An Ode To Cosmos, Comets, and Rosetta Spacecraft

Let's face it.  These days it is rather easy to be pessimistic about the human race and so-called "advanced" societies.  The news is full of reports of wars, terrorism, genocide, religious extremism and sectarian violence, willful ignorance (aka pseudoscience and anti-science), cruelty, environmental degradation, political paralysis, ideological stalemates, economic meltdowns, social incivility, the failure of institutions to provide for the common good, the exploitation and subjugation of women and minorities, etc., etc., etc.  The message is clear:  "Humans are no damn good. Film at 11."

Then, every once in a while something comes along that suggests there may be a glimmer of hope after all.  For me these rare moments are usually associated with (a) acts of extreme unselfishness and compassion that dramatically alleviate suffering or improve life opportunities for people who are desperately disadvantaged, (b) manifestations of artistic or literary talent that produce astonishingly powerful emotional experiences or intellectual insights, and (c) technical or scientific accomplishments that involve supremely focused applications of accumulated human knowledge and logic driven by the irrepressible spirit to know more simply for the sake of knowing.  The last category is the subject of this blog.

The event that has suggested a glimmer of hope to me is the recent success of the European Space Agency's mission to rendezvous with a comet, land a small craft on its surface, and accompany the comet as it approaches the sun. This of course isn't as news-worthy as any of the negative things listed above, but if you examine what it implies about human nature it offers a refreshing and inspiring glimpse of a more positive side of our human potential.

After a journey of 10 years and almost 4 billion miles, on August 6th the spacecraft Rosetta arrived at

Rosetta Probe

its target, a comet named 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko (the name is reason enough not to make it big in the media news).  Although previous spacecraft have flown by comets and have even deliberately crashed into one, this is the first to achieve an orbit around around a comet, the first to study it as it approaches the sun and, if all goes well, the first to soft-land a smaller craft on the comet's surface.  And it's off to a great start, judging by the stunning postcard it sent back to show us it had arrived at the comet.

This is a remarkable accomplishment.  It also adds to a growing list of achievements using unmanned space probes, including the Mars landers, Voyagers 1 and 2,  the Pioneer series, and one of my favorites, Galileo (see my blog, Confessions of a Selective Technophile for more on Galileo).

The Comet 67P/C-G

To put the Rosetta mission in perspective, try to imagine a tiny speck of dust and ice 250 million miles from earth.  From there the sun is a tiny dot, and the light level from the sun is only about 4% what is on earth. The earth looks like most of the rest of the stars, maybe a little brighter. The target speck is only a couple of miles in diameter and traveling at 34,000 miles per hour.  Now imagine trying to send a spacecraft no bigger than a large refrigerator to that icy speck. How would you do it?  How would you find and rendezvous with the speck, given that it is moving 20 times faster than a bullet?  How would you accelerate a spacecraft to 34,000 miles per hour without expending an impractically huge amount of fuel?  How would you communicate with the craft and control it when it is so far away -- so far that radio signals take up to 50 minutes to travel the distance?

The answers to these questions illustrate the extraordinary power of the human intellect  -- they entail a difficult and complex integration of cutting-edge mechanical and electrical engineering, materials science, computer science, applied and theoretical mathematics, astrophysics, astronomy, geology, and many other fields.  Oh, and a huge dose of insatiable curiosity and a relentless drive to explore questions of cosmic significance like "what is the origin of life?"  Humans may not be totally bad...more on this improbable story at 11!

I'll leave a lot of the details to the science reporters (see my embedded links or some of the links below if you want to know more).  I've read a number of them and have marveled at the level of scientific achievement some of my fellow human beings have displayed in this project.  For example, the acceleration problem was solved by looping the Rosetta several times around the earth, using the earth's gravity as a sling-shot to gather speed each time, a technique that took no fuel but added billions of miles and many years to the journey. This acceleration trick has been used previously with other space probes, but never with this much precision.  In this case it was necessary to calculate the exact positions of the spacecraft and the comet as they would be in 10 years, as well as their relative speeds, in order to determine precisely when to fire rockets to slow the Rosetta to match the comet's speed.  Being a bit math-challenged, to me this is a jaw-droppingly awesome feat.

I was a huge fan of the t.v. series Cosmos hosted by the late astronomer Carl Sagan over 30 years ago, in 1980.  Sagan would have loved witnessing the accomplishment of orbiting a space craft around a comet, and would no doubt be making eloquent commentary on the mission. He was not only an accomplished scientist, he was one of the first champions of making science accessible to the general public in an entertaining yet educational way.  The Cosmos series was the first of its kind and highly critically acclaimed -- and it reinforced my lifelong fascination with astronomy and cosmology.  A recent updated version hosted by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson is a fittingly high-quality successor.  It has the same up-beat, inspiring and humbling effectiveness as the original.

Look very closely.

Sagan wrote a number of popular books on space and astronomy, one of which was titled The Pale Blue Dot, a reference to the earth as it appeared in a photograph taken by the spacecraft Voyager 1 in 1990 as it left our solar system.  Voyager 1 was about 6 billion miles from earth at the time, and the photo is a sobering "selfie" that clearly depicts the smallness of our place in the universe. One often quoted passage in the book is particularly moving to me because it puts our species -- both the positive features and the flaws -- in a very insightful context, and Sage does it in his usual Cosmic style:

Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known. [My emphasis]
-- Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot, 1994

 Right on, Carl. And I hereby dedicate the Rosetta Mission to your vision.

_____________________________________
Some Relevant Reference Sources About Rosetta:

Cometary science: Rosetta's stone | The Economist economist.com

Europe’s Rosetta becomes the first spacecraft to orbit a real, live comet (updated) | ExtremeTech extremetech.com

Europe's Rosetta Spacecraft Makes Historic Arrival at Comet space.com

DLR Portal - Mission - Rosetta at a glance - technical data and timeline archive.org

Long-distance communication / Rosetta / Space Science / Our Activities / ESA esa.int

First Comet Close-Ups from Rosetta Spacecraft Reveal a 'Scientific Disneyland' (Photos) space.com

Overview | Rosetta nasa.gov

Technical Specifications | Rosetta nasa.gov

A Pale Blue Dot | The Planetary Society planetary.org

An Early Draft of Carl Sagan's Famous 'Pale Blue Dot' Quote - The Atlantic theatlantic.com

Cleaning Up Poop In Paradise

[Caution:   Squeamish?  Have good taste?  Read the title again and then don't say I didn't warn you.]

