Showing posts with label numbers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label numbers. Show all posts

Friday, August 28, 2026

Why did Donald Trump rename Lake Ontario, whose area is the smallest of the five Great Lakes, to Lake America?


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yesterday President Donald J. Trump issued an Executive Order titled Honoring the American History of the Great Lakes and Renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America. Section 2 says (paragraph breaks added by me):

 

“Sec. 2.  Lake America.  (a)  The body of water currently known as Lake Ontario is a tremendous asset to the United States and part of our Nation’s heritage.  With the deepest parts of the Lake’s waters lying within United States territory, the United States claims most of the Lake’s volume.  

 

The Lake has long been an integral asset to American exploration, settlement, commerce, and defense.  From the colonial period through the early republic, the Lake served as a critical artery for American trade, commerce, and military logistics, including the establishment in Oswego of a historic fort and the first United States port of call from the St. Lawrence Seaway, shipbuilding and naval operations during the War of 1812 at Sackets Harbor and other New York posts, and the movement of goods, settlers, and later industrial cargoes that linked the interior of the United States to eastern markets and the Atlantic.  

 

Maritime commerce on the broader Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system — of which the Lake is the easternmost and gateway segment — continues to generate substantial economic activity for the United States, supporting hundreds of thousands of American jobs and billions of dollars in annual economic output, cargo value, and related business revenue, with our  ports, carriers, and States deriving a significant share of the system’s benefits in iron ore, limestone, coal, agricultural products, and other bulk commodities.  

 

Water from the Lake is used to supply nuclear, natural gas, and oil-fired power plants and to supply municipal drinking water to nearby communities.  United States domestic and cross-border shipping activity on the Great Lakes system has historically underpinned regional manufacturing, steel production, agriculture, and energy supply chains in several States, reflecting the strategic and economic importance of these waters to the United States that continues to this day.  The Lake will continue to play a pivotal role in shaping America’s future and the global economy.  

 

In recognition of this flourishing economic resource and its critical importance to our Nation’s economy and its people, I am directing that the Lake officially be renamed as Lake America.”

 

There an article by Deepa Shivaram at npr on August 27, 2026 titled Trump directs federal government to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America. Another article by Louis Casiano at Fox News on August 27, 2026 is titled Trump renames Lake Ontario ‘Lake America’ amid intensifying US-Canada trade dispute. Still another article by Madison E. Goldberg at People on August 27, 2026 is titled New York Governor Slams Trump’s ‘Lake America’ Stunt, Noting Great Lakes Acronym Went From ‘HOMES’ to ‘SHAME.’

 

And there is a three-minute YouTube video at the New York Post on August 27, 2026 titled ‘It’s official’: Trump signs order renaming Lake Ontario ‘Lake of America’[sic]. When he was asked what message are you sending, he bizarrely answered ‘no message.’ He should have just briefly quoted from Section 2 of his Executive Order.

 

There is a Wikipedia page titled List of lakes by area with the following information showing Lake Ontario is the smallest and least impressive (as also can be seen above in a satellite view):

 

Areas for the Great Lakes (in square miles)

Lake Superior   31,700

Lake Huron       23,000

Lake Michigan  22,300

Lake Erie             9,910

Lake Ontario       7,340

 

And there is another Wikipedia page titled List of Lakes by volume:

 

Volumes for the Great Lakes (in cubic miles)

Lake Superior   2,900

Lake Michigan  1,180

Lake Huron          840

Lake Ontario        391

Lake Erie              117

 

There is a third Wikipedia page titled List of Lakes by depth with a table of Lakes ranked by maximum depth (maximums above 1300 feet) that only shows Lake Superior as 1,332 feet and #39 in the world. Another table with Lakes ranked by mean depth only shows Lake Superior as 482 feet and #66 in the world.

