All the Republican candidates for President are for reducing Medicare and Medicaid. Dr. Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is currently leading in the polls. He has a plan to replace Medicare and Medicaid with a plan that covers all Americans, young and old. Every person would receive $2000 a year from the government to pay for health care, with $700 to go towards health insurance and $1300 available to pay routine medical expenses. If you don't use the $1300, it accumulates in your health savings account.
It's a great plan for everyone who is not currently on Medicare or Medicaid. Quite simply, they get $2000 from the government that they are not currently receiving. For a family of four, that's $8000 a year. Very nice. Working people would still be able to get health insurance through their employer, so for them, this is just free money. If I were 18, I'd vote for that.
What about people on Medicaid? Some would be better off but some would not be better off. Those with low medical bills would get free money from the government. For those with high medical bills, the $2000 a year would fall far short.
But for people like myself, retired and on Medicare, it's a complete disaster. First of all, there is currently no private health insurance in the United States for persons 65 and older, and even if there were, it's unlikely that I would be able to get it for the $60 a month that Carson's plan provides. For someone born when the plan is in effect, they might be able to save enough from the $1300 a year that they have plenty in their health savings account by the time the get older, but that doesn't work if you're already retired when the plan goes into effect. I've had no medical expenses this year, but last year was an ordeal involving three surgeries and the medical bills were almost $150,000.
Total yearly medical expenditures in the U.S. are about $3 trillion, of which about one-third is Medicare and Medicaid. There are 320 million Americans and that times $2,000 is $640 billion a year. So the Carson plan pays less than one-fifth of total medical expenditures. Those on Medicare and Medicaid, whose expenses are now pretty much fully funded, get hit with an 80% reduction in the amount that the government pays for their care.
There is a sense in which the Carson plan is more fair, of course. It treats everyone equally, rich or poor, young or old, healthy or sick. That's great for the rich, the young, and the healthy, but it leaves the poor, the old and the sick in a hopeless position. In particular, it pulls the rug out from under retired people who have paid for Medicare all their lives through payroll taxes and were counting on it in their old age.
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
Saturday, September 19, 2015
My AI Program
This morning, the Loebner Prize is being contested at Bletchley Park, the location outside of London where Alan Turing and other British code breakers successfully cracked Nazi encryption. The Loebner Prize is described on their web site as follows:
The Loebner Prize for artificial intelligence ( AI ) is the first formal instantiation of a Turing Test. The test is named after Alan Turing the brilliant British mathematician. Among his many accomplishments was basic research in computing science. In 1950, in the article Computing Machinery and Intelligence which appeared in the philosophy journal Mind, Alan Turing asked the question "Can a Machine Think?" He answered in the affirmative, but a central question was: "If a computer could think, how could we tell?" Turing's suggestion was, that if the responses from the computer were indistinguishable from that of a human,the computer could be said to be thinking. This field is generally known as natural language processing.
In 1990 Hugh Loebner agreed with The Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies to underwrite a contest designed to implement the Turing Test. Dr. Loebner pledged a Grand Prize of $100,000 and a Gold Medal (pictured above) for the first computer whose responses were indistinguishable from a human's. Such a computer can be said "to think." Each year an annual cash prize and a bronze medal is awarded to the most human-like computer. The winner of the annual contest is the best entry relative to other entries that year, irrespective of how good it is in an absolute sense.
I've been interested in artificial intelligence for many years and at one point I wrote a modest program designed to give human-like responses. While my program is not sophisticated enough to be entered in the competition for the Loebner Prize, I thought that, in honor of the Loebner Prize, I might try it out this past week, using my neighbor here in Florida as the human who would give answers to my questions that I could then compare with answers from my computer program. The results are shown below. I've labelled the responses "A" and "B". Can you tell which is the human and which is the computer?
Question: Why is Donald Trump doing so well in the polls?
A: He will make America great again.
B: He is cynically telling stupid people what they want to hear.
Question: Is President Obama a Muslim?
A: Yes of course.
B: No, he is a Baptist Christian.
Question: Where was President Obama born?
A: Kenya.
B: Honolulu, Hawaii.
Question: What should we do about the problem of illegal immigration?
A: Build a wall.
B: Grant young illegal immigrants the right to work in the U.S.
Question: What should we do about Putin?
A: Try to get along well with him.
B: I don't understand the question.
If you guessed that A was the human and B the computer program, you're right, of course. This is just my admittedly simplistic program, and the programs competing for the Loebner prize are much better. Even so, as you can see, computer programs have a long way to go before they can match human intelligence.
