I would think that the principle and purpose behind the concept of government was an outgrowth of earlier tribal organization. A chief by whatever name, usually the strongest, surrounded by his warriors and “wise” elders or something very similar was the precursor to organized government. The purpose wasn’t necessarily the aggrandizement of individuals but to protect the tribe members from predation from within and without of the tribal structure.
In dense blue run cities it seems that the basic purpose has been inverted to center on the increase of the wealth and power of a central elite and the public can be damned.
The only valid purpose of government should to provide a framework of protection from predators physical and economic, codify limits of behaviour and enforce same so the population can thrive without fear to whatever extent possible.
Seems to me that Brandon has flatly failed at his warrant and is flailing around blaming the ramifications of his failure on whoever seems to be semi-plausable while the predators swarm and prosper. Essentially chaos.
Multiply that by a large enough factor and it is civilizational failure.
Interesting thought what would make good Sci-fi/Fantasy Movies. Previously much of sci-fi and fantasy was off limits as the settings (and other races) were unachievable at any price. Movies like the Avengers pictures, Project Hail Mary, Lord of the Rings and the recent Dune show that the capability is there (although at a steep price in some cases.
Some I can think of are:
Lensman series: Start with Galactic Patrol, tweak SOME of the characters (e.g. make C. MacDougall a full blown doctor instead of a nurse). The No Female Lensman will be a hard sell (with one exception) but I think it has to stay. At one point J Michael Straczynski of Babylon 5 fame was looking at this in the early 2010’s but I think the rights expired
Zelanzy’s Amber Series. Nine Princes in Amber starts as a noir pulp mystery and then goes weird. Casting will be hard, the initial movie shouldn’t be too hard/expensive, though, as we move through things, the movie cost goes up. Do it right, and it will be no problem
Heinlein The Moon is A Harsh Mistress, No aliens, mostly indoor shooting, a rogue AI this actually might be a cheap one and done right would be a stunner.
Connie Willis To Say Nothing of the Dog . Again mostly indoor shoots and outdoor in some equivalent to the River Thames River C. 1890. Get all the Victorian costumes from the BBC for a few pence. A comedy, a time travel story, a mystery, rescuing an extinct species, and some romances rolled all into one. It’d make a great date movie. Again, I think casting will be critical, people are going to have to really sell their roles and the number of modern actors who do that well are limited.
Matt Dinniman Dungeon Crawler Carl series: I just ran into this. It is a riot about how Earth and its populace get turned into a reality show of a dungeon. all the fantasy animals will be a bear and having a magically enhanced Persian cat as a main character may present issues, but again, limited sets, and this will draw the male/gamer audience back to the theater (and their Dates may just enjoy themselves in the process)
Yeah 2026 is looking dicey to say the least. 2028 looks good for Presidential unless something goes wrong (or is made to go wrong A La 2020). The Democrat presidential slate is looking very weak in comparison to either Vance or Rubio. The 2028 Senate and House I would say LEAN republican, but it depends heavily on local status, especially the economy, and if the Dems get the House or Senate in 2026 they can play havoc with that.
2028 is critical as whoever holds the executive in 2029 on the lead-up to the census controls how that counting is done. It would help to have Congress just in case some Judge (I’m looking at YOU Boasberg ) gets feisty and throws a hissy fit (sorry, injunction) against counting methods. As it is several blue states are due to lose representation (CA, NY RI and a couple others) to several Red States (Especially FL and TX). The magnitude of those losses depends on how you count. The Constitution says (Article I, Section 2, Clause 3)
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
The Thirteenth Amendment and the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 essentially reduce it to “the whole Number of free Persons”. As it is free persons, the clear interpretation is any human beings you find (sadly) not Citizens or Voting age Citizens or similar that would make better sense. Changing that would likely take a constitutional amendment. However, two issues would require at most Congressional support (and possibly are within the realm of the Executive branch).
The first is that currently, many populations are estimated, especially in large cities, and those estimates include folks who may or may not exist. The constitutional language seems clear: “The actual Enumeration” estimation is NOT by any means enumeration/counting and certainly is NOT within what the writers likely envisioned with that language. Certainly, the aspect of recording names and addresses of each person is contrary to just estimating. Throw away the estimates, and large Cities (Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, and NYC, as well as likely some Red cities like DFW, Austin, Miami and Atlanta) lose large swaths of their populations.
The second is the last half of the census sentence “and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct”. This seems to give great latitude to Congress on how the Census should/must be run. It may be that Congress long ago delegated this power to the Executive.
