Another Instapundit tag I want to discuss….at another time but read it and ponder.
Author Archives: Sci Fi Engineer
The Barbarians are at the Gate, but which side?
Aside
Every civilization carries the seeds of its own destruction, and the same cycle shows in them all. The Republic is born, flourishes, decays into plutocracy, and is captured by the shoemaker whom the mercenaries and millionaires make into a king. The people invent their oppressors, and the oppressors serve the function for which they are invented.
– Mark Twain in Eruption
www.twainquotes.com/Civilization.html
On Liberty — 9/11 Thought this then Think this now and I was in the air during the attacks…..
Aside
In 1755 (Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, Tue, Nov 11, 1755), Franklin wrote: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
From: www.ushistory.org/franklinOK I’ll Agree its not NASA’s fault they serve Congress…
As always Glenn Reynolds keeps his finger on the pulse, this great article by Rick Tumlinson provides much of the reason for my concern with the current path NASA is on. While pointing out that it’s not really NASA’s fault. He also puts forth a much stronger case and view of, the near term piece of my vision. He touches in more concrete terms the technological items that make a L point observatory and exploratory complex an important stepping stone.
He explains what the SLS (Space launch System….or as he calls it the Senate Launch system) is but not so much the FAR and does not address its nearly equally pernicious cousin ITAR.
The FAR is (are) the Federal Acquisition Regulations, an accretion of CYA (cover your ass) and make sure the Guilds and Unions get their cut, rules based on the accretion of laws and executive directives that one could swear must contain fossils from the Civil War, let alone WWII. The FAR is often refered to in the singular as at the beginning of this sentence, like the monster it is. Why is the FAR a problem:
- Because it requires special accounting methods and tools the FAR makes it all but impossible for a company that sells products to the commercial sector also sell to the Gov’t unless it is strictly off the shelf (toilet paper comes to mind for some reason.) You will notice that many companies, Motorola, Texas Instruments, GE, and many, many others who used to do a lot of Gov’t work no longer do so, they sold off the units that did mostly Gov’t work long ago to companies like Raytheon, L3, DRS even those giants who do both, Boeing is the one example that comes readily to mind, are very special cases.
- The FAR requires that contracts have things like Small Business Set aside plans (a targeted $ amount that goes to small, women owned, disadvantaged, Indian….etc companies.)
- The FAR requires that even for a Fixed Price contract you have to open your books to Gov’t auditors and show that you in fact gave the gov’t the lowest possible price and appropriately sent out bids to three vendors for major sub assemblies….this is after you have been chosen as the lowest cost technically compliant supplier and promised on the bankruptcy code that you will deliver the program at the agreed upon cost.
- The FAR requires that you identify where you get your materials from, heaven help you if you buy certain grades of stainless steel from a vendor who got it from China or any one of a long list of other Congressionally frowned upon countries.
- If you are working on a Gov’t contract you have to make sure that you pay a living wage and that your suppliers do as well and follow all union rules. You have to pay overtime, you have to account for hours accurately.
- Almost worst of all the FAR makes evolving technology and relationships and dealing with risk and changing circumstances extremely difficult. All of these things do happen, between Gov’t units that have existed and had a strong mission for decades and large industrial companies with the lawyers and deep pockets to ride through a bad spot, (the Navy Aircraft Carrier and Submarine programs for example.) But its a disaster for small lean companies trying to drive forward a program that needs to move forward in months not decades or even years and is subject to the caprices of a few Senators and Congresspersons who see NASA as their personal fief.
Individually most of the rules can be explained to a reasonable person (though I am sceptical that they all can be) the problem is that there are too many with too many special exceptions and special restrictions. You need specialists who know the FAR, special processes to do the work and special groups to deal with the paperwork, making it extremely expensive to do gov’t work. So expensive that you almost cannot do commercial work, generally you’re overheads are going to be 30% to 200% more than a pure commercial house, and in some cases more than that upper bound.
Many will argue that FAR just codifies Laws and Ethical Business Practices, the problem is that the R in FAR is regulations, and there are auditors who check on this stuff and they have the full faith and fury of the US Gov’t behind them. Look at Gibson Guitars problems and this is because of fricking slivers of wood!
