Category: Science

  • A Guide to Preventing Data Leakage

    The Internet is a big old scary place, full of dark corners, strange protocols, dodgy individuals, unscrupulous corporations and cynical state-level actors.

    The tools we use to access the Internet, though often very powerful, remain badly-designed. This is true not only in terms of the User Experience (UX) and User Interface (UI), but also in how they let us use and manage our data.

    Most big Internet/Web companies use “dark patterns” to exploit normal human behaviors profitably, and often without serious consideration of the consequences to the average human psyche.

    Every day there are hundreds if not thousands of severe security breaches, and every month or so we hear of egregious acts of deliberate abuse, or contemptible neglect on the scale of millions of individuals affected.

    This is made worse by the sheer amount of data our devices leak, all the time. Pretty much every computer has a hardware backdoor, either explicitly as in the Intel Management Engine (perhaps added at the behest of the National Security Agency), and most mobile telephone modems are little black boxes over which the user has no control. Location, browser history, contacts, messages, emails, etc., etc,. are all leaked in multiple ways, through apps and websites, through wifi and 4G, and worst of all directly from the operating systems.

    For example, in this video, we load the following sites simultaneously in a Firefox browser and use Lightbeam to visualise all the links made between sites by loading shared assets such as images, scripts, style sheets and other data common to any website.

    Simulating a typical browsing session on 18 sites (nytimes.com, theguardian.com, huffingtonpost.com, en.wikipedia.orgi, skatehut.co.uk, amazon.com x 2, vox.com, bbc.com, cracked.com, facebook.com, trivago.ie, skyscanner.net, nbcnews.com, answers.com, weather.com, ie.match.com, imgur.com) you can see 384 different servsers now have data on how you access these websites. The extreme amount of inter-connectivity is quite a show!

    Now we reload the same 18 pages with partial tracking prevention plugins to Firefox and observe only 58, and these only minimally.

     

    What follows is a guide to ‘tightening up’. This advice is intended for personal use. It is broken down into sections so it can be implemented in stages. Each section is colour-coded according to difficulty as follows:

    Easy – even for Grandpa

    Normal – can set up email on phone

    Hard – summon nearest teenager

    Difficult – might need professional help


    Problem: Hardware

    At the bottom of the stack we have the hardware problem, which is that most computers are not totally under the control of their users, and usually have at least one but often two or more completely independent, remotely-controlled, onboard computers. On Intel chips it’s called the Intel Management Engine, on AMD it’s called the AMD Platform Security Processor. Most mobile telephones use a proprietary technology from Broadcom, a massive US company, and are made in China, and are known to have a variety of intentional holes in their security.

    Solution: Use AMD products on the Laptop/Desktop and wait for Purism Mobile (and verified RISCV in the long term).

    AMD make all the main desktop/laptop/server chips that are not made by Intel, and have a better reputation.

    The Purism mobile project (Librem 5) is the great hope for everyone interested in fully user-controlled mobile phone. It will hopefully be ready in about a year. RISCV is a completely open, community-created, modern-chip-architecture that promises high-performance in both number of computations per second and energy use.


    Problem: Operating System

    Here we get to the big one, the choice of “church”. There are four main options: Apple, Google, Microsoft, GNU/Linux.

    Apple is the most cultish OS, a mono-aesthetic walled garden, famous for its ‘taste’ and convenience, infamous for its rigidity and cost. They manage their app store jealously, refusing programs that interfere with their ability to profitise your time on their systems. They have a well-funded reputation for safety, frequently destroyed for those in the know by errors such as the ability to login in remotely as administrator without a password. Their mobile efforts are more secure in some ways, but Apple themselves still extract huge amounts of ‘telemetry’ on every user, for their own and others benefit.

    Google offer Android. Google make money by selling advertising to third parties, along with detailed information about how to use best their platform. Android, though quite secure in certain aspects from a technical point of view, is still essentially a mobile person monitoring device. Google recently removed their famous “Don’t be evil” motto from their handbook.

    Microsoft sell Windows 10, the latest version of the most widely and successfully attacked operating system ever. Microsoft have been in trouble all over the world for their antics. Their devices send vast amounts of ‘anonymized’ data back to headquarters deliberately, and to pretty much every major Internet crime group as well.

    GNU/Linux is a multi-decade community-driven operating system initiated by one of the true heroes of privacy and freedom: Richard Stallman. It is now developed all over the world, in the open, by companies such as Google (who use it internally to power their advertising thought-trap) and organisations such as CERN and NASA. It powers most of the Internet, and is freely used on everything from wireless routers to phones to laptops to supercomputers.

    Solution: Linux Mint, the easiest and most polished operating systems distribution (free as in speech and as in beer)

    Difficult, but not impossible


    Problem: Safe Browsing

    We use a browser for nearly all our general use of the Internet. This is great as it provides an all-in-one tool that can do everything from email to games, but distressingly insecure as it is a one-stop-shop for tracking people’s habits online. There are four main browsers, each associated with one of the operating systems listed above.

    • Apple – Safari (also runs on Microsoft)
    • Google – Chrome (also runs on Apple, Microsoft, GNU/Linux)
    • Microsoft – Edge
    • Gnu/Linux – Firefox (also runs on Apple, Google, Microsoft)

    Solution: Firefox and Tor Browser Bundle

    Only one choice here, but it comes in two varieties: Firefox, and Firefox packaged as the Tor Browser Bundle.

    Firefox is a powerful, research-driven, privacy-focussed, standards-compliant, community-backed browser. All the code is open-source, meaning is can be and is examined out in the open by experts all over the world. The non-profit organisation that oversees Firefox, Mozilla, is very clear in its motives. The Tor Browser Bundle wraps the browser with the Tor project, providing vastly increased anonymity online, at the expense of being slower to use due to the added encryption complexity.

    Firefox is better with plugins, here are a few to get you started (these can break many websites):


    Problem: Your Internet Service Provider/Mobile Phone Operator

    Companies that sell you Internet Access are almost all required by law to record a lot of data about your activity.

    Solution: A Virtual Private Network such as Proton VPN

    A VPN sets up an encrypted point-to-point link from your computer/phone to another computer in a server farm elsewhere on the Internet. This hides your IP address (one of the most important tracking details), and some other data.

    Solution: Use TOR

    TOR is a method of encrypting your network traffic over a randomised colection of links over the Internet. It is quite secure, more so than only a VPN, but really quite slow. Used with a VPN (computer -> VPN -> TOR) it is quite effective.


    Problem: The Law in every jurisdiction

    Every Government on the planet reserves the right to legislate on people’s use of the Internet, and exercises it to varying degrees. The Government of the U.S.A., instrumental in the development of the Internet, reserves quite ridiculous authority to interfere, and uses and abuses this with aplomb.

    Solution: Stay in the EU/become an EU citizen

    Amazingly, the EU, the latest political hegemony in the most consistently abusive collective polity in human history, is now the bastion of Human Freedom. It is actually becoming quite effective in this role, and improving all the time.

    Solution: Enforce Human Rights Law

    ‘Article 12.

    No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.’


    Problem: Web Services and Social Media

    The entire business model of providing web services (email in your browser, for example) and social media is to monetise the data you give up by using these services.

    Solution: Don’t, just don’t (at least not yet)

    There are a small number of privacy-respecting web-services/social media organisations that provide most, but not all, of what we expect from these systems. They are still young, suffer from technical and User Experience problems, and have yet to achieve critical mass. In a few years, perhaps sooner, the landscape will be very different. Instead, just give people a ring, or write them a postcard, or just make sure to look them up next time you are near. If everyone reaches out the world becomes small.


    The Electronic Freedom Foundation provides the best overall guide to being safe online. Read more here.

  • Drinking from the Waters of Prevention in Public Health

    The Lancet’s recent editorial, ‘Austerity in Spain: time to loosen the grip’, argues that low government expenditure was ‘undermining the principle of universal coverage’ in that country. They point to pensioners devoting a substantial proportion of their incomes to medicines, and warn of excessive delays in elective surgeries being carried out. Detrimental effects are particularly evident among socially marginalised groups, such as migrants, they contend.

    Yet in spite of these privations the authors note that life expectancy in Spain had reached 83 years in 2015, up from 79·3 years in 2000, the highest, on average, of any EU country. Unconvincingly, they assume the repercussions ‘of the financial crises are not necessarily all detrimental: ‘increases in healthy behaviours (eg, cycling, walking) and reductions in risky activities (eg, consumption of alcohol or tobacco) might occur’.

    It is a common misconception that increasing health expenditure in any Western society will bring about a rise in life expectancy. In fact, there are rapidly diminishing returns on investment. Primary care, especially in maternity services and pediatrics (including selective use of antibiotics, and vaccination), certainly minimises premature deaths, but most healthcare addresses the symptoms rather than acting on the lifestyle triggers of the diseases that are now the greatest cause of mortality (and morbidity) in the Western world.

    This reflects the Tudor-Hart Inverse Care Law, which states: ‘The availability of good medical care tends to vary inversely with the need for it in the population served. This … operates more completely where medical care is most exposed to market forces, and less so where such exposure is reduced.’ In other words, efficiency declines as expenditure increases, and the freer the health market the worse the outcomes.

    The two main causes of mortality in the Western world are cardiovascular disease and cancer. An early diagnosis may indeed nip a problem in the bud, but does not address the social and environmental drivers of these maladies. The hospital experience itself may even be unhealthy, as an expansive 2014 Swiss cost-benefit analysis of Mammogram services suggests. One in five of the cancers detected with mammography and treated was not a threat to the woman’s health, and did not require treatment such as chemotherapy, surgery or radiation.

    In fact, the adverse effect of medical treatment is one of the leading causes of death in most developed countries: especially the high-spending United States, where in 2000 Dr. Barbara Starfield estimated:

    • 12,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgeries.
    • 7,000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals.
    • 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals.
    • 80,000 deaths/year from nosocomial infections in hospitals.
    • 106,000 deaths/year from nonerror, adverse effects of medications.

    More recently in 2016, a John Hopkins team calculated that 250,000 deaths were caused by medical errors each year, making iatrogenic illness the third leading cause of death in the U.S., after cardiovascular disease and cancer. This serves as a particular warning to those countries converging with U.S. norms, where health care is largely left to market forces.

    Yet health discourse continues to promote the scientific holy grail of the wonder cure, even for ailments intimately related to lifestyles and environmental factors. This approach may be traced to a Romantic era of science at the end of the eighteenth century, and has profound implication for government funding of health services.

    Moreover, when a person is afflicted with serious a disease the demand for a cure becomes a matter of life and death. Most of us will do anything in our power to survive, crying from the rooftops if necessary. A healthy person, on the other hand, is generally oblivious or uninterested in why they remain hale and hearty. Stories focusing on the affordability of medicines or failures in health services have far greater news currency than the multifarious reasons why one society is less prone to disease than another.

    A rational health system would continue to pursue medicinal breakthroughs, in collaboration with but not at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry, but place greater emphasis on addressing the complex aetiology of pathologies, in particular lifestyle and other factors that give rise to cancers and cardiovascular diseases.

    II Lifestyle Factors

    The advancement of lifestyle change, as opposed to dispensing medicines, would also require a cultural shift among the medical community, which could have revolutionary ramifications for society.

    By and large doctors are trained to intervene against clearly defined pathologies, mainly through medication, and have less training in ‘soft’ psychological skills, which might alter self-destructive behaviours at source. Psychiatry, psychology’s close relative, is a specialised branch of medicine, overwhelming devoted to treating mental illness rather than providing guidance to society at large. Moreover, the complexity of lifestyle factors often renders research data unsatisfactory, with findings easily dismissed as conjecture or mere correlation.