 

When we look at web pages for the individual Great Lakes we can find the following:

 

Maximum Depths for the Great Lakes (in feet)

Lake Superior   1333

Lake Michigan    923

Lake Ontario       802

Lake Huron         750    

Lake Erie             210

 

Average Depths for the Great Lakes (in feet)

Lake Superior    483

Lake Ontario      283

Lake Michigan   279

Lake Huron        195

Lake Erie             63

 

Lake Ontario doesn’t come in first based on Area, Volume, Maximum Depth, or Average Depth. Lake Superior comes first in all four of those rankings! It is what we rather should have chosen to call Lake America.

 

The only reason for choosing to rename Lake Ontario is to antagonize Canada by eliminating the lake with the same name as one of their provinces. (We already have Lake Michigan which has the same name as a U.S. state).

 

 

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

The U. S. national debt now is forty trillion dollars. What does that really mean?


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As shown above, we can express forty billion by different factors of a thousand, as multiples of a trillion, billion, million, or thousand.

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is an article by John Towfighi at CNN Business on August 23, 2026 titled The national debt just hit $40 trillion. But just how big is $40 trillion. He answers that question by asking What is my share? Divide that number by the population of the U.S. The Joint Economic Committee at the United States Congress has a Debt Dashboard with lots of statistics. As shown above, one of them is that the total gross national debt amounts to $116,480 per person.

 

And if we look at a web page from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis for Real Median Personal Income in the United States, we find that the latest number from 2024 was $45,140. So, the national debt per person is about 2.6 times the median income. Thus we are not able to quickly pay it off.

 

Back on August 17, 2011 I blogged about How to make a large number incomprehensible – or comprehensible. And on And on July 12, 2016 I blogged about How to make statistics understandable. More recently on December 23, 2024 I blogged about How should we present a huge number like the two billion dollars earned by the Taylor Swift Eras tour?

 

The cartoon bag of money came from OpenClipArt.

 

 

Saturday, August 1, 2026

Buying a whole-house air purifier


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I bought an Airdog X8 home air purifier, as is shown above. It is a console 15” square by 30” high. We put it in our living room.  

 

Lately we have suffered from unsatisfactory air quality due to smoke from large wildfires. In Boise that smoke is blowing east from central and eastern Oregon. I decided to purchase a whole-house air purifier. There is an article by Courtney Linkwall in the May-June 2026 issue of Consumer Reports titled How to Pick the Right Air Purifier. It says that most purifiers use a certified HEPA (high efficiency particulate air) filter, sometimes with an activated carbon filter.  

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those purifiers basically are just a fancy box with a fan and holders for disposable filters. Under Features that article listed the annual cost for replacing filters. For our HVAC system we already have 20”x20” and 14”x14” (shown above) pleated paper filters that have to be changed every three months. They are inlets for holding them on the second-floor ceiling.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At the end of the listing for Extra Large Rooms there was an alternative - the Airdog X8 which instead used an electrostatic/ionizer and washable filters (so no annual cost for replacing disposable filters). For example at Amazon, the AeraMax SV has an initial cost of $486 versus the $1199 for the Airdog X8. But the AeraMax SV has an annual cost of $293 for filters. As shown above, after two and a half years the AeraMax already will begin costing more total than the Airdog.  

 

 

Friday, July 31, 2026

Do wind turbines kill all the birds? Or is it the cats instead?


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Donald J. Trump often cites a very questionable number. Then he shows a lack of credibility by continuing to repeat it - even after it has been debunked. A number also needs to be put into context. How does it compare with other related numbers?

 

Back on June 2, 2016, there is an article by Vanessa Schipani at FactCheck.org titled Trump’s Hot Air on Wind Energy which said that:

 

“Scientific studies have come up with a wide range of mean estimates concerning bird mortality due to wind farms – from 20,000 to 573,000 bird deaths per year. But no study has estimated that wind farms presently kill 1 million birds a year, as Trump claimed.

 

 …A 2013 Nature study by Loss and others estimated that ‘free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds’ in the U.S. annually. But the researchers added, ‘Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality.’

 In another study published in the journal The Condor in 2014, Loss and colleagues also estimated ‘that between 365 [million] and 988 million birds … are killed annually by building collisions in the U.S., with roughly 56% of mortality at low-rises, 44% at residences, and <1% at high-rises.’”

