All posts by michael.dhar@gmail.com

Drones Shoot Insects Now

by Michael Dhar

Let them mate.
Let them mate.

From somewhere high in the sky, we could hear the gentle buzzing.

“What new insect hell is this?” we wondered. Some even said it aloud. Pa, he spat upon the earth, dried and dessiccated from the infestation. Because the bugs also sucked all of the moisture out of the ground somehow? I don’t know, they were pretty bad. They might have done that. Let’s just say they did that, too.

But Pa, like most spitting men, knew what was up. “That’s no infestation, that,” he said, pointing to the sky with an arc of spit, the way he always pointed. “That there is our salvation.”

We squinted to where his spit had indicated: A weird, angular seabird seemed to be spilling two black trails of particulate, one from either wing. And it had no beak to speak of; on its nose, instead, a set of propellor blades buzzily chopped the air.

This was no bird — this was some sort of propeller-based superhero, a Propeller Man if you will. “Propeller Man!” I said, in my simple way, pointing at the sky with a finger instead of an arc of spit, for I was not yet a man.

“No,” Pa said, expertly spitting at the object. “That’s a drone. And those? Those are bugs it’s spitting out. Bugs to save us all.”

***

That’s pretty clearly the way things probably go down on farms all over the Cotton Belt from time to time, as the USDA has adopted a somewhat bizarre method of combatting “pink bollworms.” These are the larva of a thin, grey moth, and they live to eat cotton. The critters have been mostly eliminated from the United States, but to tamp down the occasional flare-up, the USDA sicks drones on the bugs — drones armed with other bugs.

Yes, if the specter of pilotless craft eyeing you down the caverns of every big-city alleyway and from high above any large-scale protests isn’t unsettling enough, now the drones shoot insects. Admittedly, the idea of a drone firing weaponized insects to fight off the bugs eating our crops is kind of cool, in an X-Files, future-dystopia sorta way.

But it gets even weirder/cooler/unsettling-er: The “good-guy” insects we’re firing at these larvae? Just adult versions of those same insects. No, they’re not devouring their own young. (It’s not quite that weird/cool/unsettling.) It actually involves a bit more strategy. See, these moths have been altered, irradiated into sterility. (As you can see in this delightfully school-instructional-video-esque clip from the USDA posted by Mother Jones.)

Blissfully unaware of their impotence, the nuked moths shot from the drone overwhelm the moth dating websites in the targeted cotton field. All that hot moth-on-sterile-moth action, of course, produces no offspring. So the moths die out.

It’s a tricky little gambit tacked on top of the already-weird method of drone-mounted insect cannon: Instead of attacking the moths, we give them what they (think) they want: mates. We give them so many fruitless mates that their mating is ineffective. It’s like a DoS attack. But in another way, it’s “all-natural.” No pesticides involved. Drone-assisted organic agriculture has arrived.

So, growing up, what kind of future did you imagine? Hoverboards and the Cubs winning the World Series? Or pilotless flying robots spewing altered insects to outgame nature’s prime directive? Truth and fiction, as they say.

Cool Pope Runs Afoul of America’s Religion

 

coolpope
One of Cool Pope’s early U.S. emissaries

The cool pope’s in town, guys. He thinks atheists can be good people! He admits capitalism’s flaws! He wants churches to aid the poor and refugees! And he sees combatting human-caused climate change as a moral and religious mission — something he reiterated on the White House lawn as his most excellent adventure in America continues.

“It seems clear to me also that climate change is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation,” the awesomest pope ever said, whipping off his wraparound Ray-Bans. Proving that even Cool Pope (TM) can pander to the local audience, he quoted one of America’s favorite sons to rope into one’s particular worldview. “To use a telling phrase of the Reverend Martin Luther King, we can say that we have defaulted on a promissory note and now is the time to honor it.”

Added Cool Pope the First, “Anyone here go to GEORGETOWN!?”

But it’s all still cool, because unlike, say, when Fox News broadcasters invoking Dr. King to say that Black Lives Matter protestors should behave differently, climate change action seems like something the Reverend would have actually supported. Yet and however, such pro-science proclamations from Buddy Pope have upset many religious leaders in the U.S.

That was glib. The reflexive disapproval by many U.S. conservatives of Good-Guy Pope’s statements on climate change seems, superficially, like anti-science religiosity. People upset about climate science seem to walk and talk like anti-evolutionists, those who oppose what Darwin wrought because it opposes their understanding of the Bible.

In both cases, opponents of a politicized area of science must go through some weird contortions. They live in a world defined by science and technology, but cannot accept a core finding of modern science. Thus, in the case of anti-evolutionists, you get Intelligent Design, an attempt to distort the logical-scientific enterprise so that it somehow arrives at the preconceived notions derived from religion.

Climate-change deniers commit similar deformations of science and logic, but here the preconceived conclusions are not religious. Sure, you can derive Bible-based arguments to oppose climate action — e.g., God gave us this planet to use, and so drill (baby, drill) we must. But the major reason for climate-change denial is economic. Fighting climate change means thinning the wallets of fossil-fuel companies. It does not, primarily, commit sins against the teachings of the Bible. It commits sins against the tenets of unfettered capitalism.

So Pope Kick-Ass’ statements on a warming planet anger many American conservatives not because he’s a religious figure denying religious teachings in favor of science — but because he’s a religious figure denying capitalism’s teachings in favor of science.

The way the religious right has yoked Jesus to Adam Smith still surprises me sometimes. Here, we see, arguably the most powerful living Christian figure in the world rejected by the most political of Christians in a country, attacked by those same Fox News broadcaster — because he’s not capitalist enough. Christianity was a Jewish religious co-opted by Rome. It now, here at least, seems like a Roman religion co-opted by Goldman-Sachs.

 

Betinia-guiden: Slik maksimerer du bonusen og spiller trygt

Before you register at https://betinia.eu.com/, take five minutes to read this guide — it could save you time and money. Her får du en komplett gjennomgang av alt du trenger å vite: fra registrering og bonuskalkulasjon til innskudd, uttak og sikkerhet. Vi har også inkludert praktiske tips og svar på vanlige spørsmål.

What You Need First

  • En gyldig e-postadresse for å opprette kontoen.
  • Et mobilnummer for verifisering og tofaktorautentisering (2FA).
  • Et offisielt identifikasjonsdokument (pass, førerkort eller nasjonalt ID-kort) for KYC-prosessen.
  • Et betalingsmiddel som støttes: Visa, Mastercard, nettbank (Trustly, Skrill, Neteller, eller kryptovaluta).
  • En stabil internettforbindelse – Betinia sin nettside er optimalisert for alle enheter.
  • Minst 18 år (eller lovlig alder i ditt land) og bosted i et land hvor Betinia tilbyr tjenester.

