Unexpected Visitor and the Power Switch Mystery | April 02 2026, 18:01

Everything is normal, I’m working, suddenly there’s a knock from the backyard and the power goes out in the whole house. I look over my right shoulder – and there through the window IN MY LOCKED BACKYARD is some guy.

I go out, say hello. He’s like, “I’ve done everything.” I say, I noticed, but who are you exactly? He’s like—you submitted an application to switch to the EV tariff. Well, I had to press a button here. I say and you’ve pressed everything already?

He says – yes. I say then close the door behind you, because my dog got freaked out here.

Then the dog comes up. Sleepy. Stunned. Who’s this, he asks.

But generally, it would be nice at least to be warned about visits and the sudden power cut. I could have shut down my computer or something.

But now it will be $0.0732 per kWh at night, and $0.12694 during the day.

Insights from a Visit to the Civil War Medical Museum | March 10 2026, 15:59

Today a big interesting historical post.

Where I was: Historical Museum of Military (Civil War) Medicine in Frederick, MD. Entry is $9, $15 with a guide. For an hour and a half, we got a very smart guy who gave an interesting lecture, making the provincial museum really very interesting. We even tipped the guy afterward.

A few interesting facts that I didn’t know before. During the Civil War in the USA (1861-1865), there was a monstrous scale of losses – over 600,000 people. One in every ten was mobilized for the war. That is, excluding women, children, and the disabled – yes, someone from almost every family fought.

Apparently, Americans were not very experienced in wars back then, and organizing large groups of people was based on the “fend for yourself” principle. From gastrointestinal diseases alone, nearly four times more people died than from wounds. Soldiers cooked everything themselves – there was no cook or porridge for the platoon. They split into micro-groups of a few people, pooled whatever they had, and fried it on a fire. For some reason they mainly fried, not boiled (which also contributed to diseases). Their main rations were salt pork and hard-tack — crackers as hard as a stone. Fried hard-tacks were called Skillygalee.

Remember, it was not like that in European wars. And all because there were many of them, and they quickly figured out how to make them more effective. Plus, there was also a civil war, poorly organized and spontaneous.

Initially, soldiers were handed money in the field and they sent it to their families as best they could (not all reached its destination). For Southerners, money devalued faster than they could carry it to the tent. Back then, each state issued its own money. They write about 8000 different banknotes at that time. I didn’t quite believe it, started researching, and it turned out that this is still a very conservative estimate. Yes, anyone (state, city, private bank, railway, factory, and even a pharmacy) could print their own paper money. Each bank issued banknotes of its own design for different denominations ($1, $2, $3, $5, etc.). In 1860, there were about 1600 private banks in the USA, and almost each issued its own range of notes. But in the end, greenbacks – federal money prevailed.

They also told us about Dorothea Dix, the head of army nurses for the Union. She introduced an interesting age standard for the nurses. No “young and beautiful.” Only women over 30 years of age, “plain-looking,” no jewelry, fashionable dresses, or crinolines – only strict brown or black dresses. At that time, the appearance of a woman in a male military camp was considered almost indecent. Dorothea wanted the soldiers to see in the nurses strict mothers or aunts, not objects of flirtation.

To join the army, a volunteer was required to have at least two teeth opposing each other. Why? A soldier needed to quickly bite off the tip of a paper cartridge to pour the powder into the barrel. No teeth — you’re useless in battle.

Back then, they shot with Minié balls – made of soft lead. It was huge caliber (thumb-sized) and when it hit the body, it didn’t just pass through, it “burst” and literally turned bone into fine crumble. Repairing such a bone was impossible, so amputation became the only way to save a person from gangrene. At least there was some form of anesthesia (chloroform/ether).

Before the Civil War in the USA, people were buried where they died. But the war generated a demand: affluent Northern families wanted to bring their sons’ bodies home. That’s when embalming flourished. Right behind the front line were tents of “embalming surgeons” who for a decent sum (about $50–$100 for an officer) extracted blood and injected chemicals (arsenic and zinc) into the body. Actually, the museum building included such a place. Lincoln’s body after his assassination was transported across the entire country on a train, and it looked “alive” thanks to this new technology, which became the best advertisement for the new industry.

Overall, Frederick is a very nice city, full of art and nonconformists 🙂 Like our Leesburg, but 20 times bigger.

P.S. It was interesting to study what drove people to go die. Of course, our guide said “patriotism”.

But if you google, it turns out not quite so. Of course, in 1861 no one knew that the war would last 4 years and take 600,000 lives.

Reason #1 – boredom. Life on a farm in the mid-19th century was incredibly monotonous. War seemed like the greatest adventure in life. Guys thought: “I’ll go, see the world, shoot, become a hero, and then return to harvest.”

Reason #2 – naivety. The first volunteers went to the front as if on a picnic. In the first major battle (Bull Run), civilians from Washington even came with picnic baskets to watch the “spectacle,” until they were swept away by the retreating crowd of bloodied soldiers.

Reason #3 – “honor.” In the 19th century, “honor” was not an empty word. If you were a healthy guy and didn’t go to the army, you became an outcast in your own town. It’s written that girls often refused to go out with those who didn’t wear a uniform.