I've lived in Hawai'i for over 13 years and I love it.  There are many reasons why I enjoy it so much -- the weather, the culture, the geology, the natural beauty, the fact that our one measly Electoral College vote means we don't have to listen to very many obnoxious Presidential Election campaign ads.

However there are costs to residing in (near) Paradise.  We locals call these "Paradise Taxes," and although we gripe about them we are also glad they exist, otherwise everybody would want to live here. The most obvious one is implied in the term "cost" -- Hawai'i is an expensive place to live in terms of housing, food, energy, all of which are about 30-35% higher than on the mainland, sometimes more depending on the category.  For example, we pay about four times more for electricity per kilowatt hour here than we did on the mainland.

But there are also less obvious costs, one of which is the subject of this blog -- the trials and tribulations of cleaning up poop. 

That's right, there's a lot of poop in paradise and if you're a conscientious home owner you have to learn to deal with it way more than if you live on the mainland US.  I'm not talking about your usual pet poop, which of course is the same here as anywhere.  I'm talking about "critter crap" that is perhaps unique to our constant and benign climate.

There are at least a couple of ways to discuss the scope and characteristics of the maintenance challenge of poop. One is to examine the different categories of poop based on variations in the qualities of the target substance.  Another is to talk about the major sources of poop and how they differ in the maintenance efforts required.  I've chosen the second approach for this blog because it will more clearly contrast living here versus on the mainland since the major sources aren't likely to be encountered by mainland residents.

Source 1:  Geckos 

Culprit 1

I've written extensively about these little lizards in my blog, "More Than You Ever Wanted To Know About Geckos."  The most common type, the Gold Dust Gecko was introduced to Hawai'i from Madagascar in the 1970's and has become a common feature both outside and inside of most households.  In my earlier blog I mentioned the poop problem just briefly so now I'll explain more about it.

We tolerate geckos because they are very good natural controllers of flying insects, and because we find their intelligence and social nature very endearing. However, "bugs-in-poop-out." Given the open nature of most houses in Hawai'i, including ours, geckos are almost bound to find their way indoors and no screen door or window can prevent this.  We try to keep their numbers low by catching and re-locating as many as we can, but invariably there are a few who manage to take up residence inside -- which means we must deal with their poop until we can catch them.

Geckos are like cats in that they tend to go in the same place every time.  They prefer to do it dangling, usually choosing a high beam or a piece of corner molding to do their business, which is in the form of a small missile about the size of a grain of rice.  If these hit carpeting or a hard flat surface cleaning them up is pretty easy with a vacuum or a broom (best to let them dry first, otherwise they smear).  However, if the poop strikes the wall or the floor molding on its way down things are more difficult. Some ingredient in Gecko poop seems to allow it to bond very strongly to housepaint.  This produces dark streaks on walls or dark spots on molding that are very difficult to remove, and the longer you wait the worse it is in terms of both quantity and the tenaciousness of the bonds.  Besides the daily cleanup of the missiles, we try to go on regular "poop patrols" around the house to wash the walls and molding.  If you wait too long the only remedy is another coat of paint. We've learned that it helps to repaint with a glossier finish, but this doesn't totally eliminate the problem.

Source 2:  Myna Birds

Culprit 2

This poop source was introduced to Hawai'i from Asia in 1866 to control insects in sugar cane fields (see the Bishop Museum's authoritative account ).  Although this worked, the myna adapted very well and is now considered a nuisance by many residents due to a number of rather obnoxious traits (a nice succinct description is in the Hawai'i Nature Journal).  To the list I will now add Myna Bird Poop.

Mynas are omnivores, meaning they will eat ANYthing, including the aforementioned geckos that live outside (I suspect this is one reason geckos find living indoor environments attractive, despite less food and having to deal with irate humans).  During fledgling season mynas have discovered that geckos are a good source of protein for their chicks, and they hunt them relentlessly around our decks (lanai's).  And while they're doing that they poop.  Lots.  And sometimes while flying.

The result?  Many splatto's on the tops of the wood railings that go along our lanai's (their favorite hunting grounds), on the wooden deck surfaces below the railings, and on the flagstone around our swimming pool.  The poop-while-flying resembles something from a military plane on a strafing run -- a splat of poop that can be several inches long.  Like gecko poop, this also can bond to paint if you don't clean it quickly, and it penetrates the surface of porous sandstone making it very difficult to clean up unless you periodically seal the stone with a special (expensive) product.

Unlike our catch-and-release program with geckos, we have no control options with mynas other that shouting and clapping our hands to scare them off.  Unfortunately this doesn't work very well, and we probably look like crazy people.

Source 3: Turkeys

Culprit Maximus

A number of different types of turkeys have been introduced to Hawai'i over the last 200 years, but the ones that are most common now were brought from the mainland U.S. in the early 1960's.  Like the gecko and the myna bird, turkeys have increased in numbers very quickly and now are found in almost every neighborhood walking down the streets, roosting in monkey pod trees, and marauding through people's gardens (see my blog, "The Curious Case of the Kona Coyote," for more).  

Turkeys travel in flocks, leaving a swath of poop as they go that can be astonishingly nasty. Turkey poop is hands-down the worst excrement we have to deal with in terms of quantity, variety, and gag-reflex-producing olfactory and visual obnoxiousness.

Our first encounter with Turkey poop was on a rainy day not long after we moved here.  Turkeys were still a novelty to us and we found them interesting and sort of endearing.  A female turkey and one of her young offspring took refuge from the rain by roosting on one of our lanai railings.  How cute, we thought, as we took a couple of photos.  On the third shot I could see in the viewfinder a remarkable stream of brown liquid shooting first from Mama Turkey and then from Junior, both streams hitting the deck with a sound that was reminiscent of spilling brownie batter on a kitchen floor. The analogy stops there, however, as I found when gagging during the cleanup operation.

Not long after that incident I was sweeping another lanai one day when I discovered the most amazing pile of poop I have ever seen with maybe the exception of elephant droppings (which don't stink nearly as much, by the way).  Yup, a turkey had found the railing a good place to park for awhile -- long enough to repeatedly poop in the same place, building up the mound so that it resembled one of our island's volcanoes.  The magnitude of this pile was so incredible I took photos of it, but I'll spare you the sight -- let's just say it was 3-4 inches tall and really foul-smelling.  The deck surface here was flagstone and when I washed off the poop I found it had stained the stone badly and it was very difficult to remove.