How to Sign Up

  1. Gå til Betinias startside og klikk på “Registrer” eller “Bli med”.
  2. Fyll inn e-post, velg et sikkert passord (minst 8 tegn med store/små bokstaver og tall).
  3. Oppgi personopplysninger: fullt navn, fødselsdato, adresse og mobilnummer.
  4. Velg foretrukket valuta (NOK, EUR, USD osv.) og eventuell bonuskode hvis du har en.
  5. Godta vilkårene og bekreft at du er over 18 år.
  6. Verifiser kontoen via e-postlenken du mottar.
  7. Fullfør KYC ved å laste opp ID innen 72 timer (anbefales gjort umiddelbart for raskere uttak).

Calculating Your Bonus

La oss ta et praktisk eksempel: Betinia tilbyr en velkomstbonus på 100% opptil 5000 kr med omsetningskrav på 35x (innskudd + bonus). Hvis du setter inn 1000 kr:

  • Bonussum: 1000 kr (100% av innskuddet)
  • Total saldo: 1000 kr (innskudd) + 1000 kr (bonus) = 2000 kr
  • Omsetningskrav: 2000 kr × 35 = 70 000 kr
  • Dette betyr at du må satse totalt 70 000 kr før bonuspenger kan tas ut.

For å regne ut forventet tap under omsetningen, bruk formelen: Forventet tap = Omsetningskrav × (1 – RTP). Hvis spillets RTP (Return to Player) er 96%, blir forventet tap: 70 000 × (1 – 0,96) = 70 000 × 0,04 = 2800 kr. Med andre ord, i gjennomsnitt vil du tape 2800 kr før du har oppfylt omsetningskravet. Husk at dette er et statistisk estimat – faktiske resultater varierer. For å maksimere sjansene, velg spill med høy RTP (over 97%) og lave innsatser som teller 100% mot omsetningen (sjekk Betinias bonusvilkår).

Money In, Money Out

Betinia tilbyr flere betalingsmetoder med varierende behandlingstid. Tabellen under gir en oversikt over de vanligste alternativene.

Metode Min. innskudd Behandlingstid innskudd Min. uttak Behandlingstid uttak
Visa/Mastercard 200 kr Øyeblikkelig 300 kr 1–3 bankdager
Trustly 100 kr Øyeblikkelig 100 kr 0–24 timer
Skrill/Neteller 50 kr Øyeblikkelig 100 kr Under 24 timer
Kryptovaluta (BTC, ETH) 200 kr Øyeblikkelig (etter nettverksbekreftelse) 200 kr Opptil 1 time

Merk: Uttak krever alltid at KYC er fullført. For å unngå forsinkelser, last opp dokumenter før du ber om første uttak. Betinia støtter også Betinia mobile via progressiv webapp (PWA) – du legger den til på startskjermen fra nettleseren.

Safety & Licensing

Betinia drives under lisens fra Curacao eGaming. Dette innebærer at kasinoet følger visse regulatoriske krav, men vær oppmerksom på at gevinster fra Curacao-lisensierte kasinoer kan være skattepliktige i ditt hjemland (for eksempel i Norge må du selv deklarere gevinster over en viss grense). Vi anbefaler å sjekke med lokale skattemyndigheter. Nettsiden benytter SSL-kryptering for å beskytte data, og alle transaksjoner håndteres av pålitelige betalingsleverandører. For å styrke sikkerheten ytterligere, aktiver 2FA i kontoinnstillingene.

Common Problems & Fixes

  • Problem: Jeg får ikke logget inn.
    Fiks: Sjekk at du skriver riktig e-post og passord. Bruk “Glemt passord” for å tilbakestille. Hvis problemet vedvarer, tøm nettleserens buffer eller prøv en annen enhet.
  • Problem: Uttaket blir forsinket.
    Fiks: Sørg for at KYC er fullført. Kontakt kundestøtte via live chat for status. Noen ganger kreves ekstra dokumentasjon.
  • Problem: Bonusen blir ikke kreditert.
    Fiks: Les bonusvilkårene nøye – noen bonuser krever minimumsinnskudd eller bonuskode. Kontakt støtte hvis du oppfyller kravene.
  • Problem: Betinia mobile fungerer tregt.
    Fiks: Slett appdata eller oppdater PWA-en. Sørg for stabil internettforbindelse. Alternativt, bruk datamaskin.
  • Problem: Jeg får melding om at landet mitt ikke støttes.
    Fiks: Dette skyldes geografiske restriksjoner. Bruk av VPN bryter vilkårene og frarådes. Velg et alternativt kasino som aksepterer spillere fra ditt land.

Insider Advice

Ansvarlig spilling er viktig. Betinia tilbyr flere verktøy for å hjelpe deg med å spille kontrollert:

  • Innskuddsgrenser: Sett en daglig, ukentlig eller månedlig grense i kontoinnstillingene. Når grensen er nådd, kan du ikke sette inn mer før perioden er over.
  • Spilltidsbegrensning: Bruk en timer for å minne deg på å ta pauser. Du kan også sette en maksimal øktlengde.
  • Selvutestenging: Hvis du føler at spillingen går utover livet ditt, kan du aktivere selvutestenging i 24 timer, 1 uke, 1 måned eller permanent. Under utestengingen er det umulig å logge inn eller sette inn penger.

Vi anbefaler å bruke disse verktøyene allerede fra starten. For mer informasjon, besøk Betinias side for ansvarlig spilling.

Quick Answers

Hvordan aktiverer jeg Betinia casino bonus?

Etter registrering velger du bonuskampanjen under “Mine bonuser” og oppfyller innskuddskravet. Noen bonuser krever en bonuskode; skriv den inn under innskudd.

Hva er omsetningskravet for bonuser?

Omsetningskravet varierer, men typisk er det 35x (innskudd + bonus) for velkomstbonusen. Spor fremdriften din i kontooversikten.

Kan jeg satse på Betinia betting med bonuspenger?

Ja, men sportsbetting teller ofte med redusert prosent (f.eks. 50%) mot omsetningskravet. Sjekk alltid vilkårene for den spesifikke bonusen.

Hva er minimumsinnskuddet på Betinia?