Reason #4 – “regimental solidarity.” As I already said, regiments were formed from neighbors. Not going to war meant betraying your friends, brothers, and father. Shame before neighbors was stronger than the fear of death.

What did they fight for?

Here the goals of the North and South radically differed:

For the North, the main idea was “Integrity of the Union.” For them, the USA was a great experiment in democracy that could not be allowed to fail. The slogan “Save the Union” was more powerful than “Free the Slaves.” At first, not everyone was ready to die for abolition of slavery.

For the South (Confederacy), the main motivation was “Defending their homes.” Most Southern soldiers did not own slaves (slavery was too expensive a luxury for ordinary farmers). But they were convinced that the “Yankee northerners” were coming to seize their land, burn their homes, and impose their rules. They saw themselves as heirs of Washington, fighting against “tyrant” Lincoln.

Reason #5 – bounties

When initial enthusiasm faded (by 1863), pure calculation played its part. States and the federal government started paying huge “enlistment bounties.” A sum of $500–$1000 was equivalent to a few years’ earnings for a laborer. For a poor immigrant (Irish or German) just off the boat in New York, it was a chance to provide for a family or buy a farm after the war.

In 1862-63, both sides introduced the draft, as volunteers were running out. This exposed social injustice.

In the North, you could officially avoid the army by paying $300 (huge money for a poor man, but manageable for the middle class) or find a “substitute” (a person who would fight in your place for money).

In the South, there was the “Twenty Negro Law.” Owning 20 or more slaves exempted you from service, as you were “needed in the rear for production control.”

This caused fierce resentment among ordinary soldiers. The famous “Draft Riots” in New York (1863) were sparked precisely by this sense of injustice.

So there you have it 🙂

Redefining Third World: Beyond Cold War Labels | March 07 2026, 03:36

Today I read that the Third World countries were initially countries not part of NATO (First World) or the socialist bloc (Second World), that is, countries such as Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, Ireland, and Austria. Some still use the term “developing countries,” where it is customary to include low-income countries, but, darn it, a developing country is actually a good definition. The one that has developed and stopped developing – that’s a signal. Incidentally, Qatar, which has the highest GDP per capita in the world, is formally considered developing.

Tesla vs. Gasoline: Analyzing Fuel Costs in 2025 | February 26 2026, 04:07

We bought a Tesla in mid-2025 – comparing gasoline costs to electricity costs.

Looking just at charging the Tesla, the stats are separate. Since buying, we’ve used 5000 kWh costing $738 – covering 13,550 miles. Meaning, traveling 18 miles (28 km) costs one dollar. On a Toyota RAV4, one dollar spent at the gas station gets me 10 miles (16 km).

Federal Reserve Under Pressure: Jerome Powell’s Video Address on Presidential Influence | January 12 2026, 21:43

In the Russian-speaking segment, this news is somehow not visible at all, none of the media outlets are writing about it. Yesterday, Jerome Powell, the chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, released a video message on the official Federal Reserve website’s homepage, stating that the president’s administration is putting pressure on him and his system, and part of this pressure involves trying to charge him for the building’s facade repairs.

The Federal Reserve System is the “bank of banks” and the main printing press of the world. Since the 1950s in the USA, there has been an unwritten rule: the president does not interfere with the Federal Reserve’s operations. If the Federal Reserve starts printing money or lowering rates just because the president needs to “boost” the economy before elections, the dollar will depreciate, and inflation will become uncontrollable.

Quote:

“I deeply respect the rule of law and accountability in our democracy. Of course, no one, including the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is above the law, but this unprecedented action should be viewed in the broader context of threats from the administration and ongoing pressure.”

“The threat of criminal prosecution is a result of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best judgment of what serves the public interest, rather than according to the President’s preferences. The issue is whether the Federal Reserve can continue to set interest rates based on data and economic conditions — or whether monetary policy will be determined by political pressure or intimidation.”

If the pressure continues or if Powell is removed/arrested, there is a high chance that the loss of the Federal Reserve’s independence could lead to a sharp drop in the dollar’s value and an increase in the prices of gold and other assets.

As Nikolai Chapaev said in the textbook “Introduction to the Course ‘Philosophy and History of Education'”, “God forbid you live in an era of changes”…

Dreams of Power: Cocaine, Rare Earth Metals, and Unexpected Diplomacy | January 03 2026, 13:40

I slept through everything. What are you betting on 1) all the cocaine is ours now? 2) they’ll release them in exchange for a deal on rare earth metals and oil? 3) Maduro turns up in Saratov?

Navigating the Airline Seat Dilemma: Equality and Passenger Size Policy Changes | December 30 2025, 20:21

As I sit on the plane, I ponder how airlines separate excessively obese people from those not obese enough, and how they make the former pay twice as much. And how does this align with the policy of universal equality and equal opportunities? The issue causes “anthropometric dissonance” – over the past decades, the average airplane seat width has narrowed from 47 to 43 cm, while the average passenger weight has significantly increased. As a result, there emerges a rigid classification of passengers into “regular” and officially recognized “Customers of Size” (CoS).

.