The Loebner Prize for artificial intelligence ( AI ) is the first formal instantiation of a Turing Test. The test is named after Alan Turing the brilliant British mathematician. Among his many accomplishments was basic research in computing science. In 1950, in the article Computing Machinery and Intelligence which appeared in the philosophy journal Mind, Alan Turing asked the question "Can a Machine Think?" He answered in the affirmative, but a central question was: "If a computer could think, how could we tell?" Turing's suggestion was, that if the responses from the computer were indistinguishable from that of a human,the computer could be said to be thinking. This field is generally known as natural language processing.
In 1990 Hugh Loebner agreed with The Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies to underwrite a contest designed to implement the Turing Test. Dr. Loebner pledged a Grand Prize of $100,000 and a Gold Medal (pictured above) for the first computer whose responses were indistinguishable from a human's. Such a computer can be said "to think." Each year an annual cash prize and a bronze medal is awarded to the most human-like computer. The winner of the annual contest is the best entry relative to other entries that year, irrespective of how good it is in an absolute sense.
I've been interested in artificial intelligence for many years and at one point I wrote a modest program designed to give human-like responses. While my program is not sophisticated enough to be entered in the competition for the Loebner Prize, I thought that, in honor of the Loebner Prize, I might try it out this past week, using my neighbor here in Florida as the human who would give answers to my questions that I could then compare with answers from my computer program. The results are shown below. I've labelled the responses "A" and "B". Can you tell which is the human and which is the computer?
Question: Why is Donald Trump doing so well in the polls?
A: He will make America great again.
B: He is cynically telling stupid people what they want to hear.
Question: Is President Obama a Muslim?
A: Yes of course.
B: No, he is a Baptist Christian.
Question: Where was President Obama born?
A: Kenya.
B: Honolulu, Hawaii.
Question: What should we do about the problem of illegal immigration?
A: Build a wall.
B: Grant young illegal immigrants the right to work in the U.S.
Question: What should we do about Putin?
A: Try to get along well with him.
B: I don't understand the question.
If you guessed that A was the human and B the computer program, you're right, of course. This is just my admittedly simplistic program, and the programs competing for the Loebner prize are much better. Even so, as you can see, computer programs have a long way to go before they can match human intelligence.
Friday, August 14, 2015
Trump, The Bully
Donald Trump is many things--billionaire, misogynist, raging id, narcissist, genius. But there is one thing he is above all. He is a bully.
Bullying is out of favor these days, but here's the thing: bullying works. Just ask Vladimir Putin, or go to your favorite psychic medium and ask Adolph Hitler or Genghis Khan. I wish we lived in a world in which we did not tolerate throwing your weight around, but in my lifetime, nothing much has changed.
Trump's bullying came out in full force over his rough treatment by Roger Ailes in the recent Republican candidates debate. He charged back Hell-bent on gore. Everyone who, like myself, is voting for the Democrat for President next year no matter what, cringed at this pre-adolescent tirade. Half of those who are voting for the Republican next year no matter what, cheered, stomped and hollered. Those who will actually decide the election next year, the "undecideds", aren't paying any attention at all to this and won't until a few weeks before the election.
There's a good chance that Trump will bully his way to the Republican nomination for President. He's right that the other Republican candidates are weak, except maybe Ted Cruz. His threat to spoil the Republican chances by running as a third party candidate must be taken seriously. He has let everyone know that he will do anything to take revenge on his enemies. I believe him. In the end, the party will have to give in to his bullying and give him the nomination.
If it comes to Hillary vs. Donald, it will be the most amazing Presidential election in a very long time. Donald would have a chance to win, except for one thing. As he never tires of telling us, he is no one's puppet. Rich people, though, need to have a puppet as President. They were happy enough with Bill Clinton. They won't mind Hillary. But they will stop Trump. I hope.
Bullying is out of favor these days, but here's the thing: bullying works. Just ask Vladimir Putin, or go to your favorite psychic medium and ask Adolph Hitler or Genghis Khan. I wish we lived in a world in which we did not tolerate throwing your weight around, but in my lifetime, nothing much has changed.
Trump's bullying came out in full force over his rough treatment by Roger Ailes in the recent Republican candidates debate. He charged back Hell-bent on gore. Everyone who, like myself, is voting for the Democrat for President next year no matter what, cringed at this pre-adolescent tirade. Half of those who are voting for the Republican next year no matter what, cheered, stomped and hollered. Those who will actually decide the election next year, the "undecideds", aren't paying any attention at all to this and won't until a few weeks before the election.