Minimumsinnskuddet er 50 kr for e-lommebøker, 100 kr for Trustly og 200 kr for kredittkort og krypto.

Hvor lang tid tar et uttak?

De fleste uttak behandles innen 24 timer, men kort kan ta 1–3 bankdager. Krypto-uttak er ofte løst i løpet av en time.

Er Betinia mobil tilgjengelig for iOS og Android?

Betinia mobile er en progressiv webapp (PWA) som fungerer i alle moderne nettlesere. Du legger den til på startskjermen for app-lignende opplevelse.

Hva gjør jeg hvis jeg mister tilgangen til kontoen?

Bruk “Glemt passord” eller kontakt kundestøtte. For sikkerhet kan de be om ekstra verifisering. Hold alltid e-post og telefon oppdatert.

Er gevinster skattepliktige på Betinia?

Siden Betinia er lisensiert i Curacao, kan det hende du må deklarere gevinster i ditt hjemland (f.eks. i Norge for gevinster over 10 000 kr). Rådfør deg med en skatterådgiver.

Hvordan kontakter jeg kundestøtte?

Kundestøtte er tilgjengelig via live chat, e-post (support@betinia.eu.com) og FAQ-seksjonen. Chat er raskest.

Denne guiden gir deg en solid start hos Betinia. Husk å lese de fullstendige vilkårene, spill ansvarlig og bruk verktøyene som er tilgjengelige. Lykke til!

B7 casino nl: stapsgewijze gids voor aanmelden en bonusberekening

Je eerste opname goed krijgen is de echte test van elk iGaming-platform – deze gids laat zien hoe je hem doorstaat. Of je nu net begint of je kennis wilt opfrissen, bij B7 casino draait alles om een soepele ervaring. In dit artikel doorlopen we stap voor stap het registratieproces, berekenen we exact wat een bonus je oplevert en geven we praktische tips voor stortingen en opnames. Gebruik de checklists en formules om zelfverzekerd te spelen.

Getting Ready

Voordat je je aanmeldt bij B7 casino nl, is het handig om een paar zaken klaar te hebben. Dit versnelt het proces en voorkomt haperingen.

  • Een geldig e-mailadres dat je regelmatig controleert.
  • Een identiteitsbewijs (paspoort, ID-kaart of rijbewijs) voor de KYC-controle.
  • Een betaalmethode die je wilt gebruiken – denk aan iDEAL, creditcard of een e-wallet zoals Skrill.
  • Een stabiele internetverbinding – bij voorkeur via wifi of mobiel netwerk.
  • Een apparaat met een moderne browser; de site is mobiel-geoptimaliseerd, dus je kunt ook via je telefoon spelen.
  • Zorg dat je de algemene voorwaarden van de bonus begrijpt, vooral de inzetvereisten.

How to Sign Up

Het aanmaken van een account bij B7 casino is eenvoudig en duurt slechts een paar minuten. Volg deze stappen:

  1. Ga naar de officiële website van B7. Klik op de knop ‘Registreren’ of ‘Aanmelden’.
  2. Vul het registratieformulier in: kies een gebruikersnaam, voer je e-mailadres in en stel een sterk wachtwoord in. Gebruik een combinatie van hoofdletters, kleine letters, cijfers en speciale tekens.
  3. Voer je persoonlijke gegevens in: volledige naam, geboortedatum, geslacht en adres. Zorg dat deze exact overeenkomen met je ID-bewijs, anders wordt de uitbetaling later geblokkeerd.
  4. Selecteer je gewenste valuta (EUR is standaard voor Nederlandse spelers) en accepteer de algemene voorwaarden.
  5. Bevestig je registratie via de e-mail die je ontvangt. Klik op de link in die e-mail om je account te activeren.
  6. Optioneel: voeg meteen een betaalmethode toe in het kasgedeelte om je eerste storting te doen.

Heb je hulp nodig? Het team van https://b7-casinonl.org/ biedt ondersteuning via livechat en e-mail. Na registratie kun je direct de welkomstbonus claimen – lees wel eerst de bonusvoorwaarden.

Calculating Your Bonus

Stel dat B7 casino een typische welkomstbonus aanbiedt: 100% tot €500 plus 200 gratis spins. De bonusvoorwaarden vermelden een inzetvereiste van 35x het bonusbedrag. Hoe bereken je nu of de bonus de moeite waard is? Laten we een concreet voorbeeld nemen.

Je stort €200 en ontvangt €200 bonusgeld. De inzetvereiste is 35 × €200 = €7.000. Dit betekent dat je voor €7.000 aan weddenschappen moet plaatsen voordat je het bonusgeld kunt opnemen. Niet alle spellen dragen even zwaar mee: slots doen meestal 100% mee, tafelspellen zoals blackjack vaak maar 20%, en sommige spellen tellen helemaal niet mee (bijvoorbeeld live dealer-spellen).

Formule: vereiste inzet = bonusbedrag × inzetfactor (35). Hoeveel moet je inzetten op basis van je speelgedrag?

Let op: Als je alleen slots speelt (100% bijdrage), hoef je slechts 1 × €7.000 = €7.000 te zetten. Speel je echter blackjack (20% bijdrage), dan wordt de effectieve inzetvereiste: €7.000 / 0,2 = €35.000. Dat is een enorm verschil! Daarom raden we aan om slots te spelen tijdens de bonusfase.

Daarnaast is er vaak een maximale inzet tijdens het voldoen aan de vereisten, bijvoorbeeld €5 per ronde. Overschrijd je dat, dan vervalt de bonus.

Om het verwachte verlies te berekenen: Stel dat de slots een RTP van 96% hebben (huisvoordeel 4%). Na het plaatsen van €7.000 aan weddenschappen verlies je gemiddeld 4% × €7.000 = €280. Daarnaast heb je €200 bonusgeld ontvangen, plus de winst uit de gratis spins. Netto winstverwachting: (€200 bonus) – (€280 verwacht verlies) = -€80. Maar vergeet niet dat je ook daadwerkelijke winsten kunt hebben die het verlies compenseren. Met een beetje geluk draai je positief uit. Onthoud: bonus is geen gegarandeerd geld, maar een manier om langer te spelen.

Deposits & Withdrawals

B7 casino nl ondersteunt meerdere betaalmethoden. Hieronder een overzicht van de bekendste opties, met minimale en maximale bedragen en verwerkingstijden.