There are many excuses for why the FAR is the way it is but to be honest its like it is for the same reason the tax code is like it is, because of special interests and too many attempts to create rules that deal with peculiar and special circumstances that should instead be left to the discretion of a human agent with integrity and oversight. (My daughter tells me that no such creature exists…but note I used the word oversight, that is a process of oversight that can’t be too easily and quickly co-opted.)
Small lean aggressive entrepreneurial shops move forward thinking that their predecessors just weren’t that smart and run into the FARs bureaucratic buzz saw. The reason that the entrepreneurs have made as much progress as they have is that they have avoided the Gov’t but at some point that is or at least seems impossible, but the new $’s comes from a poisoned chalice and it’s not clear to me that the majority of the inflowing new $’s won’t go to rapidly increasing staff of administrators instead of into bent metal and blazing rocket trails.
Then you have ITAR
ITAR is the International Trade in Arms Regulations, and in many ways though often wrong-headed its at least reasonably logical and only long because it essentially deals with anything that could be used as a weapon….possibly even carving knives and lawn darts for all I know…
What most people I meet don’t understand is that commerce is not a protected right, particularly international commerce. This has always been the case since the founders assumed that most of the USA’s gov’t revenues would be generated by taxes on imports and exports. (They were men of their time. Up to that point in history a large majority of cash gov’t receipts had come from excise duties…which is why smuggling [also called free trading in some times and places, and often associated with Piracy] has been an issue ever since the first recognizable states evolved…but that’s a great topic for another day.) My point is that for US Citizens exporting is a privilege regulated by the Gov’t not a right…its in the constitution. And the Gov’t regulates it more than most people realize, especially if one of their buddies in industry get’s a bit bloodied by a foreign competitor.
At one time the US restricted ballistic missile technology and some related technologies related to solid rockets (we had some level of leadership over the soviets in the early days (We should all take our hats of to the soviet submariners who went to sea with liquid fueled ballistic missiles aboard for decades!!) However basic launcher technology was unrestricted…we had Werner Von Braun and the Sov’s had a whole bunch of lower level engineers, and its over the years Russian Liquid Fueled Rocket engines have generally been better as well as cheaper than US ones. Satellite technology was also seen as commercial and not restricted that much.
That changed when an US rocket scientist of Chinese heritage was accused of supplying the Chinese with technology. Then some years later it was found that several US space companies had shipped satellites with supposedly sensitive technology to China for launch on the Long March boosters (developed by the aforementioned rocket scientist, who’d decamped to China.) The Chinese were beginning to frighten the launch companies in the US with their low price and initially good reliability. There were too many & too expensive launcher companies in the US and the US (read certain executives and their cronies in congress) reacted by making space technology ITAR, thus making it very difficult for any US company to use cheaper launch services overseas, and for any overseas company to buy satellite technology in the US, they could buy the system here, but not technology or components.
The result was obvious to anyone with an understanding of the most basic economics. We propped up the profits of the US space industry for some years, while also providing stimulus for european and asian countries and companies to get into the business, not only for militar or dual-use (commercial products with military applications…such as Earth observation) technology but all technologies. This also propped up marginally viable space programs in many countries who could now launch their own military platforms.
All of this would have happened anyway eventually but we did not slow the proliferation by more than a few years and made it more broad-based, we also damaged our own industry
- Helped price support competitors
- Stimulated nationalistic me to programs
- Propped up expensive industrial age companies
- Continued to fly derivatives of launchers first flown in the fifties
- Strangled international coöperation between engineers and scientists
There are now currents to reign in ITAR, its done what it can to slow by a few years the outflow of technology to our enemies while slowing our own development of those same technologies by some amount, at a great cost to the US Taxpayer.
Gov’t and Industry arrogance and short-sightedness (fueled by ignorance of basic economics and history) has cost us a great deal over the last few years. More stable and long viewed policies would have allowed NASA to do much more with less and would have long ago gotten NASA out of the launcher business, it should was obvious years ago that the ISS was the ideal stimulus for a commercial human and cargo launch industry but Congress just wouldn’t get it…they were to enamored of all those good paying gov’t subsidized jobs…without being able to see the long-term consequences.
And so back to the article by Rick Tumlinson, maybe we just need to cancel the SLS and exmpt NASA from the FARs as an experiment (and just fire and or jail someone if they cheat, lie, steal, instead of trying to create a new rule)
Cheers
And Best Wishes NASA, you still provide our window on the stars. I just hope that others will grow up to carry you forward.