I quickly rigged up a string system to keep turkeys from roosting there in the future, and I try to re-apply stone sealer regularly.  I also chase the flocks whenever I catch them in our yard, brandishing a broom as I run toward them yelling and shouting (again, crazy person?).  This seems to work, though I find they keep testing me to see if I'm still vigilant -- every once in a while I find a nice dollop in my driveway to remind me they're still around.

So there you have it.  Paradise is not perfect.  We have to struggle with homeowner problems that are perhaps unique but like elsewhere require effort, expense, and time to confront them.  Perhaps this will give you some solace as you huddle around your heat vent this winter.

Could I send you a nice holiday turkey?

"I'll Be Right Back" -- And Other Famous Last Words

I've already confessed to having a warped sense of humor in several earlier blogs (see It's A Guy Thing, Why I Hate Liver,  Geezer Olympics: Competive Complaining, or What, Me Worry?).  It's time for another installment.  Warning:  this qualifies as an addition to my TMI or Oversharing series....

Things can be funny to me even when (or maybe because) the situation ordinarily calls for somber reflection, philosophical erudition, and compassionate consolation. Take death, for example.

There is nothing inherently funny about the final proof of our mortality. In fact, it can be terrifying if it is our own end we are contemplating, and terribly sad if involves someone who died before their time or if it is accompanied by unnecessary suffering. Still, the concept of death is maybe too often treated as simply negative -- anything that is inevitable should perhaps also be seen as having a lighter side.

One source of humor about death comes from the last words someone utters, often referred to as "famous last words" even when the words aren't attributable to famous people.  One of the funniest treatments of last words of some real historical figures is by Ian Cheesman of Cracked.Com, and I make no pretense at even coming close to the humorously warped level of his presentation (see Cheeseman, part 1 and part 2).  By the way, the fact that I'm linking to Cracked.Com should tell you something about my sense of humor.  Cheesman introduces his analysis this way:

"Everyone hopes to leave a legacy. To be remembered after our passing is the closest thing humans have to immortality, at least until cryogenics figures out how to reanimate Walt Disney's head. Some people try to pull off immortality with a lifetime of achievements and noble acts. But why piss away all that energy on altruism when you can simply spout one badass quote before you take the dirt nap and live on through eternity known as a guy who needed a second casket for his ....[censored]?"  (Cheesman, 2008, part 1)

Cheesman's choices include serial killer Carl Panzram just before being executed in Indiana (Hurry up, you Hoosier bastard, I could kill ten men while you're fooling around!"), Chief Sitting Bull confronting the soldiers who killed him ("I'm not going. Do with me what you like. Come on! Come on! Take action!  Let's go!"), Joan Crawford on her death bed when someone started to pray for her ("Damn it, don't you DARE ask God to help me."), and Karl Marx when someone asked him for his last thoughts ("Go away! Last words are for fools who haven't said enough!"). Ok, I admit some of these aren't so much funny as admirably gutsy, but Cheesman's analysis that accompanies them is very funny and definitely my kind of humor -- I really recommend it.

In addition to the last words that famous people have said, there are quite a few that have been made up by some very warped minds -- kindred spirits to me.  Most of these pertain to situations where the speaker doesn't know these will be his or her last words (a key element in the humor, I suppose, and it helps to picture the situation). Here's a sample from various sources, including yours truly (for more go to Funny.com):

• "Hold my beer and watch this..."
• "Let's just keep on ignoring it and it will probably go away...."
• "Don't worry, I know what I'm doing...."
• "It doesn't look that deep to me...."
• "I know a great shortcut......"
• "They look friendly...."
• "We need something stronger to get this fire going....."
• "Did you hear something?"
• "What does this button do?"
• "I wonder where the mother bear is?"
• "Look ma! no hands!"
• "I'm sure this isn't the poisonous kind...."
• "All you have to do is connect these two wires...."
• "Stupid safety labels....
• "Lightning never hits the same spot twice"
• "Manual?  Who needs to read the dumb manual!" 

A final (pun intended) source of funny last words comes from tombstones.  Cemeteries are rich sources of information about a culture (see "My Favorite Cemeteries"), and the inscriptions on the grave markers can at times be very humorous -- in a warped kind of way.  Some of the cutest are epitaphs found on the 13 family tombstones at the Haunted Mansion attraction in Disney World and Disney Land.  The names on the markers are all actual people who worked on the design or construction of the mansion, but the nature of their passing is made up  Here's a sample: 

• Rest in Peace – Cousin Huet – We All Know – You Didn’t Do It 
• Here rests Wathel R. Bender – He rode to glory – On a Fender
• Here lies good old Fred – A great big rock – Fell on his head R.I.P. 
• In memorium Uncle Myall – You’ll lie here – for a quite a while

If you do an internet search for "funny tombstones" or something similar, you'll find most of the results repeat the same list of epitaphs and it is difficult to know if the authors actually saw the graves or are just re-posting the same list over and over.  Even so the sayings are still humorous.  Here's a few I like, taken from a great blog called My Wintersong, who is at least specific as to the location of the graves:

Memory of an accident in a Uniontown, Pennsylvania cemetery:
Here lies the body
of Jonathan Blake

Stepped on the gas
Instead of the brake.

In a Silver City, Nevada, cemetery:
Here lays Butch,
We planted him raw.

He was quick on the trigger,
But slow on the draw.

A lawyer’s epithet in England: 

Sir John Strange
Here lies an honest lawyer,
And that is Strange.

Lester Moore was a Wells, Fargo Co. station agent for Naco, Arizona in the cowboy days of the 1880′s. He’s buried in the Boot Hill Cemetery in Tombstone, Arizona:
Here lies Lester Moore
Four slugs from a .44
No Les No More.

On a grave from the 1880′s in Nantucket, Massachusetts:
Under the sod and under the trees
Lies the body of Jonathan Pease.
He is not here, there’s only the pod:
Pease shelled out and went to God.