Methode Min. storting Max. storting Min. opname Verwerkingstijd opname
iDEAL €10 €50.000 €20 0-2 uur
Creditcard (Visa/MC) €10 €10.000 €20 1-3 werkdagen
Skrill €10 €10.000 €10 0-24 uur
Neteller €10 €10.000 €10 0-24 uur
Bankoverschrijving €20 €100.000 €50 3-7 werkdagen

Tip: Opnames worden vaak alleen verwerkt na een geslaagde KYC-controle. Zorg dat je documenten (ID, adresbewijs) klaar hebt staan. De meeste opnames worden binnen 24 uur goedgekeurd, maar bankoverschrijvingen duren langer.

Security Overview

B7 casino maakt gebruik van SSL-encryptie (256-bit) om al jouw gegevens te beschermen. Daarnaast biedt de site optionele tweefactorauthenticatie (2FA) aan voor extra veiligheid bij inloggen. Het casino werkt onder een Curaçao-licentie (eGaming). Let op: voor Nederlandse spelers kan het zijn dat winsten uit Curaçao-gelicentieerde casino’s onder de inkomstenbelasting vallen. Raadpleeg je belastingadviseur of de Belastingdienst voor de regels omtrent kansspelbelasting (momenteel 30,5% over winsten boven €449).

Verder wordt KYC (Know Your Customer) toegepast: je moet je identiteit verifiëren voordat je een opname kunt doen. Dit is een standaardprocedure om fraude en witwassen te voorkomen. Bewaar kopieën van je documenten veilig.

When Things Go Wrong

Ook bij een goed casino kunnen er problemen optreden. Hier zijn vijf veelvoorkomende scenario’s en hoe je ze oplost.

  • Vergeten wachtwoord: Gebruik de ‘Wachtwoord vergeten’-link op de inlogpagina. Voer je e-mailadres in en ontvang een resetlink. Kies een nieuw, sterk wachtwoord.
  • Opname wordt geweigerd: Controleer of je al je bonusvoorwaarden hebt vervuld. Vaak kun je de status van je bonus in je account zien. Neem contact op met de klantenservice als je denkt dat er een fout is.
  • Bonus niet gecrediteerd: Soms moet je een bonuscode invoeren bij de storting. Controleer of je de juiste code hebt gebruikt. Als het bedrag niet verschijnt, wacht dan 15 minuten en ververs de pagina. Daarna support raadplegen.
  • Account geblokkeerd na KYC: Als je documenten niet overeenkomen of onleesbaar zijn, krijg je een melding. Stuur duidelijke, goed belichte foto’s van je ID en een recent nutsvoorziening (max 3 maanden oud).
  • Verbonden met een self-exclusion? Als je eerder een uitsluiting hebt aangevraagd, kun je niet opnieuw registreren. Neem contact op met de klantenservice om de status te bespreken. Gebruik ook de landelijke uitsluitingsregisters (Cruks) voor Nederland.

Good to Know

Spel met het hoogste RTP in online casino’s zijn doorgaans videopokerspellen (99%+), bepaalde blackjackvarianten (99,5%) en slots met een hoge volatiliteit van 97-98%. Vermijd spellen zoals Keno of Bingo, die vaak een RTP onder de 90% hebben. Bij B7 casino vind je een breed aanbod aan slots van NetEnt en Play’n GO met RTP’s tot 98%. Speel voor de lol en niet alleen voor de bonus: het huisvoordeel blijft altijd bestaan.

Common Questions

Hoe lang duurt het voordat mijn account wordt geverifieerd?

Meestal binnen 24 uur nadat je de juiste documenten hebt geüpload. Zorg dat de foto’s helder zijn en alle hoeken van het document tonen.

Kan ik mijn bonusgeld meteen opnemen?

Nee, je moet eerst voldoen aan de inzetvereisten. Pas daarna wordt het bonusgeld omgezet in echt geld dat je kunt opnemen.

Welke betaalmethoden zijn beschikbaar voor Nederlandse spelers?

iDEAL, creditcard, Skrill, Neteller en bankoverschrijving. iDEAL is de populairste optie vanwege de snelheid.

Zijn er kosten verbonden aan opnames?

B7 casino rekent doorgaans geen kosten voor opnames, maar je eigen betaalmethode kan transactiekosten in rekening brengen. Controleer dit vooraf.

Hoe stel ik tweefactorauthenticatie in?

Ga naar je accountinstellingen, kies ‘Beveiliging’ en volg de stappen om een authenticator-app (Google Authenticator) te koppelen. Gebruik de code bij elke inlogpoging.

Wat als ik mijn zelfuitsluiting wil opheffen?

Self-exclusion is definitief tijdens de gekozen periode. Na afloop kun je contact opnemen met de klantenservice om het account te heractiveren. Wees je bewust van de risico’s van gokken.

Mag ik meerdere accounts aanmaken?

Nee, slechts één account per persoon, per huishouden, per IP-adres is toegestaan. Overtreding leidt tot blokkade en verbeurdverklaring van winsten.

Hoe wordt mijn RTP berekend in een spelsessie?

RTP is een theoretisch gemiddelde over miljoenen spins. Jouw individuele sessie kan sterk afwijken. Houd geen jacht op verliezen; stel een budget in.

Met deze gids kun je vol vertrouwen aan de slag bij B7 casino nl. Onthoud: spelen moet leuk blijven. Stel altijd een limiet in en overschrijd die niet. Veel succes en speel verantwoord!

Words Cannot Capture the Holy-Shitness of This Moment

by Michael Dhar

Grabs from BBC YouTube video of Bug Blue Live in which presenter Steve Backshall has to interrupt an interview because a blue whale has surfaced nearby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2Xsfb4cT9Y
“o.m.g.”

This guy gets really excited.

But it seems justified. The man totally geeking out over nature in the above video is Steve Backshall, a British naturalist and television host. In this clip, he’s hosting a program for British television called “BBC Big Blue Live,” when that very same “big blue” occurs in a very much “live” fashion. Having just asked a whale expert, “Is this a remarkable moment in time?” (first rule of journalism: ask leading, yes-no questions), the moment in time turns, in fact, remarkable. I challenge you, can you be so snarky as to not smile when that profusion of piping, British enthusiasm declares that a real big blue has surfaced to say hello?

I like this video not in spite of Backshall’s outburst, but because of it. It invites the viewer to imagine the experience of seeing this creature. The emotive force of Backshall’s reaction may not exactly convey what the experience feels like, but I think it inspires the viewer to attempt to imagine it — to put some mental and emotional effort toward conceiving of him or herself in the presence of such a gigantic animal. What must this be like to cause such an outburst?

