This is George Rebane's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following George Rebane's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
George Rebane
Naturalized Citizen, Entrepreneur, Professional Engineer and Systems Scientist formally trained in Physics, Complex Dynamic Systems, and Computer Science.
Interests: music, history, friends, community, science/cosmology, future of man, avid reader, camping/canoeing, and family, philosophy, politics, investing, flying, shooting
Recent Activity
GeorgeB 446pm - well said, and keep us sorted out on the regional media's coverage of the election.
Toggle Commented 4 hours ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
BarryP 235pm - There, I knew that you had a skeleton in your closet ;-)
Toggle Commented yesterday on Ruminations - 30sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
fish 123pm - Doesn't matter, but did he spell my name correctly? ;-)
Toggle Commented yesterday on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
re fish 102pm - Don't know who you're quoting, but it sounds like those out there you're referring to haven't had a clue about how to "move forward" for the last 150 years.
Toggle Commented yesterday on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
'My Uncle Frank in Chicago was a staunch Conservative, and voted straight Republican until the day he died. Since then he has voted Democrat.' (H/T to reader) George Rebane Measure S proponents have an ex parte court hearing tomorrow to... Continue reading
Posted 10 hours ago at Rebane's Ruminations
Walt 1059am - A worthy and useful profession indeed.
APatriot 1114pm – My company delivered 83 ASCIT™ (interactive multimedia videodisc) systems to Disney’s EPCOT. These were emplaced in the park’s CommuniCore facility – the big building on your right as you entered EPCOT’s main gate. EPCOT’s objective was to showcase the future of interactive communication and urban transport (people movers). The ASCIT dialogs (interactive multimedia programs) Disney featured ranged from educational through travelogues to promotional. ATT had the contract for the park’s information kiosks (much simpler touch screen systems) located throughout. And thank you for the kind words on the honorific. When we moved into these foothills, I somehow lost my PhD and became Mr again. It seems that most folks around here only know to call someone Dr if they are a physician, dentist, chiropractor, or veterinarian. As your dad will tell you, we PhD’s get a little snooty looking at today’s proliferation of the ‘Dr’ honorific for all kinds of degrees and certifications. A couple of other PhD friends up here have suffered the same ignominy, so I really don’t feel singled out ;-) PhDs (ScDs) are still awarded only to those who have expanded the domain of human knowledge, which expansion has been recognized by their peers. Just mastering an existing body of knowledge was never sufficient to earn an academic PhD. Before about 1800 only people who did successfully ‘philosophize’ – extend knowledge – received that vaunted and always used appellation of Doctor, which then did not always require matriculation from a university – e.g. Dr Ben Franklin. But then around 1800 a select group of physicians (formerly grouped with barbers) began serious study and contributions to biology and physiology, they too, with some considerable justification, demanded to be called Dr. And then things got out of control. By the 1830s anyone with formal medical training or just claiming it anointed himself with Dr, and the rest is history. Someday I should do a piece on the current role and spotty practice of maintaining honorifics in our society. Please pass my greetings to your dad.
PaulE 939pm - You've finally confirmed my point that both S and 2349 have the same ambiguity for enforcement, and the property rights thing was a red herring in this discussion when it comes to a choice between S and 2349. I will deal with the property rights viz code inspection in a separate post. APatriot 954pm - have no idea where you are coming from. But reading your comments, it appears that your reasoning is pretty ragged. You also haven't read this comment stream, so you believe you are raising new points when you keep circling the barn. Yes, that's one of the established weaknesses of S is that it cannot be changed ('amended' is not the right word) without holding another expensive election. And the county coming up with S+ codes has been amply covered here as a weakness of S. And on governance you're a bit rusty on the blessings of the democratic republic that our Founders left us. The last thing you want is for a semi-literate, disinterested, and/or uninformed electorate voting on specific laws. That engenders pure democracy which for nation-states has been the kiss of death. We elect representatives to make laws for us. California is Exhibit A for the ills of having sound-bite driven voters making laws to which the chickenshit politicians would not risk attaching their names. And the last thing I'd call this BoS is "out of touch". We might not agree with all their actions, but this is one of the most informed BoSs that the county has had. Signing off, it's my bed time.