    Nonetheless, in a research paper this year entitled: ‘Impact of Healthy Lifestyle Factors on Life Expectancies in the US Population‘ researchers attempted to show that countering a range of unhealthy conditions including being a smoking, maintaining a high body mass index, taking little or no exercise, and consuming a poor diet and alcohol to excess, could significantly increase life expectancy:

    The United States is one of the wealthiest nations worldwide, but Americans have a shorter life expectancy compared with residents of almost all other high-income countries, ranking 31st in the world for life expectancy at birth in 2015.3 In 2014, with a total health expenditure per capita of $9402,4 the United States was ranked first in the world for health expenditure as a percent of gross domestic product (17.1%). However, the US healthcare system has focused primarily on drug discoveries and disease treatment rather than prevention. Chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the commonest and costliest of all health problems but are largely preventable.

    It is notable that the U.S. spends the highest proportion of its GDP on healthcare in the world, yet witnesses poor outcomes relative to other developed nations. This reflects the Tudor-Hart Inverse Care Law, which Obama’s Patient Care and Affordable Care Act (so-called Obamacare) redresses. Ironically, this is being whittled away by the Trump administration, who enjoyed support in the Presidential election from states where more than four out of five of those who rely on Obamacare reside.

    Aside from insufficient access to Primary Care, the U.S.’s disease burden also arises from addictions to junk foods, drugs and cars. Medications or surgery do little to confront the obesity pandemic, or drug dependencies, including the opiate crisis which killed more than 33,000 thousand in 2015.

    Rather than ramping up access to healthcare the authors instead recommend adherence to a ‘low-risk lifestyles, which could:

    prolong life expectancy at age 50 years by 14.0 and 12.2 years in female and male US adults compared with individuals without any of the low-risk lifestyle factors. Our findings suggest that the gap in life expectancy between the United States and other developed countries could be narrowed by improving lifestyle factors.

    The logic of this emphasis is consistent with the explanation of the authors of The Changing Body: Health, Nutrition and Human Development in the Western World since 1700 (Floud et al., Cambridge, 2011) for why average life expectancies have risen across the world over the past three centuries.

    Crucial breakthroughs in raising global life expectancy arrived first in England in the late eighteenth century with government intervention in the grain market, which stabilised prices, thereby averting periodic famines. The average age at death climbed more dramatically once clean drinking water became available at the end of the nineteenth.

    An important consequence of early-nineteenth-century urbanisation had been ‘the deterioration of the quality and quantity of the water supply(1)’. Drinking water only improved after substantial state-funded infrastructural investment in the 1890s. Thereafter, a range of water-born diseases like diarrhea, cholera and dysentery ceased to trouble the population to anywhere near the same extent.

    The authors make a significant claim:

    it would be easy to exaggerate the importance of scientific medicine when one considers that much of the decline in the mortality associated with infectious diseases predated the introduction of effective medical measures to deal with it(2).

    They acknowledge that drugs like insulin, penicillin and prontosil as well as the mass immunizations of the post Second World War era made a difference, but maintain that adequate nutrition and clean water were the main determinants which overcame the infectious diseases which had carried off most of the population until that point.

    III Smoking and Obesity

    Today the drivers of disease in developed countries are manifold, but one factor often overlooked is the stress of living in perpetual income insecurity. This goes some way towards explaining why it tends to be the poor who make unwholesome food choices, especially favouring refined sugar, and continuing to smoke in spite of vivid health warnings.

    Wolfgang Schivelbusch describes the ubiquity of smoking as a clear index of the state of civilisation: ‘If smoking is defined as an ersatz act which absorbs the increasing nervousness of civilized man, affecting the body’s chemistry as well as motor function, then this penetration of our culture by smoking demonstrates to what depth the culture is permeated by nervousness.(3)’

    Moreover, the medical writer Kurt Pohlisch describes how: ‘In the act of smoking the nervously restless hand fixes on a purpose.’ He continues: ‘Smoking creates both a feeling of activity in leisure and one of leisure in the midst of activity … In terms of motoricity, pharmacology and sense psychology, smoking creates a cheerful mood, highly varied nuances of physical feelings, an agreeable stimulation with which to perform intellectual work, a pleasant sense of calm, a state of contentedness, satisfaction [and] easy cordiality.(4)’

    Consequently, a substantial minority continue to smoke, despite constant and graphic advice to quit. What the campaigns against smoking fail to recognise is the role played by smoking – and the use of other drugs – in relieving the stress of living in perpetual income insecurity.

    Smoking: ‘activity in leisure and one of leisure in the midst of activity’.

    Similarly, sections of societies living under free market conditions are prone to unhealthy dietary patterns. Avner Offer asserts: ‘Among affluent societies, the highest prevalence of obesity is to be found in countries most strongly committed to market-liberal policy norms.’ He argues: ‘if stress generates obesity, then welfare states protect against stress, and are likely to have lower states of obesity.’

    He says: ‘it is appropriate to think of the rise of obesity as an eruption, and to look for another eruption to explain it’. He identifies this as the emergence of the New Right in the late 1970s, and the market-liberal regimes that subsequently carried out their economic and social programmes in the main English-speaking countries, and elsewhere.

    He argues ‘the economic benefits of flexible and open market liberalism, such as they are, may be offset by costs to personal welfare and public health, which are rarely taken into account’, citing the example of the UK where adult obesity has tripled since 1980. An obesogenic environment was actually largely in place by the 1970s: car-use and television-watching were well established, and food was already sugary, cheap and plentiful before Margaret Thatcher came to power. The same stress-inducing conditions emerged in the United States under Ronald Reagan.

    Increased stress levels, especially fueled by employment uncertainty affect dietary choices: ‘Physiologically, stress leads individuals to prefer fatty and sweet foods, and frequently to consume more calories, exacerbating weight gain, especially in the form of risky abdominal fat.’ The idea of a link between insecurity, stress and obesity is supported by the ‘social gradient’ of obesity’: it is most prevalent among those at the bottom of the social ladder.

    Illuminatingly, in the month after September 11th, sales of snack foods increased by more than 12% across the United States as paranoia, verging on hysteria, swept through the country. Overall: ‘among rich nations, the USA and Great Britain have experienced the greatest income inequality since 1980 and the greatest increase in the prevalence of obesity(3)’.

    Peter Whybrow connects these responses to our early evolution. He argues that stress causes the lizard core of our brains to release dopamine, a hormone connected to pleasure, after consuming fatty and sweet food.

    He paints a lurid picture: ‘In the presence of continuous psychosocial shocks, a complex work environment, repeated deadlines, a difficult marriage – the alarm bells are continuously ringing and the stress response is continuously in play. In consequences, the body is maintained in a high state of psychological arousal, where the vulnerability to chronic illness is increased, with obesity as no exception.(4)’

    IV The Miracle Cure

    Richard Holmes argues that several crucial misconceptions crystallized around the idea of science at the start of the nineteenth century, aspects of which continue to confound our understanding of public health.

    There emerged at that point, ‘the dazzling idea of the solitary scientific ‘genius’, thirsting and reckless for knowledge, for its own sake and perhaps at any cost’. This is closely connected with the idea of the ‘Eureka’ moment: ‘the intuitive inspired instant of invention or discovery, for which no amount of preparation or preliminary analysis can really compare(5).’

    Western medicine perpetuates what is essentially a mythology of invention, assuming genius will produce a wonder cure for diseases such as cancer; just as Edward Jenner developed the idea of vaccination for small pox by infecting a young farm boy with the disease after first giving him a dose of cowpox. He had learnt from local folklore that milk maids who developed that mild condition never contracted the deadly pox.

    The chronic conditions we confront are not, however, susceptible to silver bullet breakthroughs in the form of drug interventions or vaccination. Medications may extend lives but generally fail to eliminate the diseases or address underlying causes. Nonetheless, the media is transfixed by tantalising cures lying on the horizon.

    One notable exception is the long-standing campaign against smoking, but as indicated, governments fail to recognise why people refuse to give up. Meanwhile, we see desultory efforts to warn against or tax consumption of ‘pure, white and deadly’ refined sugar, or red and processed meat, categorised as possible and probable carcinogens by the WHO. Likewise the transport infrastructure of most developed countries is designed primarily for motor cars, leading to a serious lack of physical activity.

    In the past doctors displayed greater awareness of the lifestyle factors that lead to disease, including the health benefits, or otherwise, derived from staple foodstuffs.

    By the seventeenth century bread was a vital element in the diet of most Parisians, who, on average, ate a remarkable one kilo-and-a-half per day. At that the time the perceived adulteration of bread with ‘barm’ or yeast, as opposed to the traditional sourdough ‘levain’ method, produced a medical controversy, leading to the formation of an expert medical panel.

    In condemning the use of yeast, the leading medical expert Gui Patin stated:

    To say, as those who defend it do, that they have not seen anyone drop over sick or dead from eating this bread is not a good way to clear it of the faults with which it has been charged. It is like sugar refined with lime or alum, or heavily salted, peppered and sliced meats, or wines in which one tosses lime or fish glue, or other things bad in themselves which men concerned about their health avoid, even if none of these things causes death or threatens one’s health on the day it is ingested(6).

    In spite of his advice the Paris parliament maintained a policy of laissez faire. The preference of bakeries for yeast is explained by it acting faster than levain. Since the arrival of the Chorleywood Process we have reached a point where most bread is no more than a junk food, which is surely a significant, slow-burning cause of disease. Indeed, the quality of a country’s bread may be an overlooked comparative indicator of its overall health.

    The early nineteenth century radical doctor Thomas Beddoes defined the philanthropic doctor as ‘one who is humane in his conduct not so much from sudden impulses of passion as from a settled conviction of the miserly prevailing among mankind(7)’. Many doctors today display these qualities, but are often ground down by a system which processes disease. As specialisation increases compassion declines, with the body reduced to its composite parts. The pharmaceutical industry also increasingly distorts priorities, even in ostensibly publicly funded systems of healthcare.

    As his career drew to a close, Beddoes made a number of simple proposals for raising public health: he suggested that all wives should be provided (free of charge) with anatomy lectures, washing machines (steam-powered), fresh vegetables and pressure cookers(8). These proposals would not be out of place today.

    The emphasis of public health should shift to the general practitioner, whose role could be more educative (lessons in anatomy that Beddoes speaks of) than prescriptive, and the idea of general physician perhaps revived.

    V The Wide Angle

    ‘The Second Battle of Moytura’ is the centrepiece of a ninth century Irish mythological cycle. It consists of a series of fantastical episodes of enduring interest. One such is the story of Nuada who loses his arm and authority in battle. We learn that the court physician Diancecht fashions him a prosthetic silver limb in its place.

    In the meantime, Diancecht’s son Miach begins to heal Nuada’s real severed arm, but the father prefers his own methods and surgically kills his son by removing his brain. Miach is buried by his sister Airmed and from his grave sprout three hundred and sixty-five healing herbs, which she orders in her cloak. Diancecht has other ideas, however, scattering the herbs, each of whose value would remain obscure.

    The possibilities of Miach’s more complimentary approach, rather than Diancecht’s artificial limb, suggests that healing may come from within the body itself, while the scattering of the healing herbs represents ignorance of the cures available in Nature.

    Diancecht wish to preserve the dominance of his profession might serve as a metaphor for the approach of the pharmaceutical industry. Ben Goldacre’s Bad Pharma (London, 2012), in particular, has drawn attention to serious corruption in that industry. But medication will remain all-important as long as disease, not health, is the focus of public policy.

    Human beings cannot expect to live forever, but serious reductions can be made to the burden of disease. We can address drug addictions, the quality of food and increase physical activity, but stress and low-level depression, lead to unhealthy lifestyle choices. If you take your meal in a car, as is the case with up to twenty per cent of those consumed in the U.S., it is more than a nutritional issue.

