OT subject but worth a main-stream read- OT News Feeds...

dbCooper

In order to "protect democracy" Ecuador has moved to a quasi dictatorship for the next six months or so.  We have a strong affinity for the country after multiple trips there, so following the developments...

https://cuencahighlife.com/lasso-invokes-the-cross-death-closes-assembly/

lousubcap

View new satellite images of the devastated Ukrainian city of Bakhmut, thanks to a dozen before-and-after photos released Wednesday by Maxar. The differences between May 2022 and May 2023 are incredibly stark, as you can see in the gallery, linked here:

https://maxar.mediavalet.com/galleries/61be2dbb-80e7-401f-8a32-6c9e72bb894c_c12292d4-091e-49f1-b604-9d84e876c104-ExternalUser 

lousubcap

@dbCooper -thanks for the read.  Interesting concept but at least the military is supporting their Constitution. 

Historically Ecuador rewrites their constitution quite frequently as the current one (in place since 2008) is their 20th. 

lousubcap

Solid read from Tom Nichols of The Atlantic regarding tenure:

Tom Nichols STAFF WRITER

"Republican lawmakers in several states have begun the process of rolling back tenure at their public institutions of higher education on the grounds that no one should have a lifetime job. And yet, many national conservatives seem determined to defend Justice Clarence Thomas on those very grounds.

Dancing Bears Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and John Roberts in 2022 (Alex Wong / Getty) Conservatives, in general, hate the idea of academic tenure. I say this not only as an impression after 35 years in academia (most of them while I was a Republican), but also because conservative officials are taking concrete action against tenure now in states such as Florida, North Carolina, and Texas. (Republicans have engaged in similar attempts over the past several years in North Dakota, Tennessee, Arkansas, Wisconsin, and several otherstates.) Decades ago, when conservatives were more consistent in their views, their position on tenure proceeded from their worship of markets. They argued that no other business would protect employees from the consequences of poor performance or even misconduct with an unbreakable contract. A coherent position, perhaps, but one rife with incorrect assumptions, as I’ll explain below. Full disclosure: I have been denied tenure twice, and granted tenure twice. I’ve chaired a tenure committee, and been on both sides of the tenure process. Often, it’s not a pretty business, but it is essential to higher education. With some variations between small colleges and big professional schools, the tenure process mostly looks like this: A new teacher with a Ph.D. holds the rank of assistant professor for three years, at which time they face a contract renewal for another three years. During that next contract, they will “come up for tenure,” an up-or-out decision, much like the cut the U.S. military makes after certain ranks, or when a professional firm makes decisions about partnerships. The applicant submits a package of accumulated work, and his or her department will also ask senior faculty at other institutions to review the entire file and submit letters with their recommendations. (I have been asked to write such letters myself.) The entire package then gets a recommendation from the department and is sent up to a higher body, drawn from other departments and usually convened by an academic dean. A final recommendation is then sent to the school president. At any point in this process, the candidate’s application can fail. There are multiple layers of review here, and sure, there are many opportunities for mischief. (A classic move, for example, is for committee members to solicit letters from reviewers they know will either support or torpedo a candidate’s application.) Candidates who succeed become an associate professor; the title of full “professor” comes years later and requires another complete review in most places. After tenure, faculty are insulated from firing for just about anything except gross misconduct or financial exigencies—say, if a department is eliminated or cut back. But “misconduct” covers a lot of ground, and tenured faculty are far from unfireable. Falsifying research, engaging in sex with with students (at least, at those schools where such relationships are forbidden), nonperformance of duties (like not showing up for class), and criminal behavior can all count. My first tenure contract was with a Catholic school that had a “moral turpitude” clause, which as you could imagine can mean many things. Tenured faculty, however, cannot be fired for having unorthodox or unpopular views, for being liberals or conservatives, for failing your kid no matter how smart you think Poopsie really is, or for being jerks in general. This is as it should be: Some opinions will always be controversial; some teaching styles rub people the wrong way; some classes are harder than others. There are, to be sure, cases where professors are so wildly offensive that they functionally destroy the classroom environment—but such cases are rare and should be adjudicated by the institution, not by the state. The alternative to tenure is to keep faculty on short-term contracts and to abandon the important democratic principle of academic freedom. If faculty can be fired—or their contracts quietly “non-renewed”—for any reason, they will self-censor. If they think the students are unhappy, they will pander. If you want faculty who are confident, will say what they think, and will deal honestly with students, tenure is essential. If you want faculty who will become timid clock-punchers, then contracts are the way to go. The contract system eventually grinds down even the most well-intentioned academics, and, as I once warned one of my own institutions, it turns many of them into dancing bears for student and administration applause. Dancing bears are exactly what today’s Republicans want. Some of the market-oriented GOP attacks on hidebound faculty many years ago had merit; during my career I saw colleges wrestle with that very problem. The current GOP assault on tenure, however, is about culture, not economics or even education. The GOP base doesn’t like that universities are full of liberals, and so Republican elected officials attack higher education for the rush of approval they’ll get, much of it from people who no longer have kids anywhere near college age. As FiveThirtyEight’s Monica Potts noted, there’s a reason that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed his tenure-review bill in a ceremony at The Villages, Florida’s noted retirement community. Meanwhile, New York’s Representative Elise Stefanik proudly sponsored a legislative attack on academic freedom, charging that leftism “has pervaded” the State University of New York system and asserting that she was going to do something about it. Elise Stefanik, of course, went to Harvard. But like DeSantis (a graduate of Harvard and Yale), she was going to make sure that the commoners weren’t exposed to any dangerous ideas at the schools reserved for the proles, the rabble whose names are not Elise Stefanik or Ron DeSantis. Nowhere, however, is the hatred of a guaranteed lifetime job more hypocritical than in the continued right-wing defenses of Justice Clarence Thomas. The litany of Thomas’s ethical issues is far beyond anything that required poor Abe Fortas to step down from the Supreme Court in 1969. Thomas’s behavior cannot adequately be captured by so gentle a phrase as the appearance of impropriety, the standard set for other U.S. judges. But despite Thomas being utterly insulated from consequences, conservatives deny even that Thomas should face criticism. As Justice Samuel Alito whined recently: “We are being hammered daily, and I think quite unfairly in a lot of instances. And nobody, practically nobody, is defending us.” (Alito is plenty angry about criticism of the members of his own club, but he seems less concerned about attacks on other government employees—especially far less powerful people such as teachers, election officials, and civil servants. But I digress.) What’s really going on, of course, is that Republicans have given up on persuading their fellow citizens to support them at the ballot box, and so they’ve decided to get what they want by using a tactic for which they once excoriated the left: appealing to judges who have lifetime appointments. Professors with secure jobs are a threat to the republic, apparently, but judges who can throw the country into turmoil with one poorly reasoned opinion must be defended at all costs. I support lifetime tenure for federal judges and Supreme Court justices, not least because I do not want them to try to time their judgments against impending deadlines for retirement. But Republicans across the country who are railing against ostensibly unfireable elites on campuses might consider being a bit more consistent about one sitting in regal isolation on First Street in Washington, D.C."