The main technical criterion separating these categories is the “armrest rule.” If a person’s body extends beyond the outer boundary of the lowered armrest by more than 1 inch (2.5 cm), they are officially recognized as “oversized.” The inability to fully lower the armrest without pain or discomfort to oneself or a neighbor is grounds for requiring the purchase of a second seat.

.

Until 2025, Southwest Airlines was considered the “gold standard” for large individuals, allowing them to occupy a second seat for free. However, as of January 27, 2025, the rules changed: such passengers are now required to purchase a second seat in advance when booking. If an individual fails to do this and the flight is full, they may simply be denied boarding and offered to rebook to another flight where two adjacent seats are available.

.

The financial risks now almost entirely fall on the passenger. According to the new 2025 policy, a refund for an additionally purchased seat is only possible if the flight departs not fully booked. Considering that the average aircraft occupancy today is 85–90%, the likelihood that money paid for a “comfort seat” will not be refunded is extremely high.

.

There exists a “geographical lottery” of passenger rights in the world. In Canada, a unique doctrine of “One Person, One Fare” (1P1F) is affirmed by court. There, obesity is recognized as a “functional disability,” therefore, airlines are required to provide a second seat for free on domestic flights if the passenger presents a medical certificate. In the USA and Europe, no such benefits exist, and comfort is considered a commercial service.

.

Technically, there is also a “seatbelt rule,” which is the second most important (after the armrest rule) and serves as a kind of “legal and technical barrier.” Specifically, every passenger must be buckled during taxi, takeoff, and landing. If the belt does not fasten, the passenger physically cannot be seated. This isn’t a matter of comfort, but a question of legality aboard the aircraft. If the standard length of the belt is insufficient, the passenger has the right to request a seatbelt extender, which usually adds between 25 to 60 centimeters. The mere request for an extender often gets recorded by flight attendants as a marker of an “increased size passenger.” This is a critical moment. Most airlines globally explicitly forbid the use of two extenders simultaneously. If the length of one standard belt plus one extender is not enough, the passenger is recognized as “oversized” for that seat type. In this case, the airline has the full right to remove them from the flight or demand the purchase of a second seat, as safety cannot be ensured.

.

Airlines’ main argument for imposing limitations is flight safety. According to EASA and FAA standards, a full airplane evacuation must take no more than 90 seconds. A large passenger, who physically does not fit in the seat, can block the aisle or slow the movement of others in an emergency, therefore they are prohibited from occupying seats near emergency exits. Personally, I think this is just a nice reason to avoid spending extra money.

.

Identifying “too fat” passengers often happens right in the cabin. Flight attendants have the right to demand that a person undergo an “armrest test” in front of witnesses. If an “encroachment” into a neighbor’s space is discovered, priority is always given to those who fit in their own seat, and the CoS passenger may be removed from the flight for the comfort of others.

The Uncertain Future of Automation and Employment Disparities | December 21 2025, 15:27

Everyone is waiting for a cyberpunk future where each cafe table is served by an android. But it seems that it will never happen. The automation of the service sector is stagnating and will continue to do so for one simple reason: maintaining a human is becoming cheaper than servicing an industrial robot.

Food and clothing are rapidly depreciating. Production volumes are such that feeding and clothing a “bag of skin” today costs pennies. Now compare this with the cost of developing, software, and maintenance of a complex robot waiter or cleaner. A human is a self-regulating system that fuels and updates itself. And if worn out, easily replaced. Pure economy!

In the “First World,” the motivation to labor hard will disappear. Why go to a hard, boring job if basic needs are met with minimal effort, and everything else is done by others who really need to? People in developed countries will work only where there is thrill and pleasure. Eventually, we will face a shortage of hands where it is “not cool,” but there won’t be robots there either – too expensive.

Poor countries will be stuck in the past. Their populations are growing like yeast. Choosing a job there is a luxury available only to a few. An excess of labor makes work almost free.

I think the world is facing a harsh imbalance. Developed countries will likely permanently close their borders to avoid diluting their comfort, and all industries that are still difficult or expensive to automate will simply move to poor regions. Perhaps, developed countries will become less likely to conflict with one another, as there will be too many resources to make every resident happy.

But it will be harder with poor countries. Why invent a complex robot if you can relocate a factory where thousands are ready to work for food, which becomes cheaper every year? This has long been happening and will most likely continue for a long time.

Conventional programmers in the USA won’t be replaced by AI, but by programmers from Southeast Asia and South America. Several layers of AI for quality control and one manager approving AI conclusions and automatic layoffs and hiring will oversee them. And those programmers who remain in developed countries will focus more on orchestration than on coding. This role requires even more intelligence, and only one in ten current individuals will be capable. Only, the reason for such a crisis will not be AI.

Also, I think that the borders of the future world may close in one direction. It will become increasingly difficult to enter developed countries from developing and poor ones, but the opposite will be facilitated by authorities. Africa is growing so fast that it will surely become a problem if people there are not already prepared for life beyond their villages.

The future is not about the uprising of machines. It’s when some work for pleasure, and others because they are cheaper than electricity and gears.

Do you agree, or am I exaggerating too much?