I Admire NASA but, Should it be Disbanded?
I do not hate NASA, it is and was a shining example of many things I dreamed about as a kid. And I hate to say this, but if we are serious about space it should should be shuttered, and its staff released to find other jobs.
Then we need to create a vision of where we want to be in the long term, and not in small terms…we need sweeping strokes that paint a backdrop for us to see our childrens children against and be excited.
And no I don’t want to kill all space science, it has at times kept me from losing hope in the human race but there has to be more tha wonderous pictures of far stars and Marscapes
So after NASA is good and defunct, maybe 2 years, maybe 5 a number of smaller and more focused organizations need to be set up to support the commercial development of space as well as the advance of technology:
- National Aviation Science Bureau (aviation technology) {small and lean probably supporting the airforce and army as well as Boeing, et al with things like wind tunnels and basic research into manned aircraft.}
- National Earth Observation and Services Bureau (terrestrial observation/science, terrestrial Navigation, terrestrial emergency/disaster nets, etc
- National Space Service (Space Craft Operations (like the ISS,) crewing deep space exploration, oversight of commercial crew training )
- Space Science Board to support the above with scientist based at universities and programs funding basic science and instruments (Future, Hubble, Voyager, Sojourner vehicles would be funded by them but not run by them)
Why not just move to this from NASA? Because I have worked in several large-scale (read Gov’t and Mil Industry) organizations through huge upheavals in ownership and management structure and seen how incredibly resilient the ‘cultural habits’ of such organizations are.
- [Bureaucratic / hierarchical structures are an offshoot of early industrial age military organizations and the fundamental requirement of an organization in attrition warfare is the ability to keep driving forward after massive losses.]
Don’t break the organizations cultural links with the past and you will not change how it operates in any meaningful way.
- {Don’t worry too much about ‘corporate knowledge’ its mostly bad habits and paperwork given a gloss by few knowledgable curmudgeons who get crap done. Those folks will resurface if you give them half a chance, they love the potential and the work.}
I would throw out all this stuff about going to Mars first or the Moon first. The long-term objective is expansion of the human meme space and resource base. Of course the Moon, of course Mars, eventually Venus and I believe that free flying Habs (Habitats) may eventually contain the majority of the human race….in a few hundred or a thousand years. But that is vision not a practical plan.
In the short-term keep the goals limited and real with an eye towards long-term objectives. Grab every chance you get to make a buck, but also incentivize people to stay lean and dream. Every ‘commercial’ space endeavor out there has more fundamental thought in it than has been put into NASA and the ‘Space Program’ since Von Braun. He understood you needed to dream big but work the small near term stuff hard, fast and clean.
Get rid of the idea that there is any advantage to keeping space technology ‘secret’ or that we can try and keep it as a US bastion. This thinking and the resulting ITAR (International Trade in Arms Regulations) categorization has done a lot of damage to our space industry by providing opportunities to our competitors. That’s over and above the damage that having the US Gov’t as the only real customer has done to the commercial viability of our industry.
Space access needs to be the province of the commercial sector. We need variety and flexibility, not just SpaceX and Orbital Sciences, we also want Virgin Galactic/LM Scaled Composite, Blue Origin, Boeing, EADS, probably Long March, Kawasaki and others.
The commercial lifters (and Habs) need to be regulated for safety but reasonably and lightly. A combination of teaming and adversarial oversight is needed, the FAA wobbles between these two methods and neither is healthy. The space access regulator should have a dual model, with two separate organizations, one, the principle one provides oversight via teaming support. The other unit is made up of a few hard-nosed smart auditor teams who check on the partnerships, relatively infrequently.
Bigelow is right, space Habs (space stations) should largely be inflatable structures. They should also be designed for flexibility and for tourists, not professionals. Tourists, who may be astrophysicists, teachers, bio engineers, nano material specialist, or (rich) entertainer. The ISS should become the center of a commercially driven space complex. Its served its original purpose of learning how to build things in space, now we need to treat it as an operational asset, plan to have multiple commercial craft able to access it and use it. Commercialize it, let our commercial innovators as well as those in Europe and Asia use it as a stepping off points for their space plans.
