My Flying People experiment

 kw: generated art, ai experiments, surveys, simulated intelligence, prompts, prompt adherence

Introduction

This is quite long so I include headings.

I remembered a science fiction story that I read decades ago, about a planet of creatures that looked a lot like humans, but had wings and flew about. Pondering a way to illustrate the central idea of the story, after some experimentation, I came up with this prompt:

On a planet with low gravity and dense air, many winged men and winged women are flying into and out of very tall buildings with doorways and landing platforms at every level

I was primarily interested in the great variety of imaging Models offered by Leonardo AI, and I had thousands of credits available. I surveyed nearly all the possibilities in Classic State, which yielded 184 images, all based on a particular Seed; more on that anon. I also used the prompt to produce much smaller suites of images with Dall-E3, DesignStudio, Gemini, and ImageFX. To jump ahead to a useful conclusion, I found that Dall-E3 produced images closest to the meaning of the prompt; in the lingo of the field, it has the greatest Prompt Adherence. Here are two examples, the best of the 24 images I gathered from Dall-E3:

I am showing two images because the first has the best people and the second has better buildings. When prompting an art generating program, it takes persistence and cleverness to get good adherence to a complex prompt. BTW, did you notice the figure with wings on backward?

Models and Styles

Leonardo AI (henceforth Leo) has thirteen Models or Presets and each has a number of Styles, as many as 23. This is a list of the 13, with the number of Styles each includes, and the cost in credits per four images, the usual number. The free program assigns 150 credits daily. It is easy to use them up pretty fast! The basic monthly subscription assigns 8,500 credits per month for $12. These pile up fast unless you are very active. I wish there were an in-between subscription level such as 3,000 credits for $5.

The total number of Styles is 61, and the number of Model+Style combinations is 194. I did not quite use them all. Several Styles are named Monochrome or include B&W in their name and those don't interest me.

Seeds

Leo also has the option of using a fixed Seed. Leo's help text says that this Seed is used to generate the "noise" that the reverse-diffusion process starts with to produce an image. That is not all there is to it, because the Seed value also influences the Transformer (the routine that figures out object identity and placement, which defines the goal toward which the diffusion algorithm operates). Seeds in Leo (also DreamStudio) have six digits.

When I set a fixed Seed, I tend to pick Seed values that are a multiple of 999,999/7 or 999,999/13, all of which have six digits except 999,999/13, which is 76923. After a period of noodling around, I found the region around 428571 (3*999,999/7) most interesting and settled on 428575. All the images shown here were produced using this Seed.

Selection 1: Leonardo Lightning Style Gallery

No matter how I may group the images, it would be tedious for the reader to wade through a discourse on 184 images. Thus I picked certain themes. I chose primarily certain Styles across all the Models, but I will start by showing the gamut of Styles for the Model called Leonardo Lightning (or LLightning), which runs faster than the others and costs the least—two credits per Medium-size image (1280x720), while for most Models the cost is 3 or 4, and it goes up to 12, and even higher where larger images are available in certain Models.

Forthwith, the gamut of LLightning images, screen-captured three across from File Explorer, so the file names can be seen:

The last image above is from the next set, from the Model Phoenix 0.9.

LLightning is unique among Leo's Models; 16 of the 21 Styles shown here produced things with wings, but only 7 are winged people. The third Style, Cinematic, has what appear to be human-sized bats, but they may be humans with bat wings. It is hard to tell which, even on the full size image. Two others show beetle-like flyers, two have birds, and the flyers in the other 4 images are unidentifiable. Finally, the images from None and Unprocessed are apparently identical, which I find logical: both claim to be doing nothing "extra" to the Model. This is also seen for the Model Cinematic Kino, the only other Model that offers both None and Unprocessed.

Compared to the other Models, this mix in LLightning is interesting. Four Models (the two Phoenix versions and the two Flux versions) adhere to the "winged" part of the prompt 100%, although only the two Phoenix versions have winged persons in all images, while the two Flux versions have more birds and fewer people. On the other hand, two Models (Graphic Design and Stock Photography) never produced wings on anything. Most of the Models yielded low percentages of winged persons. Anime is unique in a different way. Half of its Styles produced images with winged humans and two Styles have airborne humans without wings (one hopes they are floating, not falling). Only two Anime Styles had no wings at all.

Selection 2: Model Galleries for nine Styles

Style 1 = None (10 uses)

Now I will focus on particular Styles as developed in different Models. The Styles to be presented are those having larger numbers of Models that use them, in descending order by usage numbers. The first is None, meaning no Style was applied. This (non-)Style is available for the largest number of Models (10), with a modification to be mentioned below. I used a search to isolate each set of images, and a quirk of the search function is that the images are presented in reverse order.

In the next-to-last row of images, the first two appear identical. Upon very close inspection I find a few tiny differences. In the row above that, the second and third image are, so far as I can tell, identical. This shows that behind the scenes Portrait Perfect and Cinematic Kino use the same engine, as do Graphic Design and Illustrative Albedo. So in this case the 10 Models produce 8 unique images (discounting a few nearly invisible differences in one case). These images show what each Model produces when it is not constrained by a Style.

Style 2 = Dynamic (8 uses)

Dynamic is the default Style for the 8 Models that use it.

