Sunday, July 23, 2017

Where are the workers?

The large bulk carrier left the Shanghai port several days ago.  The orders were put in weeks and months before and all the full containers were loaded by automatic systems that the Chinese put in place.  While being loaded and well before leaving the harbor, a massive group of drones, like a swarm of bees, flew around them scanning each and every one of them, scanning the bar charts to ensure that all containers were accounted for and ready to be loaded.  As each one is checked, the information was wirelessly fed into the massive container ships onboard computer and matched with the roster.  Whenever there is a mismatch, the missing container is scratched off the list and added to the roster for the next container ship.  The shipping date information for the missing containers is automatically updated and the information sent to the recipient as to the revised expected day of arrival at the California port.

The destination, Long Beach California, had already been pre-programmed into the container ship.  The onboard ship computers then confirmed the plotted course and immediately sent the course plan to a Port Central Control Unit for confirmation and permission to set sail.  The pilotless tug boats were automatically summoned to assist the pilotless container ship.  From there, the tugs entered the area and like a sea faring ballet moved into position around the gigantic container ship, slowly nudging it into position to start its journey across the Pacific.  Updated weather data allowed the computers to update the path slightly to steer clear of a storm brewing, having the monster ship head slightly north toward Fukuoka, Japan.

Once clear of the impending storm, the ship heads out to open waters and makes its way to the USA.  The trip takes about 21 days.

California has strict rules in place for ships to avoid various areas and to keep speeds below a certain amount.  All rules, which are complex in some areas off the California coast were already preprogrammed and the ship handles the environmentally sensitive areas flawlessly.

By now, the container ship has already notified the Ship-To-Shore surveillance computer system that it has arrived and is awaiting permission to enter the harbor and drop anchor for unloading.  A signal from the STS computer alerts the tugboat system and identifies what boats will be available to assist the Chinese megaship to enter the harbor and be positioned for unloading.  This data is sent to the container ship along with an estimated wait time.  Today is a very busy day and the ship must wait offshore for another day or two.  This information is sent to the Roster and arrival dates of the goods on board the ship are sent to the final destinations, updating the shipping dates for each bulk container.

Finally, the Chinese seafaring ship is alerted that the tugboats are on their way. And again, like when the ship left Shanghai, the tugboats automatically and almost lovingly nudge the huge vessel into the berth. Once secured, the Chinese ship asks for permission to be unloaded.  Permission is granted (PG).

The PG signal alerts the loading booms and cranes to get in place to start unloading the bulk containers.   Again, massive clouds of drones hover to scan container bar codes as they are automatically removed.  Many of the containers are equipped with RFIDS that make the scanning faster.   The onshore computer checks the ship’s manifest against information sent earlier before the ship embarked to ensure that what left Shanghai, made it to Long Beach.  The drones also, using cameras, scan the condition of each of the bulk containers checking to make sure there is no damage.  Damaged containers are set aside as rejects and subsequently loaded back on the ship once unloading is complete.  Delivery information is automatically updated to show that the customer’s orders were canceled or delayed and will be resent if requested.  The inventory of goods within the damaged container is sent to the Chinese supplier alerting them that their orders were not delivered due to damage.  Before the day is out, a new container back in China will have already been filled and sent to the Shanghai port for delivery to California.

Back in Long Beach, the older loading system had been modified to load containers directly onto a series of flat bed rail cars.  Each set of trains delivers the containers to positions outside the Port Authority Area to be automatically transferred to waiting trucks for delivery to various distribution points.

Each truck receives a bulk container, the 40 ft container is scanned by a drone, and the coordinates for the intended distribution center is fed into the truck’s automatic piloting system.

The truck departs, in this case for a Target Store Distribution Center located northwest of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.  This is the dead of winter and roads are treacherous.  The auto-piloted truck is alerted to icy and snowy conditions at various points along the route.  The truck contacts the distribution center with updated delivery time information.   The truck reroutes its path to head south through Phoenix, Tuscon, Dallas, Oklahoma City, Wichita, and finally Cedar Rapids, missing 90% of the snowy, icy weather.

Three days later, the truck arrives at the distribution center and backs into an empty bay.