PaulE 819pm - Remember we have only one of two choices - keep the amendable 2349 or toss it and substitute the unamendable S. Until you finally tell us all how S would solve your property rights assertions, this thread is over.
And now to put a bow on his gift of national chaos, he has vowed to make illegal all profiling by the nation's police departments and investigative agencies to include - wait for it - national security agencies and units. If followed, this removes possibly the most powerful tool that such governmental units have for preventing crime, catching bad guys, and defending the nation. The name of the tool is Bayesian decision theory.
Toggle Commented yesterday on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
PaulE 446pm - the hundreds of illegal RMJ grows in the county and the number of nuisance calls to the sheriff. That's about as close as I can come to it. Walt 450pm and DonB 516pm - You are both on the mark, but that doesn't mean that liberal minds are receptive to any of it. Nevertheless, this comedy turned farce needs to play itself out, and we need to be in there with counterpoints for the sake of readers who are still trying to decide how to vote.
PaulE 131pm - for that same reason I will not start 'writing' and then debating MJ cottage industry regulations. Life's too short, but I will evaluate what the pros have written. Since I too believe that 2349 can be improved, a "citizens repeal of 2349" sounds interesting. Am not sure in what order things would happen so that there remains some basis in the interval besides the inadequate MMJ provisions in the state and follow on case laws. Maybe that is still something to consider after S is defeated. But I'm still interested in what the problem is with the current 2349 that the BoS cannot fix through amendments (as radical as they need be, including rewriting the damn thing completely).
Gregory 148pm - Wow, never thought of that gambit. In that case he sure is keeping a stiff upper lip in his pledge to stay in "public service" after being AG. Can you do that from jail? ;-)
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
fish 102pm - You're a hard man Mr fish.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
Any comments on the long-awaited resignation of AG Eric Holder? I have long considered him to be rogue in his duties, a racist in his belief system, and a full supporter of Obama's goal to fundamentally transform America into a second rate nation giving rise to the chaos that our withdrawal has already created. A more complete litany of Holder's racial politics is provided by Edwin Meese and Kenneth Blackwell here -
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
PaulE 1103am - With that logic, reasoned discussion goes off the rails. I in no way support what today is "the EIR process" - it is abhorrent from all angles. But I do support common sense conservation or established life styles and the environment. Today's EIR process is bereft of common sense and does nothing but serve the interest of what we may label as Agenda21 proponents. You have ignored my 1037am so there is no profit in circling that barn again, and crickets are still responding to Measure S' implied solution to the property rights problem. But the fundamental aspect of these left/right discussions is that the Left has no understanding of a nuanced solution, it is either a 0 or 1. For progressives only binary alternatives exist - if one eschews a 0, then he must clearly be a strong advocate for 1, and vice versa. To proceed profitably we must bring in such things a culture, tradition, situational judgment, ... that have long organized society in place of the crappy crafting of detailed laws and codes which prove totally inimical in their application. In light of this, it's tough to make progress.
PaulE 1009am - Since I'm not making any headway, perhaps reading DonB's 1026am might help. Your crickets continuing to imply that S will somehow fix the property rights problem says it all about the thrust of your inquiry. Re my supporting MJ cultivation as a cottage industry, I've already answered that many times in my general support of legalizing RMJ. So one more time - yes, presuming RMJ consumption is legalized, I would support such a cottage industry if it can be regulated so as to balance the neighborhood nuisance and community health/safety concerns. (Much in the same way I would support any residential manufactory/shop that doesn't lower the neighbors' QoL.) Re your 1026am - Paul, you're not reading my comments. I already responded to that need to inform voters of the salient facts surrounding an item on which they are asked to vote. You and the S people claim that there is a MMJ access problem in Nevada County. Where is the evidence for the scope and magnitude of such a problem? Numbers instead of emotional hot air please.
What remarkable good news indeed for SBC. I had no idea that what was keeping our local economy in the dumps was the lack of having a Small Business Development Center to serve all those would be entrepreneurs and struggling small businesses that have been standing around with their thumbs up their ... well, you know. So now we have the ability to import more government money into the area as a measure of economic success. Unlike a defense contract from which the government gets a product/service that it cannot provide at lower cost or at all, this kind of money coming into the Sierra will just create dependency on more such money coming later. But the real question is from where does the SBC get the business acumen to actually serve as a competent SBDC helping to bolster or set up for-profit businesses? But then again, I suppose they could hire a bevy of new business savvy consultants. Finally, I wonder if there is any metric that lets taxpayers evaluate the performance of a SBDC after the local progressives are done with their happy dancing. One thing is for certain though, Mr Frisch is very good at what he really does.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
PaulE 1022pm – (I believe you’re referring to Ordinance 2349 not 2439.) At last week’s meeting the sheriff reiterated that their enforcement of 2349 is complaint driven. But that a smell from a legal grow is not sufficient grounds for issuing a citation for “abatement” (i.e. chopping down the plants). If the grow is legal, then the sheriff said that “we walk away”. That is pretty much as it has been for ordinances covering a gazillion other manufacturing processes and constructs on private property for at least a hundred years. Pro-S people don’t complain that their legal grows are egregiously inspected; their complaints center around 2349 being too restrictive in how many plants can be grown where. Your implied point is that somehow 2349 has more onerous provisions that give rise to inspections than will S. But your crickets answer on this point, and inspecting the details of S doesn’t support this claim, explicit or implied. So again, what is you point in bringing up the inspection issue that has not been a concern of legal MMJ growers? And DSmith’s 1058pm concern is unwarranted until we know how many people in the county are legal MMJ users, and moreover, is there any record of our legal MMJ users not being able to satisfy their prescribed medical needs? The same commenter’s 1102pm goes off the rails on the school bus stop claim. The Union annually publishes the current year’s bus stops, and 2349 provides only for the current working bus stops, not a legacy list that goes back to 1952. Another wild claim for which evidence is needed. BradC’s 836am represents a real situation, but we don’t know how often that happens. It is though a pleasure to see a liberal suddenly argue for property rights when their life is a litany of supporting government’s rollback of property rights in all other aspects. (‘You can’t just one day set up a pig sty in your backyard in the middle of a developed neighborhood, now can you?’) In any event, since MJ is easy to grow and so prolific in the county, removing one legitimate MMJ user’s ability to grow on their property should not pose too much of a problem since other sources of MMJ abound. However, such a sudden restriction would put a hitch in the MMJ user’s ability to generate a little extra income by selling her excess into the RMJ market. Again it is the numbers that define the problem. And remember if the data supports it, the BoS can simply amend 2349 as yet another tweak to rebalance between the legitimate MMJ use, neighborhood nuisance, and community health/safety need. Not possible with Measure S. I again draw your kind attention to my 804am, 944am, 841am comments which expand on the real differences between 2349 and S, most of which understandably draw crickets from the pro-S folks.
PaulE 923pm - Thanks for the review Paul, but I do know the difference between regulatory inspection and a criminal search warrant. What you need to cite is chapter and verse from where you get the reality that "police can inter(sic) private property based only on a presumed complaint that someone doesn't like the smell in the air." The reality is that neither police nor code compliance inspectors can enter your property without showing probable cause that there is a violation on said property. Your stating that a "presumed complaint" is all that is needed doesn't make it so, but does keep the pot boiling (pun intended). BTW, are you suggesting that passing S would somehow restore the property rights you claim are being violated under 2349 enforcement? Or is this just a diversion for us to stop our critical comparison of S and 2349?
Gregory 858pm - Good catch Gregory, keep us posted.
BTW, anyone wanting to read some after-action reports on the legalization of MJ, please google 'the legalization of marijuana in Colorado the impact' for a snootful of excellent references, pdfs of formal reports, and serious articles on the topic. The links cover more than just Colorado.