Last: my mid near term goal would be the Lagrange points, the development of a sustainable space based science network and operational habits for humans out of immediate range of Earth.
- Are We Nuts to think about launching the Webb telescope to the Lagrange point with no way to repair it?
- The L points are great vantage point s for many things
- Set up a Bigelow Bungalow at the L point, big enough to live in for a few months at a time. Send cargo vessels to it when you need to occupy in then a space taxi with the crew.
- Need to set up a new telescope? Send a crew : Need to repair an observatory? Send a crew : Have a couple of billionaires who want to show their mistresses an out of this world experience? Send up the wait staff.
- There are small rocks around the Lagrange points
- (don’t treat them as cultural relics, melt them down and experiment with using them to make stuff in space so we can worry about getting humans out of the gravity well not all their gear)
- They offer access to near earth asteroids….stir and repeat
Learn how to operate in deep space, learn how to make things (not just assemble them) get used to putting assets in place so they can support long term plans. The only way we will start making significant progress is by establishing an infrastructure and working knowledge base that give us the keys to our future.
Above all else get over the concept that space is the province of rocket scientists and big brains in general and know that expanding the human envelope has always been dangerous, people will die, we’ll regret their passing but they will have been where they wanted to be, on the leading edge, we should see them as the practical heroines and heroes of our future.
Adrift in Space —- due to sedementary regulation
This article pointed to by Instapundit, is really far too positive.
We are adrift and it’s not clear there is any hope for us. Politicians are good at some things but long-term strategy is not one of them, particularly in our instant gratification fantasy addled society. Space is an area where this is demonstrated again and again. While it is simply amazing what engineers and scientists have done with the space program given the horrific level of uncertainty and outright incompetence they have had to deal with from above, it is heart-rending to think of what could have been accomplished if leadership had been competent and the visions stable over time.
Look at what the Space entrepreneurs (scaled composites, virgin galactic, space x, orbital science, etc) have accomplished since they essentially gave up on the gov’t. They are using technology developed by the US, European and even Russian (best cheap rocket engines in the world) space programs. But much of the technology being used is far from bleeding edge. How can it be that Elon Musk (Space X Falcon) can confidently say that he can develop a heavy (medium heavy) lifter that can reach the goal of $1000/lb. A goal that has evaded the US big boys for something like 20 years and do it with functionally tiny amounts of money?
Because……….I was on a call today talking about a program very near to my heart (in real life) and our customer mentioned that he’d recently had a success where he demonstrated insertion of a new technology to the gov’t. When demonstrating to the gov’t customer one of the gov’t program guy’s asked how long and how much it had taken, and was blown away, ‘How did could you do this in such a short time with so little money?’ The contractor looked the gov’t guy in the eye and said, “Because the gov’t wasn’t involved.”
His team had identified the problem, figured out the solution, implemented it and put on this demonstration for a fraction of what it would have cost because he could do it quickly, No CYA and Second Guessing that a normal program entails. If his team had to trade-off something like weight for performance, or ruggedness for cost, they could make the decision in only the time they needed to work it out then move on.
He didn’t have to start out with a study, then develop a spec, have that spec mangled and twenty pages of gov’t specs added to it, then either compete for the job or send it out for competitive bid, set up a gov’t audited program with gov’t audited subcontracts and then carry out the work with every step requiring a sign off and every other step requiring a wait while a bureaucrat made up his/her mind, and/or went home early for a long weekend.
That sort of process is required for the most trivial of programs selling hardware to the gov’t today. If the gov’t were adding value by being the top-level engineer (true until post Apollo) it might be at least acceptable, but the gov’t long ago lost most of its competent people, today they are just a layer of semi technically literate auditors. When you look at the paragraph above and understand that is what one has to go through to change a voltage regulator or a belt pulley on what is essentially a truck and multiply that by a thousand times when talking about a whole vehicle, tens or hundreds of thousands of times for a spacecraft, it’s actually amazing we get anything done.
Why has it come to this, because of CYA and a lack of creative destruction in the gov’t. It’s too strong to say that nothing ever dies in the gov’t it’s also not a bad approximation. The system we have today is the equivalent of sedimentary rock built up by hundreds of thousands CYA rules accreting one on top of the other.
We keep coming up with these grandiose plans, but they mean nothing in the long-term because they are not long-term. And the smaller programs that get some traction are less and less able to break through the near impenetrable impediment that is the space industrial complex and its layers of CYA rules.