And "finally"

In a Thurmont, Maryland, cemetery:
Here lies an Atheist
All dressed up
And no place to go

Ok, that's enough.  If you want to add your own suggestions or favorite last words, just post them as comments or email them to me and I'll include them (anonymously, in case you're still in the closet about your warpedness......)
------------------------------------------------
Update:

See the comments for some reader suggested last words.  Also, here's an anecdote and an actual newspaper obituary that a friend who researches sports fan identity collected:

• Accepting that the end was near, the funny grandfather and great-grandfather said earlier in the day there was an upside to death: at least he wouldn't have to watch another Bengals loss 
• He respectfully requests six Cleveland Browns pallbearers so the Browns can let him down one last time.

American Travelers Abroad: The Chips Are Down

[Note -- it is hard to believe, but this is my 100th post!  That's a lot of hot air!  Thanks for listening.......]

Despite the title, this blog is actually another in my "Banker's Math" series. Or maybe a dual entry -- the other being my "Traveler's Woes" series.

My wife and I travel regularly to Western Europe. For example, a year ago last fall we returned for our fourth visit to Italy, that time to northern regions just in time for mushroom season. This spring we flew to Holland for tulip time, then continued down to southern France for three weeks.

Over the years it has become easier for us to travel independently in Europe, thanks in part to the availability of internet technology for booking hotels, finding restaurants and attractions, and obtaining information about the local region. Language problems have nearly disappeared as English has become the universal travel language (we often hear other travelers talking to locals in heavily accented English, then return to their native language among themselves). Navigation GPS devices make it easier to drive yourself through the maze of ancient streets and web of country roads, assuming you don't always believe the instructions (that will be another blog!). Europe has also become increasingly hi-tech in the sense of allowing (and even requiring) payment by credit card and providing access to local currency via ATMs.

Although we have thoroughly enjoyed all of our trips to Europe, we recently have encountered some problems due to our antiquated American financial technology. I'm referring to the "swipe and sign" credit card that has facilitated several high-profile hacker attacks recently, for example the infamous Target data breach.  These attacks are the work of nefarious ne'er do wells, of course, but their efforts have been made much easier by the vulnerability of the credit cards issued by U.S. banks. The information on the magnetic strips is easy to hack, the cards are easy to counterfeit, and the information transmitted by data terminals at retail outlets is easy to intercept. 

The weaknesses of "swipe and sign" credit cards have been known for some time, and most of Europe has moved to a much more secure system which involves embedding a small integrated circuit chip (called the EMV chip) in each card that encrypts the user's data and protects it with a pin number. Point of sale machines can read the chip (once the pin is supplied) and the data is then encrypted for transmission.  Though there have been a few hacks of this kind of system, it is much less vulnerable than ours. As Tom Groenfeldt of Forbes magazine describes it:

Much of the rest of the world uses a small chip on the credit card to validate with a transaction. The chip employs cryptography and a range of other security features and measures that create a multi-layered defense against card fraud. When combined with a Personal Identification Number or PIN code (the sort used on ATM cards), it substantially raises security. Even with just a signature it makes a marked improvement over a simple magnetic stripe. (Groenfeldt, 2014).

Now enter the hapless American traveler abroad, equipped with banking technology widely regarded as woefully insecure and antiquated.

As my wife and I discovered last month while exploring Holland and France, the issue isn't so much the insecurity of our cards -- they aren't more insecure when we use them in Europe as when we use them here in the U.S.  Rather, the difficulty comes from the fact that Holland and France are very advanced countries, and credit/debit cards are used for nearly everything.  For example, here in the U.S. getting cash from ATM is a matter of convenience. In Holland and France, only banks in the largest cities have human tellers who can dispense cash on demand, so using an ATM is nearly a necessity for getting currency.

The ubiquity of card transactions (and the weakness of our swipe and sign card) was brought home to us the very first night we were in Holland.  We had driven to a restaurant for dinner and learned that nearly all parking in the town required payment -- not to a human being but to a central machine that only accepted coins or...you guessed it...cards with the EMV chip.  Having just arrived we didn't have any coins and we were going to have to find a nearby store to get change -- not something most merchants are keen on doing, particularly since all we had were large bills. Plus unless one of us stayed with the car we ran the risk of getting a ticket. Fortunately a nice Dutch family waiting to pay gave us the minimum required in coins -- about $1.40.  Of course, they then stepped up to the machine, stuck in their chip card, keyed in their pin and away they went.

Parking machines aren't the only places where our credit card failed us -- trying to buy train tickets went from a simple matter of interacting with a machine to having to stand in a long line to pay at a counter -- only to have the agent's machine refuse to read our magnetic strip. On another occasion we had a major hassle when we tried to use a Park and Ride system in Amsterdam. Without the EMV chip we were unable to buy a special discounted ticket for city transportation and were forced to locate the parking structure attendant and try to explain our predicament. Again, the helpfulness of locals (and maybe their pity) won the day, and the attendant unlocked the machine and manually forced the discounted fare somehow.

Getting gas for our rental car also proved to be a hassle without the EMV chip, as I discovered the first time I inserted my swipe card into a pump's pay terminal, thinking this would work like it does here in the U.S. The station attendant came on the intercom and said something in rapid fire French, which of course I couldn't understand.  The tone, though was very clear.  I tried to fill up anyway, but the pump didn't have any obvious way of allowing for filling and then paying inside.  Soon the attendant came out of the kiosk and with more rapid fire French and a bit of charades she communicated that I had to move our car to the "penalty pump," which she would activate for filling and then paying inside. By the way, the security of the chip and pin cards allows many service stations in Europe to remain open 24/7 without any attendants at all after normal hours. We would have been out of luck -- and out of gas -- had this happened late at night.

Fortunately, most merchants, hotels, and restaurants in both Holland and France have machines that can (for the time being) process our cards -- in addition to the slot where the machines read an EMV chip, they also have a slit that allows swiping a card.  In fact most of these European machines are portable -- in a restaurant the waiter brings the machine to your table when you are ready to pay your bill and the whole transaction takes place right there.  Since your card never leaves your sight, this is another way in which the European system is more secure. Although we never had a problem with a merchant refusing our swipe and sign card, this isn't always the case. Tom Groenfeldt quotes one credit card vendor as saying that merchants, especially in France where they have had EMV the longest, are very resistant to taking a card that isn’t chip and PIN, and restaurants sometimes don’t want to accept cards with just a mag stripe. In other words, unless you want to wind up washing dishes for your delicious meal in Cannes or Monaco, take plenty of cash as a backup.

