Christmas in Japan

Many years ago I heard T.R. Reid, then Tokyo bureau chief for The Washington Post, recount on NPR’s Morning Edition that KFC had convinced Japan that the American thing to do on Christmas was to eat Kentucky Fried Chicken. This struck me as implausible or at least likely exaggerated, so I asked a Japanese economist I knew if it was true. He sadly replied, “Yes, it’s true.” Apparently this is still going on. The Talking Points Memo website published a piece on it just before Christmas (link).

Japan has adopted some other aspects of Christmas, and back in 2000, I think it was, Tokyo’s Aqua City Odaiba Mall erected a giant smoke-breathing Christmas Godzilla wearing a Santa hat. For pictures see this link and this one. And there’s a piece from Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader (link) that covers both Santa Godzilla and KFC Christmas.

Finally here’s an amusing report from a Brit teaching English in Japan on his KFC Christmas adventures. It’s under six minutes and worth a look:


Link: http://youtu.be/SFw-TZzqX8M



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Anti-science in 2014

This goes nicely with the clip from John Cleese I posted this morning:

An article by Tim McDonnell (link) from just before Christmas summarizes some of last year’s worst new developments and continuing annoyances in the realm of people who, for various reasons having little to do with facts or sound reasoning, just don’t want to believe science. This includes diverse well-meaning but misinformed cranks, members of Congress, a few religious figures, various school board members, and the increasingly wacky Donald Trump. It’s both hilarious and infuriating, with a few pieces of good news mixed in for variety.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Amusing dancing prank takes a bad turn

Here’s another video clip you might already have seen. I’m posting it because it’s both funny and disturbing, though fortunately no one gets seriously hurt.

It seems that Ellen DeGeneres recently challenged her viewers to shoot video of themselves dancing behind people who weren’t aware the dancing was going on, so YouTuber Alexander Bok took her up on it, dancing on Christmas Eve in and near Grand Central Terminal in New York.


Link: http://youtu.be/6sbCzXQsVoQ

It’s entertaining, and as pranks go pretty harmless. At most a couple of people are momentarily startled. One startled guy is also clearly delighted and amused when he discovers what Bok is doing. But then Bok decides to dance behind some NYPD officers outside. Immediately he’s surrounded and interrogated, and while he quickly explains what he’s doing and why, the cops aren’t amused. Finally deciding he hasn’t actually done anything illegal, one angry officer nevertheless shoves him so hard he falls to the street, which happens to be a criminal offense on the cop’s part. (Reportedly the incident is under investigation.)

I understand that a lot of members of the New York and other police departments feel concerned right now about public attitudes toward them, and of course two NYPD officers were murdered in cold blood not that long ago. (For the record, the murderer in that case wasn’t an anti-police activist but a disturbed person who had shot his girlfriend not long before he killed the cops and shot himself soon afterward. But deliberate cold-blooded assaults directed against officers have been carried out elsewhere, including here in North Carolina.)

So I get that the cops in this video might have thought Bok was at least mocking them, and nobody likes being mocked. But we’re all, cops included, supposed to practice some self-restraint in those cases. If the angry officer in this case wants the respect most of his colleagues deserve and get, he needs to obey the laws he’s sworn to enforce.

[Updated for clarity and to fix some typos.]



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Kevin Drum’s predictions for next 30 years or so

[Updated to add a link to Drum’s follow-up post.]

Kevin Drum, one of the best political bloggers in the business, offers up some interesting speculation about technological, environmental, economic, and political changes over roughly the next three decades (link) and the following day added a second post in response to the suggestion his original one was too pessimistic (link). It’s nothing more than informed guesswork, but it’s worth reading and thinking about.

Following is a quick summary of what he says, as paraphrased by me, together with some of my own thoughts, such as they are:

Artificial intelligence and robotics will advance a lot. This will drastically reduce the need for human workers and create major economic disruptions.

