Cal pumped an endorphin mix, Blue C6, synthesized on ship, put together by his specs. All algorithmic jockeys had their own special brand of non-habit forming synth. His consisted of 1/3 cocktail of endocrine, synthetic blend and natural occurring. He edged it with a bit of old fashioned methamphetamine. This was illegal, of course, but the ship's captain allowed for some things - as long as they weren't entered in the ship's log. The cocktail worked quickly; the bleariness he felt melted away.
The algorithm tactical control (ATC) was already making calculations based on the current threat within the 1:23 minutes it took Cal to take his chair. [Well apart from the bridge, the ACS (algorithmic control specialist) was a command and control all its own. In the case of the Harper's Ferry, the bridge was on the fore of the armored hull, the ATC was well nestled in the heart of the ship, as near to Engineering as could be established.]
He checked the status of the threat as the Charon. This was a vessel close to their own in many respects. Cal had to know every major class ship of the enemy. He briefed himself weekly on the latest intel. At last count there were well over 3,000 different types. It was vital that any ACS knew their hard data. They learned, from methodology at the academy, to put together information in a form most productive for them. In Cal's case, he siphoned data in much like branch structure, but not in two dimensions, but learned it as four. There were general trunks, specific branches, breadth of lines and, the fourth, was correlational threads.
The Charon was an enemy vessel, of the destroyer class, headed under the 11th expeditionary force and correlated to 21 specific data points that he could call up within a minute. Each of the critical points were logged quickly into the threat system. The ACS was not the person who fired, that was the captain, but the captain was definitely reliant on the ACS for making that distinction as clear as possible. And, right now, Cal could almost sense the Charon's ACS performing the same tasks as he was. It was 4:13 minutes from init contact and Cal had finished the basic threat analysis. The captain was already aware that it was a threat, the ship was far too afield at this point to fire - but they only had another 2 minutes before a decision was to be made.
"All actionable data compared: 67% positive outcome, 31% negative, 2% unknown" Cal knew too, Captain Monsen's temperment. He would like these odds. Now to formulate a different mix of algorithmic offense and defense lines. He would have 30 seconds. By judging the telemetry, mass, possible armament (providing there were no unknowns) make-up and the odds of the ACS being better than him - all were on the table - Cal furiously pounded data on the specially designed UI. The interface to the ATC was such that it could take data reads from all of Cal's actions and help funnel the actionable data correctly into the system.
The AI, nicknamed 'Brutus', also spent a ton of hours comprehending actions from his counterparts, the ACS team. Since his knowledge of the Charon was fair, he was able to discern soft spots in the armor, similar to the Harper and provide a solution that garnered positive to 71% - probably the highest he could ask for considering the time constraint. To this, he also put in defensive ordinance at their vulnerable areas. He recommended to the captain off-shifting the tack of their offensive line at a degree to allow to bring a hard to starboard in the event of a problem.
At the thirty second mark, he entered all his data and was confident of the work. In 6:28 minutes he had a report that would account for 110 pages of data. In it he improved their odds to the point where, at worst, they would only lapse to 32.569% of possible failure. This would provide the Harper enough time to figure out a back-up option. [Also, alerts were sent to the fleet in the vicinity to appoint to this location at the moment of contact per naval protocol.]
The ship began to thrum. The Captain was taking action; the point of no retreat had happened in the time that Cal's relief, Bethany, took the chair. Cal's work was completed. Algorithm Contigency was Bethany's forte. Cal grabbed a gel to come down off of the high, (he found himself sweating profusely) and strapped down to a binding station until the alert was over. By his calculations, he would know if they were to live or die in the next :46 seconds. He squeezed the cooled gel down and wiped at his eyes. ....excerpt complete....
Politics, since the famous Kennedy/Nixon televised debates, has expanded into a serialized mess. The primary problem is our viewpoint between substance and style is no longer a dichotomy: they are one and the same. This presents some fundamental problems in the way we address real issues. It fundamentally breaks down the walls that once made incredibly insightful distinctions.