So why haven't American banks switched to the new cards?

According to an analysis posted on the Credit Card Forum there are several reasons:

Why? Well, there isn’t exactly a huge demand for them. Unless you’re traveling abroad, you don’t really have an everyday need for a chip card, as few merchants have upgraded to payment terminals that accept them. Add in the fact that chip cards a more expensive to produce, and you wind up with three parties (consumers, merchants and issuers) who haven’t been in a big hurry to make the switch.

From a Banker's Math perspective the expense to card issuers of covering fraudulent charges is less than the cost and inconvenience of changing to the chip system. The public concern over identity theft and insecure credit card transactions may be changing that equation, however.  Credit card issuers now see the chip technology as a possible competitive advantage in attracting new accounts and have begun to offer them in limited markets -- but almost always in connection with yearly fee cards and not necessarily with cards that have no foreign transaction fees.  For current lists of who offers what, see posts by The Points Guy,  Credit Card Forum and NerdWallet.

To make things even more confusing, most of the chip cards now being made available to Americans are "chip and sign," not "chip and pin."  (If a pin is issued with these cards, it is for obtaining cash advances at ATM's, not for point of sale purchases.) And a quick search of internet forums will reveal many reports of people being unable to use them in Europe, or finding that they will work in some instances and not others.  Not a good solution but still better than the old system.

For now we have adopted a wait-and-see stance.  But before our next trip abroad we will have one of the chip cards The front runners right now are Barclaycard Arrival Plus ($89) and the Chase Sapphire Preferred ($95).  The Barclaycard is a true chip and pin card.  The Chase Sapphire is chip and signature now and likely to have chip and pin later in the year.  We'll keep you posted.

Happy travels, happy banking.........

The Curious Case of The Kona Coyote

Well, right up front I have to admit that coyotes do not really exist in Hawai'i, at least in the form that most of you know.  Here they are much smaller and go by another name -- Herpestes Javanicus or "Mongoose" for short.  I call them coyotes because they fill much the same ecological niche here as coyotes do on the mainland U.S.

Coyotus Konicus

Although many visitors to Hawai'i assume mongooses are native to the islands, they are actually from India and Indonesia, and were deliberately introduced here in 1883 to control rats in the sugar cane fields. Some initial success in the Carribean and West Indies with this method was reported in 1882 by naturalist W.B. Espeut.  Espeut and others quickly began to raise mongooses and sell them commercially, including some to cane growers in Hawai'i (not all the islands, however).  Unfortunately Espreut may have been a teensy bit premature in promoting the introduction of mongooses both here and elsewhere. Not only do we still have rats, the mongoose is now a very serious problem, as it is nearly everywhere else it has been introduced.  In their authoritative book on mongooses, Dunn and Hinton describe the introduction of the mongoose into the West Indies as "...one of the most disastrous attempts ever made at biological control"  (Mongooses, p. 63), and the same is true here.  The reasons for the failure are an important cautionary tale for those of us who live on islands, as we shall see.

The rat, too was introduced to Hawai'i but unintentionally -- one species coming with the Polynesian settlers about 1600 years ago and two others (the Black, or Roof Rat and the Norway Rat) with Europeans and Americans beginning in the late 18th century (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Factsheet).

Espeut assumed that all rats are the same, as most of us do (you've seen one rat, you've seen them all, right?). Turns out the differences are very, very important. The Norway rat is a ground-nesting species whereas the other two nest in trees or high structures (the Polynesian and Roof rats). The mongoose is a mediocre climber and so it was able to prey on the Norway rat but had much more difficulty with the other two. In a number of studies scientists have found that the introduction of mongoose has led to a decrease in Norway rats but increases in the other two varieties.  The often-quoted story that the mongoose didn't control rats in Hawai'i because the mongoose is active during the day whereas rats are active at night is a gross oversimplification -- the mongoose was able to find the nests of the Norway rat and destroy them even during the day, but it couldn't reach the other two, day or night.

Espeut also underestimated the breeding ability of rats, which far outstrips predation by mongooses.  Further, after reducing the numbers of Norway rats, mongoose then go after other sources of food, including the eggs of ground-nesting birds, beneficial lizards, snakes (none in Hawai'i) and amphibians.  And there are no natural predators in Hawai'i to keep the populations of mongoose in check.

Both the mongoose and the rat were introduced to Hawai'i and are clearly new arrivals here.  In fact, prior to the arrival of humans in the Hawaiian Islands there only two species of endemic mammals -- the Monk Seal and the Hawaiian Bat. The Polynesians intentionally brought two more (besides themselves, of course):  a small domesticated pig and a small variety of dog.  All the rest have been brought here intentionally or accidentally in the last 200+ years -- the blink of an eye in geological and evolutionary time. While it is true that everything here came from somewhere else, the rate of introduction is crucial to understanding the ecological impact these introductions have had and to appreciating those things that are truly unique here.

The Hawaiian Islands are the most isolated group of islands in the world.  Their isolation has meant that the species of plants and animals that managed to arrive here on their own from other parts of the world were themselves isolated from that time on and evolved over eons into unique forms.  For instance we have raspberry vines here but they don't have thorns because they no longer needed them as defense against browsing mammals. Almost all endemic Hawaiian birds evolved from a single species of honey creeper and are found nowhere else on earth. Certain trees, like the Ohia, evolved in the presence of almost continuous volcanic activity and are able to withstand and even thrive in conditions that would kill many others.

Most people who visit Hawai'i see a lush and colorful landscape that, though exotic, still seems somewhat

Java Sparrows (Introduced 1960's)

Safron Finch (SA, introduced 1960's)

familiar.  This is because many of the plants, animals, birds, and insects are in fact not from Hawai'i at all but from the mainland U.S., South America, Europe, and Asia. For example, nearly all of the colorful birds people see (including parrots, turkeys, pheasants, and various songbirds) came from elsewhere, many within the past 200 years or less. At my house I occasionally see two endemic bird species, the I'o and the Pu'eo (native hawks and owls, respectively).  That's it. There are, however many cute introduced birds in my neighborhood, like the Saffron Finch from South America and the Java Sparrow from Indonesia, both introduced in the 1960's. There were dozens more native birds but they are either now extinct or are only found in remote areas, usually at much higher elevations than most tourists go (an exception is Volcanoes National Park where a number of native birds can be seen).