[DGG: Among other things, this will inevitably have drastic consequences for conservative ideology and might lead to a some form of guaranteed income, which has been advocated by some conservative, liberal, and even laissez-faire economists. As noted in this Wikipedia  article, support for the idea goes back to Tom Paine, Napoleon, and even the first caliph, Abu Bakr, who implemented it. More recent advocates have ranged from Martin Luther King Jr, Paul Samuelson, and John Kenneth Galbraith on the left to to Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman (who advocated a “negative income tax”), and Charles Murray in various outposts of the right. This Atlantic Monthly article describes the conservative case. See also this piece from Reason Magazine and this interesting blog post with some additional information and discussion. Advocates of the so-called “Fair Tax,” which would replace the federal income tax with a huge national sales tax, propose pairing it with a tax “prebate” amounting to a sum of money roughly equal to the poverty level to be paid to everyone.]

Medicine will be revolutionized as well, and implants will enhance both physical and mental abilities.

Climate change will start being a serious problem in no more than about 15 years, especially in the tropics. We’re not likely to do enough soon enough to prevent that, even though solar panels are getting cheaper fast enough to offset a lot of fossil fuel use. As things get rapidly worse, there’s a significant chance (or risk) of turning to geoengineering to attack the problem.

[DGG: Among other reasons to doubt an adequate response, Republicans are putting James Inhofe, who calls climate change a “hoax,” in charge of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Geoengineering means massive human intervention into the environment, such as seeding the oceans with minerals and other nutritents intended to promote the growth of phytoplankton in the hope that they’ll draw a lot of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere through photosynthesis. This might not work, or it might work too well and cause an ice age, and there’s no telling all the effects it might have on ocean life.]

The average age will continue to rise everywhere.

Personal privacy will all but disappear, which will at least mitigate the growth of terrorism [DGG: or may be used to suppress political dissent].

On-line shopping will improve to the point that there’s little need for physical stores. Drum says a shopping center near him is turning into a medical complex and this may be typical of future development. Technology will allow more product customization for individual purchasers.

Driverless cars will take over the roads with major consequences. (If driverless taxis become sufficiently cheap and efficient, maybe operating on a subscription basis like telephone service, many more people might give up the hassle of owning and maintaining their own cars.)

Drum is pessimistic about crewed space missions, predicting we won’t colonize the Moon and we’ll at most send one or two missions to Mars, which will learn nothing that robot explorers haven’t discovered already. FTL (faster-than-light) travel will remain impossible. (“Thanks a lot, Einstein!” he complains.)

Russia will decline and China will advance, but the U.S. will still outperform most of the world.

More countries will get nuclear weapons, and a few may even use them. There will be more terrorists but also more means to control them. (See above on the loss of personal privacy.) There will be likely some biological attacks, but natural pandemics may be a greater threat.

In his follow-up post Drum suggests that there are two key technological developments required for a positive future: benign artificial intelligence and sources of abundant clean energy.

The foregoing is only a summary; do have a look at what drum has to say in his original post (link) and his follow-up (link).



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“The world has forgotten them” — 3,500 women and girls kept as slaves by ISIL

This BBC News report was originally aired December 22. It recounts how the self-styled “Islamic State” (which is in fact neither) has abused several thousand women and girls kidnapped four months ago. The captives are members of the Yazidi religion, a faith practiced by a subset of ethnic Kurds mainly in northern Iraq.

While some have escaped or been rescued by advancing Kurdish Peshmerga forces, an estimated 3,500 are still being held in brutal captivity and subject to rape, forced marriage, forced religious conversion, and slavery. They have been bought and sold the equivalent of ten or twenty dollars. (Girls with blue eyes cost the most.) Some are given as gifts or passed around among a group of men. Part of the clip shows several young men cheerfully anticipating a slave market.

The report is not graphic, but it is disturbing. It’s also worth seeing, because the world should not forget these women and girls, or the other men and women and children subject to the same kind of horrors in far too many other places.


Link: http://youtu.be/LsS-8pSGBjQ



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Good news of 2014

Here’s the BBC’s summary of good news reported in 2014. Don’t be too worried that it runs only 90 seconds; these are rapid clips with links to longer reports.


Link: http://youtu.be/TjyTldaQz3c

There’s a lot of good news not mentioned here, such as the economic recovery in the U.S., the surprising fall in the rate of medical cost inflation at the same time more people are getting health insurance, and so on.