    The culture of Spain is notable for its conviviality, although one could overstate how mealtimes are not rushed affairs, or that work can always be done manana. Nonetheless, the siesta is still respected, and the life-affirming fiesta an important dimension of civic life. However, the recent economic crisis, and current political turn, may be eroding aspects of this way of life. Moreover, the Mediterranean diet is no longer followed, and obesity increasingly apparent.

    Notably, the generation in Spain enjoying such longevity today spent most of their working lives in a political system that protected industry from foreign competition, and, especially after the Socialists came to power at the end of Franco’s dictatorship, lived under a welfare state.

    The generation at work in Spain today, or not as the case with so many, are subject to greater uncertainties in life than their parents, with potentially long-term health consequences. Indeed across Europe life expectancies have actually gone into decline for the first time since records began. This may reflect the stress induced by increasing income insecurity and inequality  in the era of the euro.

    Altering any culture is slow work, but a rational view of public health should recognise a cultural dimension to most infirmities. A breakthrough in public health could be to see all medicine ‘as a branch of psychiatry, and psychiatry as a branch of philosophy’, as Iain McGilchrist put it.

    We may also return to a more general appreciation of our reality that animated the first generation of scientists, including polymaths such as Alexander von Humboldt who wrote: ‘In this great chain of causes and effects no single fact can be considered in isolation.’

     

    (1) Roderick Floud, Robert W. Fogel, Bernard Harris, and Sok Chul Hong The Changing Body: Health, Nutrition and Human Development in the Western World since 1700 (Cambridge, 2011), p.173

    (2) Ibid, p.178

    (3) Wolfgang Shivelbusch Tastes of Paradise: A Social History of Spices, Stimulants, and Intoxicants (New York, 1992) pp.96-111

    (4) Ibid, pp.96-111

    (5) Avner Offer, R ‘Time Urgency, Sleep Loss, and Obesity’ in Avner Offer, Rachel Pechey, and Stanley Ulijaszek, Insecurity, Inequality, and Obesity in Affluent Societies (London, 2012) pp.129-141

    (5) Richard Holmes, The Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science (London, 2008) p. xvii

    (6) Madeleine Ferrieres Sacred Cow Mad Cow (Translated by Jody Gladding) (New York, 2006), p.188

    (7) Richard Holmes, The Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science (London, 2008) p.286

    (8) Ibid, p.302

  • The Slow Death of Irish Nature

    ‘Blade Runner 2049’ is a sci-fi follow up to the 1982 cult classic starring Harrison Ford and Sean Young. Our future hero is Ryan Gosling who navigates a lonely, desolate world amid general dystopian bleakness. The viewer is told that by 2049 all ecosystems have collapsed, leaving a sterile planet, allowing humans to survive only due to our air and water purifying technology. Food is the produce of industrial laboratories and citizens eek out their pointless existences huddled in soulless (and loveless) cities. It’s not pretty, and 2049 is only 30 years off – eek!

    Although evidently a work of fiction, the idea that we stand on an ecological precipice is very much the stuff of daily news. Two studies in particular, one on the decline of insect populations in Germany, the other on the disappearance of farmland birds in France, really let the headline writers out of the traps.

    Scientists warn of ‘ecological Armageddon’ after study shows flying insect numbers plummeting by 75% warned the London Independent; Europe faces ‘biodiversity oblivion’ after collapse in French birds howled the Guardian, which went on to say that “intensive farming and pesticides could turn Europe’s farmland into a desert that ultimately imperils all humans”.

    Environmentalists lap this up – it bolsters what we’ve been crying about for years (and decades in some cases). Maybe, now that we’re all about to die a horrible death, politicians and policy makers will finally take us seriously and do what’s necessary to avert calamity. But hold up a sec. How exactly does turning Europe’s farmland into a desert imperil all humans? Sure, flying insects pollinate crops – and I’ll miss apples and strawberries when their price rockets because pollination has to be done by people with feather dusters – but I’m not going to starve! Where are the facts behind these doomsday assertions? What does it even mean when an ecosystem collapses?

    II

    Surprisingly, the idea of ‘collapse’ is not nearly as well studied as you might imagine. The book of the same name, by polymath Jared Diamond, looked at the collapse of societies, or human civilisations, which generally features environmental change as one of a number of factors.

    For instance, the collapse of the Viking settlements in Greenland was largely due to the inability of the farmers, with their cows and oats, to adapt to colder conditions – even thought the Inuit alongside them did just fine hunting and gathering.

    The Maya civilisation of Central America may well have collapsed primarily due to environmental changes, but it did not mean that all the Maya people died out – many people of Maya descent live in Central American countries today.

    We have our own example right here in Ireland – the Céide Field dairy farming community on the north coast of County Mayo made a living from the land up to about 5,000 years ago. Some believe that the collapse of their society was partly due to deforestation, which made the soil wetter, and promoted the spread of bog and the loss of nutrients. Yet farming in Ireland continued.

    Instances where all life has been destroyed are rare if non-existent – the only example I can think of are the oceanic dead zones where so much farm and human waste has been dumped in the sea that bacterial action has sucked all oxygen from the water (none of these thankfully are anywhere near Ireland). Even deserts are not dead.

    The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is the global body which monitors the health of Earth’s ecosystems and it is best known for its conservation assessments of individual species, which results in endangered species lists (or ‘red lists’ as they’re known). Its assessment of habitats – that is, the environments in which species live – is much less developed. It does however provide a useful definition to allow us to tell when a whole ecosystem has collapsed:

    “An ecosystem is considered collapsed when it is virtually certain that it’s defining biotic [living] or abiotic [non-living] features are lost, and the characteristic native biota [i.e. the plants and animals] are no longer sustained. […] Collapse is a transformation of identity, a loss of defining features, and/or replacement by a different, novel ecosystem”.

    As an example it shows how the Aral Sea in Central Asia, which was once the fourth largest inland water body in the world. Extraction of the water for agricultural irrigation meant that by the late 1980s  most of the water had disappeared along with the community of plants and animals which once lived there. The Aral Sea today is not a dead zone, plants and animals continue to live there, but it is drastically different to what it was. It no longer supports the livelihoods which once sustained themselves by fishing, and salt intrusion from deep in the soil means that it may never recover.

    Another example of ecosystem collapse is the Grand Banks cod fishery off the coast of Newfoundland. There, despite the ending of all fishing in the 1990s, the cod have not returned. In both cases, the loss of the ecosystem led to devastating social and environmental disruption. Yet nobody died and life in these areas goes on (of the human and non-human kind), and a new normal has settled in. Sad tales to be sure, but it’s a far cry from Hollywood disaster zone.

    III

    To get a glimpse of what it’s like to live in a collapsed ecosystem just take a trip to Iceland. When the first human settlers arrived there around the end of the first millennium AD they found a country that was up to 40% covered in forest. The rest of Iceland was covered in a near-sterile ice sheet or bare volcanic rock.

    Like farming communities everywhere they set about felling the trees to plant crops or graze animals. The forests were a source of fuel and fodder for people and their animals but nevertheless deforestation continued right up to the 1950s. The result was massive soil erosion which prohibits the growth of any vegetation, as well as destructive sand storms as the fierce sub-Artic wind whips up the loose soil.

    Today Iceland has virtually no forest left and establishing new woodland has proven to be extremely difficult. Much of Iceland is now technically a desert. Nevertheless, its small population enjoys a high standard of living and a consumer culture that is available to anyone else in the world on a middle-class income.

    It is currently enjoying a tourist boom, with more visitors perhaps than it can cope with, and these people are drawn primarily for its dramatic landscapes. Modern technology means that no one goes hungry or wants for freshwater. They have abundant geothermal energy which is even being harnessed to grow peppers and tomatoes in polytunnels outside Reykjavik. They also have a renowned fishing industry which, due to good management, is still productive.

    Visitors to Iceland scarcely notice that they are traversing a collapsed ecosystem but are nevertheless enthralled by its beauty and grandeur. So the question is posed: is it possible for the natural world to collapse all around us and, rather than provoking death and destruction, for it be met with a shrug? Maybe there will be no point of reckoning, no fulcrum upon which the attention of politicians will swing towards policies which are genuinely geared towards restoring the living world. Maybe it will happen and we’ll be too busy on our screens to pay any attention.

    IV

    Take a look at the environmental history of Ireland. It is believed that when people first arrived on our island the land was cloaked with extensive oak forests. In between there were wetlands (bogs, swamps and the like), lakes and rivers, and maybe the very tops of some of the higher mountains had no trees. The oceans teemed with life.

    Now-extinct Sturgeon in the Natural History Museum.

    5,000 years ago the first farming communities emerged and, just like in Iceland, this was associated with deforestation. Some species went extinct in this time, such as the brown bear, lynx and wild cat, and this is bound to have had an effect on the forests that remained. Up to 500 or 600 years ago, most of these ecosystems on land and sea were largely intact. Forest cover had reduced dramatically (one reference gives forest cover as about one eighth of the land cover in 1600) but our rivers ran free, great wetlands held flocks of cranes and wolves were widespread.

    By 1800 the forest ecosystem had collapsed completely, at this stage only tiny fragments remained while key forest animals like the wild boar had vanished (wild boar increase woodland biodiversity and help in the germination of tree seedlings by rooting in the soil). The wolf was also extinct. Most people appreciate that food webs are impacted when only one species is taken out, though oftentimes the exact impact can be hard to discern. Not the wolf – we now know just how important the presence of a top predator is in keeping all the plants and animals in check, not only deer but the smaller predators like foxes.

    By the end of the 1800’s not only the wolf but all the large birds of prey (two species of eagle, Red Kite, Buzzard, Osprey, Goshawk and Marsh Harrier) were also gone. By 1920 the extinction tally was added to further. Even the North Atlantic Right Whale – hunted off the coast of Donegal in the early 1900s – had disappeared completely.