JohnInCarolina

@lousubcap - good piece.

The other thing that people miss about removing tenure from state institutions is that they don't operate in a vacuum.   The best people will just leave, and move to institutions - either private in the same state, or in another - that still have tenure.  

I'm not sure I agree that SCOTUS appointments should be for life, however.  The same goes for tenured faculty.  I feel like some kind of age limit would be more than reasonable, and appropriate, for both.  I don't think doing that would trigger the kinds of concerns Nichols mentions for term limits.  

lousubcap

I agree regarding the aging out for SCOTUS appointments however, you then enter into the game of you know when you will get an opportunity for a replacement unless the judge decides to retire sooner.  There are pro's and con's with any way you choose.

If you had the courage of your convictions based on facts then you wouldn't have any issues with any challenges.  But when you are where the R's are today and the lack of any substance you will grab at anything. 

At least its only Friday eve. 

lousubcap

Friday Russia-Ukraine update:

"The Pentagon has overvalued the weaponry it sent to Ukraine by at least $3 billion. This error could eliminate the administration’s need to ask Congress for more money to keep Kyiv fighting this spring, people familiar with the situation said. Gordon Lubold and Doug Cameron report for the Wall Street Journal. 

The Biden administration has signaled to European allies that the U.S. would allow them to export F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, sources familiar with the discussions said. The U.S. would have to approve third-party transfers because of the jets’ sensitive technology. A handful of European countries have a supply of F-16s, including the Netherlands, which has signaled a willingness to export some of them to Ukraine. Natasha Bertrand, Kylie Atwood, and Oren Liebermann report for CNN.