Many of the less attractive aspects of Hawai'i also are not original.  Here's a partial list of negative critters that were NOT in Hawai'i before their recent introduction by humans:

• rats
• mice
• cockroaches
• ants
• mosquitos
• termites
• wasps (Yellow Jacket variety)
• giant centipedes
• slugs

Looking at the list above, it is clear how we use our past experiences with the world to shape our expectations and interpretations of what we encounter in new places.  Nearly all of us have lived where pests like rats, ants and mosquitos are a natural and common aspect of our environment and so we are not surprised when they exist here in Hawai'i also. The real surprise is that this was a place not long ago where they did not exist.  Imagine -- no rats, mice, mosquitoes, ants, or cockroaches!  And of course the sad fact is that they wouldn't be here now if it weren't for us.

Our past experiences can also lead us astray when we assess the implications of what we see in a new environment. This is particularly true for Hawai'i's isolated and uniquely fragile environment. For instance, many of those beautiful birds I mentioned are considered by biologists to be serious problems here because although they are in ecological balance in their original habitats, they become an invasive species when they are introduced to Hawai'i.  Relying on our preference for their attractiveness or their benign role elsewhere as the basis for judging their desirability in Hawaii's environment can be a very bad mistake.

To call something invasive isn't the same as using other negative terms, like referring to a particular plant as a "weed."  Weeds are often simply something we deem undesirable based on aesthetic preference.  An "invasive species" is something that meets one or more of a number of specific scientific criteria, including:

• being able to spread quickly and widely
• being either a predator that threatens to extinguish beneficial native species or having qualities that give it competitive superiority over other species for food or territory
• altering the habitat in unsustainable ways
• producing significant negative impact on the local economy

Of course, values and attitudes are still at play when we decide what action, if any, should be taken to control invasive species. This is particularly true when the species is something we find beautiful or cute, like most of the small birds we have introduced, or a species we find desirable in other ways, like the animals brought here to be hunted for food or sport.

An instructive comparison is between a variety of wild turkey introduced here in 1961 versus the Nene, an endemic variety of goose and the Hawai'i state bird. Both are large, ground-nesting and foraging birds that prefer not to fly much but are magnificent when they do. The Nene is severely endangered, whereas the wild turkey has increased from 400 birds to 16,000 in just 50 years (there

Latest introduction 1960's

are actually several varieties of turkeys in Hawai'i, all of them intentionally introduced beginning in the late 1700's and 1800's).  In its original environment of North America the wild turkey's numbers are kept in balance by several predators (fox, coyotes, cougars, large birds of prey, skunks, bobcats, racoons, possum, and snakes), harsh winters, and hunting by humans. Being a prey animal living in harsh conditions, it evolved a number of characteristics to counter these threats:  (1) it has large number of offspring, 10-14 chicks; (2) it is polygamous, with the males establishing large harems of females during mating season; (3) it eats almost anything -- leaves, fruit, seeds, and nuts of a wide variety of plants, shrubs, and trees, insects of various kinds, even small amphibians and lizards, (4) it takes refuge in trees at night to avoid predators; (5) it has developed resistance to many diseases carried by other mainland birds and animals. Without the controlling influences in the turkey's original environment, these qualities can be very ecologically problematic in Hawai'i where there are far fewer predators, a very benign climate, few competitors, and plenty of food.

The Nene, on the other hand, evolved in the absence of all the predators listed above with the exception of birds of prey, and without the ecological competition of other foraging birds (recall,

Nene -- Endemic

most other birds were types of honey-creepers).  It has fewer offpring, 1-5 per female, tends to be monogamous (often mating for life), is a selective and somewhat picky eater of leaves, seeds and berries and has no immunity to diseases carried by birds and animals recently introduced.  These qualities were adaptive for the environment that existed before the arrival of humans and the introduction of predators and generalist competitors. But Nene are poorly equipped to handle these sudden changes, and only through an aggressive captive breeding program have they been brought back from the brink of extinction. People often see Nene in open grasslands, like golf-courses, and incorrectly assume they are plentiful.  Visitors mistakenly believe them to be Canadian Geese, from which they evolved starting about 500,000 years ago, and which have become a serious nuisance in urban areas of the mainland where they congregate in large numbers -- another example of how past experience can sometimes lead to wrong conclusions in new environments.

The natural introduction of a new species causes an imbalance in an existing ecosystem that in time will sort itself out. In the case of Hawai'i new plants, animals and insects arrived at a relatively slow pace due to the isolation of the islands. However, beginning with the arrival of humans 1,600 years ago and accelerating tremendously with Cook's discovery of the islands a little over 200 years ago, hundreds of new species of plants, animals, insects, and diseases have been introduced within a very short time.  And the ecosystem is still in turmoil, according to biologists who are studying this process and who find Hawai'i a fascinating and valuable natural laboratory to observe both ecological adaptation and evolution in action. The biologists naturally and understandably stress the negative impact new species have had on native populations but they are also intrigued by how these new species interact with each other and in some cases how native species have adapted in positive ways to the newcomers.

Apapane -- Endemic

For example, the Pue'o (endemic owl) and the I'o (endemic hawk) never saw a rat or a mouse until their recent introduction.  Their diet consisted mainly of other native birds.  Now, however, they are learning that these new furry critters are a tasty source of protein.  They also are quite happy to eat introduced birds, particularly now that the native varieties are scarce. Another example is that one species of endemic bird, the beautiful Apapane, is apparently developing a resistance to Avian Malaria that is carried by alien birds -- this disease, transmitted by mosquitoes that breed in terrain uprooted by European wild boars, has decimated many native Hawaiian species. As I said, evolution in action.

There are also examples of new arrivals controlling each other. Mongoose, rats, and feral cats -- justly demonized for preying on native birds -- are now major controllers of burgeoning populations of introduced birds that would otherwise become an even greater destructive problem than they are now. This is why I call the Mongoose a Kona Coyote -- in this environment it performs a controlling role similar to the coyote on the mainland U.S.. Although mongoose, rats and feral cats are themselves a serious problem, if they were to be suddenly eradicated in Hawai'i the populations of introduced bird species would skyrocket, with severely negative consequences.

