Electric cars

In the recent years we’ve been bombarded by propaganda trying to shove electric cars down our throat, regardless of the fact that nobody really wants them, so I’ll write some things about that.

First of all, I have to say that I actually like electric cars as a concept. The electric motor is much more reliable and easy to maintain than the internal combustion engine. It also has excellent performance curve. My problem is with other things: first, the Li-ion battery is simply unfit for purpose. It decays after a few years, which is a problem since it’s the most expensive part of the car. It uses up Lithium, which is a very rare element that has to be mined and transported across huge distances, it’s a much more limited finite resource than petroleum, the batteries pose an inherent fire hazard which increases with age, use and mechanical damage, in order to power a car a battery needs to have huge capacity, and in order to charge such a huge battery you need either lots of time, or you need to shove an incredible amount of amps into the battery in a very short period of time, in your garage during the night, and this makes me uneasy, because if something goes wrong you have an incredibly deadly mixture of high current, dangerous chemistry and fire. Some of the battery issues can be resolved in the future, but we are not there yet. Right now the towing companies outright refuse to deal with wrecked electric cars because they are such a hazard.

Also, the electric cars are incredibly uneconomical. They cost more and do less. Apparently, most people agree with me since adoption of electric cars was not widespread, outside the circle of rich hipsters at least. You see, there’s a much more ecological and economical option: get a diesel with a modern particle filter and you get something that goes fast, sips fuel, is so low emission it actually beats most sources of electricity and certainly beats the environmental impact of Li-ion batteries, and is comparatively a bargain. Which is why the eco-nutcases are now working to badmouth and eventually ban diesel. Don’t get me wrong, I’m actually in favour of outlawing the old diesel shitboxes that leave black clouds of suffocation behind them, but we are talking about cars that don’t have particle filters. Euro 5 and Euro 6 diesels are not only not a problem, they are actually the best solution available. Everybody should drive those and the ecological impact of cars would drop to the point of background noise. Also, natural gas makes great sense as fuel, since it’s abundant and cheap, and you can easily convert gasoline engines to run on it and reduce their environmental impact, not on the combustion side, but on the oil refinery side of the equation.

But when we get to the energy supply side of things, it’s not like electricity is actually an abundant resource. In fact, I don’t see additional nuclear power plants being built to offset the expected increase in power consumption caused by the electric cars. Everybody talks about those stupid windmills that are the most useless and dirty power source of all time, and solar panels which are basically toxic waste, don’t work in most places for the majority of time, and work only at the time of day when people don’t charge their electric cars; the peak expected consumption would be over night. And oh yeah, neither the windmills nor the solar panels are recyclable. It’s just terrible landfill fodder, which makes “ecological” electricity sources terrible for the environment.

Which is why I expect the following to take place.

Now it’s “diesel is nasty, has to be banned, electric cars are pure and clean and wonderful”. Let’s say everybody switches to electric cars. Then it will be “electric cars consume more power in a day than a normal household consumes in a year, how dare you drive those pigs!”, “electric cars use components sourced from poor countries/using child labour/consuming finite resources, you should all feel guilty and kill yourselves for driving them”, and so on, ad nauseam. The next step would obviously be to restrict private vehicle ownership and push us to public transportation, which would of course be as crowded as those Japanese bullet trains where people are packed as sardines in a can. Which brings us to the next step, where the eco-freaks will simply kill us all because that solves all problems.

Intermittent freakouts

Whenever there’s a political/military crisis, like that current one with Iran, YouTube starts recommending survival, prepping, EDC and similar videos, as if the level of freaking out in the general population had temporarily exceeded the background noise level at which it resides in normal circumstances. And it’s actually funny, because if your response to a potential world war is to buy a “survival knife” or something else “tactical” (more accurately, “tacticool”), or if you think you’ll survive a SHTF event by getting a “bug-out bag” and going to the woods, you really do have a problem.

But the EDC (every day carry) videos did make me think; what is it that I carry with me every day, and, as a corollary, what objects do I need so much that I would replace them immediately if lost or destroyed. And, as a further corollary, what is a dependency list of things one would run out of in a collapse scenario; things you would need to stock up on, or go hunting for if you ran out.

So let me go through the process slowly, because I’m usually quick to jump to conclusions and my thought processes remain unclear.