For the Dynamic Style, the image I like best is for Phoenix 0.9. It is the best match to the image I had in mind after reading the story, so long ago. Comparing all these images with the prior set, I find that for Flux Schnell the Dynamic Style produces the same image as None. Similarly for Flux Dev, Phoenix 1.0 and Phoenix 0.9. For the other Models, these Styles produce significantly different results. Three of the Models—Illustrative Albedo, Cinematic Kino and Lifelike Vision—have what I call "winged structures", although one of them (for Cinematic Kino) looks like an immense beetle.

At this point note that "doors at all levels with landing platforms" is seldom found, and that is primarily in Phoenix 0.9.

Style 3 = Portrait (8 uses)

As we'll see later for the Fashion Style, Portrait often emphasizes a central figure, although in the case of Illustrative Albedo, that figure is a flying structure, looking like a giant crab with 6 wings. The image from Lifelike Vision has a figure with wings that are more like hang glider wings, rather than bird wings. But, wings they are.

Style 4 = Stock Photo (7 uses)

Stock Photo is the only Style used by the Stock Photo Model. Its image is almost identical to the one produced by Cinematic Kino, but not entirely (one must look hard to find the differences). The other 5 Models all yielded winged things with this Style, but only the image for Phoenix 0.9 has winged people.

Style 5 = Ray Traced (7 uses)

Now we can start to see that certain Models, such as the two Phoenix Models and the two Flux Models, have the primary influence. In other cases, the Style seems to be "stronger" than the Model. Other than having a brighter and more colorful appearance, Ray Traced is similar to Stock Photo. For this Style, only the Phoenix Models produced flying people.

Style 6 = Illustration (7 uses plus "Anime Illustration")

It is more clear with these, compared to the prior sets, that the Style is paramount for LLightning, Illustrative Albedo, and Lifelike Vision. Here, Anime Illustration Style in the Anime Model joined the Phoenix Models in producing flying people.

Style 7 = Fashion (7 uses)

Here is a Style that produces winged people, almost 100%! Lifelike Vision's person has a winglike, flowing robe. Perhaps the presence of about 8 wings on the person in the Cinematic Kino image makes up for that… As one might expect from the name, a "fashion model" is front and center.

Style 8 = Creative (uses = 7)

Following trends we've seen above, some of these differ from other Styles for a particular Model, while a couple of them are more similar. Only Flux Dev and the Phoenix Models produced flying people. The flying things in the LLightning image seem to be huge insects though one of them has feathered bird wings. I don't know why a scattering of these images feature hot air balloons.

Style 9 = 3D Render (7 uses, with two added sizes)

As mentioned earlier, most of these images were generated for the Medium 16:9 size, which is 1280x720 for most Models, but is 1184x672 for the Phoenix Models and the Lux Models. I did a side experiment to show the effect of changing image size with Phoenix 0.9. You can see in the file names for "LPhoenix09" the numbers 01a, 01b, and 01c. The image sizes are 1184x672, 1376x768, and 1472x832. When I want to use any Phoenix image for a 16:9 wallpaper, these sizes are a little off. Leonardo can upscale an image so it is larger than 1920x1080 (full HD), but then trimming is needed to get an exact ratio. Changing the size causes changes in the overall image, though the three images are similar.

For this Style, the Phoenix Models produced flying people, but the others differed: LLightning and Flux Dev made flying beetles, Flux Schnell made birds, while Illustrative Albedo and Lifelike Vision produced lots of balloons but nothing with wings.

Wrap-Up

The Leonardo AI Models definitely have minds of their own. Only images produced by Phoenix 0.9 had both elements, flying people and towering buildings with landing pads at upper levels. Few other Models had the buildings as I had asked. Generally, the images are somewhat inspired by the prompt, sometimes rather distantly. It would take a lot more investigation, letting the Seed be randomly produced, to see whether any particular Model+Style is capable of better compliance.

I use art generating software as a "commissioned artist". A few of the Models in Leonardo, the more costly ones, are reasonably compliant. Programs other than Leonardo vary in their Prompt Adherence, and Dall-E3 is probably the best. The rest of Leo's Models, in most of their Styles, are fun to experiment with, but are unlikely to yield results that well match anything but the simplest queries.

I did not test a rather new way of using Leonardo AI, Flow State. It has a different way of doing things. Neither did I turn on "AI Enhancement" for my prompt in those Models that offer it. What we have here is complex enough already.

The folders of images I produced are a useful Gazetteer of possibilities that I can use in the future to select an image generation routine.

A mixed bag of an SF anthology

 kw: book reviews, science fiction, fantasy, science fantasy, collections, short stories, anthologies

The volume is The Best American Science Fiction and Fantasy 2024, edited by Hugh Howey. 20 stories. I skipped 8, 4 were at best so-so, leaving 8 that I enjoyed reading. Two of these I gave a ++ in my personal rating scheme, and I'll dwell on them briefly. But I must say, with only this volume to go on, I weep for the state of science fiction and speculative fiction in the US right now. Fortunately, there are other collections, and I'll review another in coming days. Note: this image doesn't pertain to any of the stories. It is a side product of another project, and it has a science-fiction-fantastic feel that I like.