What that work of imagination, it becomes something more than simply estimating a thing of great size. It becomes an experience of something sub-verbal, an appreciation of the natural sublime: the natural world, so large and awe-inspiring, that it is failed by words. The thing about this gigantic animal is that it cannot be adequately described linguistically. Of course, it can be measured. And Backshall uses his words to do that — it is bigger than any dinosaur; it would be longer than his ship were it to swim up alongside it.

But those are merely words. The *experience* of seeing this whale is in his voice. It is unusual, clearly, to see a grown man emote like a toddler in the presence of a really cool fire truck. One response to seeing this on the Internet would be to toss a snarky grin, and comment accordingly. Another is to see it as evidence of something powerful being experienced, and to wonder at what that must be like.

On the one hand, “This thing is a really big thing,” is an exceedingly boring fact to learn or experience. Some things are bigger than other things. I am aware if this fact. But part of what makes a blue whale so intense, at least for this man (and many others), is that it is living — not only huge, but also alive. It does what we do — breathes, moves, eats, fears, communicates, dies — feels its own mass shift and turn in the cool water. And it does all this at a size that is nearly incomprehensible to us, at a size that leaves this experienced TV broadcaster nearly breathless.

So, that’s what I found myself thinking about. It’s by no means the only way to try to understand what Backshall experiences here, but one way in is to wonder at another experience: the whale’s. What can that be like, to own a body like that, to *be* a body like that? It is a mysterious and transformative question. Maybe that’s what Backshall was experiencing as he went all adorable on national television: a mysterious kinship with a creature that is yet alarmingly alien. His outburst was him expressing the energy of that collision. The presence of that mystery.

Of course, maybe he was just excited because he likes whales, and this was going to be a good moment for his TV show. But I do sense a real desire on his part to express the inexpressible. And simply by making the attempt — and failing — he may have succeeded.

Lucky Professor Gets to Quit

by Michael Dhar

badass
badass

“Marketing” and “branding” sound like dirty words if you’re a scholar or an artist. I take that back — actual dirty words are awesome if you’re a scholar or an artist. “Marketing” and “branding” sound like compromised ideals if you’re a scholar or an artist, which is much worse than crudely referencing sex or taking the lord’s name in vain. (That just makes you a “cool professor.”)

They’re pretty uncomfortable words to most of us, but something we must generally accept — in the same way most people hate networking, yet still print up business cards. But those academics and artists who hold university positions can set themselves apart; academia is separate from — above, really — all of that. Which is why the resignation of Alice Dreger, in protest of Northwestern University privileging academic branding over academic freedom, must be celebrated as an act of courage and conscience.

Anyway, that’s the press release I might have written were I Prof. Dreger’s publicist (or branding manager, say) . Of course, academia is not separate from marketing — universities must sell themselves, as well. They need brands to attract suckers (I mean, undergraduates). Academic researchers must sell their projects to get funding. Artists must contrive those horrible artist statements. And Alice Dreger’s very act of anti-branding is itself a brilliant act of branding. You see, Dreger has written a book on academic freedom and scientific controversies. Her resignation is priceless press, and it seals her brand as a warrior for intellectual independence. (The book is “Galileo’s Middle Finger” — she’s a cool professor — available now on Amazon!)

To be clear, I don’t suspect any underhanded dealings here — no invented outrage so that she could courageously resign and sell more books. The facts of the incident seem clear: Dreger, a medical humanities and bioethics professor (formerly) at Northwestern, guest-edited an issue of the university’s Atrium magazine, which included an essay about a consensual blowjob between a nurse and a patient. Northwestern said that essay violated the university’s “branding agreement” with the medical school, and had the issue taken down.

That act of censorship inspired the resignation of Dreger, who said, “Academic freedom is always going to cause brand problems. A brand is very much about something specific, and a university has to not be.”

Well, that’s great! It’s just pretty funny how all this rebellious, anti-branding activity bolsters Dreger’s personal brand so perfectly. This quote, from Greg Lukianoff of FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education), is just priceless:

“I am proud that Alice was willing to take this stand for free expression and academic freedom, and I strongly recommend her book, Galileo’s Middle Finger.

I’m sure he means everything he says there. But I can also just see him holding up a copy of the book at the end of that quote, a big Coca-Cola smile on his face for the cameras.

Because rebellion, of course, is a brand, too. Just walk into any Hot Topic or review youth popular culture since forever (or, at least, the ’50s). Anti-branding is a brand, too. Just look at how well Adbusters and the like have sold the anti-corporate lifestyle.

Anyway, I would like to say fuck Northwestern (I’m a cool professor!) for their act of prudish censorship. But, concomitantly, congratulations to Prof. Dreger on the tremendous ad campaign that fell into her lap. She should be OK — as she has said, she was relatively free to resign her post, because she has income from the book and scheduled appearances. So hopefully that resignation will sell some books. More people need to read about Galileo, anyway.

 

Don’t Worry, Science Is Still Right

by Michael Dhar

pteranodon01
Ready for his portrait.

Scientists across the planet mopped the flop sweat from their brows yesterday and gave each other a series of weary, dorkily off-target high fives.

“It’s OK,” they croaked to one another through parched and bleeding lips, their eyes red from exhaustion and worry. “Everything we believe has NOT been upended. Turns out people didn’t ride around dinosaurs for fun.”

It was possible that the firmaments of geological, astronomical and paleontological science might have been overturned, had not a hero cadre of scientists figured out that a rock-art painting wasn’t of a pterodactyl.

Scientists can now continue to open their books of equations and careful observations, instead of burning them and only reading the one true Book — that is, until the next challenge to all of scientific observation arises. Creationists, however, will have to keep looking for solid evidence. And/or just keep insisting that they’re right. We’ll see which route they choose.

This latest reprieve for science came in the Black Dragon Canyon of Utah, where rock-art drawings by the Fremont peoples had long received what we’ll call “slightly different” interpretations from scientists and creationists. Scientists saw a grouping of several figures, including both people and animals — a reasonable interpretation of the drawings of an agrarian people who lived from about A.D. 1 to 1100. Creationists saw a pterodactyl, which science says lived in the Jurassic period some 150 million years ago, or a pterosaur, which existed as early as 228 million years ago.

Both sides accepted what science had to say about the age of the rock paintings and the Fremont culture. Creationists merely suggested that a depiction of a dinosaur-era flying reptile proved that all of geology and paleontology were wrong about the age of dinosaur bones and the Earth itself.