I recently had a nasty little situation. I have a habit of going for long walks in the nearby hills, on trekking roads, and there isn’t really any mobile network coverage, since the terrain is basically canyons and hills. A few kilometers in, on a steep climb, I renewed a poorly healed ankle injury. It was surprisingly nasty, because it felt as if I had a nail driven up my tibia, instead of having a foot; I couldn’t even stand on that leg. Since I couldn’t walk properly, I thought of making a crutch out of a branch or something, and then I saw that I left my Swiss army knife in another jacket. So I was few kilometers in, on steep terrain, injured, no cell coverage, and the temperature was barely above freezing. It’s a very unlikely combination of things, but that’s exactly how you get fucked, and it’s also how we get to the concept of EDC – I didn’t have my pocket knife with me at the only time in years that I actually needed it. It didn’t take a global apocalyptic event for me to possibly need to improvise a crutch, or even make a fire in the forest if I couldn’t walk and I got cold. In a few hours it would get unpleasant. I would also need water, but fortunately I always carry a water bottle with me into the woods. It never came to really being an emergency; I rested my ankle for a few minutes, discovered that it was a specific motion that aggravated the injury and learned to limp in a way that didn’t hurt, and I slowly got to the car. During that slow walk home, I decided I’ll buy enough pocket knives that I always have one with me because they’ll be in every jacket I own. That damn thing would easily solve a problem that almost happened. So, yes, my normal EDC/survival gear is very simple. A water bottle, paper handkerchiefs, a Victorinox Huntsman pocket knife, a butane lighter, an iPhone and a can of pepper spray (because of dogs and wild boars). This combination gives me tools to work with wood in an emergency, it gives me light (iPhone), fire and defense against possibly rabid wildlife; I know the normal animals are unlikely to bother me. Yes, the boars are extremely common, and I’ve seen tracks everywhere, and they actually harass people in the nearby villages, so it’s not just a theoretical danger. They roam around in large packs and the hunters don’t seem to be doing anything about it because they are protected by some law. I actually photographed a dead boar in a creek at one point.

Also, I occasionally pass by some very weird specimens of human wildlife. Nothing threatening so far, but the idea of stumbling upon a drug deal in progress with a camera in hand is very unpleasant. They might think I took a picture. You can imagine the problem. I would feel safer if I could carry a gun, but this is Croatia, and gun ownership is so regulated I actually feel safer without one, because owning it would place me on a state-maintained list I would rather not be on, if I can help it. That’s one thing where America has a big advantage; there, I wouldn’t have to explain why I’m carrying a gun in a forest full of boars and, potentially, dangerous criminals. Although, things seem to be changing there, and not in a good way.

As you can see, considering what I do almost on a daily basis, my approach to safety equipment is rather minimalistic, because my assumption is that it will always be easier to walk home or call for help than to create a shelter and make fire in an emergency; the distances are simply not that great. Also, I did encounter wildlife (foxes and deer, mostly), even at very close proximity, but nothing bothered me and was actually very happy to get away in a hurry. In theory, I could justify carrying all kinds of survival gear for unlikely emergencies, but in reality, a water bottle, pepper spray, pocket knife, lighter, lip balm, paper handkerchiefs and a phone are what I actually have with me.

What I find interesting is that some people will find my choice of things to carry excessive, while others will find it extremely insufficient. There seem to be two main schools of thought: the first is that noting bad will happen if you have pink thoughts throughout life, and the second is that Murphy was an optimist and all kinds of shit will eventually happen if you’re here long enough. I’m somewhere in the middle: there’s a matter of probability. I prepare for probable events. It’s very probable that I’ll have to blow my nose, be thirsty, have to pee, pick mushrooms or chestnuts in season, and change clothes because I’m sweaty in the summer. It’s improbable, but possible that I’ll at one point have to deal with hostile wildlife, or cut off a branch and shape it to fit my needs. It is very unlikely, but still in the realm of possibility, that I will have to light a fire and camp in the woods because I’m too injured to walk to the car, or drive, and there’s no cellphone coverage, so I’ll basically have to wait until someone stumbles upon me and walks to the point where he can call the mountain rescue service. That last one looks incredibly improbable, because I’ve been walking in those woods for literally decades, in all kinds of weather, and I never got even close to being hurt, until that situation a few days ago, when I suddenly couldn’t walk, kilometers into the woods, and with no signal on the phone, because canyon. So, basically, things never happen, until they do, and then you’re suddenly ten percent away from the worst case scenario and things were perfectly fine and routine minutes ago.