There's a good chance that Trump will bully his way to the Republican nomination for President. He's right that the other Republican candidates are weak, except maybe Ted Cruz. His threat to spoil the Republican chances by running as a third party candidate must be taken seriously. He has let everyone know that he will do anything to take revenge on his enemies. I believe him. In the end, the party will have to give in to his bullying and give him the nomination.
If it comes to Hillary vs. Donald, it will be the most amazing Presidential election in a very long time. Donald would have a chance to win, except for one thing. As he never tires of telling us, he is no one's puppet. Rich people, though, need to have a puppet as President. They were happy enough with Bill Clinton. They won't mind Hillary. But they will stop Trump. I hope.
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Birthers Got It All Wrong
"Birthers" are those, like Donald Trump, who believe that President Obama wasn't born in Hawaii as he claims, but in Africa. They've got it all wrong. Obama wasn't born in Africa, but he wasn't born in Hawaii either. He was born on Alpha Centauri Bb, an extrasolar planet orbiting the star Alpha Centauri B which is about four light-years from Earth in the southern constellation of Centaurus, affectionately called "lava world" by its inhabitants because of its high level of volcanic activity. I know because I'm from there too and I came to earth about the same time as he did. Both our families are originally from the Skitze clan of the Alphane moon, which accounts for our tendency to blather.
I don't remember him well. He wasn't so interested in politics then. Mostly he was known for being wicked good at playing the video game Space Invaders, which on Bb is similar to but way different from the game played here on earth. For one thing, it's played with real space invaders, who invariable get the worst of it. Earthlings would do best to consider that if they ever think of invading Bb.
The year on Bb is only 3 earth days, which makes him (and me) really old in Bb years. There are no days on Bb because the same side of the planet always points to its sun. On Bb, when you want to go out for the evening, you have to travel to the dark side. It was rumoured that Obama spent way too much time there. Most Bbans stay mostly on the day side of the planet, where the work day is infinitely long and there is no weekend because there are no days. This can get to be a drag. It's why I came to earth and I'm sure it had something to do with Obama's migrating here as well.
Since it was discovered by earth scientists in 2012, there has been some scepticism here as to the existence of our home planet. I don't take offense, though. There are still some on Bb who don't believe in earth, despite the large number of Bbans who have migrated here over the years. Once we get here, there's a tendency to forget about Bb and not write home, and that may have something to do with it. My own birth parents on Bb started denying my existence soon after I left, but it's only because of a wicked law on Bb that makes parents liable for their children's exit tax if they leave without paying. The tax is really high, roughly comparable to the gross domestic product of Haiti, and no one pays it. If you reporters want to ask Obama an awkward question, ask him whether he paid the exit tax.
All taxes on Bb are really high, which is why most people there feel they need to work infinitely long days without weekends. That's probably why Obama feels that Americans don't have it so bad tax-wise. We really don't. Bbans do have really good government mandated health insurance though. The excellent health system helps people to keep working those infinitely long workdays for an infinitely long lifetime, which ensures that they'll keep paying taxes and keep the whole thing going. Do the math.
So, Donald Trump, get a clue. Don't go making wild accusations about things you don't know nothing about.
I don't remember him well. He wasn't so interested in politics then. Mostly he was known for being wicked good at playing the video game Space Invaders, which on Bb is similar to but way different from the game played here on earth. For one thing, it's played with real space invaders, who invariable get the worst of it. Earthlings would do best to consider that if they ever think of invading Bb.
The year on Bb is only 3 earth days, which makes him (and me) really old in Bb years. There are no days on Bb because the same side of the planet always points to its sun. On Bb, when you want to go out for the evening, you have to travel to the dark side. It was rumoured that Obama spent way too much time there. Most Bbans stay mostly on the day side of the planet, where the work day is infinitely long and there is no weekend because there are no days. This can get to be a drag. It's why I came to earth and I'm sure it had something to do with Obama's migrating here as well.
Since it was discovered by earth scientists in 2012, there has been some scepticism here as to the existence of our home planet. I don't take offense, though. There are still some on Bb who don't believe in earth, despite the large number of Bbans who have migrated here over the years. Once we get here, there's a tendency to forget about Bb and not write home, and that may have something to do with it. My own birth parents on Bb started denying my existence soon after I left, but it's only because of a wicked law on Bb that makes parents liable for their children's exit tax if they leave without paying. The tax is really high, roughly comparable to the gross domestic product of Haiti, and no one pays it. If you reporters want to ask Obama an awkward question, ask him whether he paid the exit tax.
