Sunrise — 6:52, 6:58, 6:58, 7:08.

The ice — other than the ice shove — is gone. I like the ice. I think it tends to make better pictures. There's more texture and variation in the reflectivity. We're getting lots of warnings about a big winter storm. I think that's overblown. They're always out to scare us about the weather. I'm betting that it will be mostly rain and then less than 10" of snow — but we shall see.

Write about whatever you want in the comments.

"I’m not the kind of squirrel who gives up just like that...."

Our squirrel is Blondie.

"For decades, Cuba has been held up as an ideological lodestar by leftists across Latin America...."

"Even among opponents, Cuba often earned grudging respect as an unyielding bastion of resistance against generations of American presidents. But now Cuba is running out of oil, and its economy is nearing collapse. A new wave of right-wing leaders in Latin America see Cuba not as a place of revolutionary nostalgia, but of authoritarian dysfunction. And in a seismic shift, the leftists at the helm of the region’s three most populous countries — Brazil, Mexico and Colombia — will not provide Cuba with emergency fuel shipments out of fear of incurring President Trump’s wrath.... Cuba’s increasingly draconian crackdowns on dissent, including the expansion of civilian groups that spy and inform on neighbors and new censorship measures criminalizing online criticism of Cuba’s political system, have also hurt Cuba’s standing. As happened in Venezuela under Mr. Maduro, who also imprisoned hundreds of political critics, these moves have withered the support Cuba traditionally held in the Brazilian left...."

From "Is Latin America Ready to Abandon Cuba? Latin America’s left saw Cuba as its lodestar. Now leaders across the spectrum are hesitant to aid a nation in the Trump administration’s cross hairs" (NYT).

"Even if Communist Party leaders want to unleash more spending, formidable obstacles stand in the way, including..."

"... a work force increasingly trapped in insecure, low-wage employment, a rapidly aging and shrinking population and a weak social safety net that encourages people to save for emergencies. China’s people, perhaps more than at any time in the last few decades, are in no mood to go out and splurge. Many have been airing growing anxiety online, posting about falling incomes and scarce jobs. The average income was just over $500 a month in 2025. Unemployment is high.... An estimated 200 million people, or at least one-quarter of China’s work force, are now engaged in insecure 'gig' employment — delivering meals or packages, driving ride-hailing cars, selling goods online or doing other short-term work.... Adding to worker insecurity is China’s household registration system, which restricts access to social services like schooling and health care outside one’s hometown. This effectively ensures that people from China’s vast countryside serve as cheap migrant labor for megacities like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen.... These are hardly a foundation for a vibrant consumer economy...."

Writes Anne Stevenson-Yang, author of 'Wild Ride: A Short History of the Opening and Closing of the Chinese Economy,' in "China’s Long-Promised Consumer Boom Is a Mirage" (NYT).

"The United States bombed military installations on an island that serves as Iran’s main oil export hub and threatened to 'wipe out' the oil infrastructure there..."

"... if Iran continues to block the Strait of Hormuz. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps replied on Saturday that Iran would turn U.S. regional economic interests 'into a pile of ash' if the United States carried out its threat...."

The NYT reports.

It's been so windy.

We'd planned to stay in for the sunrise, but at the last minute, Meade decided to venture forth. He got this picture at 7:25 — 13 minutes after the official sunrise time:

The strong winds had already broken up the ice. Here's how it looked at 4:46 in the afternoon. This is my photograph, as you may be able to tell from the shadow in the lower left corner:

That's the familiar vantage point, and you can see the lake ice is gone except for the wall of ice blocks shoved up against the shore. That's a bit impervious to the brutal wind. I don't know how I made it all the way out there. It wasn't really cold, but oh! the wind.

Here's the video Meade made as I was standing there. Take note of the strong waves in the lake and the ring of fire:

Write about whatever you want in the comments. This is the overnight open thread.

"Getting sun exposure within one hour of waking up can have a powerful effect on your sleep later that night..."

"The light suppresses hormones that make you sleepy and shifts your body into wake mode, setting you up to be tired again by bedtime.... Ideally, we’d all get out in the sun for an hour every morning.... 'Ten minutes is better than zero minutes'... even if it’s cloudy."