A train carrying grain derailed yesterday on the Russian-occupied peninsula of Crimea, local authorities said. Crimean railway officials blamed the derailment on the “intervention of outsiders.” Stephen Kalin and Georgi Kantchev report for the Wall Street Journal.  

Russian forces retreated from around Bakhmut yesterday, as Kyiv pressed on with its most significant advance for six months, the Ukrainian military and Russia’s paramilitary organization Wagner group have said. Ivan Lyubysh-Kirdey reports for Reuters."

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/AtomicAnalyst/status/1659584963518296064?s=20

The whole thread is worth a read.

Legume

Will there be a transfer portal and NIL $ for professors ?

Legume

I think a fixed term would work well for SC Justices, just make it long enough to be meaningful and take age out if the selection process. Taking duration that someone will sit into consideration when choosing a nominee isn't ideal. Justices trying to decide when to retire based on who sits as president is equally wrong.  Take both of those out of the equation.  20? 25 year terms?

JohnInCarolina

Legume said:

I think a fixed term would work well for SC Justices, just make it long enough to be meaningful and take age out if the selection process. Taking duration that someone will sit into consideration when choosing a nominee isn't ideal. Justices trying to decide when to retire based on who sits as president is equally wrong.  Take both of those out of the equation.  20? 25 year terms?

I'd be fine with that.  I still think you'd get the occasional judge deciding to retire before their term ended so that their replacement could be appointed by whomever was in the White House.  There's not really a perfect solution, and the whole thing is kind of moot as the political environment prevents any real change.  

Legume

The historical average tenure for justices is 16 years.  Make a term 18 years, stagger them and you can lock in turnover of 2 per presidential term.  Maybe this is too aggressive, but regardless, the process in the senate probably needs some work too to eliminate the gamesmanship.

JohnInCarolina

Legume said:

The historical average tenure for justices is 16 years.  Make a term 18 years, stagger them and you can lock in turnover of 2 per presidential term.  Maybe this is too aggressive, but regardless, the process in the senate probably needs some work too to eliminate the gamesmanship.

One suggestion I’ve seen is that every President gets to appoint two justices per term, no matter what, and a Senate vote is not required.  Over time that would rebalance the court.  

This would obviously mean that the number of seats on the court could vary, but that’s ok.  There’s nothing particularly special about nine. 

lousubcap

Only thing special about nine is the odd number.  However, once Thomas resigns (nods with a smirk) we will be at eight so a tie could be possible, although not likely. 

It is Friday.

HeavyG

Legume said:

The historical average tenure for justices is 16 years.  Make a term 18 years, stagger them and you can lock in turnover of 2 per presidential term.  Maybe this is too aggressive, but regardless, the process in the senate probably needs some work too to eliminate the gamesmanship.

Eighteen year terms has been a popular proposal in the last few years but one of the problems is that most experts are of the opinion that removing life tenure would require a constitutional amendment. That would likely be an insurmountable obstacle.

The Constitution does not require that SCOTUS judges be paid so I suggest that after "xx" number of years they no longer get a paycheck.

Maybe offering retirement at full pay after "xx" years and zero pension if they hang around longer than that.

Of course that wouldn't work because they would all likely earn far more than their federal paycheck just by raking in bucks from speechifying on the rubber chicken circuit. 

JohnInCarolina

lousubcap said:

Only thing special about nine is the odd number.  However, once Thomas resigns (nods with a smirk) we will be at eight so a tie could be possible, although not likely. 

It is Friday.

Not even that is special.  As it turns out, there have been times when there have been an even number of justices. George Washington himself set it up with an even number of six!  A tie tends to just result in status quo or a deferral to a lower court ruling.  

lousubcap

From The Atlantic today:

People taking Ozempic for weight loss say they have also stopped drinking, smoking, shopping, and even nail biting.

Did Scientists Accidentally Invent an Anti-addiction Drug?

Article linked below-

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2023/05/ozempic-addictive-behavior-drinking-smoking/674098/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=one-story-to-read-today&utm_content=20230519&utm_

lousubcap

Monday Russia-Ukraine update:

"Russian forces captured Bakhmut yesterday. While Kyiv disputes Russia’s claim of controlling all of Bakhmut, Ukraine’s top commander in the region, Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskiy, has acknowledged that his forces retain a presence only in an “insignificant” part of the city. Yaroslav Trofimov and Matthew Luxmoore report for the Wall Street Journal. 