JoeK 1027am - let me inject an editorial interpretation here that may clarify. Your logic on "bad government is liberal and good government is conservative" is too simplistic and incorrectly interprets the apologetics of RR and its ideological cohort over the years. The arguments here have amply demonstrated that collectivism, in its inception and practice, almost invariably gives rise to bad government here in America and all over the world. On the other hand, classical liberalism (and specifically conservetarianism) gives rise to various forms of beneficent governance from which we derive what most people would call 'good government'. In short, Republicans are not innocent of contributing to bad government. But on balance, we believe they do it less than the collectivist Democrats.
Re supply of STEM graduates. Over the past years we have had the debate about America's supply of STEM graduates. Recently reports have surfaced claiming that we have a surplus of STEM workers while corporations experience shortages in the kinds of STEM workers they require. My response has been that the shoreline of knowledge has become so long and convoluted (read specialized) that having just a STEM degree is no longer sufficient to guarantee employment. The STEM student needs to be aware of what specialties do the STEM job markets demand, and then tailor his study areas accordingly. Simply citing the number of STEM degree holders having to take non-STEM misses the point. You can no longer shotgun your STEM education, you have to rifle shoot it. Here's more (H/T to a reader for this link).
Toggle Commented 3 days ago on Sandbox - 27sep14 at Rebane's Ruminations
PaulE 1056pm - Apologies for not replying more quickly on the property search issue. I've been trying to get information on the legal aspects of the matter, but will go with the best I have right after finishing breakfast. In the interval, please continue in the relief that on RR no legitimate topic has been or will be addressed by any crickets over which I have control. Stay tuned. [Later] On the issue of authorities’ warrantless search of private property. As explained to me by LE authorities, LE personnel are allowed to enter private property when they see from a public access vantage that there is a crime in process or criminal activity on private property. If no such evidence is apparent but LE still has reason to believe that there is criminal activity or evidence of such for a crime committed elsewhere, then they need a search warrant to enter and search the property. (Lawyers should weigh in on this interpretation.) In 1996 California passed Prop 215 legalizing the use of MMJ, in subsequent years additional laws and initiatives were passed that covered the state and/or various jurisdictions to more precisely define MMJ users, caregivers, and suppliers. None of this legislation was either coherent or consistent. The result was a years’ long gaggle of litigation that gave rise to even more impenetrable case law that became another full employment measure for the legal profession. At that point the most practical solution for defining legitimate MMJ users and prescribing how MMJ is produced then fell to the counties. In Nevada County this gave rise to Ordinance 2349 which also defined how MMJ could be legally grown in the county. We must always keep in mind that growing and using RMJ in California is illegal according to both state and federal law (the latter prohibiting the growth and consumption of all MJ). According to our BoS and Sheriff, to date 2349 has worked by allowing a workable balance between the grow related nuisance and patient supply/access factors for MMJ. 2349 has also facilitated the suppression of RMJ grows by its specificity in what constitutes a MMJ grow. In replacing 2349 Measure S takes a major step back from being specific (it is silent/moot on many factors, see comparison spreadsheet), and invites the BoS to enter into another round of crafting and passing (what we here call) S+ ordinances that dovetail with S and attempt to fill in any obvious holes in what S fails to define or permit LE to enforce. In short, passing S will bring back to Nevada County all the statewide problems launched by Prop 215 twenty years ago, promising to replicate the legal battles and confusion in our county that 2349 alleviated. Moreover, by its loosened grow protocols and omissions, S doubles down on the ambiguities that LE will have to overcome when there exists a probable cause for entering private property. In creating such confusion, S will definitely provide some relief to the county’s RMJ industry. And that, I maintain, is the main purpose for passing S. (Recall, that I promote the legalization, regulation, and taxation of RMJ as per our experience with other drugs such as ethanol and nicotine. But the RMJ issue should be addressed on its own merits and not avoided by hiding under the skirts of promoting compassionate MMJ use.)