Note that this is another illustration of how our prior experiences can lead us astray in new situations.  Many of us from the mainland U.S. are very familiar with the negative impact of cats on bird populations there.  But in that case the birds are not alien and not invasive. Of course, eradicating introduced birds in Hawai'i would likely also cause problems.  For instance, the Myna bird from Southeast Asia has become very fond of eating geckos from Madagascar, which aside from humans and cats have no other predators here and are very prolific breeders.

These examples illustrate the complexity of the mess we have created and the fact that solutions can't be as simple as we often assume -- some approaches will just make matters worse here in Hawai'i even though they might be appropriate elsewhere.  And since rolling back the clock isn't really possible, we are left with developing ways to substitute the control forces that are absent for the species we have introduced, an expensive and risky proposition given our historical record in this matter (remember the lesson from the curious case of the Kona Coyote).

If you look back at the list of qualities for defining an invasive species you might agree that humans fit nearly all of them.  We are able to spread quickly and widely over most of the planet. We are a predator that threatens to extinguish beneficial native species. We have qualities that give us competitive superiority over other species for food and territory.  And we certainly have a record of altering the habitat in unsustainable ways. A key difference between us and other invasive species, however, is that we are aware of what we are doing and we can alter our behavior and mitigate the effects of our own presence as well as the effects of those species we have introduced either intentionally or unintentionally.

The question is whether we have the will to do so.  And whether we still have time.
__________________________________
Some Resources and References:
Hawai'i's Invasive Species, 2001.  Staples, G.W. & Cowie, R.H. (Eds.). Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.
"Invasive Species"   U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Encyclopedia of Invasive Species: From Africanized Honey Bees to Zebra Mussels by Susan L. Woodward & Joyce A. Quinn
Encyclopedia of Biological Invasions - edited by Daniel Simberloff & Marcel Rejmanek
Biological Control by H.M.T. Hokkanen & James M. Lynch
Fighting Invasive Species in Hawai'i  The Nature Conservancy
Invasive Species in Hawai'i University of Hawa'i'
Mongooses by A. M. S. Dunn & H. E. Hinton


Other Blogs in the "Critters of Hawai'i series:
Tons of Fun
"Lei"zy Horses and Hot Malasadas
More Than You Ever Wanted To Know About Geckos

Celebrating Nothing: Twenty Years Without Smoking

I quit smoking twenty years ago, in March, 1994. It was one of the hardest things I have ever done.

For those of you who have never smoked, and those of you who were smokers who quit easily, it might be hard to understand why it can be so difficult for some of us.  It is because of this general lack of understanding that I consider those few who are still puffing despite the external and internal pressure to stop to be kindred spirits for whom I have great empathy and sympathy.  My heart goes out to them when I see them huddled together in desperate little groups outside public buildings from which they have been banned, or when I inadvertently come across one sneaking a smoke in a stairwell or a restroom.

I had been trying for years to break the habit and had managed to get down to just a few cigarettes a day, but quitting entirely was something I just couldn't do. I thoroughly understood the risks, dangers, annoyances, personal and social costs, effects of second-hand smoke, etc., etc., etc.  I knew all the reasons why quitting was a good idea and continuing was idiocy.  It didn't matter.

To punish myself for my lack of will power, I restricted my smoking at home to outside areas (during the winter this meant many cold hours in our unheated garage). I wouldn't smoke in our cars or in most public places. In my office I would sit huddled by a window blowing the smoke outside.  Long plane rides were agony, and the minute I got off I would sprint for the nearest smoking area.  Four hours seemed to be my comfort limit, as I recall. I tried to delay or avoid smoking at times it was most enjoyable, like after a meal or with a cup of coffee.  Nothing worked.  The thought of finishing my very last cigarette and having none available in case I changed my mind filled me with a very irrational sense of panic.

In those days there weren't the wide-spread smoking cessation programs there are now.  My physician was dutifully down on my habit but shrewdly realized that too much cajoling wouldn't work with me.  He knew of my efforts to cut down and he offered to help when I decided to quit entirely -- at that time a prescription was required for nicotine patches.

My turning point came one night when I woke up with pain in my chest.  Actually, not just pain, but PAIN -- like my heart was in a vice that someone was cranking tighter and tighter each time I took a breath.  And with this pain came a sense of fear close to terror -- something I thankfully haven't experienced as strongly again.  After the one and only ambulance ride of my life (well, so far) and a blur of activity in the Emergency Room, I wound up in the Intensive Care Unit overnight.  When my physician visited me the next day he gave me the wonderful news that I had not suffered a heart attack but rather a bout of something called acute pericarditis, which is an inflammation of the membrane surrounding the heart. The causes of this are not always clear, it happens most often to men between 20-50, and it often never occurs again.

Of course, I was waiting for the inevitable lecture about how smoking had led to this and was yet another reason to stop.  But my physician was honest and straight with me -- smoking was most likely not the cause, but of course it does contribute to the likelihood of heart attacks, something I really didn't want to experience if the pain was anything like the pericarditis attack.  Also, being in the ICU gave me the opportunity to achieve my 24-hour smokeless goal, because I had already gone 20 or so hours without a cigarette.  So I told my physician I wanted to try to quit smoking if he would help me.  He wrote me a prescription on the spot for a round of nicotine patches, and also for something which turned out to be critical -- an anti-panic drug.

I started with the biggest patch possible. I joke that I opted for the full wet-suit size. The patches helped numb the craving but it was the anti-panic pills that were key to continuing my effort to quit (I think it was called Xanax).  As I progressed to smaller patches the panic attacks grew less intense and less frequent.  But I learned that the patches couldn't provide the sudden "hit" of nicotine that was one of the things that made smoking so pleasurable to me, and the pills didn't deal with the craving for those.  These days there are substitutes that can provide a sudden increase in nicotine but they weren't available then.

After several months I made it to the nicotine-free level and though I had to continue the anti-panic pills occasionally, I didn't relapse into smoking and eventually I stopped them.

Before I quit smoking the public campaigns against the habit were relentless and often hyperbolic.  Smoking was the evil weed, responsible for everything from lung cancer to hangnails to global warming.  And life after smoking was touted as marvelous and just short of heaven itself.  Your sense of taste and smell would return from the dead, you would have fewer colds, better eyesight, and your hair would grow back. You would become a sexual athlete, your IQ would go up by 30 points, and you would succeed at business without really trying.  I think in retrospect that these over-the-top campaigns were probably responsible for as many relapses as they might have been for attempts to quit smoking because when the promised benefits didn't happen the residual cravings took over.