Now, the two stories that had some good ideas:

"The Long Game" by Ann Leckie. Told from the point of view of semi-terrestrial creatures similar to octopuses, on a planet coveted by humans for its resources. These creatures live 2-3 years and die after reproducing, as earthly octopuses do, but they are intelligent, sapient, and a human liaison is caring for their case while fending off mining interests. That latter point is only lightly touched upon, because the crux of the story is the developing awareness of Narr, a natural-born leader among his people. Narr's people are hermaphroditic; all bear eggs and all emit milt. This makes it hard to assign an appropriate pronoun; the author uses "they". Narr is one of the first to develop an awareness of the value of projects that reach beyond one person's lifetime. This reflects the "slow revolution" of human cultural development, which has its most visible expression in the building of complex cities, as distinct from villages with minimal infrastructure. Narr's people build a pond, a significant step in their own cultural development. Narr also takes steps to find out how life can be extended.

"Form 8774-D" by Alex Irvine. In an era of superheroes and those with the whole gamut of "powers" popping up everywhere, an agency has been established to register them, and various "hero leagues" recruit some of them. The story is a few days in the life of a functionary whose only responsibility is to check application forms, which are quite detailed (and in themselves form a significant part of the story). It slowly dawns on her that she just might need her own superhero bodyguard. Saying more would be telling…

Both these stories were great fun, and the other six that I liked were enjoyable, if not quite so ideational.

Spiders via Vietnam go hog-wild

 kw: blogs, blogging, spider scanning

I entered to add a post and found the highest activity rate to date. This is the past 24 hours (prior to 10:00 am EDT):

In the recent past Hong Kong and Singapore have provided the bulk of activity, but in the pass few weeks they have been overtaken by Vietnam. Almost 33,000 views! I was curious about the ongoing rate, so I checked the "Now" screen:

The scale is views per minute for the past two hours. The "plateau" sits between 0.7 and 1.3 views per second, and just that 80-minute stretch comes to about 5,000 views, more than 90% tagged to Vietnam.

I say "tagged" because I suspect the country has some fast DNS servers and Asian VPN's are using them. So why the activity? I have one surmise: AI training. Perhaps many blogs are being gulped down wholesale for such purposes.

Hey, guys, if you're relying on my writings for AI training, you're in real trouble!! You'll generate Artificial Nerdism. Maybe that's a redundancy.

Wolves making it against all odds

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, wildlife, wildlife management, wolves, biologists, naturalists, memoirs

About two decades before wolves were trucked into Yellowstone National Park, a lone female wolf made her way from Canada into the area around Glacier National Park. She was named Kishinena, Later a male wolf joined her, and the pair raised at least three litters of pups. By the time "re-introduction" was officially carried out, the Glacier NP area was host to a few packs of self-introduced wolves.

One woman witnessed it all, and continued to study wolves in and near Montana for forty years. Dr. Diane K. Boyd became the most skilled wolf trapper in America, although she never caught Kishinena. We can be generous and say that she was still learning in those early years.

At first when I was reading Dr. Boyd's memoir A Woman Among Wolves: My Journey Through Forty Years of Wolf Recovery, my mental image of a wolf trap was the cruel leg-crushing snap trap employed by fur trappers. Eventually I learned that recovery trappers use a cable trap that doesn't break any bones and seldom breaks the skin. A wolf (or mis-caught bear or other animal) that struggles for hours against such a trap can still cut off circulation to the trapped foot to cause permanent injury; this is why a biologist runs the trapline at least twice daily. 

The author tells one story of herself and an assistant, also female, tranquilizing a wolf that had become so exhausted from fighting the trap that it was practically frozen to death, and the foot was solid as a rock. The two women took the sleeping wolf into the truck, laid it across their laps, ran the engine fast and the heater all the way up. Then they took off their shirts and body-warmed the wolf, whose body temperature was about eight degrees below normal by then. Once the animal began to warm, Diane realized it was waking, but for a while it stayed still to enjoy the warmth. She carefully reached to open the door, holding the radio collar they'd put on earlier to keep that mouthful of teeth away from her face, and let the wolf bolt away. Quite a sight they must have made, two half-naked women covered in sweat and black-and-gray fur! Happy to see the wolf on the run. A visit to the area the next day to follow its tracks for a ways confirmed that the wolf didn't just run a quarter mile and drop dead; it was apparently well enough to run long and far. Radio tracking in the following days showed that it covered a lot of territory, and made kills as usual.

During her forty years with the wolves, the author saw their situation come nearly full circle. Wolves were once so universally hated they were destroyed from every square mile of the U.S. "lower 48" except the extreme north of Minnesota and Isle Royale on Lake Superior. By the mid 1990's they were much beloved by many Americans, federal legislation protected them, and they multiplied all across the northern states, from the Great Lakes to Washington state. Over the next decade or so the mood shifted again, and the fear and hatred of wolves was on the rebound. Even today, the pendulum is a bit to the side of "protect livestock" rather than "protect wolves". Nonetheless, the gray wolf has been restored as a major predator in the northern US.