I don’t prepare for unrealistic or unsurvivable scenarios. Yes, there’s a scenario where I stumble upon a crime in progress, deep in the woods, and yes, bodies were disposed of in several cases, very close to the places where I walk, and the criminals in question might simply decide not to risk a witness and shoot me. That’s one of those “shit happens” scenarios where not even a gun would be likely to save me, and there’s no point in preparing for something that’s both very unlikely and very unsurvivable. It’s like preparing for a meteor strike directly on your house; pointless. If that happens, it means it’s your time to die and that’s it. But there’s a grey area between not preparing for extreme scenarios, and not preparing for anything. There are unlikely scenarios that can be solved with very small additions to the content of my pockets, and that’s what I’m quite willing to do. That little can of pepper spray is actually very comforting when you hear something big moving through the woods close to you. Sure, it usually turns out to be a deer in a hurry, very much minding its own business, but it could be a rabid fox going straight for my throat. I’ve seen a video of a rabid fox attack, and that was fucking scary. It doesn’t go away, it doesn’t get afraid, it isn’t deterred when you hit it, it just attacks, again and again, until it’s dead. I don’t know what a rabid boar would do, and I don’t really care to find out.

I don’t care if someone thinks I’m underprepared, or taking excessive risks. That’s fine; everybody has his own threshold of risk tolerance; some wouldn’t dare to ever go into the woods, some wouldn’t even carry water or a phone. To each his own. However, I must admit I am disturbed by those people who think that no preparations of any kind could ever be valid. Every fucking year the mountain rescue service (which BTW is excellent here in Croatia) has to get people out of trouble because they went hiking into dangerous mountain terrain with flip-flops, no water and in bad weather. Yes, they actually do that, especially the tourists of the hipster or hippie variety, who think nature is that wonderful thing that would never harm you if you only think positive.

poskok

I encountered venomous snakes of the vipera ammodytes variety on the forest path very close to where I live; they were minding their own business, as snakes do, but if I wasn’t careful and I stepped on one, it would probably have bitten me and I’d be having a serious medical emergency in a hurry. It’s unlikely to be bitten by a venomous snake here, but it still happens to someone every year. To make absolutely no preparations, for instance go into the woods without a phone or a radio of some kind, without water, poorly dressed, and alone, you are basically setting yourself up to be fucked. And there are people who do exactly that, every single year, and the rescuers have to waste money, time, effort and other resources getting those stupid urban hipsters out of trouble. Honestly, I would prefer not to be that guy. Sure, if a snake bites me I’ll call for help because walking out would actually circulate the venom faster and worsen the situation, but if I can whittle a crutch and limp myself out with a broken leg, immobilised with a splint I made on the spot with my knife, some wood and pieces of my shirt, I’m going to do it.

OK, let’s return to the original point I was trying to make. There’s no point in preparing for unsurvivable scenarios, such as a full nuclear exchange between superpowers, or a KT-type extinction event. If that happens, oh well. However, before the last regional war there were old people who had the second world war in living memory, and they prepared for a possible war by having well stocked and protected basements, and young people made fun of them, because “everybody knows” there’s not going to be a war. When the war actually broke out, and there was no food and heavy metal was falling down from the sky, those same young people were very happy that grandpa had canned food and a well built basement to use as shelter when shit hit the fan. So, yes, there’s a very thick grey zone between “nothing happens” and “there’s a nuclear war and everybody dies”, and some reasonable preparations can greatly mitigate the worst outcomes. For instance, if there’s a regional war and you have gold bullion stored, you can take it and run, and you didn’t lose everything, you don’t have to start anew from zero. If there’s an earthquake and water is contaminated by raw sewage, if you have water purification equipment and chemicals, and if you have containers for storing water, you’re in a much better position than everybody who doesn’t. If there’s a fire and you have a fire extinguisher handy, you might be able to solve the problem yourself and with minimal damage, instead of losing your home and possibly your family members.

