat, and feeds back to let you know what your brain state is. It turns out that humans (without being to explain how) are able to learn to shift their brain states if they are given feedback on whether they are getting closer or further from some desired target. Consumer devices are available in the $400-$1400 price range that can do this with varying degrees of sophistication and requiring various degrees of training and effort. More extensive and targeted training of specific frequencies in particular spots in the brain is done in the offices of neurofeedback clinicians, often as an adjunct to talk therapy. The neurofeedback can calm the animal-level fear/panic/emotional noise, such that the client can relate therapeutically with the counselor. This can be very helpful to address specific pathologies including depression (and here), anxiety,  PTSD , reactive attachment disorder,  and maybe even autism, but naturally it is expensive to go through a course of say ten sessions with a highly trained professional. Unfortunately, you cannot count on routine coverage by insurance.

Direct Audio-Visual Stimulation

A less-expensive way to achieve a desired brainwave state is to present yourself with (say) 10 Hz stimulation of light and sound. The theory is that your brain waves become
“entrained” along with these external stimuli. Hence the name audio-visual stimulation or audio-visual entrainment (AVE).

There are many YouTube videos claiming to have embedded alpha or other frequencies. These videos often have many comments from appreciative users claiming calming or other effects, so they are certainly worth a try. The price is right. However, research studies cast doubt on whether sound alone is very effective at creating specific brainwaves. Light stimulation has been shown to evoke e.g., alpha waves.

What has been shown to work well are systems where you don headphones for the sound and lightweight “goggles” (thin opaque glasses with LEDs on the inside).  Studies have shown this to help with ADD, anxiety, depression, and migraines. Perhaps the most widely produced AVE devices are the “DAVID” models from MindAlive.  MindAlive is headed by David Siever, who has spearheaded numerous studies of AVE.

MindAlive “DAVID” AVE System

The AVE devices can quickly move you into desired brain states, in the comfort of your home, for just a modest (~ $400) up front cost. You can use them with your eyes open or closed. They are perhaps more usable for children and seniors than the neurofeedback modalities, where the client has to engage with some feedback and learn to make their brainwaves go where they should. [1] With AVE, you just sit back and relax and let the sound and light carry you along. However, AVE is something of a blunt instrument, stimulating the auditory and visual and linked centers in the brain, whereas regular neurofeedback can train say two specific spots in the brain to two different specific frequencies, and has more enduring effects.

My Experience with AVE

I have owned a DAVID for many years. I and my family members have used it off and on, when we happened to feel a need for it. We all find that straight down the middle 10 Hz alpha sessions make us feel just plain good, positive, calm, etc. This can help cure anxiety (mind too fast, hard to focus) or sluggishness (mind too slow). It only takes about ten minutes exposure to the 10 Hz to get us in “the zone.” [2] On most mornings, when I wake up feeling OK anyway, I don’t bother with it. But it is good to have it around as needed. We find the feeling from an AVE session sticks with us for a number of hours.

AVE has been shown to help with seasonal asset disorder (SAD). That makes sense because SAD is about light deprivation. I had a bit of SAD when we lived in a house with few windows, and tried my DAVID for that. It did help, but it turned out to be more satisfactory and less bother to just use a big bright sunlamp at the breakfast table.

We find the slower AVE sessions useful to combat occasional insomnia (where mind is anxious or racing) and even to help with pain. A month ago I had some serious pain from an injury, that was so bad I could not sleep. These slow programs (3.5-7 Hz) did help to divert and relax my brain and help me get to sleep.  Again, the effects can be enduring. If we have used a really slow, say 3.5 Hz, program to knock us out at night, we often are sluggish the next morning, so we reset our brains with some 10 Hz alpha. For sleep, I usually prefer a 7-7.8 Hz protocol that does nicely slow and relax my brain, but does not leave me groggy in the morning.

The literature and the operator’s manual recommend slightly faster waves, e.g. 14 Hz “beta” waves as a normal morning waker-upper, like a cup of coffee. These faster “Brain Brightening” protocols have shown benefits for seniors. My family does not necessarily find 14 Hz enjoyable. It sometimes feels feels tiring.

One the other hand, the 14 Hz protocol can sometimes be quite helpful as a pick-me-up. Early one winter, I was feeling sluggish and low, not wanting to get out and exercise, and was nearly ten pounds over my normal weight. It probably had something to do with an extended road trip (stress, food) plus Thanksgiving (food) and the reduced sunlight hours, including daylight savings time ending, plus a stretch of cloudy/rainy weather. I did use a sun lamp to get more photons into my head, but that didn’t cut it. I decided to push myself and use the 14 Hz flashing lights, instead of the comfy 10 Hz, to get more of an activation. It actually worked out well. Three mornings in a row with the 14 Hz, and I felt “reset” to a more energetic, optimistic me. So score one for beta waves.

A couple of us have experimented even faster programs, around 18-20 Hz. That gave an unpleasant buzz, which persisted. I think if I had to drive a truck all night, it might be useful for keeping me awake and alert. After these high frequency sessions I soon used the 10 Hz program to reset to my nice smooth alpha. It is nice to know that if I go too high or low on an entrainment session, I can always recover by using the 10 Hz alpha session [3].

At any rate, I am a satisfied customer and I think this is a cost-effective treatment modality for amateurs to use, or for therapists to prescribe.

* If someone is susceptible to seizures, they should avoid any device like this with repetitive flashing lights.

ENDNOTES

[ 1 ] There is a newer, less-studied technique called LENS that kind of bridges between classical neurofeedback and AVE and trans-cranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). “Transcranial” means the stimulation is from coils outside your skull. Straight TMS is approved by the FDA for treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), migraines, and smoking cessation. With LENS, the brain waves are monitored with electrodes, and this information is used to shape special synchronized electromagnetic stimulation of the brain (from outside the scalp). This stimulation is keyed to the existing brainwaves, which may make it particularly effective, e.g. for reducing anxiety and helping with PTSD and traumatic brain injury (e.g., from military explosion exposure). This LENS technique is also called direct neurofeedback, in contrast to the standard neurofeedback, where the client must actively muster the altered brainwaves via training.

[ 2 ] Many of the canned protocols in the DAVID devices begin with about ten minutes of transitional sound and light pulses. These “dissociation” segments are intended to help users transition from their starting brain states and move to the final target frequencies. But we find these segments to be an unnecessary waste of time. We fire up a program, do something else for 8-9 minutes, and then don the headphone and glasses and dive right into the desired frequency, with only 1-2 minutes of dissociation.

One other user tip is that there is some virtue in starting with the lights a little dim (which I do by either playing with the Intensity setting, or by holding the goggles an inch away from my face), and by tapering down the brightness at the end of a session as you reenter the real world. With the David, you can push a pair of buttons to have it automatically ramp down light and sound intensity over the course of a minute or so.

[ 3 ] There is some evidence that super-fast AVE, at 40 Hz, stimulates cerebral bloodflow which can do marvelous things with the brain, such as mitigate Alzheimer’s degeneration.