Consider this list: Grizzly Bear, Wolf, Coyote, Fox, Wolverine, Mountain Lion, Bobcat. Five of these seven can easily kill a human. Only wolves are hated in a special way. This came out especially strongly at a public meeting in 2018 in Trout Creek, Montana. For more than two hours a couple hundred wolf-hating folk berated Forest Service members and supporting scientists, including Dr. Boyd. Earlier in the book she calls her treatment among wildlife biologists and forest rangers, as a young, slender blonde woman among "mountain men", a baptism of fire. But this was another thing entirely. When she had opportunity, she spoke reason, but when the crowd is unreasonable—and half are drunk—that's like tossing a snowball into a hot wind.

I don't know what the national mood is today. Where has the pendulum swung in the past seven years? I was once told by a policeman that there's a threshold of 15%: if more than 15% of the population habitually speeds, for example (and the level is more like 75%), speed laws cannot be effectively enforced. I don't know what the present level of wolf-hatred is, but if it's more than about a quarter of us, a lot of wolves are at risk. Poaching has existed all through the past 4-5 decades, but it reached an all-time high within the past decade, and I just don't know if the trend is still upward, or if it is abating.

Duck-Duck-Go's AI Assist tells me this:

As of 2024, the estimated gray wolf population in the contiguous United States is between 14,000 and 18,000, with Alaska having an additional 7,000 to 11,000 wolves. Most of the populations are concentrated in the northern half of the country.

That's a big difference from the near-zero population of the period from 1940-1970. And Dr. Boyd witnessed all of that recovery. She is an admirable naturalist/biologist, and a great storyteller.

Vietnam spiders overtake Singapore's

 kw: blogs, blogging, spider scanning

After posting a short item I looked at the stats. The past 24 hours saw more than 10,000 views. Very unusual! Here is the breakdown for the past week:

All but a couple of thousand views were in the past day. There must be multiple actors here; this entire blog consists of less than 3,000 pages.

Looking at a one-day view, the views that originated in (or passed through a VPN in) Vietnam ran steady at about 850 per hour for 18 hours, then dropped, just an hour ago. Interesting!

Philosophizing AGI

 kw: simulated intelligence, ai, artificial intelligence, companies, philosophy, artificial ethics

In the recent issue of Wired, in an article about the company Anthropic, where the founders plan to develop AGI (artificial general intelligence), this photo and caption appear. The caption reads, "Amanda Askell / A trained philosopher who helps manage Claude's personality". Claude is the AI agent that the Anthropic folks are trying to develop into an AGI that is benevolent and ethical.

The first thought I had was, "Trained philosopher? Huh! What does an untrained philosopher look like?" My inner philosopher immediately replied, "Like a human being."

My second thought: "Who decides what is ethical?" In a hyper-divided America, struggling to stay afloat sociologically in a chaotic world, we find this spectrum (not at all autistic…):

• Radical (these days, Woke Leftists) - The bleeding-edge elites define ethics, to which you'd better kowtow, or else.
• Liberal - Liberty, the most freedom for the greatest number, favoring plenty of government care and oversight.
• Moderate - "Leave us alone."
• Conservative - Don't change what works; keep government out of most affairs.
• Reactionary - Whatever I say is good, is good. Contradict me at your own peril.

This doesn't even touch on religions, which have their own ethical standards, based on whatever god or scripture they believe. BUT! One thing is for darn sure: I don't want any trace of "what is ethical" to be decided within government.

A fresh take on the biosphere

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, life, biology, earth science, philosophy

For many people with a naturalist inclination, this fellow has a dream job. Others might rather be using snorkel or SCUBA in the sea, or perhaps winkling out the scarcer life to be found in deserts (my favorite).

If my memory serves me right, Dr. Peter Godfrey-Smith has taken on the role of naturalist in all three realms, and more. In his new book Living on Earth: Forests, Corals, Consciousness, and the Making of the World, the third of a series, his vivid writing brings his experiences and musings home to us.

This book is a survey of life on Earth, its history, ecology, and possible futures. How he squeezed so much into a 300-page book is a marvel to me (26 of the pages are end notes, well worth the reading. And he touts a second set of end notes available online).

Contrary to my usual practice, I didn't take notes, nor bookmark any pages. I just read, and read, and enjoyed. There are just nine long-ish chapters. The first is introductory, followed by the obligatory historical survey, which culminates in the debate that's been going on for a couple of generations: How far do we push the Gaia idea? Is it a metaphor, a reality, or a phantom? It introduces a theme of the book as a whole, that biology and geology interact, and they interact a whole lot more than scientists of all stripes usually imagine.

The strong point is made that humans are part of nature, so it's better to speak of our fellow-beings not just as "animals" but as "other animals", because we are animals also. The middle section of the book, "Who We Are", Chapters 5 and 6, reveal how dominant humans have become. The majority of larger animals living today are the cattle, swine, and fowls that we have domesticated, plus our pets. We may not yet have brought a majority of the fishes into "fish farms", but we are well on the way.

In a strong analysis of farming practices, the author points out that the lives of the great majority of domestic animals is, quite simply, a living hell. The only mercy is that such lives are kept short. Though he writes a lot of "humane farming", he isn't sure it is possible on a large scale. I think of Malabar Farm and similar experiments, and I wonder how widespread they could become, and would we be willing to pay substantially more for food produced that way?