Ukrainian forces have made gains on the Russian flanks around Bakhmut, encircling the city, according to Ukrainian officials and military personnel in the field. Adam Taylor and Anastacia Galouchka report for the Washington Post.  

Russian forces have undertaken a significant build-up of trenches and other fortifications in southern Ukraine, as revealed by examining hundreds of satellite images. The build-up is a response to the looming Ukrainian counter-offensive. Daniele Palumbo and Erwan Rivault report for BBC News."

And a link to an article about the delayed Ukraine spring offensive:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2023/05/19/why-ukraines-spring-offensive-still-hasnt-begun/?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru

HeavyG

Interesting events inside Russia near the border with Ukraine. Probably too early to see if this anti-Putin/Kremlin group has any legs.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/22/anti-kremlin-militia-freedom-of-russia-legion-overrun-russian-border-village-kozinka

https://twitter.com/MalcolmNance/status/1660685755549663243

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/benwikler/status/1660756040252551171?s=20

Botch

^^^ Reich has been screaming about that for over a year now.  

JohnInCarolina

Botch said:

^^^ Reich has been screaming about that for over a year now.  

Unfortunately what they did was perfectly legal, but man… it’s bad news.  Just disappointing that it’s mostly been ignored by the media.  

HeavyG

They just had to rake in as much of that extra cash most people had over the last few pandemic years. Now that that is gone prices will drop back. If they don't, people can always vote with their wallets.

lousubcap

Tuesday Russia-Ukraine update:

"The governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, Vyacheslav Gladkov, claimed that Ukrainian military saboteurs launched an attack across the border yesterday, wounding eight people in a small town. Gladkov said a counterterrorist operation was underway and that authorities were imposing special controls, including personal document checks and stopping the work of companies that use “explosives, radioactive, chemically and biologically hazardous substances.” Kyiv officials denied any link with the group and blamed the fighting on a revolt by disgruntled Russians against the Kremlin. Susie Blann reports for AP News. 

Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is pushing for a last-minute agreement to secure Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia power plant ahead of a counteroffensive that could see Ukrainian forces drive directly through the potentially hazardous nuclear facility. Grossi plans to present a list of five principles for the U.N. Security Council to endorse later this month. Stephanie Liechtenstein and John Hudson report for the Washington Post." 

dbCooper

Extra-legal spying by the FBI just a simple mistake, 280k times...

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/fbi-misused-foreign-surveillance-law-280k-times-to-snoop-on-people-in-the-us

lousubcap

Wednesday Russia-Ukraine update:

"A cross-border attack on the Russian Belgorod region by anti-Kremlin fighters aligned with Ukraine stretched into a second day yesterday. An explosion at a defense factory and skirmishes at a border crossing were reported. Yesterday, Russia’s Ministry of Defense said that it had pushed back all of the pro-Ukrainian fighters across the border and that scores of “saboteurs” had been killed. Andrew E. Kramer, Valerie Hopkins, and Michael Schwirtz report for the New York Times. 

The United States has distanced itself from a cross-border attack on the Russian Belgorod region. Russia released pictures of abandoned or damaged Western military vehicles, including U.S.-made Humvees. The United States insisted it did not “encourage or enable strikes inside of Russia.” Frank Gardner and James FitzGerald report for BBC News. 

The growing tension between the Russian paramilitary organization Wagner group chief, Yevgeny Prigozhin, and Russia’s armed forces leadership represents the first significant crack in the country’s establishment since the invasion began. Abbas Gallyamov, a former speechwriter for President Vladimir Putin, has said the tension demonstrates Putin’s weakness, “In times of war, keeping a united front is the basic task of a state. And Putin is unable to achieve that.” Yaroslav Trofimov reports for the Wall Street Journal. "

lousubcap

Thursday Russia-Ukraine update:

The drone attack on the Kremlin earlier this month was likely orchestrated by one of Ukraine’s special military or intelligence units, U.S. officials said. U.S. intelligence agencies reached their preliminary assessment partly through intercepted communications in which Ukrainian officials said they believed their country was responsible for the attack. U.S. officials say their level of confidence that the Ukrainian government directly authorized the Kremlin drone attack is “low.” Julian E. Barnes, Adam Entous, Eric Schmitt, and Anton Troianovski report for the New York Times. 