There is another article by Sophie Lewis at CBS News on October 23, 2020 titled Trump claims wind energy “kills all the birds.” Cats and windows are actually much more to blame. She said:

 

“During Thursday night's final presidential debate between the president and former Vice President Joe Biden, Mr. Trump reiterated his stance against wind energy with a peculiar claim: It ‘kills all the birds.’ 

 ‘I know more about wind than you do,’ Mr. Trump told Biden when moderator Kristen Welker turned to the topic of climate change. ‘It's extremely expensive. Kills all the birds. It's very intermittent. Got a lot of problems.’ "

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

A more recent article by Hannah Ritchie in By the Numbers on January 30, 2024 titled How many birds do wind farms kill? had the statistics that are shown above in a horizontal bar chart with a logarithmic scale. Cats killed 2400 million birds, while wind turbines killed just 1.2 million. So cats killed 2000 times as many as wind turbines! And cats were one of six categories that killed more birds than wind turbines did.

 

There is also an article by Joe Schwarcz at the McGill Office for Science and Society on October 11, 2024 titled The Windmills in Donald Trump’s Mind. And another article by Michael Doyle at E&E News on September 12, 2025 is titled Wind turbines aren’t the biggest threat to birds.

 

An image of wind turbines in Power County, Idaho was cropped from this one at Wikimedia Commons.  

 

 

Sunday, July 26, 2026

Celebrating another milestone of over five million total page views on my Joyful Public Speaking blog


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Stats tab on Google Blogger says this blog now has 5,026,125 page views!

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

In the past year there were about 2,200,000 page views, distributed as is shown above. For the past 12 months the daily maximum was 32,775 on June  21, 2026.

 

And over the past month there were 292,000 page views. The daily results were a maximum of 32,926 on July 24th – over sixteen times the minimum of 1986 on July 8th.

 

The image of an hp laptop was adapted from this one at Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

Wednesday, July 15, 2026

The Extended Date/Time Format (EDTF) is a standard digital way for listing dates and times


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this blog I refer to dates for articles, etc. in the usual American format of Month_ Day,_Year. But I am aware that the British instead put the Day first.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a standard way of listing dates and times using only numbers called the Extended Date/Time Format (EDTF), as shown above, with dashes between date items and colons between time items using a 24-hour clock.

 

The Library of Congress has an article on February 4, 2019 about this Extended Date/Time Format (EDTF). And Wikipedia has a page on the International Standard for it, which is ISO 8601. Markus Kuhn at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center has an article with A summary of the international standard date and time notation.

 

Finally, there is a very detailed 23-page pdf article by Annamarie C. Klose, Scott Goldstein, and Morris S. Levy in Library Resources and Technical Services on October 2025 titled It’s About Time and subtitled Use of the Extended Date/Time Format in the Digital Public Library of America.

 

 

Monday, June 15, 2026

Two more silly claims that 95% of the world population fears public speaking


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I get extremely irritated when I read claims that almost everyone fears public speaking. At Facebook on June 1, 2026 there is a post from Manish Gupta which states that:

 

“Around 95% of the world’s population has the fear of Public Speaking. It also means that only 5% have the courage to stand up in front of a crowd. Do you want to join the 5% brigade? Do you want to be a part of the select few who walk around confidently with this skill? Do you want to master this one skill which can do wonders in your life? If yes, then do call us right away!”

 

Also, in a 2022 book by Peter J. Copeland titled How to Overcome Work Stress: An Office Survival Guide it is claimed that:

 

“In fact, statistics show that some degree of fear/nervousness in public speaking affects about 95% of all speakers.”

 

But those assertions are without any backing, just ipse dixits.