So both sides had points.

However, recently, scientists made some additional points using little electronic devices — specifically, a portable X-ray fluorescence device and something called a DStretch: with this machine, the scientists could upload a photo of the paintings to a computer, and then use a program to reveal the original pigments, even when time (and some previous researchers’ activities) had obscured them.

The result? The painting, scientists said, portrays separate figures: a couple of people, a sheep, a dog and a snake-like thing. All those individuals had been mistakenly joined together by “chalking” work and, apparently, the capacity for the human eye to see images that aren’t really there. No pterosaur. No pterodactyl. No smoking gun revelation that humans and dinosaurs (and dinosaur-era reptiles, to be precise) co-existed, as a literal interpretation of the Bible would suggest they did.

All snark and satire aside, I really do wonder what proponents of the pterosaur interpretation thought (and still think) it would prove. You’d have to assume that the same scientific method that accurately dated the Fremont people failed epically, hilariously in its estimation of the majority of Earth’s geologic and biological history.

And the evidence to overthrow all that science? People drew a picture that looks like a thing. Even if they had drawn a pterosaur-like creature, a more parsimonious explanation might be that they drew an eagle really badly. (Take a look at how European explorers originally drew African animals.) Or that they had vivid imaginations. As one of the scientists explained, the Fremont people could easily have portrayed mythological creatures, as most civilizations do.

The central absurdity here is that creationists, a group who’s beliefs about reality are based on a text they take on faith, are looking to bolster those beliefs with evidence — evidence that will supplant the entire enterprise of science, the most evidence-based activity, one could argue, in human history. An enterprise whose evidence they will disregard when it violates their faith.

So, if all it takes is faith, if faith is the trump card, why look for evidence? It could betray a subconscious acknowledgement that their method has been roundly defeated, and long ago. Or simply an immature notion of what evidence means: not the testimony of reality, both ugly and beautiful, but a weapon to be selectively activated — something to cherry pick.

The scientists who released the new study apparently had a civil discussion with their creationist counterparts. “We were all very polite to each other,” the archaeologist Paul Bahn said.  

The creationist, however, was not convinced.

He said, ‘No no, no, I’ve had this checked out with infrared, and the whole thing is one single painting. It’s a very detailed painting of a pterodactyl,'” Bahn told Live Science.

His evidence, he insisted, was better.

lv bet kifizetési útmutató – hogyan vedd fel a nyereményed?

Getting your first withdrawal right is the real test of any iGaming platform — this guide shows you how to pass it. Akár kezdő vagy, akár már több online kaszinóban is játszottál, a lv bet kifizetési folyamatának ismerete elengedhetetlen a zökkenőmentes játékélményhez. Ebben a cikkben lépésről lépésre végigvesszük, mit kell tenned ahhoz, hogy a nyereményeid gyorsan és biztonságosan a számládon landoljanak.

Előfeltételek

  • Legalább 18 évesnek kell lenned, és rendelkezned kell egy érvényes személyazonosító okmánnyal.
  • Regisztrált és teljes mértékben hitelesített fiók a lvbet casino oldalon.
  • Stabil internetkapcsolat és egy modern böngésző (vagy a mobilra optimalizált weboldal elérése).
  • Egy aktív fizetési mód (bankkártya, e-pénztárca vagy kriptovaluta tárca).
  • Ismerned kell a bónuszokhoz kapcsolódó fogadási követelményeket – ezek befolyásolják, mikor veheted fel a nyereményt.
  • Türelem: az első kifizetés néhány extra ellenőrzést igényelhet.

Fiók beállítása

  1. Látogass el a https://lvbethu.eu/ oldalra, és kattints a „Regisztráció” gombra.
  2. Töltsd ki a regisztrációs űrlapot: add meg az e-mail címed, válassz erős jelszót, és add meg a személyes adataidat (név, születési dátum, telefonszám).
  3. Erősítsd meg a regisztrációt az e-mailben kapott linkre kattintva.
  4. Jelentkezz be, majd nyisd meg a „Profil” vagy „Számla” menüt. Itt töltsd fel a szükséges dokumentumokat: személyi igazolvány vagy útlevél előlap és hátlap, valamint egy számla vagy bankszámlakivonat a lakcím igazolásához.
  5. Várd meg a hitelesítési folyamat végét – ez általában 24-48 óra, de néha gyorsabb is lehet.
  6. Miután a fiókodat jóváhagyták, válassz fizetési módot a „Kifizetés” szekcióban, és add meg a szükséges adatokat (például bankkártyaszám vagy e-pénztárca azonosító).

Bónusz kiszámítása

A lv bet bónuszoknál fontos a pontos számítás, hogy tudd, mikor válik a bónuszpénz készpénzzé. Vegyünk egy tipikus üdvözlő bónuszt: 100% bónusz akár 50 000 HUF-ig, 30x-os fogadási követelménnyel. Tegyük fel, hogy befizetsz 25 000 HUF-ot.

Fontos: A fogadási követelmény a bónusz összegére vonatkozik, nem a befizetésre.

Számítás:

  • Bónusz összeg = 25 000 HUF × 100% = 25 000 HUF
  • Fogadási követelmény = 25 000 HUF × 30 = 750 000 HUF

Tehát a bónuszpénzt (és az azzal nyert nyereményt) csak akkor lehet kifizetni, ha összesen 750 000 HUF értékű fogadást tettél a kaszinójátékokban. Ehhez jön még a befizetés összegének 1x-es átforgatása is (25 000 HUF). Összesen tehát 775 000 HUF-ot kell megforgatnod.

Ha a bónuszhoz kapcsolódó játékok eltérő súllyal számítanak (például a nyerőgépek 100%-ban, az asztali játékok 10%-ban), akkor a ténylegesen teljesítendő összeg változhat. Mindig ellenőrizd a bónusz feltételeit a „Bónuszok” menüpont alatt.

Biztonság

A lvbet casino kiemelt figyelmet fordít a játékosok biztonságára. A weboldal SSL titkosítást használ, ami megvédi a személyes és pénzügyi adatokat. A 2-faktoros hitelesítés (2FA) bekapcsolása ajánlott a fiókod védelme érdekében – ezt a beállításokban aktiválhatod. Emellett a lv bet felelős játékkal kapcsolatos eszközöket is kínál: befizetési limitek, időkorlátok és önkizárási lehetőség. Fontos: Soha ne add meg a bejelentkezési adataidat senkinek, és mindig ellenőrizd, hogy a webcím helyes-e, mielőtt belépsz.