Indeed, I found that most of the promises were empty or misleading, at least at first. I believe it was my pre-existing skepticism of the claims that prevented my relapse when I found they weren't true or were exaggerated.  I did not immediately feel better.  I had just as many colds as before and they were just as severe.  My sense of taste didn't change, although I immediately gained weight because my appetite increased.  I did notice an increase in my sense of smell, but as one friend who had quit a few years before me joked, "The good news is you can smell better.  The bad news is that a lot of things smell really bad."  He was absolutely correct.  For example, I soon found a lot of men's colognes and women's perfumes to be really obnoxious -- scents that had been pleasantly muted before I quit smoking were now almost nauseatingly strong.

One thing that didn't smell bad to me was cigarette smoke. In fact I embraced it even though it occasionally re-kindled my desire.  Even to this day it doesn't smell that bad to me and I'm not one of those people who complain loudly if they get even a hint of someone's cigarette smoke.  Often these complainers are the very people whose cologne or perfume fills the air with a near-choking intensity-- they are habituated to it, otherwise it would probably completely mask the smell of tobacco smoke.  In general, I've tried to avoid becoming one of those holier-than-thou ex-smokers who show no compassion whatsoever for those who are still struggling with the habit. When I was smoking those crusaders had the opposite effect on me than they intended -- their stridency actually deepened my resolve to assert my own will, no matter how self-destructive that was.

Twenty years have passed and so far I've avoided the cancerous consequences of smoking, though the probability of lung cancer will never fall to what it would be had I never smoked.  Another sobering thought comes from the fact that I started smoking at a very young age (as an 8-10 year-old trying to emulate my two older siblings) and smoked more or less continuously for the next 40 years. Given my age when I quit, it is very unlikely I will live smoke-free for as many years as I smoked.

I'm very glad I quit, if for no other reason than recovering my self-esteem.  As an intellectual I knew full well that I was killing myself and harming others in the process, and that the logical, prudent thing was to quit.  But my habit was way beyond control by logic -- I was addicted and addiction required a different approach than simply reasoning with myself.  I'm very thankful for the pericarditis attack kick-starting that different approach.

People often ask if I still crave tobacco.  The answer is a sad one.  Yes. The craving isn't very strong and I have no intention of smoking again, but this shows just how thorough a grip something can have on you.

No matter how smart you think you are.

Fasten Your Seatbelts: Your Reward Miles Are In For A Bumpy Ride

I predict that airline reward "miles" will soon disappear, judging from a recent move by Delta.  In a stunning display of "it's a feature not a flaw," the company announced that starting in 2015 it will determine the number of reward "miles" on the basis of the ticket price, not the miles flown, and tried to tout this as an improvement for customers. As one Delta executive said in an interview with CBS news, the change was necessary because people paying top dollar for Business and First Class were having difficulty because so many seats were already taken by award travelers who had upgraded using their miles.  Imagine the gall of those riff-raft -- actually cashing in their award miles!  (Obviously my snide addition).  By changing to a revenue-based reward system, the company wished to recognize those travelers who contribute most to the bottom line.

Most industry analysts have determined that the new change effectively cuts the miles awarded for most travelers by 20-50%.  Despite what Delta says, this includes those who purchase more expensive tickets in Business Class because Delta is also dropping the bonus for this higher class of service. For instance, in a careful analysis by The Points Guy, the current award for an economy Delta ticket from Seattle to Boston is 4,992 miles versus 2,240 under the new system. For Business Class it is currently 7,448 miles (including the bonus) but will be 7,050 miles next year. The only time Business and First Class will actually benefit from the new system will be on very long haul flights, such as New York to London. Economy travelers, though will see dramatic cuts on these routes.

And there is still another shoe to drop -- Delta has held off announcing what the new requirements will be for obtaining award travel (i.e., cashing in your miles), which will likely be raised (again).  In other words, fewer miles awarded and more miles required to actually benefit from being in the Delta loyalty program. Hmmm.

Airlines have been moving in this direction for some time by issuing reward credit cards that allow people to earn miles for purchases that have nothing to do with travel.  The more you spend, the more miles you accrue, whether it is on buying milk or magazines.  Delta has now completely disconnected actual travel and reward miles -- the only thing that drives the reward process is money spent.  The more expensive the ticket the more you earn.  Period.  At this point it will be more accurate and honest to drop the "miles" and use a term like "points" or "units."  This seems to also be more in the spirit of what drives our economy -- spending, not saving.  Perhaps we should just give Delta credit for being honest:  you get what you pay for -- nothing is really free -- and the more you have the more you get.

In fact, I have to admit that if airlines had begun their rewards programs with this kind of structure I think I could have easily accepted it.  I use other programs that are based on this idea -- cash back credit cards, for example, and they seem perfectly reasonable to me.  I think what irks me here, though is the change from one kind of philosophy to another, and the motivation behind it.  It feels like a "bait-and-switch" -- I joined reward programs because I saw the value of the reward structure, but now the structure has been altered in a way that doesn't recognize my past loyalty and seems not to care much for my future loyalty, either. But then, I've never paid for a Business Class or First Class ticket and never will, and Delta is making it very clear that unless I do they aren't interested in rewarding me for using their airline.

The other irksome thing to me is that this kind of change comes when Delta is earning great profits and is hardly cutting corners in some areas.  For example, based on a $1 billion profit for 2012, Delta boosted CEO Richard Anderson's total compensation by 42%, to $12.6 million (about $ 3 million in cash, the rest in stock options and deferred retirement compensation).

I suspect he'll get a big bonus this year, too.  Perhaps we should give it to him in Reward Miles.
____________________________________
Some Relevant Resources and Related Blogs:
Delta to Frequent Flyers: Distance Mileage Is Over, Show Us the Money - Businessweek
Taking a Deeper Look at Delta’s New Mileage Earning Structure for 2015 and Beyond | The Points Guy

Delta Air Lines boosts CEO's pay package by 42%|USA Today| 

Top 10 Reasons Why I Dumped Delta | The Points Guy
Business Math + Banker's Math III:  Flying High (Snow Crash)
Flying the (Un)Friendly Skies (Snow Crash)