    All the same, the rivers were still bursting with fish and pollution was virtually unheard off. Vast oyster beds around the coast had been dredged away but the sea’s bounty remained  immeasurable. There had been lots of turf-cutting for domestic fuel but there were still vast areas of intact bog and fen, and floodplains which attracted enormous numbers of birds – particularly those which laid their eggs on the ground, like Corncrakes, Lapwings, Curlews and Redshanks. In winter these areas hosted great flocks of wintering geese, ducks and swans. The air would have constantly been alive with their calls. Since that time let’s take a look at what has happened:

    • The area of midlands raised bog has been reduced to 0.63% of its original extent, primarily from industrial-scale open pit mining. There are no untouched bogs remaining and the best example (Clara Bog in Offaly) has a road slicing through it.
    Industrial scale peat extraction is a feature of many midland counties.
    • The Office of Public Works have deepened and straightened 11,500km of river channel under the Arterial Drainage Act of 1942, cutting rivers off from their natural flood plains. Impassable dams on the Shannon, Erne, Liffey and Lee (among others) mean migratory fish cannot access their traditional spawning grounds. Salmon and Eel populations have collapsed to the point where both species are threatened with extinction. There are virtually no Salmon in the River Shannon above the Ardnacrusha dam today.
    • Approximately half of water bodies (lakes, rivers, estuaries) are polluted while the number of ‘pristine’ water sites has dwindled from over 500 in the 1980s to only 21 today. There is no river left in Ireland healthy enough to allow Freshwater Pearl Mussels to breed in.
    Drainage has drastically altered many Irish rivers, leading to flooding.
    • Of the great peat bogs which stretch across the West of Ireland and other mountain areas, only 28% are ‘worthy of conservation’ – as the rest has been destroyed beyond salvation by conifer plantations and drainage, while fires, turf-cutting, wind farms etc. have left none of our upland habitats in ‘good condition’ according to the National Parks and Wildlife Service.
    Conifer plantation smother landscapes, communities and wildlife.
    • Fish are no longer present in coastal waters in any abundance – traditional fisheries for Herring, Mackerel, Cod, Whiting, Bass, Sole, Plaice, Turbot and other flatfish have all but disappeared. ‘Fishing’ today in these areas is not for fish but crustaceans (prawns, crabs and lobsters) while the real fishing is done by enormous factory boats far out to sea. Bottom trawling and dredging – which obliterate seafloor communities of plants and animals – is carried out practically everywhere, and sometimes more than once a year. It not only results in habitat loss but overfishing of non-target species and colossal waste (up to 90% of the contents of a prawn trawl can be dumped overboard).
    • Modern farming relies increasingly on inputs of chemical sprays or reseeding, which eradicates wild plants and animals with brutal efficiency. The next time you look at a farmer’s field see how many flowers or flying insects you can count.
    • 62% of sharks and rays occurring in Irish waters are threatened with extinction. Some, such as the angel shark, flapper skate and porbeagle shark, are critically endangered.
    Bumble bees are vital pollinators of wild plants as well as fruit crops.
    • Conservation assessments have been carried out for mammals, birds, moths, plants, mayflies, dragonflies, amphibians, reptiles, freshwater fish, butterflies, water beetles, freshwater molluscs, sharks, and bees. On average a third of all of these species are either ‘threatened’ or ‘near threatened’ with extinction.
    • There is documented evidence that about 115 species of plant and animal have gone extinct from Ireland since the arrival of humans. Many more have gone from common and widespread to the verge of extinction in the space of my lifetime, such as the curlew, the nightjar and the purple sea urchin (I’m 44).

    In the words of the IUCN all of our ecosystems – on land and at sea – have suffered a transformation of identity, a loss of defining features and a replacement by a different/novel ecosystem. They have all collapsed. Yet this has largely gone unnoticed, unremarked upon and even unappreciated by many environmentalists and ecologists in Ireland.

    IV

    Today, unlike the Greenland Vikings or the Maya, we draw on resources from across the entire planet. My ice cream might contain palm oil grown on land which once had rich Indonesian rain forest, the steak I order in my local restaurant may come from a cow raised on deforested land in Brazil or my smoked salmon may be indirectly resulting in overfishing of a fish species I’ve never heard of before, in a lawless part of the high seas.

    Many Irish cows, destined to be eaten in China, have been raised by eating not only locally grown grass, but soya products from South America. Much of the time it’s virtually impossible to know what the impact of our purchasing decisions has been. Does this mean that while we may live happy, cosseted lives in our own degraded environment, we are really just exporting ecosystem collapse to the farthest reaches of the planet? Are we living on borrowed time?

    Nearly 10 years ago an international team of scientists tried to answer this question and the answer was: probably. Their paper, Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity, published in the journal Ecology and Society in 2009, identified nine planetary boundaries within which ‘humanity can operate safely’. These included climate change, ocean acidification, ozone depletion, use of freshwater, biodiversity loss and land-system change.

    For three of these, climate change, biodiversity loss and disruption of the nitrogen cycle, we have already broken through the limits of what is sustainable. In 2012 a study led by Anthony Barnosky of the University of California, Berkeley was published in the journal Nature. It asked whether humans are forcing a planetary-scale transition “with the potential to transform Earth rapidly and irreversibly into a state unknown in human experience”. It concluded that the plausibility of such an eventuality “seems high”. One of the authors told the New York Times that “the situation scares the hell out me”.

    In Ireland these arguments seem abstract despite the fact that the natural world has collapsed all around us. We rely entirely on purification technology for drinkable water as the water from rivers and lakes would otherwise make us sick. Thousands of people have been put out of work around our coasts after fish populations vanished, and continue to disappear (there is currently talk that traditional eel fishermen are in line for compensation in return for handing in their nets; the volume of exported lobsters fell by 20% in 2017 etc.).

    Extinction brings with it the irreversible loss of heritage, tradition and folklore. Across Ireland farming of any kind is increasingly a loss-making enterprise – according to Teagasc sheep, beef and tillage sectors rely entirely on state aid for an income. Even the much-touted dairy sector is heavily dependent upon subsidies which perversely promote pollution, habitat loss and further extinction.

    We have a forestry sector which is dominated by non-native conifer monocultures to produce cheap furniture and costs Irish taxpayers €100 million per year. Meanwhile climate change, along with ecological collapse, has left farmers and foresters more vulnerable than ever to extreme weather events, disease and other influences beyond their control. These changes will be calamitous for some, but for most it will unfold with a shrug.

    V

    Our lives are not quite as devoid of colour as the inhabitants of the imaginary city in Blade Runner but they are increasingly dependent upon technology and more divorced from nature. Few people today know the taste of wild salmon or hear the sound of the curlew and we are all the poorer for it.

    To bring nature back we need to change the story. We need to start talking more about the opportunities and not only about the threats. What if we planted enormous forests of native trees in which there could be food production, recreation and valuable timber? What if we could rebuild the health of the sea so that a net full of fresh Herring or Oysters or Turbot could be sold at the pier from a small, low-impact fishing boat? What if we restored our uplands and rivers so that anglers could once again catch monster Salmon; or if we had clean water to drink, and farmers could pick up a pearl (from a Freshwater Pearl Mussel) from the bottom of a sparkling river? What if we transformed the open cast peat mines across the midlands into a wilderness with bears, cranes, wolves and flocks of wild birds which darken the sky?

    Killarney National Park – under threat from invasive species and grazing by animals.

    These are experiences which would enrich our country not only for visitors but for the people who live in these areas. We have a long way to go before life itself is snuffed out and Ireland still has amazing wildlife spectacles. But these are getting fewer in number all the time. Dramatic changes are upon us and uncertainty lies ahead. We can shrug our shoulders and allow ourselves to be carried away, or we can be bold and create a future for our children which is not merely habitable, but rich and rewarding.

    Pádraic Fogarty is an ecologist and campaign officer with the Irish Wildlife Trust. His book, Whittled Away – Ireland’s Vanishing Nature was published in 2017 by Collins Press. He tweets under the handle @whittledaway

  • A Garden Should not Require Permission to Live on Earth

    This article was triggered by events that took place at the Community Garden located on Oliver Bond Street, Dublin 8 before Christmas 2017. Our petition and a background story can be found here

    The average person living in a city centre has very little interaction with actual soil: city dwellers spend most of their time outside walking on pavement while visually surrounded by a concrete jungle. Exposure to city green spaces typically takes the form of manufactured parks, managed by The City, that are suited to the frameworks for gentrification. That is why it seems obvious to me, that the following conversation relating to the Community Garden spaces in the Liberties neighborhood’s, would not be taking place if the spotlight was on a Community Garden in Ballsbridge.

    Community Gardens in Dublin: the Current Model

    The political lock out of the Oliver Bond Street Community Garden, is an excellent demonstration of how something that should be natural – plants, living outside, in their native environment; can turn into a disaster once people with zero compassion, respect, or knowledge for the health and wellbeing of the environment, see an opportunity to validate their ‘power-over’.

    The current situation in Dublin regarding space concerns has manifested a ‘secret garden culture’ among Community Garden Growers and Inner-City Gardens.

    These independent green spaces are being seized before they have the opportunity to fully blossom beyond the developmental phase because success in the form of social economy would increase a garden’s staying power. During the developmental stages these gardens are still malleable – their roots are not as strong and are therefore easier to weed out. This internal pressure to maintain Green Space autonomy has skewed public opinion on the value of Inner-City Gardening by deflecting the positive impact that these spaces can have on communities. How can the public truly understand and reap the long-term benefits from something that has never been allowed to come into full fruition?

    What does this pattern really reflect? The Necessity for a shift in public opinion

    At its core, the primary challenge for gardeners in Irish culture is a lack of public respect. This devaluation is an unusual condition that does not seem to exist in any other major European city. In Dublin, Community Gardens have been categorized as ‘substandard green spaces’ in an effort by the City to demean and add further fuel to the existing stigmatization that paints Community Gardens as no more than part-time, temporary hobby plots. As a result, there is no culture of Inner-City Community Gardening in Dublin.

    Culture of Convenience

    Removing the soil from produce has removed society’s connection to nature. The soil that gave life to the food you eat is commonly called ‘dirt’ and is seen as an inconvenience. We want produce that is “clean” and shiny.

    Today’s supermarket shopping experience reflects the principles of a complacent nation, as it is no longer a sensory one. You cannot touch or smell half of the produce that you purchase if you shop in major supermarkets, because these products are pre-washed, and pre-packaged in plastic with a barcode to cater to you: the dis-engaged consumer, who expects an impersonal self-serve experience that is fast and easy. We live in a time where people expect instant gratification, and that often comes at an environmental cost.

    Gardens take time and work – people are impatient. Culture of convenience is a culture of laziness and corporations have groomed and now cater to this model. As a result, many people have zero awareness of how to grow their own food due to the reliance they put on everyone BUT themselves. People no longer take responsibility for themselves because they no longer know how to trust themselves and this manufactured condition becomes more dangerous when detachment from self-sufficiency correlates to people unconsciously giving their personal power away.

    Corporation stimulate demand in order to survive, and exert more power through the development of ‘hero worshiping’ (the corporation), which develops a victim mentality in the consumer. Linking back to independent spaces: if people are able to use Community Gardens to figure things out for themselves: experiment, learn, and generate ideas as solutions, then they can step back into their own personal power. Community gardens reflect creativity and rebellion and that challenges those that cling to the initials and titles next to their names.

    Control

    The space-race perception in Dublin is one that creates the notion that sharing is not possible. It suggests that because there is not enough room, that you can only have either housing or green spaces, not both. And because Community Gardens generally do not provide secure profit to the Council, they are the first to face extinction.

    It is very important to make the distinction that the space issue is structural – and if The City maintains the attitude that Independent Green Spaces are not valuable, then they are communicating to the public, that the wellbeing of its citizens is insignificant, when in the same race as profit. By making a mockery out of Green Spaces in order to shape public opinion, The City is participating in environmental injustice – more specifically, food injustice

    Community Gardens add a sense of “wildness” to a neighbourhood – plants can grow as they wish, people from all walks of life can equally come together and put their hands in the soil and get ‘dirty’; everyone is reminded that an object as small as a seed has the capacity and potential to grow into something more, when given the space and nourishment to expand and change. Community Gardens have endless potential just like the people involved in them – a simple reminder that it is the passionate people that make a city compassionate.

  • A Breakthrough to Save Humanity

    In Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy (1320) we encounter a forlorn Ulysses (Greek, Odysseus) in the Inferno, punished to eternal torments for deceitful stratagems in the Trojan war, and beyond. Dante adds a layer to the Classical myth, where the aged warrior returns to his native Ithaca only to find:

    not sweetness of a son, not reverence
    for an ageing father, not the debt of love
    I owed Penelope to make her happy
    could quench deep in myself the burning wish
    to know the world and have experience
    of all man’s vices, of all human worth.