Can we re-wild any substantial part of Earth. Should we? Could we do so without taking over the management of all the lives in the new wilds? (For my part, I think of the experiment carried out at Biosphere 2. Keeping the place livable was such a struggle that much of the original agenda had to be scrapped. The problem was concrete; it both absorbs and emits carbon dioxide and oxygen in a somewhat faster-than-geological manner. Nearly every surface that wasn't glass was concrete, or dirt lying on concrete. The land area of Biosphere 1, the Earth, to date is covered by less than 3% concrete. Also the Earth's surface is 3/4 ocean, but B2 had hardly any. A poor semblance of an experiment!)

We are faced with the dilemma that it looks rather hard to be human and ethical. Yet no other animals muse about ethics. Some carry on a tit-for-tat "fairness" stance; only humans have elaborated morality to a high level.

All of us who have children have produced hostages to the future. What kind of taskmaster will that future be? Dr. Godfrey-Smith remains guardedly hopeful.

An image and its squeezed version

 kw: ai experiments, simulated intelligence, art generation, photo essays

Time to drop the other shoe. The first image is the square rendering that Gemini produced when asked to create "A desert scene with exaggerated mesas and steep mountains around an alluvial valley, extremely clear air, digital art". I used IrfanView to resize from 2048x2048 to 2048x1152, for use as wallpaper on an HD monitor. Note that the air isn't as clear as I'd have liked, but the training images probably all have haze in the background.

Squeezing a generated image

 kw: ai experiments, simulated intelligence, art generation, photo essays

I find various ways to get around the "square image" limitation of Gemini. Dall-E3 also makes square images initially, but then one at a time you can select "Resize" and "4:3", which actually produces an image 1792x1024, or 7:4. I used Dall-E3 as a test bed, using a prompt that requests a vertically-exaggerated image. It could then be vertically squeezed from square to a 16:9 aspect ratio and still look realistic, or at least pleasing. One of these three images was produced by the Resize function, and then cropped to 16:9, and the other two began as square images that were squeezed by anisotropic resizing in IrfanView to 16:9. Let me know in a comment if you can see which of the three is the unique one, unsqueezed.

A Jeremiad for our time

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, polemics, overviews, critiques, capitalism, slave trade, colonialism

When I saw the title Deep Water: The World in the Ocean, by James Bradley, I expected a scientific or technical compendium of some sort. Far from it. The subject is indeed the ocean, more particularly what the human race has done to it. It isn't pretty. And there is a lot of it, more than 380 pages, plus 44 pages of endnotes (I read endnotes only if there is more substance to them than references or sources).

Each of the thirteen chapters focuses on an aspect of the ocean. That makes for rather long chapters. The author has compiled a great mass of information in each case, but the bulk of a typical chapter is a diatribe upon the various capitalistic ills. To Mr. Bradley, the much-used terms "violent colonialism" and "capitalistic violence" and variations thereof are redundancies. Eventually it seemed to me a pale shadow of the book of Lamentations.

One might hope the author has solutions for past and ongoing ills, be they overexploitation or slavery or pollution. Nope. Fortunately, he does tell us of a number of initiatives and projects by those who seek to mitigate them. This is a book of complaints.

I could have stopped early, but I decided to let the man have his say. He appears to be balanced on a knife edge between two proverbs I've seen attributed to Winston Churchill: "Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others," and "Man is uniquely capable of finding an optimum solution to any problem, but only after exhausting all other options." I am not sure I would label the author a Socialist, but he is clearly anti-Capitalistic.

I know he wants to motivate the public in some way, or in several ways. He hasn't the knack.

Gemini's recursive answer

 kw: simulated intelligence, ai, art generation

I use Gemini less than other art generation programs for two reasons: it produces only one image at a time and the image is always square. It is a generous square, 2048x2048, but to be able to crop out another shape such as 16x9 one must write creative prompts that include the term "wide aspect", for example.

This morning I asked the following,

Can Gemini create multiple images from one prompt?

Here is the response:

Not yes, not no, just sideways. Oh, well…

When viruses help us

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, virology, bacteriophages, antibiotic resistance, medicine

These barely-living creatures look to me like a balloon attached to a hypodermic syringe. They are T2 bacteriophages injecting DNA into E. coli bacteria. The common term for a bacteriophage, a virus that infects bacteria, is "phage", which means "eater". They eat bacteria.

The phage's DNA is packed into the "balloon", a protein capsule, so tightly that the pressure inside is more than 300 psi. No wonder that, once the "syringe" pierces the cell wall of the bacterium, the DNA erupts into the cellular interior. There, "shepherd" proteins that accompany it help it integrate with the cell's DNA and begin to make great numbers of copies of the phage. Once all supplies within the cell are exhausted, lytic enzymes cause the cell to rupture, releasing thousands of new phages.

To learn of phages and the breadth of their usefulness, I read The Good Virus: The Amazing Story and Forgotten Promise of the Phage by Tom Ireland. The book has two strong themes: that phages save lives in an almost miraculous way; and that political and scientific blindness have hindered the study of phages in the "free world", primarily because they were primarily developed as a therapeutic tool in the Georgian SSR and Soviet Russia. By the time scientists in the West learned of their antibacterial use, the cultural trend was "Better dead than Red."