Banki tranzakciók és fizetési módok

A lv bet számos fizetési lehetőséget kínál, hogy a kifizetések gyorsak és kényelmesek legyenek. Az alábbi táblázat összefoglalja a legnépszerűbb módszereket:

Fizetési mód Minimális befizetés Minimális kifizetés Feldolgozási idő (kifizetés) Díjak
Bankkártya (Visa/Mastercard) 5 000 HUF 5 000 HUF 2-5 munkanap Ingyenes
Skrill 3 000 HUF 3 000 HUF 24 óra Ingyenes
Neteller 3 000 HUF 3 000 HUF 24 óra Ingyenes
Banki átutalás 10 000 HUF 10 000 HUF 3-7 munkanap Lehet, hogy a bank felszámít díjat

A kifizetéseknél a kaszinó általában 24-48 órán belül feldolgozza a kérelmet, ezt követően a kiválasztott módszertől függ az átfutási idő. Fontos, hogy a kifizetéshez használt módszer megegyezzen a befizetéshez használttal (azonos pénzügyi eszköz).

Ügyfélszolgálati útmutató

Az alábbiakban öt gyakori problémát és azok megoldását mutatjuk be:

  • Probléma 1: Nem tudok belépni a fiókomba. Megoldás: Ellenőrizd, hogy a Caps Lock nincs-e bekapcsolva, majd kattints az „Elfelejtett jelszó” linkre a jelszó visszaállításához. Ha továbbra sem sikerül, vedd fel a kapcsolatot az ügyfélszolgálattal élő chaten vagy e-mailben.
  • Probléma 2: A kifizetésem elakadt. Megoldás: Győződj meg róla, hogy a fiókod teljes mértékben hitelesített, és a kifizetési összeg eléri a minimumot. Ha minden rendben, vedd fel a kapcsolatot az ügyfélszolgálattal a tranzakció státuszának ellenőrzéséhez.
  • Probléma 3: A bónuszom nem jelent meg. Megoldás: Ellenőrizd, hogy beírtad-e a bónuszkódot a befizetéskor. Ha automatikus bónuszról van szó, a befizetés összegének meg kell felelnie a feltételeknek. Ha még mindig nem látod, kérj segítséget a chaten.
  • Probléma 4: Hibát jelez a játék betöltésekor. Megoldás: Frissítsd a böngészőt, vagy használj inkognitómódot. Ha a hiba továbbra is fennáll, próbáld ki a kaszinó mobilra optimalizált változatát.
  • Probléma 5: Szeretném korlátozni a játékomat. Megoldás: A felelős játék eszközök között állíts be befizetési vagy veszteséglimit-et, vagy aktiváld az önkizárást. Az ügyfélszolgálat segít a beállításokban.

Gyakori kérdések

Mennyi időbe telik az első kifizetés?

Az első kifizetés általában 24-48 óra alatt feldolgozásra kerül, plusz a kiválasztott fizetési mód átfutási ideje. Bankkártya esetén ez 2-5 munkanap lehet.

Szükséges a fiók hitelesítése a kifizetés előtt?

Igen, minden játékosnak teljes körű KYC (Know Your Customer) ellenőrzésen kell átesnie, mielőtt kifizetést kérhet. Ez magában foglalja a személyazonosság és a lakcím igazolását.

Van minimális összeg a kifizetéshez?

Igen, a minimális kifizetés összege fizetési módonként változik. A táblázatban megtalálod a pontos értékeket, általában 3000-5000 HUF.

Milyen bónuszok érhetők el az lvbet casino oldalon?

Az oldalon üdvözlőbónusz, heti promóciók és hűségjutalmak várnak. Az aktuális ajánlatok a „Bónuszok” menüben tekinthetők meg.

Hogyan tudom elérni a mobil verziót?

Az lv bet kaszinó mobilra optimalizált weboldalát a böngésződ címsorába írt webcímről éred el. Nincs szükség külön alkalmazás telepítésére, egyszerűen add hozzá a kezdőképernyődhöz PWA-ként a gyors hozzáférés érdekében.

Lehetőség van a kifizetés visszavonására?

Ha a kifizetés még „Feldolgozás alatt” státuszban van, általában lehetséges a visszavonás. Ehhez vedd fel a kapcsolatot az ügyfélszolgálattal a lehető leghamarabb.

Mi a teendő, ha a kifizetésem késik?

Először ellenőrizd, hogy minden adat helyes-e a fiókodban, és hogy a hitelesítés megtörtént. Ha minden rendben, fordulj az ügyfélszolgálathoz a tranzakció azonosítójával.

Fizetnem kell adót a nyereményem után?

Az lv bet kaszinó curacaoi licenc alapján működik. Magyar adóügyi szempontból a nyeremények általában adómentesek, de kérjük, konzultálj adótanácsadóval, mert a helyi szabályozás változhat.

Hogyan tudom elérni a hűségprogramot?

A lv bet oldalon a hűségprogram automatikusan aktiválódik, amint elkezdesz játszani. Pontokat gyűjts a fogadások után, és lépj előre a VIP szinteken.

Érdemes tudni

A lvbet casino hűségprogramja (VIP Club) izgalmas extra jutalmakat kínál a rendszeres játékosoknak. A program többszintű: általában 5-10 szint áll rendelkezésre, mint például Bronz, Ezüst, Arany, Platina és Gyémánt. Minden szinthez tartozik egy bizonyos mennyiségű összegyűjtött pont, amelyet a játékosok tétjeik után kapnak (például 1 pont 10 HUF tét után). A pontok aránya növekszik a magasabb szinteken – Gyémánt szinten akár 15%-kal több pontot is kaphatsz ugyanazért a tétért. A VIP szintek előnyei közé tartoznak a személyes ügyfélkezelő, magasabb kifizetési limitek, exkluzív bónuszok, ingyenes pörgetések és meghívók különleges eseményekre. Ha sokat játszol, érdemes figyelemmel kísérned a fejlődésed a VIP szintek között, mert a jutalmak időszakonként frissülnek.

Összefoglalva: a lv bet kifizetési folyamata egyszerű, ha betartod az előírásokat. A legfontosabb lépések: hitelesítsd a fiókod, ismerd a bónuszfeltételeket, és válassz megfelelő fizetési módot. Ha bármi kérdésed van, az ügyfélszolgálat készséggel segít. Jó szerencsét!