    He persuades his crew to embark on a final voyage to a: ‘world they called unpeopled’. For five months they sail until, ‘there appeared a mountain shape, darkened / by distance, that arose to endless heights,’ which is the mount of Purgatory. But, ‘celebrations soon turned into grief,’ as a whirlwind wrecks the fleet, consigning Odysseus and his crew to a watery grave. A hero, who dared travel beyond accepted limitations, is doomed to an excruciating hell, even if there is a suspicion that Dante admires his chutzpah for seeking to experience “all human worth.”[i]

    Fear of the sea is an intuitive recognition of the danger it poses, in contrast to an attachment to home ground. As Herman Melville in Moby Dick (1851) puts it: ‘For as this appalling ocean surrounds the verdant land, so in the soul of man there lies one insular Tahiti, full of peace and joy, but encompassed by all the horrors of the half known life. God keep thee! Push not from that isle, thou canst never return!’[ii]

    Odysseus’s sorry fate also reflects a medieval mindset that looked askance at unfettered ambition. This devolved into superstitions deterring voyages to unchartered territories. Thus Laurens van der Post relates a story told to him by Carl Jung, ‘that if one wanted to fix a precise moment at which the Renaissance began, it would be the day when the Italian poet Petrarch decided to defy superstition and climbed a mountain in the Alps, just for the sake of reaching its summit.’[iii] Through a rebirth in Classical ideas that followed in Petrarch’s wake, Europeans opened their eyes to hidden possibilities, leading to the discovery of new continents that relied on a spirit of innovation.

    Poetic Inspiration

    Poetry in its widest sense is a font of ingenuity and invention. Thus Andre Breton in his Surrealist Manifesto saw it as: ‘Dictated by the thought, in the absence of any control exercised by reason, exempt from any aesthetic or moral concern.’ Reversing a dictum attributed to Stalin describing poets as engineers of the human soul, Breton attributes scientific breakthroughs to a poetic imagination, arguing: ‘the conquests of science rest far more on a surrealistic than on a logical thinking.’[iv]

    This reinforces Percy Shelley’s proposition that poets, operating in varying capacities, are the ‘unacknowledged legislators of the world.’ The spark for any new venture comes from an imagination Shelley equates with poetry. He distinguishes this faculty from reason, which he describes as the ‘enumeration of qualities already known’; whereas ‘imagination in the perception of the values of those qualities, both separately and as a whole … Reason is to imagination as the instrument to the agent, as the body to the spirit, as the shadow to the substance.[v]

    Too often governments, corporations and individuals inhibit that poetic ignition. Across society we see reason and logic in constant motion, but imagination is barely nurtured, and often frowned on. We proceed from point A to B, all too often ignoring possibilities arising in the remainder of the alphabet. Yet scientific innovation is predicated on poetically imagining possibilities beyond contemporary restraints. It is notable that, besides his contributions to the understanding of the physical universe, Albert Einstein was a prolific poet.

    Technological advances have diminished our intuitive fear of the ocean. As Melville put it: ‘however much … man may brag of his science and skill … yet for ever and for ever, to the crack of doom, the sea will insult and murder him … nevertheless, by the continual repetition of these very impressions, man has lost that sense of the full awfulness of the sea which aboriginally belongs to it.’[vi]

    Incontestably, a combination of greed and frightening religious extremism motivated the global exploration of the sixteenth century, which rapidly encompassed the whole Earth. But the first voyagers also displayed admirable qualities, including a willingness to set aside a fear of the unknown, the strange and exotic.

    Crossing great stretches of ocean demanded breakthroughs in nautical engineering, including the development of a lighter, more mobile, craft, the caravel. Developed in Portugal under Henry the Navigator (d.1460), this vessel could sail into a head wind. Such innovations occurred because adventurous spirits imagined pathways previously considered taboo. It is only by taking such imaginative flights, overcoming prejudices and applying the required labour, that new inventions are realised.

    Despite the ensuing carnage and destruction of natural environments wrought by European colonisation, there remains an enduring heroism in this original repudiation of orthodoxy. In Dante’s Inferno Odysseus did founder, but we may laud a spirit rejecting preconceived limitations that a medieval mind considered hubristic. Innovation demands an interrogation of established ideas, a rejection of preconception and the embrace of the unknown – like a bird taking flight for the first time in its evolution. How did that feel?

    The Great Adventure of Our Time

    Theodore Zeldin recently considered what the great adventure of our time should be: if in the sixteenth century it was discovering new continents; and scientific enquiry in the seventeenth; or addressing political equality in the eighteenth. Precisely the most valuable quest in our time remained elusive to him, but he argued that giving a new meaning to work could offer a great adventure: ‘so that it is more than the exercise of a valued skill, more than the enjoyment of collaboration with others, more than a price that has to be paid in search of security and status, means using work to redefine freedom.’[vii]

    A revolution in working practices does seem overdue, with technology performing most basic and increasingly complex tasks. A new departure in attitudes to employment should also appeal to anyone disheartened by the irrationality of boundless economic growth. Any new economy ought to harness creativity in different domains, and address the tendency towards homogenisation of large corporations. Still, I fear this aspiration to alter work practices is insufficiently ambitious for the environmental challenges of the twenty-first century, in the shape of runaway climate change and a Sixth Extinction.

    Previously Naomi Klein has pointed a finger at unbridled capitalism,[viii] but simply achieving a more equitable distribution of wealth appears insufficient. Historically at least, socialism has been defined in materialistic terms, apportioning needs within a hierarchy that continues to inflate. There is a moral obligation to furnish all humans with basic necessities yes, but we must also enter into a harmonious relationship with the natural world, which, thus far, most political ideologies and organised religions have failed adequately to take account of. Within an altered ethical framework, encompassing an idea of Wild Law that I have previously expounded on, necessity will be the mother of invention of the tools required for favourable adaptations.

    ‘By nature free’

    We are in Milton’s words from Paradise Lost (1667): ‘By nature free, not overruled by fate’, but each individual vessel still faces ruin unless we tame the raging waters of our collective acquisitiveness. We require an Age of Empathy elevating symbiosis and cooperation. Thus according to Gandhi: ‘Man is not born to live in isolation but is essentially a social animal independent and interdependent. No one should ride on another’s back.’[ix]

    If we continue to gorge ourselves on the world’s resources – failing to acknowledge the limit of natural capital – we confront death and destruction on an unimaginable scale. Let us hope it does not take another Flood of Biblical proportions to awaken us to this reality. Alas, a shock to the global system seems necessary to shake us out of our collective stupor. We must face up to what the future holds, and aggressively confront sinister and self-serving conspiracy theories.

    The field of science – a term only coined in the 1830s the field having previously been referred to as natural philosophy – alone cannot convey the world as it will appear in the decades to come if we continue on our present course. The arts play a vital role in conveying the apocalyptic scenes awaiting. Science fiction has long plotted dystopian scenarios – going back to Mary Shelley’s The Last Man (1826) – and this vision is entering the mainstream of literature.

    In Cormac McCarthy’s The Road (2006) a father and son wander through an apocalyptic landscape denied the sun’s live-giving rays. Cannibalism is rife as the last humans compete with one another. In the final paragraph there is a mesmerising ode to a lost Nature:

    Once there were brook trout in the streams in the mountains. You could see them standing in the amber current where the white edges of their fins wimpled softly in the flow. They smelled of moss in your hand. Polished and muscular and torsional. On their backs were vermiculate patterns that were maps of the world in its becoming. Maps and mazes. Of a thing which could not be put back. Not to be made right again. In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery.[x]

    Verily a Paradise Lost.

    Harsh Realities

    When we face up to harsh realities a change in outlook can occur. Laurens van der Post writes:

    It was only when man looked death full in the face that the mortality which is imminent in the final regard releases him from all excess in his proportions, and in the surrender of egotistical presumption which follows as night in the day, unlocks him for the experience of compassion for all living things, ‘from ant to Emperor, whale to cat’, as the Buddhists of Tibet put it, which is the sign of his conscious return from exile to the all-belonging, which has been his point of departure and is then his Home. [xi]

    Humans are capable of mind-boggling cruelty and selfishness but within our spectrum we possess staggering levels of empathy and compassion. These diverging characteristics may even co-exist in the same person.

    I propose that the great adventure of this epoch lies in the way we relate to Nature, which is all life on Earth, including ourselves. The challenge, as I see it, is to ground ourselves within that diverse ecology rather than placing ourselves above other forms of life, as the Western philosophic tradition has purported to do so. Thus Plato formatively established a hierarchy of beings in his Timaeus (c.360 BCE), proceeding from men at the top down through women to the ‘lower’ animals. Somewhat comically he compares other animals unfavourably to human beings:

    The race of birds was produced by a process of transformation, whereby feathers grew instead of hair, from harmless empty-headed men, who were interested in the heavens but were silly enough to think that the most certain astronomical demonstrations proceed through observation. Wild land animals have come from men who made no use of philosophy and never in any way considered the nature of the heavens because they had ceased to use the circles in the head and followed the leadership of the parts in the soul in the breast.[xii]

    Unfortunately, the lasting impression Plato has made on Western culture with these ideas has been no laughing matter.

    Sentience

    Widening the circle of empathy brings us into communion with all living beings. Even plant life deserves reverence. In Peter Wohlleben’s The Hidden Life of Trees[xiii] we discover remarkable species, displaying unaccounted for intelligences. Trees communicate with one another using an array of languages including scent from blossoms, and via electrical signals that travel at a third of an inch per minute. This allows them to warn neighbours if they are under attack. Chemical signals are also passed via fungal networks around root tips, a so-called ‘wood wide web.’

    Moreover, the ability of plants to learn from external stimuli has been exhibited in Dr Monica Gagliano’s experiments on the sensitivity of the mimosa plant. Gagliano released individual drops of water on the plant’s foliage at regular intervals. At first the anxious plants instantly closed their leaves, mistaking the single droplets for the onset of heavy rainfall. After a number of false alarms, however, the plants recognised these to be harmless and kept their leaves open. Remarkably, the small plants learnt from the experience, applying the lessons weeks later.[xiv]

    Thus, in consuming any plant we should be mindful of all its complexity, and prize agricultural systems that permits a wide diversity of life to co-exist. Nonetheless, plant life can be distinguished from animal in terms of sentience: which is the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively. Essentially, we know that other animals feel pain – both physical and psychological – via central nervous systems similar to our own. The precise boundaries between plant and animal life may be frayed, but the evidence for pain in other animals is unmistakable.

    Factory farming may soon be viewed as among the worst crimes in human history. The food writer Michael Pollan referred to a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) he visited as, ‘a place I won’t soon forget: a deep circle of porcine hell.’ In a display of cognitive dissonance he acknowledges the pork sandwich he eats is ‘underwritten by the most brutal kind of agriculture.’ At least he quotes Ralph Waldo Emerson to the effect that ‘however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity.’[xv]

    The effect of animal domestication, especially grazing ruminants and the cultivation of foodstuffs for their consumption, also has a devastating effect on surviving free animals, compelled to make way for a vast expansion of agriculture around the globe. Astonishingly, today humans, our livestock (and pets) account for ninety-six percent of the Earth’s total land vertebrate biomass.[xvi] This has all occurred alongside immeasurable devastation to the plant kingdom.

    It is futile to read a philosophy of veganism back through human history to condemn ancestors who often killed animals for survival – or even to focus on those remaining hunter-gatherer communities living in remote and inhospitable regions. But in Western societies, at least, there are a multitude of healthful and tasty alternatives to animal products, displaying great qualities of human inventiveness in the gastronomic field. We are not obligate carnivores, unlike our near relative homo neanderthalensis that seems to have gone extinct for this reason.[xvii] A global food chain now allows us to overcome seasonal shortages and localized crop failures to provide a nutritious plant-based-diet-for-all.