The first viruses discovered were phages. Doctors noticed that sometimes the bacterial "lawn" growing in a Petri dish would develop "plaques"—clear, circular holes—but that nothing could be seen under the microscope, just bits of broken bacteria. Later, by filtering the liquid mix from the clear spots through a very fine porcelain filter, a "something" could be produced that killed bacteria. The term "filterable virus" was coined. Only later, when the electron microscope was invented, were phages seen and given their name.

Bacterial cells are so different from the cells of animals that phages cannot infect us. While there are 600 or so human pathogenic viruses, there are tens to hundreds of thousands of known phages (so far), many millions of phages known only from DNA screening of water and soil, and from billions to perhaps more than a trillion varieties of phages in existence worldwide. I way "varieties" because the biological understanding of "species" doesn't really fit the way viruses, and phages in particular, evolve and reproduce.

Step a little closer to home. It is rather tricky to count the cells in a human body. About 80% of "our" cells are red blood cells, so when you hear a number like 30 trillion, realize that about 24 trillion are RBC's, and the other six trillion are nucleated cells (RBC's don't have a nucleus). We have a microbiome, mainly in our gut but also across our skin, that numbers 60-100 trillion bacterial cells. Bacteria are so small that this amazing number of cells weighs, in total, a few pounds, or a kilogram or two. How about viruses? They are in the air we breathe so of course we contain some. Just counting the phages that have been found preying on bacteria within and on us, the number is about ten phage particles per bacterial cell, or roughly a quadrillion. Phages are so tiny that a quadrillion of them totals about 1/30th of a gram.

After phages were discovered more than a century ago, they were found to have antibacterial properties that could be used to cure infections. Before the discovery of effective and economical antibiotics such as Penicillin, phages were the only cure.

Side note: no medicine is perfect. Whether antibiotic or phage therapy, the dose doesn't destroy 100% of the invading bacteria. Rather, bacterial numbers are reduced to the point that our immune system has time to kill every single bacterium that remains, and then we are fully well. We need at least a minimally functioning immune system to overcome an infection, no matter what medicines we may use.

An early practitioner and proponent of phage therapy, Felix D'Herelle, called phages a "third arm of the immune system". The classical arms of the immune system ("arm" in this case meaning "weapon system") are innate immunity and adaptive immunity. The first is immediate, the second requires cellular learning, but also confers longer-lasting immunity. More recently I have read that our microbiome can be considered a preventive arm of immunity, because the good bacteria in us prevent pathogens from getting a foothold and causing disease. Thus I would call phages either a part of this third arm, or a fourth arm, destroying many pathogens once they "land".

A long section of the book tells of the Eliava Institute in Georgia (European Georgia), in Tblisi, a focus of "medical vacations" by people with multi-drug-resistant bacterial infections. For decades Eliava was the only place where a patient could have a sample taken, a phage therapy either found in the "archives" at Eliava or developed from searching in dirty water (!), and, hopefully before dying, being treated and their life saved.

Later chapters tell us of an increasing number of phage therapy centers arising. Parallel to them, recent excitement about the possibilities of phages has led to some businesses developing ways to create custom phages from scratch. This is based on work done with the ΦX174 phage: This virus was the first organism to have its DNA completely sequenced, in 1977; and a slightly simplified phage based upon it was synthesized in 2012. It was first isolated in 1935 from sewer water in Paris. That makes sense, because it infects E. coli, the famous "poop germ".

ΦX174 is one of the smallest viruses. It doesn't have the syringe like the "T" phages and some others. It is just a tiny balloon containing the DNA for 11 genes. The capsule has 12 spikes that allow it to attach to a bacterial cell.

Phages, with their simplified genomes, were first-line tools in the early days of the genetic revolution, even before the structure of DNA was discovered in 1951 by Crick and Watson. They remain useful for genetic studies.

One reason for producing synthetic phages is that the capsules of certain ones, without the DNA content, can penetrate the brain-blood barrier. If the content of such a capsule is a chemotherapy drug, and the spikes are created to attach to cancer cells, extremely targeted therapy becomes possible, in the brain or elsewhere.

That is just one use for phages that we find in the last couple of chapters of The Good Virus. The author also discusses fears of "gray goo", because viruses are actually nanotechnological machines. If a nanotech machine has the directive, "reproduce at all costs", can it spread throughout the biosphere, turning all plants, animals, and everything into a mass of nothing but themselves? Considering that nature has already developed exactly such machines, but that they are engaged in an eternal "arms race" with bacteria—which quickly learn to fight back—we realize that no gray goo scenario is imminent.

One more note: not all phages are wholly beneficial to us. This lovely image from Science Photo Library shows A45 phages attacking Streptococcus pyogenes cells. These phages carry genes that induce the cells to release fever-inducing chemicals, which cause strep throat. If the Strep that naturally exists in you is healthy, there's no problem. When the bacteria get sick, though, so do you!

An even worse case of "sick bacteria causing sick people" results when this filamentous phage known as CTXφ infects Vibrio cholerae: the deadly waterborne disease cholera. No doubt, other such cases abound.

Nonetheless, the usefulness of the great majority of bacteriophages is so great that the author optimistically hopes that they will provide a very beneficial path toward treating infections that our antibiotics are increasingly unable to cope with.

By the way, images and articles regarding phages and E. coli seem to outnumber the rest, not because that's the most common, but because E. coli are used for so many kinds of genetic studies that they dominate the literature.