Lion Lives

cecillion

Most people (though not all, of course) would agree that human lives are more important than animal lives. We don’t usually say it so bluntly, because it’s a harsh thing to put a relative value on any life. But the way we live (eating meat, dressing in cow skin stamped with the Jumpman log, testing medicines on monkeys) and the way our society benefits from the harvesting of animal lives makes our values pretty obvious. I certainly put humans above (non-human) animals (though examining that value system too closely gets troubling really fast).

A familiar moral-decision hypothetical regarding human-vs.-animal life is easy for most to answer — as in, a dog and a human baby are drowning, and you can only save one. Well, you’re not a monster — obviously, you save the baby (even if the dog is arguably more friendly and less expensive given college tuition these days).

So, when I saw several of my Facebook friends today post memes pivoting off the Cecil-the-lion killing to talk about the #blacklivesmatter movement, I understood their impulse: It is absurd how difficult it is to gain empathy for innocent black lives lost at the hands of police officers, particularly when we’re seeing right now how broken-hearted the world is over the loss of a large feline.

(If you need a refresher: A dickwad Minnesota dentist recently “legally” — read: totally illegally — killed and beheaded a lion, who was a beloved resident of an African sanctuary.  And generations of police abuse and killing of black people has started coming to light thanks to cellphone video. You know, in case you missed that.)

The intention of my friends’ posts is clear. And the statement they make is inarguable — “If you are upset that an innocent lion was killed, you should be more upset that innocent black humans are killed.”

Certainly.

But there’s still an atmosphere of hijacking about the statement that bugs me. Here is a rare moment for the cause of animal cruelty, a moment in which international attention is being paid to an often-ignored issue. But here you come saying another social issue is more important — even if it is. Some have been that blunt about it. I quote: “rich dude shooting lion < cop shooting human.”

Sure. Of course. But why are you changing the subject? People who shout “All Lives Matter” at Black Lives Matter rallies are being huge dicks. But the content of their statement is inarguable: All lives should and do matter. But why are they changing the subject? It does no good. The disproportionate and grossly unjust violence done to black lives finally gets some attention, and you want to shout about what we “should” be concerned about? A dickhead environmentalist could, should they desire, point out that climate change is “more important” than criminal justice reform. After all, less-violent cops won’t mean much in a world that’s no longer hospitable to humans.

But that would be pointless, and a douchenozzle thing to do.

To be clear, I’m not equating the smugness of “All Lives Matter” with memes pointing out the absurdity of caring for lions but not black Americans. I’m just saying — hijacking another social concern for (what you consider) a more important one is a bit dickish. Really, I just wanted to explain why these seemingly innocent posts bothered me.

Let’s hope some good comes to lives of animals after Cecil’s loss. And that human lives will improve thanks to social justice movements. Just, you know, don’t belittle something that someone else is concerned about.

Solitary Math

Here’s a story for you: This part-time teacher whittled away at generations-old math problems on his own time, solving a puzzle that had eluded mathematicians for 150 years. Yitang Zheng, profiled in the New Yorker here, untangled the “bound gaps” problem of prime numbers, winning the prestigious MacArthur award among other prizes. At the time, he was teaching calculus part time. Previously, he’d done accounting for a Subway franchise.

There’s a romance about such an effort, which is I suppose why these stories of solitary mathematicians surface in the media from time to time. It’s interesting, inspiring — maybe even a bit troublingly weird — which are all cool things.

Mathematics has been called the purist science, and this sort of solitary, in-the-cabin (not necessarily an actual cabin) pursuit seems like the purist of scientific pursuits. It’s the purest of the pure. It’s like farm-fresh milk bathed in hand wash. (Does that metaphor work?)

It’s appealing because it revives the archetype of the lone-genius scientist, a fiction that’s harder and harder to maintain in an era of increasingly obvious cooperation and interdependence. You can’t be the dilettante, nobleman scientist of the 1700s, exploring the universe with a set of beakers in your parlor, when today’s scientific questions require billion-dollar behemoth machines that smash protons apart. Frinstance.

Even the theoretical side of physics, where Einstein worked, and which was long considered the purist (i.e., most mathematical) of physical sciences, isn’t so solitary. It generally happens within universities, these huge institutions, involving collaboration with colleagues, advisors, review boards, journals, peer reviewers, grant providers, administrators, savant janitors, etc. Even that frazzle-haired icon of scientific genius himself was much less of a lone explorer than popularly portrayed. Einstein probed gravity and time with his thought experiments, but relied on math developed by others to create his theories — something his (enduring) celebrity obscures.

But mathematicians! They can be the magi and (sorta-weird) loners we like to imagine. There’s romance, curiosity — and even a little judgement — involved with such figures. And these are all pleasurable feelings to experience. Remember the Unabomber? I do. I remember the fascination of the media, and of myself, with this mad professor/mathematician turned criminal. It made for a great story (and yes, an uncomfortable one, being that he mailed bombs and killed people).

Zhang’s story is not so uncomfortable, of course: he’s not a criminal. The only things he has in common with Ted Kaczynski are a talent for mathematics and a solitary devotion to his pursuits. But, quite opposite to the mail-bombing hermit, Zhang did not give up his mathematical devotions for something darker or kookier — or, in fact, for anything else. He stayed devoted to them, ultimately, without the support of a tenured academic position — i.e., without those big institutions that support so much of modern science and academics.

Zhang pursued the bound gaps proof while teaching basic courses in calculus at the University of New Hampshire. So, what motivated him? Zhang was working in “pure mathematics,” not the applied sort. He himself said that his proof was “useless for industry,” while others said that it had “a renaissance beauty.” The thrill of the puzzle, then, and the beauty of an elegant proof, seem to be the sole motivators. Zhang labored for years handling the books for a Subway franchise. He was a numbers genius, associates said, but had been unable to publish or get an academic post, so he’d mostly given up on his mathematical dreams.

Eventually, in a rare case for the field, Zhang achieved success in middle age. He wasn’t able to pursue his passions until a friend helped him find a job teaching calculus — clearly a very elementary use of his abilities, perhaps not much better than doing accounting for a sandwich shop. But it gave him the time and financial stability, maybe even the self-respect of knowing he was an academic again, that he needed to do his passion project. So, really, this is less the romantic story of a lone genius than a demonstration of the difficulty of such a path, even in the purest of sciences. Zhang might have found his proof much earlier, or at least much easier, if he’d had the support of a major institution — that is, if he hadn’t been forced into the “lone” part of the “lone genius” schtick.