But then there are those people who think that, if shit hits the fan, they’ll take a “bug-out bag” full of “survival gear” and head into the woods and “live off the land”. That kind of thinking is actually more dangerous than not preparing for anything at all, because they are actually increasing the probability of a bad outcome with their “prepping”. In an emergency scenario, the woods are the place where you go to die. Your greatest probability of success lies in pooling resources with neighbours and organizing something on a community level, not in collecting “tacticool” knives and fire rods from Amazon. What you need to do is stay put, stay informed, and organize or join a community effort. That’s where reasonable preparations pay off: someone will have means of purifying water. Another will have canned food in store. Someone else will have antibiotics and bandages. Another will have insulin injections. And some will have weapons. Pooled together, this creates something that is actually likely to get you through the initial wave of shit, and to the point where the outside help starts coming. But if there is no outside help, if everything is affected or destroyed, you must realize that your chances are slim to none. Still, you must realize that “tacticool” equipment is most likely a waste of money and a psychological crutch. It’s a substitute for actual preparedness. Get out of immediate danger. Shelter. Water. Food. Medical equipment. Defense. Those are the priorities. It’s completely unlikely that you’ll be able to make it through on your own, so pooling resources with others is your best chance; however well equipped you think you are, you will have to sleep, you might get sick, you might lack some critically needed resource, and you will lose control and die. But if you share your stack of food and other resources with others, it is true that it will last shorter, but it’s also true that you will thus gain others who will stand guard while you sleep instead of waiting for you to fall asleep so that they can kill and rob you, and if there’s something you need, someone will probably find it somewhere.

Gold and silver getting scarce

Essentially, things are moving more slowly than I expected them to, but they are following the predicted pattern. The spot prices are completely fixed due to the fact that most “metal” being traded exists on paper only, but physical metal is getting scarce, especially since the central banks mopped up majority of it. Having in mind that only a small fraction of the population actually has physical metal, and the majority didn’t wake up and smell the coffee yet, you can imagine what will happen when the majority tries to convert their paper savings into gold and silver, only to find out that there isn’t any on the market.

In Germany, a small “gold rush” in the order of magnitude of 200 people daily per retail store was sufficient to completely exhaust the amount of metal available for sale.

About exceptions

There are several things I saw people do in online conversations that annoy me, because they think they are using arguments, and they are in fact committing logical fallacies.

The first one is citing exceptions to disprove a rule. They will cite a smart black man and a retarded Asian in an attempt to disprove statistical findings about race and intelligence. They will find a woman who managed to give birth in late 30s, or one who is happily unmarried in her 60s, they will find a quiet Italian and a loudmouth German, or a Lesbian that actually doesn’t hate men, and say “gotcha”. To that, my answer is that sociology isn’t mathematics. In mathematics, if you state there are no even primes, and I cite number 2, your theory is disproved and that’s the end of it. However, even in mathematics, there’s statistics and probability. In statistics, citing a sample of 1 in order to invalidate a rule is worthless. Let me use an example.

This is a dark image. It was intentionally shot as such, and histogram shows a statistical distribution of pixel luminance values. On the left side are the pixels with values closer to 0, which means black, and on the right side are the pixels with values closer to 255, which means white.

What the political left wants us all to believe, under threat of violence, is that you can’t say that an image is dark just because the luminance values are grouped in the left side of the histogram, as long as there are any white pixels on the picture. You can’t say that a cat is black if they can find one white hair on it, basically. But on the other hand, if you disagree with them about absolutely anything, essentially if your agreement with their ideology is less than the perfect 100%, you are a Nazi. That’s fundamentally intellectually dishonest; essentially, they are using logical fallacies and counting on the fact that most people are only vaguely familiar with logic, and they heard somewhere that you can disprove rules by citing exceptions, only they don’t understand that this doesn’t necessarily apply even in mathematics, because statistical analysis was developed exactly for the purpose of dealing with exceptions to rules. That’s why sociology uses statistics to formulate statements about human groups. Similarly to that picture, if some human group has a median value of 6 in 0..255 range, you can say it’s very “dark”. It’s basically how the biblical God saw Sodom. It’s the case where white pixels don’t disprove the rule, they prove it, because if you can basically count them all by hand, it says something.