Pirates…..AARGH….but it’s no Joke
Until recently most people in the west, particularly the US have thought of Piracy as anomaly of the distant past and rather romantic, (in the persona’s of Errol Flynn, Kirk Douglas, Johnny Depp, etc.) However piracy has existed (in one form or another) ever since people took to the Sea, and it has taken place in every place where you have craft carrying any form of wealth. There are many places where it has been rare or almost unknown, but there are other places it has been the norm and not the exception. The Horn of Africa is one of those hotbeds. Today you hear most news of Pirates coming out of that part of the world but in reality Piracy of various sorts is common in many places.
This article on TheStrategyPage is one of the best ones I’ve read dealing with the ‘Somali’ piracy from an economic strategic standing. If you change some of the words and places you could turn that article into one written by Spanish author talking about the Caribbean, or a Roman author discussing the Saxon Shore.
Piracy in general is very hard to stamp out unless the ‘host’ country controls its coastline and wants to suppress piracy. In fact it may have been easier to suppress it in times past because the tools of the trade were costly and conspicuous (fast ships and big crews and/or heavy weapons.) Also piracy on any scale is not a lone wolf occupation, you have to be able to convert your booty into ready cash and that takes a pretty sophisticated network.
Another sad throwback that you should note in the article is the rather cold-blooded off-hand comment about the pirates butchering the crews of the smaller African or Arabian vessels they capture. This was the norm in most times and places, and accounts for the harsh justice dealt out to captured pirates. it was assumed that the pirates had murdered a lot of people before they were captured, or would have if they had gone uncaught.
Piracy has been with us for such a long time because it is not one phenomenon. At the small-scale end a pirate can be a starving fishermen who has bad catch and reacts violently to a rivals good luck; at the other end of the scale they can be rich nobles or merchants given carte blanche to attack the enemies of their sovereign in undeclared war. Piracy around the Horn of Africa today (as is typical of most objectionable human activities) is fomented/supported by a mix of elements, with poverty and geopolitics key among them.
One comment I’ve received in writing sci-fi is the frequent reference to space piracy. Some have found it unlikely that piracy will emerge in space, that the technology is too expensive and the environment too dangerous to make it worthwhile, etc. But we all forget how vast and dangerous the sea was to our ancestors, and that ships, even craft we would call boats, were once the epitome of technology. Unfortunately (at the personal level at least) when we establish a complex civilization in space there will be pirates and they will be as bloody handed as they have ever been.
Yes I am a pessimist in that I do not think that humans or human societies can be perfected in the way that some have dreamed of. You can perhaps program piracy out of future-sapien and its Utopia but I would argue that the people would not be human as we are human, and that the Utopia would not be a society/civilization as we have today. And I would expect such a Utopia to be fragile and/or more utterly ruthless than the most bloody handed pirate.
Piracy is a human activity and as long as there are creatures that are human there will be pirates.
Pirates AARGH!!!
Consumption vs Production
I am frustrated with the silliness that passes for wisdom these days. To much of what is said is based on simplistic assumptions and understandings, with solutions crafted for sound bites not reality. One recent example is the call for more Consumption. The argument is that we are a consumer economy and that more consuming will by itself drive the economy forward and up. This seems to be based on a simplistic interpretation of the meaning of what a consumer based economy is all about.
In the beginning the early mass production auto manufacturers had it right. They paid their workers enough to buy the product that they were building. The rationale was that they could buy the cars(or other products) which required labor and materials: sheet steel, wood frames, rubber tires, copper wire, iron castings, etc, all of which required labor and materials from a lower level supplier. Each time the money passed through it was 1) applied in as effective way as possible, 2) stimulated value added labor, 3) Brought more people 4) got people to think of ways to do the job more efficiently so they could capture more profit. This was the Consumption based economy, an engine of progress.
But if you think about it the productive effect of a dollar spent on different consumption has vastly different leverage, spend it in Defense to buy a new jet or missile and you get a huge leverage (mostly US parts, mostly special equipment and special designs, high value add.) Spend it on a Twinkie and its smallish, a few low paid workers and raw materials. Spend it on a hamburger and its even smaller, spend it on consumer electronics and most of the value goes to Asia..