All taxes on Bb are really high, which is why most people there feel they need to work infinitely long days without weekends. That's probably why Obama feels that Americans don't have it so bad tax-wise. We really don't. Bbans do have really good government mandated health insurance though. The excellent health system helps people to keep working those infinitely long workdays for an infinitely long lifetime, which ensures that they'll keep paying taxes and keep the whole thing going. Do the math.
So, Donald Trump, get a clue. Don't go making wild accusations about things you don't know nothing about.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
NSA Slide Shows
The latest revelation from Snowden is that NSA and British intelligence stole the encryption keys for billions of cell phone SIM cards, allowing them to listen in on conversations without the assistance of the telephone companies involved merely be setting up radio receiving equipment near where the cell phone is being used.
That fact that NSA did this is not too surprising. It's safe to assume that spy agencies do everything you can think of and a lot that you can't think of. What strikes me, though, about this and the other Snowden revelations, is the form in which this information appeared within NSA and which was stolen by Snowden. It was a "slide show", that is, a PowerPoint presentation.
I remember somebody telling me once, I don't remember who or when, maybe my parents, that if you tell someone something, it's not a secret any more. A slide show is of course specifically created to inform a group of people, presumably people who don't have much knowledge of what is going on to begin with. My point is that, if you tell too many people about it, it's not going to stay secret for very long. It seems that NSA hires, I don't know, 2,000 people maybe? 20,000? And then swears them all to secrecy and tells them everything and expects that everything will stay secret. The truly shocking thing about Snowden's revelations is that NSA seems to be spreading around a lot of information about its operations to people who don't really need it to do their jobs. It's problematic to understand the motivation for this. It may just be braggadocio. It may be to justify funding or advance careers.
In spook films like "Mission: Impossible", spy secrets are kept in vaults with exotic electronic defenses. In reality, it seems that the nation's secrets are scattered haphazardly all over God's creation. If you need more evidence of this, consider the leak to a news reporter of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity by Richard Armitage in 2003. As far as I can tell, there was no reason for Richard Armitage to know that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. It was never explained how he knew that in the first place. Yes, he was a Deputy Secretary of State, but even so he would not need to know the identity of secret agents and shouldn't know it. The fact that this question never even came up in the scandal and grand jury investigation tells you that this is business as usual.
Then there's the question of how Snowden himself had access to all this. Well, OK, he was a system administrator. But it's not that hard to encrypt files to keep system administrators from being able to read stuff they're not supposed to read. I could do it using simple tools and I'm not much of a security expert. NSA on the other hand are supposed to be encryption experts. I can only conclude that our security agencies are bloated bureaucracies that are not very focused on their mission.
Some forty years ago I expressed my dismay to a friend about how inept U.S. intelligence agencies seemed to be. He expressed the thought that they might put out disinformation to make everyone believe they were dumb so that our enemies would underestimate them.
I wish it were true.
That fact that NSA did this is not too surprising. It's safe to assume that spy agencies do everything you can think of and a lot that you can't think of. What strikes me, though, about this and the other Snowden revelations, is the form in which this information appeared within NSA and which was stolen by Snowden. It was a "slide show", that is, a PowerPoint presentation.
I remember somebody telling me once, I don't remember who or when, maybe my parents, that if you tell someone something, it's not a secret any more. A slide show is of course specifically created to inform a group of people, presumably people who don't have much knowledge of what is going on to begin with. My point is that, if you tell too many people about it, it's not going to stay secret for very long. It seems that NSA hires, I don't know, 2,000 people maybe? 20,000? And then swears them all to secrecy and tells them everything and expects that everything will stay secret. The truly shocking thing about Snowden's revelations is that NSA seems to be spreading around a lot of information about its operations to people who don't really need it to do their jobs. It's problematic to understand the motivation for this. It may just be braggadocio. It may be to justify funding or advance careers.
In spook films like "Mission: Impossible", spy secrets are kept in vaults with exotic electronic defenses. In reality, it seems that the nation's secrets are scattered haphazardly all over God's creation. If you need more evidence of this, consider the leak to a news reporter of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity by Richard Armitage in 2003. As far as I can tell, there was no reason for Richard Armitage to know that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. It was never explained how he knew that in the first place. Yes, he was a Deputy Secretary of State, but even so he would not need to know the identity of secret agents and shouldn't know it. The fact that this question never even came up in the scandal and grand jury investigation tells you that this is business as usual.