So control of the 2030 Census could drive control of the House delegations through 2040. It will be interesting to see if the Democrat side understands/admits this quandary. If the Democrats find some Abigail Spanberger (run from the middle until elected) type candidate, they might be able to squeak things out in 2028. The problem is their base loves the Squad/Mamdani/Platner/etc and the base is who turns out for primaries. That is going to drive the Democrat candidates hard left, and Hard Left does NOT win the presidency. On top of that a Hard Left candidate will only have “coattails” in blue or bluish states, That means getting the House in opposition to a popular Republican candidate will be a challenge (or so I dearly hope).
This is by XKCD, aka Randal Monroe, a PHD physicist, who used it in a whimsical study on the practicality of using the recoil from an A-10 30mm rotary cannon as a method of propulsion.
I took this shot at the Pensacola Mardi Gras. Not sure what to think or say about it other than to note I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t do that unless possessed by demons and maybe not even then.
Here’s a link to a youTube of a brother/sister duet that starts out normally enough but quickly evolves into something startlingly beautiful. Absolutely exceptional, to me anyway.
But I use a full desktop with pretty good speakers. Probably wouldn’t have the same effect on a phone.
I remember helping my dad set up for shots with his Mamiya C330 TLR, no match needle, he had a Gossen Luna Pro light meter (considered one of the best of its day) that I still have (although it is inoperable as it uses batteries that are no longer common). My job was to run to various spots and get the values from the light meter. Similarly, he had a flash meter that you used to make sure the flash was providing enough light and to figure out what exposure you were going to use as the Light meter just kind of overloaded with the flash 🙂 . Modern cameras with a dozen exposure modes, built in fill flashes and all the bells and whistles you could want are amazing, but some days the shots taken on 64 ASA Kodachrome on 2 1/4 ” 220 film on the TLR are still astounding. I wonder what my dad would think of my Cannon Rebel let alone a modern Hasselblad 2 1/4 at 100 Mpixel.
The picture I posted is of an old late 70’s era lens for a film camera. It looks a little grungy but I haven’t touched it in well over 20 years.
This lens has a feature that all lenses had at the time but not any more and I don’t know why. It is called “depth of field preview”. This is set up at f4. See the 2nd ring out from the body? It has the straight vertical orange line with the little 4, 8, 11, 16 on each side of the vertical. Notice that the lens is now focused between 10 and infinity (meters). Now look down at the 4’s on each side of the orange vertical. They show that the camera will be focused from around 10 meters to infinity. That explains your shot above.
The DOF preview also tells you that if you were shooting f16, you would be focused from roughly 4 meters to infinity.
To this day I miss this feature. But I guess that it requires too much thinking (read any) for today’s public.
UPDATE:
I should mention that this camera is a Canon AE 1 from sometime in the late 70’s. It was an auto exposure (AE) but you still got to set ISO and shutter speed, and not to mention focus vis a split image distance finder.
(Quick historical aside: split image was the principle optical range finding method for most naval gunnery prior to radar. If you’ve ever seen the zagged warship camouflage paint schemes from WWI and up to mid-war WWII, the purpose was to defeat or eliminate the effectiveness of split image range finding. It gives you no clear planes to match up.)
I had a main camera before the AE1, a Nikon F1, a pure manual camera though it did include a “match needle” for setting shutter and f stop. Before match needles, we had to carry a light meter on a cord around our necks. Things were definitely manual but that meant that you had to have an understanding of all of the elements involved and how they related.
I learned to shoot with my Dad’s single shot 1934 depression era .22 bolt action. No magazine. In order to shoot, you had to, open the bolt, take a single .22 round, insert it in the chamber. close the bolt, pull back the firing pin, aim and fire. Just like having to set all the elements of a photograph, this little production meant that the shooter had no instant backup and had to think about about what he was doing, and understand.
I remember trying to teach my stepson how to shoot with a Ruger 10-22, an autoloader. The 1 lesson was a disaster. With all the easy backup rounds, he had no motivation to absorb the elements that go into a successful shot and just start spraying to little effect. All further lessons until he was a fundamental shooter were with Dad’s old Winchester single shot. Or as I was later pounded into us in the Marine Corp, “sight alignment, trigger squeeze”. I already knew but I did qualify Expert using a M14.
Successful photography is a balancing lesson between a number of variables. Until you learn those variables, one by one and how they interrelate——–