A state-of-the art Yaskawa Motoman robotic system moves forward and scans the container bar code and confirms that the goods have arrived at the correct distribution center.  The Motoman opens the container and enters, methodically unloading the products onto an integrated roller conveyor system.  The boxes move past a scanner system that checks the goods against the list it has in memory to ensure that these are the correct goods ordered.  Stationary scanners inspects the items from all angles to ensure there is no damage.

Another Motoman lifts the goods from the roller conveyor and deposits them on a Kiva system that then takes the goods to the correct rack for storage to await ordering from the Target Stores.  The whole unloading process is complete in a matter of minutes.

A “stock replenish” signal is received from a nearby Target store that the distribution center supplies.
Bulk amounts of the stocked items are gathered and again handled by the Yaskawa Motoman system used for loading the delivery truck.  The truck leaves the bay and its auto-pilot system guides the truck to the receiving dock at the store which is only 90 minutes away.  Another Yaskawa Motoman system unloads the truck, turning over the goods to the Kiva system to stock the back room.

An order by an individual at the Cedar Rapids Target had already been placed for one of the goods.  He used his iPhone Target App to order, then purchase the item using Apple Pay.  There are no cashiers.  There are no registers.  There is no need for any.

The individual waits at the receiving area as the Kiva system retrieves the item from the stock.  Once delivered to the individual, the transaction is complete.

Welcome to the future.

Saturday, July 22, 2017

Be Very Worried About The Future Of Free Expression

I find the future frightening.  Are we really headed into a time where something you might say about the government in a flippant manner could land you into jail in the USA?  Or worse, a gulag?

I don't know what we can say or what we can do to stanch what is slowly happening. I recall when the whole "hate speech" thing started.  Once you've started, where the hell does it stop? 

The answer is it doesn't stop.  And it will steam roll its way forward taking down every thing that is PERCEIVED as hate speech.  And then each day, the definition of Hate Speech will morph into something that will put even more limits as to what you say and where you say it.

For instance, will there be a time when we will be banned from saying things that will be defined as Hate Speech on the internet?  What would cause it to be banned?  Why everyone in the world can read what's on the internet.  Any post or comment you might make can be read by someone in India, Russia, or Saudi Arabia.

Say something offensive of  Muslims?    Say something offensive of Indians? BLOCK IT.  Maybe you'll be given a warning the first time.  A hefty fine the second time.  And finally jail time?  Re-education camp?  Torture?

Death?  Could we see a time where Hate Speech will be regarded as a high crime worse than capital murder?

Things like this already happen in some countries.  Could we see a time where, say, I say something offensive of the King of Thailand (a crime in Thailand) and be extradited to Thailand to be tried and convicted of Hate Speech against the country?

The reason why there is no limit on what we can call hate speech is because EVERYTHING WE SAY IS HATE SPEECH.  Anything I might say is probably hated by someone or many someones throughout the world.

So, anyway, here is the article:
If it’s not Big Yogurt, it’s Big Oil or Big Somethingorother. Democrats have for years campaigned to overturn the First Amendment and ban political speech because of “fairness.” This position and its justifications all run on the very same ideological fuel. Believe it or not, though, allowing the state to ban documentaries is a bigger threat to the First Amendment than Donald Trump’s tweets mocking CNN.

It’s about authoritarians like Laura Beth Nielsen, a professor of sociology at Northwestern University and research professor at the American Bar Foundation, who argues in favor of censorship in a major newspaper like Los Angeles Times. She claims that hate speech should be banned because it has “been linked to cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and requires complex coping strategies.” Nearly every censor in the history of mankind has argued that speech should be curbed to balance out some harmful consequence. And nearly every censor in history, sooner or later, kept expanding the definition of harm until they shut down the rights of their political opponents.

Anyone who’s watched partisan groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, who accuse civil rights lawyers of being in a “hate group,” understands where this goes.

Actually, you can see where it’s going by checking out Europe. Dismiss slippery slope arguments if you like, but in Germany, where “hate speech” has been banned, police have raided the homes of at least 36 people accused of posting “illegal content.” There is a proposed bill right now in Germany that would fine social media companies millions of dollars for failure to remove hate speech within 24 hours. When debates about immigration are at the forefront in Germany, the threat to abuse these laws is great.







Tuesday, July 4, 2017

It's that time again! "California Woman Sues..."