 

On December 1, 2024 I blogged about Does 95% of the population experience public speaking fear? And my answer was no. There are no surveys covering the whole world. And back on December 20, 2016 I blogged about Bursting the overblown claim that 95% of Americans fear public speaking at some level. On October 23, 2025 I posted on how In the eleventh Chapman Survey of American Fears for 2025, public speaking only was ranked #46 of 67 fears at 33.7%. Detailed results from that survey are:

 

Grand Sum for Very Afraid,

Afraid, and Slightly Afraid  68.5%

Sum for Very Afraid

and Afraid                             33.7% 

Very Afraid                            15.5%

Afraid                                     18.1%

Slightly Afraid                       34.9%   

Not Afraid                             31.4%

Web Blank (Don’t Know)      0.1%

 

That Grand Sum is more than 25% lower than the 95% Mr. Gupta claimed. According to the Wikipedia page on Demographics of the United States the 2025 estimated population is 341,784,857. 21.5% are under 18, so 78.5% are over, for an adult population of about 268,300,000 adults. 33.7% of that is about 90,417,000 people who significantly fear public speaking. Or, using the Grand Sum, about 68.5% or 183,790,000 people fear public speaking at some level. Those real numbers are more impressive statistics than overstated percentages.

 

My cartoon was created in PowerPoint from a globe and monkey at OpenClipArt.

 

 

Monday, May 11, 2026

Covering your floor with tilings (tessellations)


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We could find a speech topic just by looking down at the floor of a room. Our bathrooms have a grid consisting of brown 20“ square tiles. (Back when I was growing up we had much smaller white hexagonal tiles). You also could use triangles. There are Wikipedia pages for a Triangular tiling, a Square tiling, and a Hexagonal tiling. The mathematical term is Tessellation, for which Wikipedia says:

 

“A tessellation or tiling is the covering of a surface, often a plane, using one or more geometric shapes, called tiles, with no overlaps and no gaps." 

 

Tiling can have translational symmetry (be periodic) or not (be aperiodic). There is a Wikipedia page for Penrose tiling that begins:

 

“A Penrose tiling is an example of an aperiodic tiling. Here, a tiling is a covering of the plane by non-overlapping polygons or other shapes, and a tiling is aperiodic if it does not contain arbitrarily large periodic regions or patches. However, despite their lack of translational symmetry, Penrose tilings may have both reflection symmetry and fivefold rotational symmetry. Penrose tilings are named after mathematician and physicist Roger Penrose, who investigated them in the 1970s.

 

There are several variants of Penrose tilings with different tile shapes. The original form of Penrose tiling used tiles of four different shapes, but this was later reduced to only two shapes: either two different rhombi, or two different quadrilaterals called kites and darts. The Penrose tilings are obtained by constraining the ways in which these shapes are allowed to fit together in a way that avoids periodic tiling.”

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More recently single aperiodic tiles (monotile or ein stein for one stone) were found, like the hat shown above. The hat got mentioned at the beginning of a monologue at Jimmy Kimmel Live on March 29, 2023 For more detail, watch this 5-1/ 2 minute YouTube video by Aylien on June 2, 2023 titled Finally, a true Aperiodic Monotile. There also is an 18 minute video from Up and Atom on September 3, 2023 titled How a Hobbyist Solved a 50-Year-Old Math Problem (Einstein Tile).

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There also are a Turtle, and a Spectre. 

 

If you want to see the math, there is one 91-page pdf article by David Smith et al. at Combinatorial Theory in 2024, (Volume 4, Number 1) titled An Aperiodic Monotile. A second 25-page pdf article (also by David Smith et al.) in Combinatorial Theory for 2024, Volume 4, Number 2 is titled A Chiral Aperiodic Monotile.

 

How did I find this topic? I read about it in Matt Parker’s 2024 book Love Triangle: How trigonometry shapes the world. In his chapter five, Well Fit, the final section is titled Don’t Make Me Repeat Myself:

 

“For a long time, the holy grail for mathematical tiling patterns was a polygon that could perfectly cover a surface but in a way that never repeats. One thing all the tiling patterns we’ve seen so far have in common is that they repeat periodically. I only had to give the builders a small diagram of snub-square tiling because once they got the pattern correct it could be repeated forever. Easy.

 

Mathematicians dreamed of a shape that sat right on the cusp between order and chaos. Some polygons are able to cover a surface with no gaps in a neat pattern, and others cannot fit together without gaps. But imagine a shape that brings both sides together; it cannot form a repeating pattern yet it still can cover a surface.