Needless to say, there’s also enough bad news out there to entertain fans of dystopian fiction, but to start the year it’s worth remembering that nice things happen as well.

Happy New Year to you and yours.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

How a homeless person spends $100

A YouTuber conducts an experiment worth seeing. A homeless man is given $100 and then followed to see what he does with it, then confronted and questioned about it, including how he came to be homeless. It really is worth a look.


Link: http://youtu.be/AUBTAdI7zuY

Let me anticipate a few valid responses. Not all homeless people are like this guy. Quite a few are dealing with serious mental problems. Some invent a moving story to con people into giving them money. There have always been fake beggars. I don’t know for a fact that everything the guy in the video says is on the level.

But on the other hand, look at his actions. The filmmaker says he has a lot of additional footage that suggests the guy is what he appears to be.

Again, it’s worth a look, and some thought.



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Radiation levels

This video from Veritasium is surprisingly interesting, involving visits to a number of the most high-radiation places on Earth, including Chernobyl, Fukushima, and an airliner in flight. It also builds up to a shocker of an ending, so if you have time to watch part of it, start about 3/4 of the way through, which will be in a hospital near Chernobyl.

If you do skip ahead you might be mystified by the banana graphics. Bananas are actually slightly radioactive owning to the fact that they contain potassium, which has a naturally occurring radioactive isotope. Eating a banana exposes you to about 1/10 of a microsievert of ionizing radiation. The graphics represent how many microsieverts you would be exposed to in an hour in the various locations shown. For example, 20 bananas means an exposure of two microsieverts per hour.


Source: http://youtu.be/TRL7o2kPqw0

Something the video doesn’t get into but is worth noting: “Ionizing” radiation is any sort of radiation that can knock electrons loose from atoms and molecules, and hence directly create chemical changes, including damage to DNA. Not all radiation is ionizing, and not all ionizing radiation is equally dangerous and the danger is also very dependent on the type of exposure.

For example, alpha particles, which are emitted by some types of radioactive decay, are the bare nuclei of helium atoms. Outside the body they aren’t very dangerous because they’re very easily blocked. Generally even a sheet of paper or your outer layer of skin (made up mainly of dead cells) can stop a fair amount of alpha radiation, and a Geiger counter often can’t register alpha particles unless its detector is equipped with a window able to transmit rather than blocking them. On the other hand, if you inhale a bit of radioactive dust that emits alpha particles, this can lead to serious harm to the unshielded cells of your lungs.

Photons are the particles of electromagnetic radiation, something that includes visible light, infrared, ultraviolet, radio, x-rays, and gamma rays. The energy of a photon depends on its wavelength, and X-rays and gamma rays have very short wavelengths and hence very high energy. X-rays and gamma rays are ionizing radiation and can definitely damage DNA and thereby cause cancer, though the danger of course depends on exposure. Ultraviolet light, while not ionizing, can still cause chemical changes that can lead to skin cancer, which is why you should wear sunblock outside and definitely avoid tanning beds. Ultraviolet light can also damage your eyes. Bright visible light, especially near the short-wavelength blue part of the spectrum, can also damage your eyes if you’re exposed to enough of it, of course.

But the longer the wavelength, the lower the possibility of health effects. All wavelengths of light can cause heating, which can cook living tissue if it gets too hot, but aside from that, for wavelengths longer than visible light there’s no known cause for concern for anything other than heating. Every object around you actually gives off a glow that depends on its temperature, but we don’t see it because they glow in infrared wavelengths, longer than visible light. This is why we tend to associate infrared light with heat, but otherwise, contrary to popular belief, there’s no special connection between infrared and heat. Any wavelength can heat things up, including microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, and even X-rays. Even longer and less energetic than infrared light are the various wavelengths of radio.

About half of the older airport whole-body scanners in use in the United States (the sort where you stood between what looked like a couple of monoliths) employed low-energy backscatter x-rays and hence presented a small but non-zero risk of skin cancer (a lot less than the flight itself, however). But modern scanners use millimeter waves, and there’s no evidence they’re harmful.

(The text below the video has been revised a few times since the original post to correct typos and add clarity.)



Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather