You are not logged in.
For RobertDyck re post in Chat: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 13#p237413
That's an impressive piece!
It deserves a wider audience than it is likely to find here.
I think the answer is that America is doing this because a sufficient number of Americans voted ** for ** Donald Trump in the last election.
We have at least two Trump voters in the forum, so we may be able to hear from them.
My guess is that the outcome you described is not what the Trump voters had in mind (taken as a group).
However, the voters ** knew ** that the man was a convicted felon, and they voted for him anyway.
It is not too late to recover from the headlong rush to the end of the American Experiment, but if you are right that this was (and is) a carefully planned Russian effort, then chances of recovery are poor. Once trust is broken on a global scale, it will be difficult to restore.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck ....
First, thank you for keeping your cool in discussion ... I am always confident when I open one of your posts that I will come away refreshed.
You have a writing style that serves us well in challenging times.
***
In this evening's Linux meeting, one of our regular members lives East of Toronto on the shore of the Great Lake there. I asked him if Canada would be willing to provide safe haven for people from Minnesota who might wish to escape persecution. He reminded me that Canada has been playing that role literally for hundreds of years.
You are a lot close to the action right now than that gent is. Would your City be able to put up some terrified US citizens if that should become necessary.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck ...
Because of your interest in meal preparation for Large Ship, I thought you might be interested in this competition:
Dallas Express Media
NASA Launches “Mars To Table” Challenge To Build Earth-Independent Food Systems For Deep Space
Dallas Express
Mon, January 19, 2026 at 9:30 AM EST
3 min read
Add Yahoo on Google
Add Yahoo as a preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.
China’s Zhurong Rover Uncovers Ancient Mars Shorelines, Fuels Ocean Theory | Image by Artsiom P/Shutterstock
China’s Zhurong Rover Uncovers Ancient Mars Shorelines, Fuels Ocean Theory Image by Artsiom PShutterstock
Generate Key TakeawaysNASA has officially opened a major international competition aimed at solving one of the most fundamental challenges of long-duration space exploration: building a complete food system that could sustain astronauts on the surface of Mars or the Moon without heavy dependence on Earth.
The Deep Space Food Challenge: Mars to Table, announced by NASA on January 13, 2026, invites multidisciplinary teams — including scientists, engineers, food experts, chefs, students, and citizen innovators — to design fully integrated food systems capable of meeting all dietary and operational needs of long-term planetary missions.
The challenge comes as NASA advances its Moon-to-Mars strategy through the Artemis program, which aims to establish sustained human operations beyond low Earth orbit.
A shift from cargo to infrastructureTraditional space missions carry pre-packaged food from Earth. For multi-year missions to Mars or sustained lunar surface operations, NASA says that approach is unsustainable.
Advertisement“In the future, exploration missions will grow in both duration and distance from Earth. This will make the critical question of feeding our astronauts more complex, requiring innovative solutions to allow for long-term human exploration of space,” said Greg Stover, acting associate administrator of NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate.
NASA frames the Mars to Table Challenge as a shift in mindset — from viewing food as cargo to treating it as mission-critical infrastructure.
Competitors are asked to design systems that cover all stages of the food life cycle: production, processing, preparation, storage, and waste management.
Teams must deliver solutions that:
AdvertisementProvide 100% of daily nutritional needs for crew members
Operate as an integrated, end-to-end system
Limit Earth-provided food to no more than 50% of total system mass
Integrate with life support systems to maximize reuse and efficiency
“Future crews on the Moon and Mars will need food systems that are nutritious, sustainable, and fully independent from Earth. Food will play a pivotal role in the overall health and happiness of future deep space explorers,” said Jarah Meador, program executive for NASA’s Prizes, Challenges, and Crowdsourcing Program.
NASA underscores that such systems must consider not only calories and nutrients but also taste, safety, variety, morale, and operational usability under extreme constraints.
Global competition with practical spilloversNASA has allocated up to $750,000 in prizes for U.S. teams, including:
Advertisement$300,000 for first place
$200,000 for second place
$100,000 for third place
Category awards of $50,000 each for specific achievements
International teams are eligible to participate and be recognized, though prize money goes only to U.S. teams.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck re "none of the above"...
This is the first time I've heard of that option.
That doesn't mean it's not a good idea. All it means (to me ) is that if it's been tried, I've never heard of it.
What we ** have ** tried is the third party option, which is a real spoiler when it is implemented.
Ross Perot and the gent who wrote a book about dangerous cars are examples of third party candidates whose participation swung elections.
I'm doubtful I would select "None of the Above" in an election, but there might be folks who would. Casting a vote for None of the Above would be a gamble.
Of course, casting a vote for a declared candidate is a gamble.
Locally we have a lecture coming up on how elections work (or don't work, I presume). Your idea appeals to me to toss into the hopper.
The event is in February, so I've made a mental note and will let you know if anything happens.
My guess is that there is a reason I've never heard of this idea, but perhaps it has. If it has, it didn't create a strong impact.
Ranked Choice voting is an alternative that seems to me to have some of the qualities you might be looking for.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck re election in the US ...
My impression is that not ONE of the individuals who voted for the winning candidate had any confusion at all about who they were voting for.
The presence of "none of the above" would have made NO difference.
The people who would have voted for "none of the above" threw away their votes on candidates who could not possibly win.
My interpretation is that this is the outcome millions and millions of Americans wanted.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck re Chinese population ...
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 07#p237507
Thank you for another thoughtful and thought inspiring post!
While your major theme seemed to be about the Adam Smith concepts of Specialization and Division of Labor, you did spend a few moments thinking about the dilemma of the Chinese Communist Party trying to optimize population by edict.
While the actual situation necessarily is more complicated than you could have dealt with in a short paragraph of a larger post, I thought your word picture of the trends we have observed from a distance was reasonably accurate.
What you may have chosen to overlook is the mad race between Elon Musk and the Chinese to design, build, test and refine humanoid robots. I think Elon's vision is reasonably accurate (as I understand it), but I think the Chinese will achieve success on a large scale before Elon is able to achieve success on a modest scale.
What I ** think ** this competition will yield is a humanoid robot with the IQ of ChatGPT or Gemini.
In the Chinese system, which appears to harness capitalism under the close watch of the Party, the population id likely to enjoy the benefit of these innovations long before the Western cultures with looser reins on capitalism.
You've pointed out that an aging population might well become miserable in later years due to the lack of young people to help, but I expect that China will not see that problem in quite the same way as Western cultures.
The next few years should be ** very ** interesting to watch. Some of us might even get a chance to participate in the flow of innovation that is under way, though how that might happen I cannot guess.
Of all of us, you seem the best positioned to find yourself immersed in the flow of innovation at the level I'm describing. The reason is the field of service in which you've been operating for several years. In recent years (as I understand it) you've been helping a large governmental agency to serve a population scattered over a massive landscape, by providing technical assistance at a level only available in very large cities such as the one where you live.
If my prediction is correct, and if your country is able to further trade with China, you may find yourself escorting medical humanoid robots to assignments in locations were medical facilities are currently absent or minimal. Unlike with humans, the robots on the horizon will be able to accept uploads of specialized knowledge in short periods of time.
In any case, I am looking forward to seeing how you may think about these ideas.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck re Canadian leadership in unsettled times...
Without necessarily naming personalities, I am impressed by the leadership that seems to be emanating from Canada these days.
Again, without naming personalities, I would definitely be interested in your sense of how your neighbors are thinking about recent events in which Canada has played a part.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
For RobertDyck re intelligent robots to amplify human manufacturing capability.
You are one of our members who appears to have retained the ability to learn despite advancing age.
I'm willing to help you learn about robotics if you are interested.
You could monetize such knowledge in a couple of ways:
1) You could offer to service robotic systems for your current client
2) You could offer education (for a fee) to fellow citizens of your Nation
3) You could take part in a group effort to achieve manufacturing independence of the United States.
(th)
Offline
Like button can go here
The businesses once upon a time did retraining for those next level up jobs but that stopped when automation cost for power made them move out of the US as those jobs vanished making manufacturing pay even less than what they had been getting.
Rotating layoffs where the excuse to hirer new employees at even lower rates claiming business slow down. After those people did not seek out those jobs taking what ever they could get which were lower paying more part time jobs.