 

This mystical tiling pattern is called ‘aperiodic.’ A lot of tiles can form a ‘non periodic’ pattern: square tiles can be arranged with each row offset a different, irrational amount from the previous. Technically, this is a pattern that never repeats. But an aperiodic pattern involves the stronger condition that it is impossible to arrange the tiles in a periodic fashion. Square tiles could be knocked back into a periodic pattern and so they don’t count.

 

The first set of aperiodic tiles was found in 1964, but it involved combining 20,426 different shapes of tiles together. By 1974 this had been reduced to a set of two shapes, called Penrose tiles, which were aperiodic as a team, but the search was still on for a monotile that could be aperiodic all on its own. This mysterious, hypothetical shape was often called the ‘einstein’ as a hilarious German-language pun on ‘one stone.’

 

Even though mathematicians had yet to find an Einstein tile, they did know some things about what it must be like (if it did exist). Recall Rao’s proof from 2017 showing that all the convex pentagons that could tile had been found. This completed the search for all convex polygons, and every single one that could cover a surface did so in a nice periodic fashion. If there was an aperiodic monotile out there, it was not convex. It must have concave, sticking-in bits.

 

In 2010 an Einstein was discovered! But it was a terrible shape. The Socolar-Taylor tile, named after its discoverers, was an aperiodic monotile but it wasn’t contiguous. Several little disjointed pieces all made up, technically, ‘one tile.’ Having tiles each made from a collection of disparate parts did feel unsatisfactory. In a follow-up publication the discoverers described it as ‘an Einstein according to a reasonable definition’ Which is absolutely true. But both mathematicians and builders agreed that each tile being a solid piece was an even more reasonable definition.

 

Then in March 2023 it was found. The first ever aperiodic monotile. See if you can guess if it was someone messing around on their kitchen table at home or an advanced computer search! Answer to follow. I remember the release vividly: the news broke on March 21 and on March 22 I was due to give a public lecture at the Royal Society in London called ‘Every Interesting Bit of Maths Ever.’ A swift rewrite ensued.

 

The excitement was instant. It swept through the maths world very quickly, and the mainstream media was not far behind. Th mathematicians who had found the shape had dubbed it ‘the Hat’ because thy thought it looked like a hat. It has also been claimed to look a lot like a shirt. The point is, it was a nice, tidy, public-friendly shape. Before long people were 3D printing them, baking cookies shaped like them. My friend, Aliean MacDonald showed up for my Royal Society lecture in a Hat-covered dress she had made herself.

 

There was something about the Hat that made it popular with the public and mathematicians alike: it was surprisingly simple. Given this shape had been eluding the entire mathematics community for over half a century, nobody expected it to be so straightforward. It’s a 13-sided polygon, far fewer sides than I would have predicted. It’s concave, as expected, but it doesn’t have any detached, fragmented bits or any holes. When I look at it, I see a slightly modified equilateral triangle. Even in the research paper announcing its discovery says, ‘The shape is almost mundane in its simplicity.

 

None of this is to devalue the incredible feat of finding the Hat. It was discovered by a retired print technician, David Smith, doing some recreational maths at home on his kitchen table. He had been designing shapes in a tiling software package when he outlined the Hat and realized there was no obvious way to arrange it in a tiling pattern But it looked like it should fit together nicely. David cut 30 of them out of cardboard and found they did fit together but with no obvious pattern Another 30 copies were cut out and added to the tiling; still no pattern.

 

He contacted mathematician Craig Kaplan, who used some adopted software to explore how far the Hat could tile. It tiled further than any other known non-tiling shape, which strongly suggested the Hat could indeed cover any infinite surface. Yet the patterns it formed were not periodic. More mathematicians were recruited, and soon they managed to prove that the Hat was indeed an aperiodic monotile. For completeness they even proved it two different ways. The first proof was done using a computer, which worked but didn’t offer any insight into why the shape was aperiodic. As they said in the paper, ‘These calculations are necessarily ad hoc, and are essentially unenlightening.’ So they proved it again in a much more satisfactory way. There was now no doubt this was the Einstein shape everyone had been looking for.