    New Departure

    In his biographic account of hunting whales on board a Norwegian vessel in the 1920s Laurens van der Post, recites an extraordinary statement on the new departure he considered necessary in our relationship to the natural world:

    I could not deny the excitement and acceleration into a consummation of archaic joy which the process of stalking and hunting, even at sea, had invoked in me, although I was at present now only as an observer. On the other hand, hard on these emotions, came an equal and opposite revulsion which nearly overwhelmed me when the hunt, as now, was successful and one was faced with the acceptance of the fact that one had aided and abetted in an act of murder of such a unique manifestation of creation. The only dispensation of the paradox ever granted to me in the past, unaware as I had been of the immensity of it until revealed to me in this moment at sea, was that in hunting out of necessity, all revulsions were redeemed by the satisfaction one felt in bringing food home to the hungry. That such satisfaction was not an illusion, nor a form of special pleading in the court of natural conscience, was proved to me by the profound feeling of gratitude one invariably felt for the animal that had died in order for others to live … [but]what could this possibly have to do with the necessities which were essential for the redemption of the act of killing … in this increasingly technological moment of my youth, when control of life was passing more and more from nature to man, and when there were already available all sorts of artificial substitutes for the essential oils which animals like the whale had once been the only source of supply, what, I asked myself bitterly, could justify such killing except the greed of man for money … Worse still, I was certain that our imperviousness to the consternation caused by such killing in the heart of the nature could be the beginning of an enmity between man and the life which had brought him forth that could imperil his future on earth itself.[xviii]

    Dietary change may indeed be relevant to the wider transformation of the human person. The legendary gastronome Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin’s maxim ‘Tell me what you eat and I will tell you what you are,’ perhaps overstates the argument, yet the constituents of a diet do exert a profound influence on minds inseparable from bodies. This is ingrained in almost every spiritual tradition, even Christianity. Thus in Western monasticism, going back to the Early Church Fathers and the Rule of St. Benedict, consumption of animal products was considered incompatible with a life of meditation and prayer.

    We are a product of the air we breathe, the fluids we imbibe and the bacteria with which we co-exist, our genetic programming, and perhaps morphic resonances, whereby self-organising systems inherit a memory from previous similar systems.[xix] Nonetheless, the vast complexity of food at our disposal makes this arguably the leading variable in that process of growth and atrophy characterising life as we know it.

    Humanity today utilises a mere six hundred out of the hundreds of thousands of edible plants that exist on Earth.[xx] This vast, unrealised potential of unnurtured crop varieties mean we are only skimming the surface of agricultural possibilities, with dramatic implications for the environments that we manage. Untapped potential may also lies in the cultivation of bacteria, that could be conditioned to taste like familiar foodstuffs, including meat. George Monbiot recently argued that lab-grown food could save the planet,[xxi] albeit these technologies are still in their infancy. What we now require is an alliance of farmers, chefs, scientists and gastronomes, unbound by convention, to imagine new possibilities in a Fourth Agricultural Revolution.

    Theodore Zeldin is right to say that: ‘The invention of a new dish is an act of freedom, small but not insignificant.’[xxii] We can all play a part in this great adventure.

    An altered relationship with Nature would be a revolution unlike any other in human history, and it is surely essential for this to occur in the Anthropocene, our current geological age of human impacts, where the accumulated bones of domesticated chickens are a sign of our overweening presence, along with nuclear residues, and climate chaos. Aside from any ethical stance, ecological limits are in sight: we cannot continue slaughtering over fifty billion domesticated animals each year for food.

    Vegan Diet

    As Jiddu Krishnamurti puts it: ‘We haven’t time to fool around anymore – the house is on fire.’[xxiii] The world’s population now stands at over seven billion. At the beginning of the last century we were a mere one and a half billion, with a far shorter life span than today, leading lives far less exacting on the planet’s resources. We have since applied science to the manufacture of all manner of conveniences, culminating in a global obesity pandemic and giant plastic graveyards in the Pacific Ocean. We have waged a relentless war on the natural world that sees no sign of abating. Since the 1970s, when I was born, 60% of all mammal species have gone extinct,[xxiv] mainly through a loss of habitat intimately connected to the foods we eat.

    Scientists are devoting their imaginative faculties to the realisation of a carbon-diminished future, but environmental morality should not be reduced to an exercise in carbon accounting. I would argue that the single most transformative step any person can take in their life is to embrace a vegan philosophy, which entails a cooperative rather than exploitative relationship with Nature. And if you should fail initially, try and try again.

    Projected population growth over the coming decades makes meat consumption even more unsustainable, leading to further, horrific ‘efficiencies’ in factory farming. The whole edifice of animal agriculture ought to crumble, perhaps bringing an expansion in human consciousness. Thus Charles Darwin argues that the history of man’s moral development has been a continual extension of the objects of his ‘social instincts’ and ‘sympathies’ writing:

    Originally each man had regard only for himself and those of a very narrow circle about him; later he came to regard more and more not only, the welfare, but the happiness of all his fellow men; then his sympathies became more tender and widely diffused, extending to men of all races, to the imbecile, maimed and other useless members of society, and finally to the lower animals.[xxv]

    Tennyson’s ‘Ulysses’

    Five hundred years after Dante’s Divine Comedy in 1833 Alfred Lord Tennyson published his poem ‘Ulysses’, where he develops the epic tale of Odysseus further. Again we find a frustrated Odysseus in Ithaca before a final voyage bemoaning:

    How dull it is to pause, to make an end,
    To rust unburnished, not to shine in use!’
    To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
    Beyond the utmost bound of human thought.

    In the spirit of his age of expansion Tennyson hails an ambition ‘to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield,’ and so might we adopt such an approach to confront impending environmental crises. As a species we are entering unknown and decidedly choppy waters, and now require imaginative capacities to take flight. This is an ominous, but ultimately heroic quest that requires us to cross new moral frontiers.

    [i] Dante Alighieri The Divine Comedy, Inferno, Mark Musa (Translator), New York, Penguin, 2003, Canto 26

    [ii] Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Wordsworth Classics, London, 1992 p.262

    [iii] Laurens van der Post, Yet Being Someone Other, The Hogarth Press, London, 1982, p.18

    [iv] MANIFESTO OF SURREALISM BY ANDRÉ BRETON, 1924.

    [v] Percy Bysshe Shelley, ‘A Defence of Poetry’ (1821)

    [vi] Melville, 1992, p,261

    [vii] Theodore Zeldin, The Hidden Pleasures of Life: A New Way of Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future, MacLehose Press, London, p.313

    [viii] Naomi Klein This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate, Simon and Schuster, New York, 2014.

    [ix] Anthony Parel, Gandhi, Freedom and Self-Rule, Lexington Books, London, 2000, Washington, p.109

    [x] Cormac McCarthy, The Road, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, p.287

    [xi] van der Post, 1992 p.223

    [xii] Plato, Timaeus and Critias, translated by Benjamin Jowett, Penguin Classics, London, 2008, p.90

    [xiii] Peter Wohlleben, The Hidden Life of Trees, Jane Billinghurst (translator), Black Inc., Carlton, 2016

    [xiv] Monica Gagliano, Thus Spoke the Plant, North Atlantic Books, New York, 2018

    [xv] Michael Pollan, Cooked – A Natural History of Transformation, Penguin, New York, pp.49-51

    [xvi] Olivia Rosane, ‘Humans and Big Ag Livestock Now Account for 96 Percent of Mammal Biomass’, EcoWatch, 2018, https://www.ecowatch.com/biomass-humans-animals-2571413930.html

    [xvii] Tim Flannery, Europe – A Natural History, Allen Lane, London, 2018, p.177

    [xviii] van der Post, 1982, p.88

    [xix] Rupert Sheldrake, https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance

    [xx] Theodore Zeldin, An Intimate History of Humanity, Harper Perennial, London, 1994, p.93

    [xxi] George Monbiot, ‘Lab-grown food will soon destroy farming – and save the planet’, The Guardian, January 8th, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/08/lab-grown-food-destroy-farming-save-planet

    [xxii] Zeldin, 1994, p.94

    [xxiii]  Jiddu Krishnamurti, ‘Knowledge and the transformation of man,’ https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/knowledge-and-transformation-man

    [xxiv] Damian Carrington, ‘Humanity has wiped out 60% of animal populations since 1970, report finds’, The Guardian, October 30th, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/30/humanity-wiped-out-animals-since-1970-major-report-finds

    [xxv] From The Descent of Man.

  • Why is Software so Complicated?

    In the beginning in order to count we used, as we still do, our fingers, and sometimes our toes. Not only are they conveniently arranged according to the prime divisors of their sum (2 and 5 multiplied make 10, and no other primes less than 10 divide evenly therein), but we can also fold them up and down according to our needs, so allowing a primitive but very effective memory aid.

    In more recent times the abacus was was the paradigm of calculation. It was efficient, communicable, and easily learned, mainly because it is like having many more fingers we can fold up and down.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Chinese-abacus.jpg
    Chinese Abacus.

    In the ‘good old days’ of early electro-magnetic computation we programmed directly onto the computer via switches. Think of an abacus with an automatic left-alignment capability. We still need to know how to use an abacus but we can mechanically automate left-alignment. Things progressed to abstractions such as punch-cards, which could be prepared in one’s own time and then inputed into the computer to perform the calculations.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Blue-punch-card-front-horiz.png
    Punch-card.

    As you can see there are similarities between punch-cards and an abacus. They both use a columnar layout, they are of limited scope, and both require familiarity with arithmetic. Already we can also see the increase in complexity, both in terms of the density of the information on display and the amount of meta-information used.

    Nowadays we have the X86-64 architecture. Good luck with that.

    Modern microchip.

    And yet, even though these devices are so tiny and complicated that they operate near the limits of measurability itself, to such an extent that the designers have to worry about electrons jumping from one adjacent wire to another and hence spoiling everything, we don’t need luck to make them work. We use abstractions!

    We encode these abstractions in software. The first recognised programme was designed by Ada Lovelace, who worked with Babbage on the Analytical Engine,  and calculated Bernoulli Numbers. Ever since we have been working to increase both the power and clarity of our ability to communicate our calculable ideas both to computers, and to other humans.

    As a brief digression, programming is at least as much about sharing thought with other people as it is with computers. A good piece of software not only runs efficiently on whatever the hardware requires; it is also easily understood by other programmers so that when, not if, it needs to be altered to fix errors, or extend its functionality, this can happen with a minimum of stress.

    So why IS software complicated? Some of the reasons are:

    • Hardware gets more complicated and so the requirements to programme them becomes more complicated.
    • The ecosystem gets more complicated as we create more and more general libraries each of which specialises in one particular competence (for example numerical calculations).
    • New techniques are developed all the time, normally coming from academia, especially the field of Pure Mathematics.
    • We demand ever more functionality from our computers, such as real-time communication, or fancy graphics.
    • We keep on adding leaky abstractions.

    As seen above, computer hardware is becoming more and more complicated as the years go by, and this rate of increasing complexity is well described by one of the most famous heuristics in the industry: Moore’s Law which states: ‘the number of transistors in dense integrated circuits doubles every eighteen months’. This has held true for over sixty years, though we are coming up against hard quantum mechanical limits now. While this means we can perform more calculations, faster, than ever before, it also means the hardware is becoming more complicated, and so the software needed to manage the hardware must keep pace.

    A contemporary operating system is typically composed of many millions of lines of code, broken into many different parts. Typically an operating system comprises a kernel that interfaces directly with the hardware, and many libraries that specialise in tasks such as networking or the graphical user interface, as well as the programs most users need, such as word processors, games, and web browsers.

    In Mathematics itself there is a more than two-thousand year quest to define and guarantee the correctness of the subject itself, and quite apart from every novelty of efficient computation, the foundations themselves have undergone radical development in recent years. One hundred years ago Set Theory was introduced and has served well, if trickily, ever since. The trickiness involved, as well the seeming vagueness of some of the underlying assumptions, further led some, especially L. E. J. Brouwer, to try to reformulate Mathematics on an ‘intuitionistic’ basis. This in turn led to the recent Univalent Foundations and Homotopy Type Theory (HoTT). HoTT, in particular, shows considerable promise in allowing us to reason with great abstraction and powerful correctness on the theory and practice of programming.

    Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer.jpeg
    The face of a man who looked upon infinity and saw only potential.

    Our demands for greater ‘power’ impose constraints that can only be met with greater complexity. Without going into great detail, as we move from the relatively simple one-to-one, client-server computational architecture to a fully distributed computation model, as is ubiquitous in Nature (the speed of light guarantees a locality of computation), so we are more and more reliant on the subtle and intriguing theories such as Paxos, which no matter one’s expertise is still not simple. Developments in this area, from the use of bunches of graphics cards for statistical modeling, to the growth of secure data storage systems, tend to be significant both in terms of novelty and difficulty.

    Abstractions, especially as implemented by the congenitally lazy programmer, tend to reveal too many of the underlying assumptions, and hence ‘leak’ complexity both up and down our level of abstracion, though mainly up. These leaks then require us to stick our fingers in the complexity dyke, and no matter how many fingers we may abstract, the water of complexity will tend to flow downwards, around and past and through our ability to count. (Reality is not necessarily countable.)

    So what can we do about it? The answer is simple, we can provide simplicity through abstraction.

    Let me give you an example. When we are young and learning to count we learn first to count to ten, using our fingers. Each count has its own term, one, two, three, etc.. Then we learn how to count to twenty, and the terms associated. The thirties follow, and the forties, and patterns begin to form. Then, like a piece of magic, we learn how number can be represented in table.

    Having constructed a table of the first hundred number we can not only extend this to the first one thousand, but also to the first million, as befits our patience. More importantly we can abstract over the pattern, and use this pattern in its most general sense, allowing each entry of the first one hundred to refer to a table of one hundred, thereby giving a table of tables, of numerical size 10,000, or as the Greeks would have it, a myriad. So we abstract, for we are ‘outside the area contained within the lines drawn’.

    Of course, for this to work, we need to know and understand the complexities, we need to measure them, and abstract over them, and most of all we need to learn Mathematics, for it is the language of abstraction.

    Huge efforts have been made in this field, and are ongoing. Coq is a fabulous development, as is Agda, and Haskell and Rust are becoming mainstream. In Mathematics itself there is still roiling debate and vigorous argument about the nature and validity of abstraction, both pure and applied. The conversations around these topics leach into Computer Science of course, but also Philosophy, Law, Economics and even Political Science.

    Programming is like a mixture of Poetry and Mathematics. It has all the rigour of Poetry and all the interpretability of Mathematics.

    You want to know the secret of success in this field, as in so many others?

    Play. Look at children learn. From repetition of simple tasks that adults find mind-numbingly boring children learn the abstractions that give them all their languages, all their games, all their mastery over themselves and other things. So it is with mathematicians, they play with numbers and their patterns. So it is with programmers, computers are the toys with which they learn the abstractions to understand things simply, but no simpler.

    Make like a child, be simple, practice, and understand. This is the simplicity of software.


    The featured image, taken by John McSporran which shows up in searches of complexity with reuse rights, is aptly entitled ‘complexity’. Though not a picture of software it is undeniably complicated, and also beautiful, and a good deal more intuitively so than any map of dependency graphs. It also, perhaps amusingly, evokes Ted Stevens’ series of tubes.

    Eoin Tierney is the Science Editor of Cassandra Voices.

  • Building Better than Bitcoin

    Bitcoin and the Blockchain are perhaps the most hyped technology today, rivalling even Artificial Intelligence for extreme predictions and outrageous claims. We need to talk about the ecology.

    Bitcoin is a cryptographically-backed, anonymous, pseudo-currency invented by the otherwise unknown Satoshi Nakamoto. It has a dollar value because it is traded on the market, as can be seen here. It is used to trade in everything from lattes to guns, and is always free of jurisdictional monitoring and hence taxation. In other words it enables criminal transactions.  The value of Bitcoin has grown quite predictably since its creation. This is not my main problem with Bitcoin.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The Blockchain, on which Bitcoin is built, is a hideously inefficient means of computing a tally of transactions. There are many superb descriptions of how it works, such as the following:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lD9KAnkZUjU

    It is sometimes perceived as an intellectually-elegant formulation, provably sharing a settling of a kind of account. However it costs too much. Picture a train of carriages. There is a first carriage, normally with an engine. Other carriages may be attached to this engine. Any human can get on and off the system of carriages at any time, by adding their own carriage, and may insist that everyone else who ever entered a carriage witness this, mathematically, by adding each carriage to their own description of where the carriages are positioned in the train. This is a huge computational load on all the witnesses.

    This is the fundamental purpose of the blockchain. It provides a mathematically sound proof that a certain computational task has been performed and does it in such a way that it can be demonstrated by anyone else in the chain.

    While the asymptotic nature of Bitcoin is implied in the above it makes sense to put this in context. An asymptote is a limit to which a function can computationally approach. In Mathematics we can use purely analytical techniques to describe the overall behaviour of such functions, indeed these techniques are fundamental to the theory of Calculus. When we have to determine the stepwise approximation numerically matters can become quite complicated and require significant time and effort.

    An example of this asymptotic approach, though not necessarily the most correct, is the value of the fundamental constant Π. We learn in school that Π has a value of roughly 3.14, and this suffices for schoolroom exercises. Archimedes created techniques that foreshadowed Newtonian calculus by over a thousand years in his ingenious calculation of this  transcendental number‘s digital expansion. We can now determine Π to billions of places of precision, but we will never know it as accurately as its simplest formulation: the area of a circle is Π times the radius squared. In other words, the idea of Π as a proportion is vastly more accurate than any numerical approximation. Bitcoin utilises this asymptotic approach to guarantee that the number of Bitcoins it is possible to calculate has an upper bound of 21 million, and that it gets proportionally harder to do so.

    Most, though not all, contemporary encryption relies on one simple and strange fact: it is vastly easier to multiply two prime numbers to get another number than it is to do the reverse.  Thus it is easier to multiply 5 and 13 to get 65 than it is to analyse 65 to determine what two prime are its divisors. This gets harder the bigger the number. Why this is so is deep and suggestive and still not properly understood. Indeed the study of prime numbers is perhaps the single greatest motive for the entire subject of Mathematics. They are bizarre, profound, and remarkably useful, far past their role in encryption. In particular Bitcoin, via the Blockchain, uses the very well studied SHA-256 hash function.

    As a result all the theoretical constraints outlined above and elsewhere, Bitcoin is inefficient. Like a giant out-of-control paper clip machine it now requires more energy per month for it’s computations than the Republic of Ireland’s. This is a clear signal we are not communicating effectively with regard to distributed proof-of-computational-work schemes. Indeed the very mention of schemes calls the work of Alexander Grothendieck to mind. He would regard this as no soaking of the walnut. (He preferred not to crack a walnut of a problem using advanced techniques but soak it instead in his understanding, so that it might be peeled apart with the fingers of his mind and thereby yield much deeper understanding).

    And now we come to the real problem of Bitcoin. It is trying to solve the wrong problem. We have long suffered the Identification/Authentication/Authorisation problem. Even DNA analysis, which can be very accurate, takes significant effort to compute. Adding a requirement of secrecy to this, while constrained by modern understandings, imposes unacceptable computational cost.

    Bitcoin solves the wrong problem, badly. We can and will do better, by using more sophisticated Mathematics, to develop more efficient distributed proof of work.

    Right now there are far too many exploitative people working in Finance, Computer Science, and even alternative Politics, who are jumping on the Blockchain Bandwagon, and encouraging others to do likewise because they can profit, monetarily, through their comparative sophistication.

    Put it another way, no working mathematician I know recommends Bitcoin, yet every single one recommends the study of Number Theory. Who do you trust more? Financiers or Mathematicians?

    Eoin Tierney is the Science editor of Cassandra Voices.

  • Smart Backlash Requires Smarter Response

    We are currently seeing relatively intense media focus on veganism, but I am worried this is another false dawn. All social movements go through peaks and troughs, and today’s coverage reminds me of what happened in the 1980s and 1990s. It is quite possible we are seeing the beginnings of a repeat cycle. If we are, then we need to learn how to improve our claims-making capacity in response to negative vegan stereotyping.

    The 1980s witnessed a huge peak in animal advocacy and interest in the ‘animal issue’. British groups like Animal Aid, founded in 1977, were young and energetic and, in North America, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA) emerged in 1980 as a brash, fresh, champion of other animals. This was at a time when the idea of animal rights – meaning the moral rights of other sentient beings – was being taken more seriously than it is today, and often articulated as rights-based animal rights.

    PeTA was a radical grassroots group in the early years, before it morphed into the toxic, racist, sexist, and ableist, welfarist corporation it is now. Tom Regan’s seminal The Case for Animal Rights was fresh off the presses, and things were really buzzing. At one point in England, a journalist (who was ideologically opposed to animal advocacy) estimated that the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) were carrying out around six actions per night. The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection had been radicalised, and that gave grassroots campaigners throughout Britain access to funds and materials.

    Any new generation of social movement participants wants to break with the conventions of the old brigade. As Jake Conroy notes in this recent video about activism in the 1990s, recent 21st century claims about the ‘first ever open rescue’ in the USA, and the ‘largest animal rights march ever,’ ignore the history of the animal rights movement. As regards the latter case, referring to a march in Israel, in 1990 a ‘March for Animals’ in Washington attracted a crowd estimated at between twenty-five and seventy thousand participants. The organisers claimed 55,000, far more than the number who are believed to have taken part in the recent Israeli march.

    I acted as a press officer for an animal rights organisation when mass media coverage of animal advocacy shifted in the 1980s. The message got a lot darker. We were getting used to being referred to as ‘animal freedom fighters’, and ‘rescuers’, and weren’t prepared for the ‘terrorist turn’ in mass media characterisation of animal activists. Our reputation wasn’t helped by how the Animal Liberation Front literally ran out of safe homes for liberated other animals. This led to an increase in the incidence of what in those days was called ‘economic sabotage’. Other factors, such as a Mars Bar poisoning hoax, and the development of incendiary devices based on firelighters, which the press invariably called ‘fire bombs’, added to the burden on those doing media interviews.

    With the benefit of hindsight it seems to me a smart move for embattled 21st century animal farmers, and the animal user industries in general, to attempt to re-establish a link between animal advocacy and terrorism. I want modern day advocates to be more prepared for the backlash than we were.

    The animal user industries will surely attempt to ride on the wave of the current moral panic about terrorism. For example, some farmers have recently claimed to have received ‘death threats’ from ‘militant vegans.’ I notice from reports on social media that farmers have been asked to verify these threats but have failed to do so. Expect dirty from an animal user industry backlash.

    For example, Mr. Alan Newberry-Street, the Director of the ‘British Hunting Exhibition’ – a mobile bloodsports display supported by the British Field Sports Society and the Masters of Fox Hounds Association, was jailed for planting a nail bomb under his own vehicle in a bid to discredit the animal movement. At his trial he had the audacity to ask for other similar offences to be taken into consideration.

    If the tactic of linking vegans to violence is smart, we need to be smarter. The angry vegan stereotype has already been reventilated on BBC’s Jeremy Vine Show national radio. Playing up to that image, as happened sadly, is naïve and counterproductive. Any explanation as to why vegans may be angry must be couched in a calm manner. Moreover, 21st century activists must avoid joining in with this rhetoric, as some British national animal groups did in the 1980s. Sadly, there is already evidence of this occurring. In my experience paid-up staff in the movement are unlikely to defend grassroots campaigners if negative labels have been successfully attached to their activities in the mass media, however justified and merited such activities may appear.