Spider activity subsiding

 kw: blogs, blogging, spider scanning

First thing in the morning, what do I see?
No more spiders looking at me.

After several weeks of hot action, things have settled down:

Singapore has been the heavy hitter, but represents only about half of the activity. There's no telling how much of this went through VPN's. I wonder how long things will remain "normal", or perhaps, just ordinary, at 50-100 views per day, or a few thousand per month. To me, that is satisfactory.

OPUS 500

 kw: art generation, ai art, simulated intelligence, milestones

I have been learning how to use art generation programs since November 2022. That is just a little more than two years. Initially DALL•E2 was all that was available. I used it until it went out of service a year later in favor of DALL•E3, which powers the Bing Image Creator. In the first few days using DALL•E2, with lots of experimentation, I produced two images that still please me a lot. One is a still-life "painting" in the style of Cezanne, the other is a "painting" of mountains in the style of the Hudson River School of painters:

Note the color blocks at lower right. That is DALL•E2's "signature". Pictures by DALL•E2 were 1024×1024, and to make them bigger one could Outpaint. I did that a lot. Eventually I began to make images that would be useful as screen wallpaper. I would prepare a large image and then crop it to 1920×1080, or a larger size with a 16×9 aspect ratio, and sign it in one of the lower corners with my name plus "/ Dall-E2", to give credit to both myself and my "commissioned artist".

At the very beginning I also tried out MidJourney and Stable Diffusion, but I wasn't too thrilled by the available toolsets, and SD required Discord, which I don't like to use.

Fast forward a couple of years. Over time I learned of other art generators:

• PlaygroundAI - I used it for 2-3 weeks during January 2024, but soon came across Playground, which may be related but had a better credit and subscription structure.
• Playground - I loved the Canvas mode, which also had Outpainting. It was taken out of service in November 2024, the company having decided to concentrate on graphic arts rather than fine art.
• I had been using Bard in Chrome as an alternative to ChatGPT. When its name was changed to Gemini, it was announced that it could generate art also. At first it would make four images at a time, but then it dropped three and now it only makes one per prompt, and it is always square, but 2048×2048. I've used it since February 2024.
• I found Leonardo AI in August 2024 and I've been using it since then. After a few months of using the free service, I bought a passel of credits.
• DreamStudio showed up the most recently, in November 2024. After a couple of months testing the free service, I bought some credits.
• Lastly, also in November 2024, I found Google Labs' ImageFX, which is free, but they don't keep history. Download what you want to keep right away or it'll vanish. It has some interesting features that I like, but not the rich feature set of DS or Leo AI.

My current "stable" of artists is DALL•E3, DreamStudio, Gemini, ImageFX, and Leonardo AI. All of these except Gemini can make images with various aspect ratios, although in the case of DALL•E3 the only alternative to square is "Resize to 4:3" which is actually nearly 16:9 (1792×1024), and it is a fresh image, similar to the one you "resized", but not a direct expansion of it. 

Recently I checked the folders that contain my "wallpaper" images, and found there were nearly 500. I had decided to try a different kind of image, similar to a piece of art we have that is embroidery on a floral theme. I wrote a few prompts and tried them out with the various art generators. I concluded that Leonardo AI and DALL•E3 worked with these prompts the best. At first I wanted a depiction of one artwork in a horizontal format, but none of the programs offered pictures that filled a 16×9 frame, or nearly so. Leonardo AI prepared a couple of images that featured two pieces side-by-side on a wall, so I began to concentrate on that. This is the prompt that produced the pictures of lilies:

Two pictures, finely detailed embroidery, of lily flowers of various colors and foliage within a pale green mat and dark green frame, mounted next to one another on a white wall

The upper image is of peonies, with a similar prompt but without "various colors". I also wanted an image with different flowers in each frame, and tried a prompt that said something like "peonies" first and "roses" next, but I kept getting peonies everywhere. Then I tried "roses" followed by "peonies", and still got only peonies! It seems that in existing art, peonies are a much more common theme for embroidery than roses. So I wrote a prompt that only mentioned roses, and got some images showing two pieces of art with roses. As I went along I produced wallpaper images from the ones I liked best.

I noticed at this point that I had 499 wallpaper files. I fired up Gimp (a Photoshop "cousin"), copied roses from one image with all roses and pasted them into one with all peonies, to produce my 500th wallpaper:

PS: I know that "opus" mainly refers to musical works, but I have seen it used for other creative products also.

Grin and bear down

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, teeth, odontology, paleontology, biology

It is easier to get the bite force of an alligator than a human. With a large alligator, it may be more dangerous, but the process is simple: restrain the beast, tap the tip of its nose so it will open its mouth, and stick the measuring tool in between the teeth at the back of the mouth. The measuring tool is typically a steel rod fitted with one or two force plates that can survive a few tons of force. When the gator feels the intruding rod it will bite as hard as it can, even though one or more teeth might be knocked out or broken.

Humans are more cooperative than alligators. However, a human will never bite with full force, particularly when his or her teeth meet the instrument. We have a protective reflex that snaps our jaw back open when we bite on something harder than the average bit of gristle. Very few people can bite hard enough to crack open a hazelnut, for example. We are all strong enough to do so, but the reflex prevents it. Why can an alligator (or a shark) bite hard enough to break teeth, but we cannot?