 

Then David found another one.

 

Dubbed ‘the Turtle’, it was a second example of an Einstein. It felt wildly unlikely that two unrelated einsteins would be found so close together by the same person. And, after a bit of digging, the tile team found that the Hat and the Turtle were in fact two members of the same ‘family’ of tiles. This is the same as how we consider all rectangles part of the same family of shapes, each member of the family having a different ratio between the two edge lengths. Actually, since the ratio in a rectangle can be anything, the family of rectangles is infinite. The same is true of the Hat family, but it’s a less straightforward ratio. The original Hat is made from two different side-lengths ( 1 and Ö3) and those lengths can be varied to produce other einsteins.  

 

When the side-lengths are the other way around, Ö3 and 1, the resulting shape is the Turtle. All the other ratios work as well, with three exceptions. If the entire infinite family of Hat tiles was put in a line, and labeled with their distinguishing two side-lengths, it would start with tile 0, 1 and end with tile 1, 0. Both of these end tiles are not technically aperiodic. They can be arranged to be nonperiodic but also have alternate periodic arrangements.

 

Strangely, the very middle 1, 1 tile is also not aperiodic. For a shape to be aperiodic it needs to walk a very fine line between order and chaos; too much order and it becomes periodic; too much chaos and it ceases to completely cover a surface. Having the two edge lengths the same tips this middle class into having just enough order to be periodic. But, on the plus side, we are still left with infinitely many other shapes that do work.

 

Classic maths. You wait half a century for one aperiodic monotile and then infinitely many of them show up at once. The only slight disappointment was that all of these tilings use the reflection of the tile within the tiling. Which is something the mathematicians are OK with, but actual bathroom tiles and paving blocks come with a front and a back. So, annoyingly, the Hat would not make a good bathroom tile. For that a new Einstein will need to be found that tiles without using its reflection. We can only hope.

 

And that hope has already paid off! In May 2023 the same team came back with a chiral aperiodic monotile – one that tiles without using reflections – just over two months after the first Einstein had been announced. I will add that two months was the perfect amount of time for the mathematics-communication community to have just finished work on all manner of podcasts, videos, blog posts, and magazine articles telling the ‘definitive’ story of the Einstein before bam: all obsolete. (Goodness knows what will be announced the second this book gets published.)

 

This new shape was named ‘the Specter’ [sic], and it was also hiding in plain sight. David found it right in the middle of the Hat family: it’s the shape with 1, 1 edges that we had previously discounted! All of the Hat tilings that were aperiodic needed to use their reflections, but it was the reflection of the 1, 1 tile that stopped it from being aperiodic. If reflections were banned then it would become aperiodic. David and the team realized that by curving the edges in a special way they could remove the ability for the reflected version to fit at all, turning the Specter [sic] into a ‘strictly chiral aperiodic monotile.’ Mission accomplished!

 

I feel like, over time, the general public gradually builds up the capacity to pay attention to a breaking maths story (like a video-game power bar), and the Hat came out at just the right time, depleting the reservoir of excitement. When the Specter [sic] was announced two months later it didn’t even register as a blip on the mainstream media or in the public consciousness. Sure, maths people were super excited – this was arguably the more amazing result – but the general populace had no need for another new shape so soon. Even though this one is ideal for tiling a bathroom.

 

At the time of writing I am wondering what the next startling new shape will be. It could come from anywhere. I have contacted the Hat team to double-check they don’t have some other new tilings to be announced the moment I finalize this manuscript. Because after they found the whole Hat family and saw how nonexotic the shapes were, they wrote, ‘We might therefor hope that a zoo of interesting new monotiles will emerge in its wake,’

 

I also hope it does. But not until the next edition of this book.”    

 

 

Thursday, May 7, 2026

An addition mistake in a recent article from the Idaho Freedom Foundation


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We need to carefully edit what we write, even just a table with a sum of six numbers. There is an article by Fred Birnbaum at the Idaho Freedom Foundation on April 30, 2026 titled Saving money should not be a thankless task for legislators. Fred’s LinkedIn page says has an MBA, so dealing with numbers should not be a thankless task for him. 