Offline
Like button can go here
tahansen43206: January 23 you asked about Canadian leadership. Federally we have 5 political parties. The Green party has elected 1 MP in the last election. They're Green, and take environmentalism to an extreme.
The Bloc Quebecois only exists in one province, Quebec. They represent Quebec interests. They formed when the Provinical Parti Quebecois became a big deal. The PQ is separatist. They were founded in 1968, after the October Crisis when the FLQ tried to use terrorism to force separation. After the FLQ murdered a provincial Minister, the crack-down was severe. The PQ included members of the FLQ who did not participate in violent crimes. They got elected, and a referendum for separation in 1980. They earned 40% of the vote, which was significant, but not enough. They kept pushing it. An second referendum in 1995 the separatists got 49.42%. Exit polls showed only 40% actually wanted separation, but many Quebec voters thought the threat of separation could get them goodies from the federal government. When Quebecers saw the referendum results, they were shocked! They almost did WHAT!?! Quebecers have said absolutely no referendum ever again. They don't want to separate from Canada, only wants lots and lots of goodies from the federal government. The BQ was founded in 1991 as the federal arm of the party. Initially a lot of Canadians thought a separatist party should not be allowed in the federal government, but there were no rules to prohibit it, so they were allowed. Since the separatists lost the referendum in 1995, the BQ have focused on Quebec issues. They're a one province party.
The NDP is "progressive" and socialist. Elizabeth Warren and AOC would feel at home there. That party has formed provincial governments, but federally they're the perennial 3rd party. Currently they're 4th after the BQ. The NDP only have 7 seats in the House. They did exceptionally poorly in the last election, and performance of their previous leader is why.
The Liberal Party and the Conservative Party are the only parties to ever form the federal government of Canada. They have both gone through significant changes over the decades since Canada became a country in 1867. The Liberals have traditionally been centre-left, think moderate Democrat. But under Justin Trudeau, Liberals competed with the NDP for who could be more extreme left-wing. Result was voters wanted Justin gone! Polls showed Conservatives would win by a landslide; winning a majority in the House of Commons. Liberals watch the polls, they saw this, so convinced Justin to resign. Mark Carney was his replacement. Mark promised to be more fiscally responsible, cut government spending, slash the deficit, balance the budget. When Donald Trump became the centre of attention in the world, Mark Carney promised to stand up for Canada. The United States is our friend and ally, but not our nation. Canada is not a vassal state of the US. Donald Trump has tried to bully Canada, to force trade deals that are extremely biased in favour of the US. And Trump has promised to cause so much economic harm to Canada that Canada will ask to join the US. Canadians have said no way! Canada is our own country. The US is our neighbour, not our nation. Mark said if the US doesn't want Canadian goods, then we'll sell our goods elsewhere. Trump tried to strong-arm trade, but Canada just sells those goods elsewhere, undermining Trump's extortion.
Yes, Canadians are impressed with Mark Carney. He has not been perfect. His team is the same ministers as with Justin Trudeau. Canada is supposed to come out with a budget every March, but Mark Carney didn't until November. Yes, the 2025 budget was released to Parliament November 10th. The fiscal year is April 1st to March 31st, which is why it's supposed to come out in March. Canadian law works a little different: failure to ratify a budget does not shut down government. Instead government limps along with "emergency spending" at levels of the previous budget. When the budget did come out, the deficit was larger than under Justin! That was not good.
Meanwhile Pierre Poilievre is leader the Conservative Party of Canada. He was expected to be the next Prime Minister before Mark Carney entered politics. Because Canada has more than 2 political parties, 40% or more of the popular vote normally wins so many seats the party has a majority in the House of Commons. During last election, both Liberals and Conservatives had more than 40%. In the same election! This hasn't happened in a century. Liberals are trying to paint Pierre as a loser, but Conservatives are still strongly behind him. Liberals try to paint the Conservative party as "Maple MAGA", but they're not. They're really really not. They're moderate, centre-right. More moderate than Regan Republicans. If Mark Carney screws up the economy, Pierre will win the next election.
Offline
Like button can go here