Washington is investigating reports that U.S. military vehicles were used in raids on Russia this week, U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said yesterday. “We’ve been pretty darn clear: We don’t support the use of U.S.-made equipment for attacks inside Russia … we’ve been clear about that with the Ukrainians,” Kirby said. Pentagon spokesperson Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder on Tuesday said the U.S. had not authorized nor received Ukrainian requests for transferring equipment to paramilitary groups. Veronika Melkozerova and Alexander Ward report for POLITICO. 

China and Russia solidified their partnership with high-level meetings between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin yesterday. The meetings signal a departure from China’s recent efforts to play down its alignment with Russia, as it seeks to play the role of peacemaker in Ukraine. Both sides affirmed their mutual interests and plans for cooperation. Austin Ramzy and Selina Cheng report for the Wall Street Journal.

The head of the Russian paramilitary group, Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK), which said it was behind a cross-border raid into Russia from Ukraine, has vowed more incursions. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu promised a “harsh response” to future attacks. Ukraine denies involvement in the raid. RDK leader, Denis Kapustin, is a known Russian nationalist, and his group openly says it wants a mono-ethnic Russian state. BBC News reports. 

Yevgeniy Prigozhin, chief of the Russian paramilitary organization Wagner group, warned that Moscow’s brutal war could plunge Russia into revolution unless its detached wealthy elite committed to the conflict. Prigozhin also said the war had backfired spectacularly by failing to “demilitarize” Ukraine, one of President Vladimir Putin’s stated aims of the invasion. “Russia needs to live like North Korea for a few years, so to say, close the borders … and work hard,” he added. Mary Ilyushina reports for the Washington Post.

And this from the Wagner Group:

KYIV, Ukraine — The head of the Russian private army Wagner has again broken with the Kremlin line on Ukraine, saying its goal of demilitarizing the country has backfired, acknowledging Russian troops have killed civilians and agreeing with Western estimates that he’s lost more than 20,000 men in the battle for Bakhmut.

Yevgeny Prigozhin said about half of those who died in the eastern Ukrainian city were Russian convicts recruited for the 15-month-old war. His figures stood in stark contrast to Moscow’s widely disputed claims that just over 6,000 of its troops were killed throughout the war as of January. By comparison, official Soviet troop losses in the 1979-89 Afghanistan war were 15,000.

Ukraine hasn’t said how many of its soldiers have died since Russia’s full-scale invasion began in February 2022.

White House officials said Wednesday that Prigozhin’s comments were in line with their own estimates that Russian losses have accelerated. The White House estimated this month that Russian forces had suffered 100,000 casualties, including 20,000 killed in fighting, since December. White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said then that about half of those killed were Wagner forces.

Analysts believe many of those killed in the nine-month fight for Bakhmut were Russian convicts with little military training."

lousubcap

Friday Russia-Ukraine update:

"The United States plans to announce up to $300 million worth of military aid for Ukraine comprised mainly of ammunition, two official sources said yesterday. The U.S. has pledged over $35 billion of security assistance to Ukraine since Russian forces invaded. Mike Stone reports for Reuters.

Russian paramilitary organization Wagner group said it began relinquishing control of Bakhmut to regular Russian troops yesterday. Wagner forces are expected to have pulled out by the beginning of June. With Bakhmut under Russian control, Moscow’s forces inside Ukraine are now expected to prepare for a long-awaited offensive by Ukrainian forces. Alan Cullison and Ian Lovett report for the Wall Street Journal. 

Warmer weather and drying mud signal the start of a new fighting season as conditions for the much-anticipated counterattack improve. Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has said that the counter-offensive will not be a “‘single event’ that will begin at a specific hour of a specific day” but instead described it as “dozens of different actions to destroy the Russian occupation forces in different directions.” Podolyak added that these actions were already underway. Adam Taylor and Anastacia Galouchka report for the Washington Post. 

Ukraine struck the city of Krasnodar and the Rostov region in southern Russia with a rocket and a drone, according to Russian officials. A blast damaged a residential and office building in Krasnodar. Air defenses shot down the Ukrainian missile over Rostov. Reuters reports. "

lousubcap

An interesting read regarding young adults and life development, 1980 compared with 2021:

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/05/23/young-adults-in-the-u-s-are-reaching-key-life-milestones-later-than-in-the-past/?utm_ 

lousubcap

And another involving Elon and one of his companies:

The FDA will apparently let Elon Musk put a computer in a human’s brain

Human trials:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/25/23738123/neuralink-elon-musk-human-trial-fda-approval?utm_