The second thing that irritates me is citing your personal experience to disprove some general rule. It’s statistically worthless because it’s a sample of 1. Also, every substance addict I talked to used the same argument: I’m drinking alcohol or using drugs all the time and I’m feeling great. First of all, your subjective experience is most likely just your personal delusion – the consequences might just not have caught up with you. Second, even if it were not, you might be a severely abnormal specimen – for instance, some people are resistant to AIDS and never contract the disease because they have a genetic mutation that renders them immune. Third, it still isn’t necessarily a good idea. For instance, someone can say he was drunk and jumped from the hotel room on the second floor, landed in a pool and was fine. That doesn’t prove it’s a good idea. Rather, it proves that some people have more luck than one should reasonably expect. So, essentially, I shit on your personal experience.

The third thing is that some people think feeling is an argument. They feel something therefore it must be true, or I must at least accept that they are validated in their feeling-based opinion. That’s actually true in some cases, for instance if someone isn’t sexually attracted to you, that’s all the reason they need in order not to have sex with you. Asking them to provide evidence is actually a fallacy, because you assume evidence is needed. It is not. If someone doesn’t like you, they don’t need reasons to not like you. But this is an exception to the general rule. You can’t use this argument for medications, and say that a certain substance comes in an ugly box that you don’t like, and you’ll therefore not take it. You can’t say your school professor rubs you the wrong way and you therefore won’t accept his grades. You can’t say you don’t like police uniforms and you will therefore not obey the law. In most cases, your emotions are irrelevant and nobody should care about them. Your idiosyncrasies are your problem, and have no place in a discussion. If you think something is true, you need to be able to provide arguments in favor of your opinion. Feeling a certain way is not an argument. So, essentially, I shit on your feelings. If you have strong feelings in favor of a demonstrably false concept, it’s not evidence in favor of it, it’s evidence that you’re a fucked up person.

Manipulated markets and war

How can you tell a certain commodity market is being manipulated? It’s when supply is restricted, demand is enormous, and the prices are not rising. It means someone, usually the huge buyers, is influencing the markets by complicated and marginally legal means in order to keep the prices affordable for themselves. In my opinion, that’s what we have been seeing in the precious metals market in the last few months. The central banks and other big players have been buying unprecedented quantities, including the future production, and the prices have been dropping. I have a pretty good idea how some of it is being done, and even I am quite shocked at the amount of fuckery involved.

Also, we are approaching the upper limit of my prediction, because 3 months ago I said I expect the thing to blow up in the time interval of 15 days to 3 months. This was based on the expectation that the American stock market is in a hugely unstable bubble, that the central banks and other buyers will quickly exhaust the physical metal supply and this will in turn collapse the unbacked paper market, which worked thus far only because the bluff hadn’t been called. In the mean time, the fed has been printing money like crazy, and it’s been going into the American stock market, basically trying to prop it up in order to stabilize the house of cards. Also, overnight borrowing by the banks is huge, which indicates serious liquidity issues. In essence, the visible metal prices seem to invalidate my prognosis, but I think it’s just a matter of time before this house of card collapses, and I’m actually not in a great hurry to revise my time estimates, I think we’re still on the same schedule. I’ve seen very similar patterns in 2007. Marketplace was behaving contrary to the underlying realities seemingly disproving them, until it went poof.

I’m still buying silver with all the money I can spare each month, and I still recommend it to others. If the banks are buying metal instead of paper, contrary to their long-standing custom, it means paper is going to shit. Already, bets are being made on gold exceeding $4000 by summer of 2021. Some people say someone is betting high and will probably lose money. I say somebody is betting on a certain thing in a marketplace of asshats. A major constraint on my prognosis is that this time the financial collapse will be so big, it might cause the major players to pre-empt it with a nuclear war, seeing it as a preferable option. In fact, that’s what I’ve been warning about for years already; American intentional aggravation of the geopolitical situation makes no sense in any other context. Also, America is in the overture phase of a very nasty civil war for the last 3 years, with Obama-appointed people in the intelligence agencies acting as some sort of an insurgency that is trying to negate the results of the presidential elections, sabotage the executive branch of government, and, most importantly, control the media in order to propagandize their own populace. They actually revoked a law that used to prohibit that, so that everything would be legal.

When a significant part of a nation is refusing to accept the election results, using all kinds of excuses, that’s when you know the democratic system collapsed and the country descended into banana-republic stage. The level of political discourse in America is something I am used to seeing in African shitholes, but not in serious countries. It’s basically all at the point where the sides are so far apart in fundamental issues, they can no longer be said to belong to the same civilization, let alone nation. When this war gets hot, it’s going to be worse than Bosnia and Rwanda.