    Drawing on Tom Regan’s ideas (see video above) and a rights-based animal rights approach and a rights-based animal rights approach, I appeal to a new crop of vegan spokespersons, firstly to diversify: there are too many male voices. Secondly read up on rights-based philosophy in order to respond to the characterisation of veganism as welfare-based. This counters the argument ‘we have the best welfare standards in world’ which all representatives of users industries are likely to throw at you. Welfare standards are not relevant to the rights-based case for animal rights: rights violations are never excused by the regulation of atrocities. Be smart, don’t fall for their traps.

  • Go Vegan World: A Call for Animal Rights

    The Irish-based Go Vegan World is the largest vegan education campaign worldwide. Its sophisticated advertising campaign has got under the skin of the animal exploitation industries, who have attempted, unsuccessfully, to shut it down. In this article founder Sandra Higgins explains the ethical considerations that animate her grassroots movement.

    Most people imagine themselves to be animal lovers. Few scenes on television spark more awe than those featuring animals in their natural habitats, or more affection than those featuring companion animals in documentaries exploring their complexity and playfulness. We find ourselves moved when we witness the precariousness of their lives in TV veterinary series. If we witness one of them being chased or threatened, we find ourselves with bated breath until they escape.

    From early childhood we are fair in our interactions with other animals. We don’t have an innate inclination to harm them. Most of us reach adulthood with the moral conviction that it is wrong to unnecessarily harm anyone, including other animals.

    Yet despite considering ourselves animal lovers, most of us are responsible for the oppression and needless deaths of sentient, complex, individual lives, in the most brutal manner, with every non-vegan choice we make. What has led to this tragic farce where we can affectionately cuddle the family dog, whilst eating the remains of someone just like him, who lived a miserable life and endured a violent, painful and frightening death, for something we don’t need?

    We grow up in a speciesist culture that discriminates against other animals on the basis that they are not human. But what occurs in exploitative industries is carefully hidden from us. We are progressively desensitised from our innate care for other lives into thinking that other animals don’t matter. We are educated in a system that teaches myth rather than fact. We erroneously believe that humans are superior to other species and that our difference from them entitles us to use them as objects to meet our needs. We are taught to separate their dead remains on our plates, in our clothing, in our personal care and cleaning products, and in our entertainment, from who they are.

    If we are to face the fact that, although they are different to us, they share our right not to be used, harmed or killed, on the basis that we all have in common a sentient capacity to feel, be aware and value life, then we must reconnect with them. We must stop believing the lies that we are sold that we are better than them, that they exist for our use, and that our use of them is necessary.

    Educating the public so that we rid ourselves of these speciesist ideas and reconnect with the animals we use, is the goal of Go Vegan World, which is a public educational campaign that originated in Ireland in November 2015, and now operates internationally.  It provides factual information that is our right to know and our responsibility to act on.

    The public face of the campaign are advertisements positioned in places frequented by consumers: bus stops, tube stations, taxis, outside supermarkets and restaurants; public bathrooms; on social media; at sporting events; in newspapers etc. These direct the public to a comprehensive website and free Vegan Guide, which provides evidence-based information for people to learn why veganism is imperative if we are to be consistent with the non-violent values we claim to hold, as well as practical help on how to live as a vegan. The campaign also involves lectures, print, radio and television interviews, and works individually and with groups of people as they go vegan and learn how to be effective animal rights activists.

    Although Go Vegan World is the largest vegan education campaign worldwide, it is a grassroots organisation firmly rooted in the lives of other animals. It is run by Eden Farm Animal Sanctuary Ireland which is home to more than 100 residents, all of whom are survivors of animal agriculture. They inspire and inform the campaign and their images feature in most of its advertisements.

    The advertisements are designed to encourage empathy towards the animals we use for food, clothing, entertainment and research, as individual, feeling beings. When other animals are seen for who they are, and for the qualities they have in common with us, empathy with them becomes easier. We can then put ourselves in their positions, and comprehend what they endure when we are not vegan.

    The advertisements cover several themes that counter traditional representations of animals as objects who exist to serve us, and willingly participate in their own exploitation, mutilation and death. They show the animals in a light that most people have not previously encountered: innocent, defenceless, trusting, affectionate beings who feel, and who do not want to die.

    The advertisements are colourful and eye-catching, capturing the complex sentience of the animals depicted. This contrasts with their stark educational messages, reminding us of the price they pay for non-veganism.

    The cow with a tear running down her face reminds us that Like Us, They Feel. The monkey behind bars in a zoo lets us know that the price she pays for our day’s entertainment is lifelong imprisonment. The frightened faces of the pigs at a slaughterhouse tell us that Humane Meat is a Myth. The innocent mouse reaching up to cling onto the hand of his vivisector shows us that They Trust Us, yet we torment them because we believe that our cosmetics, cleaning products and scientific research are more important than his life.

    The contentment of the pig as she is caressed by a human hand is juxtaposed with her comrade’s body as it revolves over a barbecue, reminding us that They Trust Us, We Butcher Them. The fish being dragged by a fisherman from the river that was her home depicts the human abuse of power in a classic bullying scene, whilst the headline reads We All Have One Precious Life. Will Your Lunch Take Hers? The beautiful mother-child bond of the cow as she licks her newborn calf reminds us that Dairy Takes Babies from their Mothers. Feedback from the public informs us that these messages are sufficiently powerful to prompt people to research the website and go vegan.

    Go Vegan World is one of the few organisations focused on the animals it advocates on behalf of, giving an unmistakable message that the complete abolition of animal use is the only rational response to the problems other animals face at our human hands.

    Unfortunately most campaigns emanating from the animal rights movement do not meet the needs of the oppressed animals they advocate for. In fact, one would be forgiven for imagining that veganism is a diet or a trend, or even a form of lifestyle consumerism, given the manner in which it is currently popularly portrayed. With typical humanocentricism, advocates assume the need to dilute the message to make it palatable to the public, presuming that they are unable to absorb the significance of a serious social justice issue, unless it is couched in a manner that prioritises human interests.

    The word vegan has been bastardised by both the media and even by many advocates, often resulting in the complete obliteration of the animals it concerns. Veganism is the moral conviction that it is wrong to inflict unnecessary violence on others. It is not the end goal; it is merely the step that we need to take to begin restoring their rights. Veganism is not a fashionable, elitist, fad. It is a radically new way of recognising and relating to other animals with respect, one that humbles us as we grapple to reconcile the complexity of their sentience with the bluntness of our own.

    In keeping with this definition of the word, Go Vegan World gives a clear message that other animals are not ours to use. Because the campaign is so deeply embedded in the individual histories and personalities of the animals at Eden Farmed Animal Sanctuary, it is both informed and powerful. For the first time in history the animals themselves have taken to the streets to show us who they are and to assert their right not to be used. The campaign message remains focused on the animals who are affected by our use of them. It does not distract from or compromise on what they need from us.

    The integrity of the campaign was vindicated in 2017 by the UK Advertising Standards Authority finding in favour of the Go Vegan World claim that Humane Milk is a Myth. The dairy industry had claimed this was not fact-based, and that it misled consumers into believing that farmers did not adhere to welfare regulations in the production of dairy.

    Go Vegan World clarified, however, that its aim was to show that the use of other animals is unjust regardless of adherence to welfare guidelines. The production of dairy, like every animal use, involves rights violations such as artificial insemination, separation of mother and calf, selective breeding and the consequential physiological stress of repeated cycles of pregnancy and simultaneous lactation.

    There is no humane way to exploit the reproductive system of another being. There is no right way of separating a baby from his or her mother. There is no justification for taking away the purpose, existence and entirety of someone else’s life to meet a trivial human desire for profit. Taste or habit offers no excuse for killing.

    It is because other animals are so unfairly and violently violated that people go vegan. This is quite distinct from going on a plant-based diet, or reducing animal use for health reasons, or because it is more environmentally and economically sustainable to do so. While these intersectional aspects of veganism are relevant, they do not constitute veganism and are neither necessary nor sufficient reasons for being vegan.

    There is only one reason to be vegan and that is because we respect life and refuse to participate in unnecessary violence. This is the essence of the Go Vegan World message and it is why it targets the root cause of animal use (speciesism), and why it promotes the complete abolition of animal use by humans.

    This is also why Go Vegan World has consistently attracted the attention of the animal exploitation industries. A high profile campaign that is unwavering in its call for complete cessation of animal use is unprecedented, and it is of immeasurably greater concern to those who profit from non-veganism, than all the limp calls for better welfare of those we exploit, less meat consumption, or the public portrayal of veganism as a trendy lifestyle or diet.

    Becoming vegan involves a dawning awareness that other animals share our capacity to feel; that our use of them is unjust because it harms them. It begins when we recognise that not only can they feel pain; they also feel pleasure  and they value their lives.

    Each of them, like us, has one precious life. When we are not vegan we take that one, and only, life from them, individual by individual, in their thousands throughout our lifetime. Every year seven billion humans kill over 70 billion land animals, and trillions of fishes. Veganism is made possible when we realise that animal use is unnecessary and that every one of them dies for something humans do not need.

    Veganism begins in the cognitive processes of our altered perception of the world in light of this new information. Most of us are shaken to the core when we scratch the surface of the horror of animal use. The world we imagined to be relatively safe, benign, and trustworthy is revealed as carefully organised to profit from torture and death, the brutal intricacies of which are legislated for, and sold to us as if they are both necessary and humane.

    We go vegan when we realise we have been sold a monstrous lie. Few of us would willingly participate in the extreme violence that is inherent in every non-vegan item and choice we make, if we were in possession of the information the Go Vegan World campaign is bringing to light.

    Go Vegan World is designed to target the processes upon which behavioural change are predicated. The advertisements along with the website and vegan guide, provide information that prompts the cognitive and emotional processes that motivate people to research veganism. These processes completely alter who we perceive ourselves to be; how we view the world and our place in it; and, concomitantly, how we behave in light of the awareness of the consequences of our actions on others. This is why veganism is not a lifestyle that we can adopt and reject as it suits us. It is who we are.

    In our time where there are ample alternatives, we are either mindlessly or deliberately violent depending on whether or not we are aware of the facts, or we are vegan. The aim of Go Vegan World is to make as many people as possible aware of a violence that is generally hidden, and to remind them of who they exploit and kill, so that they chose to be vegan.

    Many will read this in agreement that veganism is the right thing to do and vaguely plan to be vegan at some distant and perfect future moment. But it is your responsibility to be vegan now.

    The animals we use feel as we do. While we wait for that perfect moment to live in alignment with the basic moral premise that it is wrong to harm and kill, they are being born exquisitely vulnerable and new to this world, with a death sentence on their young heads. Newly emerged from their mothers’ wombs, they instinctively reach for the nurturing safety of her breast, only to be heartlessly taken from her so we can take the milk she produces to feed them.

    While we wait they are being confined, mutilated and tortured on farms, in laboratories, in circuses and zoos.

    While we wait they are taken to slaughterhouses where they are hung by one leg that bears the weight of their whole, frequently artificially obese, body. Some of them are still conscious when their skins are removed or when they are dropped into tanks of boiling water. All of them are alive when their throats are slit. All male chicks are conscious when they are minced or gassed.

    We do not have the right to do this.

    Their lives and their bodies are not ours to use.

    There is nothing special about being vegan. To stop participating in this violence that we ourselves would dread, is merely the decent thing to do.  We owe it to them to be vegan.

    Sandra Higgins BSc (Hons) Psych, MSc Couns Psych, MBPsS
    Feature Image: Go Vegan World