It isn't for lack of strength. As adults, if we break a tooth, it stays broken. Without the help of a dentist to fit a denture or insert an implant (both quite costly), we have lost that tooth forever. But an alligator's teeth are replaced when any break. Even more so the teeth of sharks. So it makes sense that humans have a reflex that protects our teeth, but sharks and alligator's don't need that reflex.

This is just one subject covered in a very entertaining way in Bite: An Incisive History of Teeth, from Hagfish to Humans by Bill Schutt. The first section of the book consists of eight chapters that deal with various specialized kinds of teeth. The subject of bite force is found in chapter eight, where we find that a 17-foot crocodile can exert 3,700 pounds (~1,700 kg), and that regardless which of the four kinds of crocodilians were studied, bite force was based almost totally on size (the four "crocs" are alligators, crocodiles, caimans, and gharials). For example, even though the mouth of an alligator is twice as wide as the mouth of a crocodile of equal length, the length of their jaws is very nearly the same, and the bite force is the same.

Compared to the peg-shaped teeth of these reptiles, a human molar is rather complex, as this dentist's sign shows. The strong, curved roots of the molar hold it firmly in the jaw. This is why, whenever someone needs to have a molar removed, the dentist schedules a double-length appointment, and these days takes great care to inject enough Novocain or Lidocaine, because the tooth will probably need to be broken in half to get it out, and removing each section requires a great deal of force. I've noticed that dentists tend to be built like weightlifters, and it makes sense!

Human teeth are not particularly sharp. Our pet cat's teeth are much sharper than mine. But perhaps the sharpest teeth belong to vampire bats, the subject of the first chapter. The incisors of a vampire bat are so sharp that the bat can slice off a bit of skin, really a shallow scrape, without disturbing the sleep of the victim. The typical location of the bite is a toe or ear or other easy-to-reach extremity—certainly not the neck! The shallow wound will ooze blood, which the bat laps up. Along with this understanding, we learn how the mythology of vampires and of bats had to be gradually swept aside so scientists could learn how these tiny mammals really live.

A side note on the subject of Chapter 2, the candiru fish of Brazil. Contrary to rumors, these slender catfish don't swim into you while you are peeing in the river. They are about half an inch in diameter, and won't fit. The author was able to track down just one apparently verified account of a man who had this happen, but "apparently verified" turned out to be not really verifiable.

Other kinds of specialized teeth include fangs, both the large canines of baboons and the venom-bearing fangs of certain snakes and lizards such as the Gila monster. They include tusks, which are teeth that project out of the mouth or skull. And we learn why the teeth of horses continue to grow with age: Grass is so abrasive it wears down the crowns of the teeth, so new material has to be grown continually, or no horse would live more than a few years.

Does every animal have teeth? Or at least, all the animals big enough for us to notice? Apparently the earliest vertebrates had no teeth, and no jaws. Hagfish have a weird Y-shaped sort-of-tongue with two patches of toothlike scrapers. They eat from a fallen fish or whale by gripping a bit of flesh with the Y, then tying themselves into a knot that they slip forward until they can pry against the flesh and tear out the piece, which they just swallow. Some frogs and toads are toothless, and turtles have a beak of keratin rather than teeth. Of course birds have a beak also, and the proverb "scarce as hens' teeth" is apt. Certain experiments show that the genes for making teeth are present in birds, but are inactive. The dinosaur ancestors of birds probably all, or nearly all, had teeth.

While the toothed whales—porpoises, orcas, and sperm whales—have many teeth, the other major group of whales instead have baleen or "whalebone", a filtering organ, and no teeth. The echidna, or spiny anteater, and other anteaters, have no teeth, swallowing their prey whole; their main "utensil" is the tongue.

Cephalopod mollusks (octopus, squid, cuttlefish, etc.) have beaks similar to a parrot's beak, made also of keratin. Contrary to this fanciful image of Jack Sparrow about to enter the gullet of a Kraken, or mythical giant squid, squids don't have any teeth. The beak of a giant squid is about the size of a fist; the exposed portion that actually bites is just 2-3 inches across (5-7 cm).

The last section of the book is all about human teeth, and the things people do and have done with them. You may have heard that George Washington had wooden teeth. He lost most of his teeth rather early, probably because of mercury poisoning due to medical practices of the time. His dentures contained teeth of porcelain and of human origin. When dentists of the era extracted teeth, they kept them to be fitted into dentures. Certain cultures drilled holes into the front of incisors to put jewels or other ornaments in. That's a rather painful way to show status! 

As someone who has a bunch of fillings, and now a few crowns, I know the rigors and discomfort, and sometimes the pain, of dental work. The author tells of research that may one day allow us to re-grow lost teeth. It would be a slow process, but a few months of careful chewing while the new tooth grows into place would be no worse than a few months of careful chewing while the titanium root of an implant becomes firmly incorporated into the jaw, until the titanium-and-ceramic crown can be attached. And it may cost a lot less.

Appreciate the teeth you have. Take care of them. Perhaps some folks alive today will live to see the re-growth of lost teeth. Until then, love your dentists; they really try to cause minimal pain while doing maximum good!