  


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That article contains the table shown above, which I have annotated. The line for Total saved before Governor Veto is listed as $107,576,800 – but is $800 too large; it should be $107,576,000. You can easily spot that the hundreds digit is wrong, since there are two 2s and a 6 which should total to 10 rather than 8. And similarly, the Total saved after Governor Veto is listed as $107,098,200 – but it also should be $800 smaller at $107,097,400.  

 

The adding machine image came from Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

Saturday, May 2, 2026

Celebrating a milestone of four million total page views on this Joyful Public Speaking Blog


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

This blog just hit a milestone – a total of over four million page views (exactly 4,002,327).

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As shown above, over the past month the daily results were a maximum of 21,529 on April 22nd and a minimum of 812 on April 5th. There are wild fluctuations!

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And, for the past 12 months the daily maximum was 32,316 on August 21st, 2025.

 

The computer cartoon was adapted from one at OpenClipArt.

 

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

Another three stories from Kevin Ashton’s compelling new book The Story of Stories: The million-year history of a uniquely human art.

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My previous post was titled The Story of Stories: The Million-Year History of a Uniquely Human Art is a compelling new book by Kevin Ashton. There are eight chapters in that book, titled as follows:

 

Chapter 1  A Million Years of Stories  1

Chapter 2  The Eye of Your Mind  34

Chapter 3  Pictures of Sounds  59

Chapter 4  The War of Stories  92   

Chapter 5  The All-Seeing Eye of Providence  136

Chapter 6  One One Zero  169

Chapter 7  Death by a Thousand Stories  210

Chapter 8  The Hyperreal Thing  250

 

Here are another three quotations out of this book. The tenth section in the fourth chapter, The War of Stories, is titled Story Factories. It begins on the bottom of page 130:

 

“Wood based paper first appeared in Germany in the 1840s, and by the end of the 1870s most printers in North America and Western Europe were using it. Not long after that, all paper was made from wood and none was made from rags. In less than thirty years, the price of paper fell by over 90 percent. In 1860 a pound of rags cost 44 US cents before pulping. In 1889, a pound of wood cost 4 cents after pulping. The invention of the mass production of mass communication, started by Gutenberg 450 years earlier was complete. An industrial revolution had transformed storytelling, and now there were story factories all over the world.


 


 

 

 

 

  

 

Those factories produced ever more stories, told by ever more storytellers, reproduced ever more times. In 1449, the year before Gutenberg’s printing press became operational, Europeans published two thousand new books and made an average of twenty-five copies of each one. In 1900, after paper made from wood replaced paper made from rags, Europeans published twenty thousand new books and, on average, there were twenty-five hundred copies of each one: ten times more stories a year, told by ten times more storytellers, to a hundred times more people.”  

 

The second section in the fifth chapter, The All-Seeing Eye of Providence, is titled Experience. It begins on page 139:

 

“We are now halfway through The Story of Stories. The first half covered a million years of storytelling, from the first nightfires to the first telecommunications; the second half covers only two hundred years.

 

This imbalance – four chapters for one million years, four chapters for 200 years – arises because the book’s structure is not time but change, and change is not linear: Its rate increases so much that the next two hundred years of the story of stories contains as much change as the first million years.

 

When we look at almost any example of long-term human progress, we see change speeding up around the fifteenth century. This acceleration was once mistaken for a sudden springlike return to creation after a centuries-long winterlike freeze: a ‘renaissance’ preceded by ‘dark ages.’ The various versions of this mistake are all story-shaped: They center heroic protagonists and, by implication, individual human agency, hidden behind hand-wavy vaguenesses like culture or faith.

 

This ever-increasing, ever-continuing rate of change is not caused by individual human agency. The change causes itself, especially the change in storytelling. Our increasing acceleration of innovation arises from our accumulation of equality, liberty, and freedom of thought; of health, life expectancy, and population; and of time for nonsubsistence activities, all of which exist because we have ever more ways to share experience using stories.