When approaching the elections in the coming year, take a step outside and ask yourself, 'What would be the penultimate president/senator/representative/councilperson?'. I mean when you ask that question, we look in a series of boxes that are, at their core, essentially false.
"Well, I vote x, so I follow what x says." Idiotic and dangerous.
If either party had the fortitude to really dig us out of the cyclic mire of poor decision-making, from the individual to the federal level, they would come up with much different criteria.
Any political leader, in a 'perfect' world would be someone that would have absolutely no style. I mean this person would be a dynamic, cut throat bastard, but, in essence, would have to definitely be a bureaucrat that can incisively look at the hard decisions and just enact them. And this act would not come from a 'judicious' or 'just' way - it would be a 'hard facts' mentality. Shit needs to get done and we need to make some drastic turns to: educate individuals for proper fiscal efficacy, bottom-up of the education system and national infrastructure, pass a Constitutional amendment on limitations of federal spending, and mandatorily have all states provide solvency within 5 years.
Not only do I not want, but I demand against, any one with a silk tie and Italian shoes. I don't want catch phrases and logos. I want the biggest shlep this side of an accounting work book. I don't want "big" ideas from any side, because that's not what the nation needs right now.
America needs to take a step back, collect its thoughts, and Americans need to come up with the next big idea, not a president.
I’m in the pink with the bevy of streaming classic films making their way to the tubes. I recently cut the cable, in an effort to squeeze more money out of the budget. [I’ve been adding cash to my cookie jar for furthering my collection of belts - can’t get enough of them.] There isn’t a ton of options on Netflix, but it’s a lot more than there was just under a year ago. Then there was recent news of Hulu+ gaining the Criterion collection. Could my ultimate dream of TCM as a per diem channel going to come true one day? With the expansion of home based, internet-enable solutions, it’s around the corner. There are some great flicks to catch and add to your queue all in the 40s – which is my most favored decade of film for sure. These aren’t in any particular order: 7. 1940’s “The Grapes of Wrath” – penultimate technical movie, with gorgeous lighting and direction by John Ford. Of course, he understood the beauty of sparseness and how to tone down actors. Henry Fonda and Jane Darwell are brilliant. The best of a Steinbeck rendition. 6. 1941’s “I Wake Up Screaming” – there aren’t many movies I can say I love Betty Grable in, but here it is – and a very pleasant surprise of a movie. Victor Mature is framed by a crooked cop for the murder of a model. It’s actually pretty dark and, supposedly, the touchstone ‘film noir’ movie. 5. 1949’s “The Third Man” – Carol Reed directs a top-of-his-game (read: understated) Orson Welles. Like “Citizen Kane”, this is a highly constructed picture that carries the art forward. Plus, the music just locks into your psyche. 4. 1946’s “Gilda” – Rita Hayworth, yes. Yes! A great morality play where no one is clean, but there is a bit of redemption at the end for two lovers caught beneath the wicked boss of a South American casino. No ‘clean’ ending: which would have driven me nuts. 3. 1941’s “That Hamilton Woman” – no offense to my sister, but I’m not a bit Vivien Leigh fan. Not until I patiently sat through this one. Luckily I was rewarded. The drama doesn’t begin until about half way into this historical biopic for the fractured Lord Nelson. Laurence Olivier gets better near the end, trust me. The first half is a bit rough to get through. 2. 1948’s “The Red Shoes” – if you are a fan of “Singing in the Rain”, you’ll find appreciation in this little known dance film. This early British foray into color is simply gorgeous. The dance sequences and production numbers make up for a so-so cast. But, despite a hard premise to expand on, it really just comes together. 1. 1948’s “David Lean’s Oliver Twist” – Lean is just a tremendously technical director. Shot direction and blocking are like dance sequences. This is the best take on the Dicken’s novel for sure. My kids were quiet during the harsh opening piece. The interplay of anguish on the boy is rough, and the movie beautiful. More lists to follow! Happy President's Day!