Then there's the question of how Snowden himself had access to all this. Well, OK, he was a system administrator. But it's not that hard to encrypt files to keep system administrators from being able to read stuff they're not supposed to read. I could do it using simple tools and I'm not much of a security expert. NSA on the other hand are supposed to be encryption experts. I can only conclude that our security agencies are bloated bureaucracies that are not very focused on their mission.
Some forty years ago I expressed my dismay to a friend about how inept U.S. intelligence agencies seemed to be. He expressed the thought that they might put out disinformation to make everyone believe they were dumb so that our enemies would underestimate them.
I wish it were true.
Sunday, November 30, 2014
I Declare...
Like most Americans, I am considering running for the Republican nomination for President. Usually when you run for President, you want to avoid saying anything that would offend anyone, which means you should avoid saying anything at all. This year, however, the only hope of winning the Republican nomination is to make your opinions crystal clear. So here goes:
So I guess you're stuck with Hillary for now, but it's only temporary because the End Times are coming.
Hallelujah!
- Climate Change. I'm for it. Obama was for change when he ran the first time, so in general I'm against it, except as described below, but he was against climate change so I'm for it.
- The Flag. I'm for it.
- Federal Government. I'm against it. I would repeal the U.S. Constitution, except we should keep the Second Amendment that guarantees the right to shoot guns and also the Supreme Court would be needed to protect the Second Amendment and for other reasons (see below). Because there would be no Congress or President, members of the Supreme Court would need to be appointed by the Evangelical Ministerial Association.
- Coloreds. I'm against them. Obama is one for sure and I'm against Obama. Coloreds are taking over everywhere so we should stop them. With all the intermarriage these days, it can be hard to say for sure who is colored and who is not. Here is where modern computer technology can help. It should be possible to create a high tech device that accurately measures skin color. You will need to be careful about getting too much tan but exposure to sun causes skin cancer so you should be avoiding it anyway. The Supreme Court can administer this program (see above).
- Immigration. See previous item.
- Women. I'm for them.
- Feminists. I'm against them.
- Education. I'm for it, except it should be run by the Supreme Court (see above).
- Corporations. I'm for them.
- Debt. I'm against it.
- Taxes. Don't get me started.
So I guess you're stuck with Hillary for now, but it's only temporary because the End Times are coming.
Hallelujah!
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
American Mobs
Civil disorder is part of our national character. As Americans we believe that civil disorder can be an appropriate and necessary response to perceived injustice. It was an important aspect of the American Revolution and it's practically part of the Constitution. The right to resort to civil disorder is the motivation for the Second Amendment that guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.
The civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri is neither unusual nor surprising when seen against the long history of hundreds of incidents of civil disorder going back more than two hundred years--more than one a year since the birth of the nation. For the complete list, see this Wikipedia article. Here are a few of the more notorious mob actions:
I added the Bundy Rebellion from earlier this year though it may not qualify as a riot because no actual violence occurred due to the federal government backing off from armed confrontation. The Wikipedia list doesn't include the Boston Tea Party or the American Revolution itself, perhaps because it includes only incidents that occurred after the United States was formally declared in 1781.
The civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri is neither unusual nor surprising when seen against the long history of hundreds of incidents of civil disorder going back more than two hundred years--more than one a year since the birth of the nation. For the complete list, see this Wikipedia article. Here are a few of the more notorious mob actions:
- Shay's Rebellion (1786)
- Whiskey Rebellion (1791)
- Cincinnati Riots (1829)
- Philadelphia Nativist Riots (1844)
- Bloody Monday (1855)
- New York Draft Riots (1863)
- Haymarket Riot (1886)
- May Day Riots (1894)
- Atlanta Riot (1906)
- Red Summer (1919)
- Battle of the Overpass (1937)
- Zoot Suit Riots (1943)
- Battle of Hayes Pond (1953)
- Watts Riots (1965)
- Wounded Knee (1973)
- Tampa Riots (1987-1992)
- University of Maryland Riot (2002)
- Springfest Riot (2010)
- Bundy Rebellion (2014)
I added the Bundy Rebellion from earlier this year though it may not qualify as a riot because no actual violence occurred due to the federal government backing off from armed confrontation. The Wikipedia list doesn't include the Boston Tea Party or the American Revolution itself, perhaps because it includes only incidents that occurred after the United States was formally declared in 1781.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)