The problem I see with today’s version of the consumer economy is that any consumption is good. In an economy at full steam that may be true, an extra dollar would go into buying a car, RV or adding value to your home. But in a down economy most of that next dollar goes to base consumption such as food or buying a DVD or video game only a small fraction of that money goes to drive some version of the cycle above, most of it vanishes into profits and raw materials with very little processing / value add.
Something I said the two paragraphs above is a key reason I think that our economy has not done worse than it has during the great recession (if that’s what it really is.) Huge amounts of money have gone into buying military equipment over the last five years. Ninety percent of this equipment has come from US producers and money has leveraged out through the economy. Now war isn’t a very popular stimulus method but in my opinion it has buffered us from something that could have been vastly worse and has ensured that the money was spent reasonably effectively.
But with the war economy ramping down what comes next. More Twinkies are not going to get us out of a recession. We have to find something that has the excitement, mass and leverage to get the wheels of the economy back in line. I have not seen it yet, but I see a lot of opportunities, which I will talk about in another post.
I wish that it were some grand adventure like a drive into space, low-cost space access exploration for resources among the near Earth asteroids and the moon, the generation of power in orbit, missions to mars and beyond. But I can see that as yet the ‘value proposition’ (value / costs) of space is too low to pull a big effort out of government / society which has lost its appetite for (or maybe its ability to sell) risks and long-term pay backs at least for now.
Finally!
I have worked on Moon Dreams since 2005 as my short book after the epic Across a Sea of Suns and the failure to find a market for Under Seige. I think that the books are pretty good, people who’ve read them mostly like them if they like the genre but I just don’t have the knack, or the luck, to get an in anywhere.
So along comes Smashwords and take away that barrier and today I am stepping out to see if I can find an audience for what I like to write. A lot of the credit for this day has to go out to a broad range of relatives for reading this and other works at various stages and providing input and support. In particular I need to thank my wife and my father for their unflagging support, my wife for giving me the license to go off in a corner and tap on my computer for many, many hours at a time, as well as for reading the drafts and providing valuable insight and support. And to my father for many hours of work editing, fixing my grammar, punctuation, spelling and often the continuity after I had used cut and paste far too aggressively. Thanks to my uncle Andy for his reading and critiquing and the help with some technical bits, many of which didn’t make it into this version but which I hope will rise to speak again in other adventures
Have a look at Moon Dreams at Smashwords, and hopefully coming soon to the Barnes and Noble Nook, the Amazon Kindle, the Sony Reader, the Apple iPad, etc.
M.A.Harris Hello World
Hello World was the title of the post that came from WordPress and that’s as good an intro as any.
You might ask why the world needs a new blogger… and my answer is that there are always old ones fading away and new ones coming into existence, the revolution has turned to evolution and I want to be part of the evolution.
You then ask why I decided to blog now…and the because is that I’ve finally found that I have a reason to see if I can catch your eye and a few (or maybe a lot) of brain cycles, I am an aspiring author and I want to use this blog to communicate with the wider community of people who might read a like my work, with my family and friends who have supported my long gestation as an author and possibly the wider world of authors out there.
And of course I want to use this as a place to sometimes expound and other times vent regarding the problems, missed opportunities and maybe the unseen symmetry and unseen necessity of the world and its processes.
Finally you ask what about the blog title “This World and Others” …well the answer is that I am fascinated by the evolution of: technology, weapons, war and warfare, civilization and society, science and man…This World. And I am also fascinated by: Physics (traditional and Quantum), Cosmology, Astronomy, the solar system, space technology, space travel, space colonization, space resource utilization, and mankind’s future…Other Worlds. And of course the fact that I write Science Fiction, some may call it Fantasy explains a lot. On that last point by the way there is an Arthur C. Clark (the doyen of Hard SciFi) adage that says; “Any sufficiently advanced Science will seem to be Magic to those who do not understand it, and likewise any sufficiently advanced Magic will appear to be Science to the uninitiated.”
But most of all I am interested in Mankind and Men (and Women) who overcome obstacles to try to improve their lot in life and leave the world a better place than they found it….I am also interested in those who are only interested in improving their own lot at the expense of others and the future, but they are mostly interesting as villains and obstacles.
I hope as this blog ages it will mature and provide some interesting insights and items of interest.
For now
Cheers