I haven't done this in quite some time.  I noticed over the years that women in California feel empowered to sue....anyone and everyone.  I'm not sure why that is.  Some are hilarious.  Some are quite sad.  But, here's the round up:

"California woman sues Jelly Belly Candy claiming beans were full of sugar"

"Irvine woman sues Albertsons after clerk wrongly assumes she’s on food stamps"

"California woman sues candy company over movie-theater Mike and Ike box"

"Woman pepper-sprayed at UC Berkeley protest sues university, police"

"Woman Files Lawsuit Against LAPD, Claiming Wrongful Arrest"

"Woman who contracted botulism in California sues nacho cheese-dip maker"

"Woman sues, says she tripped on Haymarket pedestrian bridge"

"California Woman Sues Chipotle for $2.2 Billion Over Using Her Photograph"

"After holes form on rear of $25 leggings, fed-up woman sues LuLaRoe"

"Sexual assault victim sues local hotel, victim claims hotel gave stranger her room key"







ILLINOIS: Watch....and learn

I've been watching the situation in Illinois for a number of years.  I haven't posted anything on it for a few years.  I had posted many articles since about 2011 or so.  It might be good to go back and read what I posted back then:

Go here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

In 2015 I stated "I give Illinois three years.  Tops."

Looks like I was a bit optimistic.




The Coyote Joke: California vs Texas

I wish I had come up with this...

CALIFORNIA: The Governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out, bites the Governor and attacks his dog.

You can imagine how different the outcomes would be between CA and TX!!

Sunday, June 25, 2017

Canada's walk down the Dark Road

I was wondering when we would start seeing this kind of thing.  Canada has had hate speech laws on the books for some time.  But now....now it's getting real.

Wild Bill for America, also known as William Finlay, a popular author and speaker, was arrested today, June 24, 2017, at a Canadian airport for “smuggling hate speech” on his iPad. He was invited to speak at an event at Calgary’s Olympic Plaza called the “Patriotic Unity Mega Festival” coordinated by Cananda’s Worldwide Coaliation Against Islam (WCAI) which also has organizations in Europe and Australia.
Who's next?  What's next?  Will Canadian Border Patrol agents start going through everyone's laptop or tablet looking for "hate speech"?

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Another Left-Wing Science Scandal

I always thought the war against glyphosate was probably all smoke.  And I was right.
As a bonus, glyphosate was remarkably benign from an environmental standpoint. In general, insecticides are toxic to humans because humans are quite a bit like bugs. Herbicides, on the other hand, are generally not very toxic to humans, because we aren’t a lot like plants. But even in this context, glyphosate stood out as a harmless chemical. It targets an enzyme that is found in plants, but not in humans or animals. Moreover, glyphosate breaks down easily and does not persist in the environment. It is pretty much the perfect herbicide (until resistance starts to develop, but that’s another story).

This sounds like a win-win situation–cheaper food, better health, longer lifespans–but some people irrationally hate genetically modified crops, even though the modification–in this case, making the corn or soybean plant tolerant of glyphosate–has nothing to do with its nutritional value. After decades of world-wide experience with glyphosate, it was accepted that the product was safe. So it was a bombshell when the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared, in March 2015, that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic,” based on tests on rodents.

Hundreds of cancer patients promptly sued Monsanto, claiming the company had concealed the danger of carcinogenicity, notwithstanding the fact that it would be hard to find a farmer who hadn’t been exposed to glyphosate. The European Union said it would consider IARC’s finding when deciding whether to continue to allow glyphosate to be used in Europe. “Environmentalists” had scored a major coup.

But the whole thing turned out to be a fraud. Reuters has investigated, aided by access to deposition testimony in one or more of the lawsuits against Monsanto, which evidently was not subject to a protective order. Briefly put, the author of the IARC’s carcinogenicity study, Aaron Blair, an epidemiologist from the U.S. National Cancer Institute, covered up his own research showing that exposure to glyphosate did not lead to a higher incidence of cancer in humans. The story, as reported by Reuters, is astonishing:

Previously unreported court documents reviewed by Reuters from an ongoing U.S. legal case against Monsanto show that Blair knew the unpublished research found no evidence of a link between glyphosate and cancer. In a sworn deposition given in March this year in connection with the case, Blair also said the data would have altered IARC’s analysis.