 

Experience is knowledge that we have stored and recorded. Before we could recall and retell stories, we stored our experiences in the error-prone, personal, private, and, above all, mortal medium of memory. The rise of storytelling, through speaking, singing, painting, writing, and printing, enshrined ever more experience in ways ever more immortal. Printing is especially good at transforming one person’s experience into everyone’s experience: Frederick Douglass died in 1895, for example, but we can forever share some of his lived experience as a slave by reading his books.

 

The invention of the printing press enabled and inspired ever more inventions for storing and sharing experiences, among them the first atlas in 1482, the first postal service in 1516, the first book of mathematical references and tables in 1533, the first peer-reviewed scientific journal in 1655, the first school textbook in 1690, and the first bookstore in 1732.

 

These inventions laid the foundation for an explosion of new storytelling technologies, many of them powered by electricity, in the nineteenth century, including the first electric telegraph in 1816, the first free, taxpayer-funded public library in 1833, the first photograph in 1838, the first paperback in 1841, the first practical typewriter in 1867, the first carbon copy in 1870 (now the vestigial ‘cc’ – carbon copy – and ‘bcc’ -blind carbon copy – options in the ‘send’ field of every email), the first telephone in 1876, the first duplicating machine for low-volume home, school, and office use in 1886, the first record player in 1887, and the first movie screening and the first radio transmission in 1895.

 

The speed with which we invented, improved, and industrialized these electricity-powered storytelling tools was a consequence of the accelerative, self-reinforcing effect of shared experience. New story-telling technologies create new storytelling technologies. Where writing took five thousand years to mature and spread around the world, and printing took two thousand years, the electrified storytelling tools of the 1800s developed and dispersed in little more than a century.

 

These inventions turned the nineteenth century into what we would now call an age of big data, where someone sitting at their kitchen table could benefit from the thoughts and experiences of others, of almost any kind, from almost any place and time, and preserve their own thoughts and experiences in handwriting, or as a printing-like typewritten manuscript that could be duplicated cheaply and in any quantity, from one to millions.

 

The inventions of the nineteenth century also laid the foundation for a twentieth-century storytelling technology: the television, invented by Philo Farnsworth in 1927, 111 years after the invention of the electric telegraph.”

 

The eighth section in the fifth chapter, The All-Seeing Eye of Providence, is titled A New Literacy. On page 160:

 

“Reading only writing may have been sufficient when writing was the only technology of story, but it is not enough today. Everyone must be able to ‘read’ stories no matter what technology is being used to tell them.

 

This technology-independent literacy is sometimes called transliteracy, a term that originated in 2005 with Alan Liu, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and means ‘the ability to read, write and interact across a range of platforms, tools and media from signing and orality through handwriting, print, TV, radio and film, to digital social networks,’

 

Transliteracy is especially well understood by librarians, the underground freedom fighters in the war of stories, whose sworn duty is to connect people in the universe of the mass of humanity to knowledge. For example, here is Tom Ipri, a senior librarian at Temple University in Philadelphia, describing transliteracy’s importance:

 

Not only does transliteracy question previous assumptions of authority, it also calls into question the often assumed privilege of printed text. Transliteracy is not unique in questioning this bias – media literacy efforts have certainly tried to raise the profile of nonprint materials. But transliteracy is unique in combining democratizing communication formats, expressing no preference of one over the other, with emphasizing the social construction of meaning via diverse media. Because of the ways in which transliteracy questions authority and devalues hierarchical structures for disseminating information, transliteracy overlaps concerns much at the heart of librarianship.” 

 

Very detailed notes at the back of Kevin’s book point out that the above statement by Tom Ipri was edited for length from one in 2010 – it is a paraphrase rather than an exact quotation. You can find the original article by Tom Ipri at College and Research Library News (2010, Volume 71, Number 10) titled Introducing transliteracy: What does it mean to academic libraries? Also see the Wikipedia page for Transliteracy.

 

The 1904 drawing of a mysterious stranger (at the top left) telling a story came from the Library of Congress.