That's #1 out of "6 Daytime Habits for Better Sleep/Experts say a great night’s rest starts as soon as you wake up" (NYT).

#5 of the 6 habits is "Wake up at the same time every day." The article treats "time" as a number on the clock. You'd think right after the "leap forward" they'd be more attuned to the reality of the sunlight and say what I assume they intended to mean: Rise consistently with the sun.

Get up and get out and do your sun exposure with the sunrise. Make it a sunrise walk (or run) and you'll take care of #6 on this list: Exercise. 

I know I'm biased because this is what I do, but I don't know why everyone doesn't at least experiment with getting up and out to do a sunrise walk or run. Were you born a night owl — a permanent night owl?

"Regarding the current U.S.-Iran conflict, former President Trump (who appears to be back in office based on recent reports)..."

"... declared at a rally in Hebron, Kentucky, on March 11, 2026, that 'we've won' the war against Iran, claiming it was effectively over 'in the first hour.' He has repeated variations of this, including that the U.S. has 'already won' but needs to 'finish the job,' amid ongoing military operations. The war itself seems to have begun around late February or early March 2026, with U.S. airstrikes and other actions escalating quickly...."

So wrote Grok, after I asked about the difference between 2 events — the victor's winning and the loser's surrender.

I was amazed to see the phrase "former President Trump (who appears to be back in office based on recent reports)."

Meade suggested that Grok was attempting to appeal to what it knew to be my sense of humor. I quoted the phrase to Grok and asked "are you trying to make me laugh?" Its answer made me laugh again:

"No, not at all—I'm not trying to make you laugh. That phrasing was just my attempt at cautious wording based on the flow of incoming reports at the time, but clearly it landed awkwardly...."

Ha ha. Cautious wording! Of all the things you might hesitate to answer with confidence!

"Legal observers exist to help vindicate the First Amendment rights of the assembled. According to the National Lawyers Guild, which formalized the practice..."

"... such observers 'create documentation during events which can later be use (sic) in defense cases, public statements, and litigation which aims to hold law enforcement agencies accountable for the actions of their officers.' The Guild notes that legal observation has its roots in the Black Panthers’ 'cop watch' activities of the late 1960s.... In 1968, in connection with anti-war and racial justice demonstrations in New York City, the Guild 'took components from this practice' of cop watch to develop its legal observer program – the self-described 'eyes and ears' of a larger infrastructure of 'arrest hotlines, jail support teams, community bail funds ... attorney referral networks, and more.' Those who have adopted the Guild’s practice, such as the Minnesota ICE Watch group with which Renee] Good was reportedly affiliated, have advocated for activities that blur the line between observation and participation in protests...."

Writes Benjamin Weingarten in "The Grey Zone: When Do Protest Observers Become Lawbreaking Participants?" (Real Clear Investigations).

"Couples who forgo honest conversation about bot usage may do so at their own peril."

"That was the case for Rhea Srivastava, a 24-year-old living in Washington, whose fights with her ex-boyfriend often resolved over text message. The messages he sent were emotionally mature, thoughtful and well-reasoned. They just didn’t seem to be written by him. 'There was no vulnerability on his end,' she said. Over time, she observed that the things he wrote didn’t seem like natural outgrowths of their conversations. They were the result, she began to suspect, of a more unguarded back-and-forth with ChatGPT, which then resulted in a carefully crafted text to her. 'It was as though our relationship problems were being solved with him, through Chat.... As time passed, it was pointless to argue with him because I could just ask Chat what he was about to say,' she said."

From "She uses AI for everything. Her husband thinks AI is a menace. What happens to a relationship when one partner depends on a chatbot, and the other is an AI skeptic?" (WaPo).

Pointless?! I think they can have better arguments — that is, conversations — by using AI to analyze what they are saying and what the other person might feel or be trying to say and then talking together again. This could be true even if only one of them is using A.I. If either person is annoyed to think they are reading texts written by A.I., you have at least 2 options: 1. Talk in person (after reflecting with or without the assistance of A.I. (or your therapist or other confidante)), and 2. Agree and trust each other never to send texts composed by A.I.

A third idea is that when you think it's pointless to argue because you could just ask Chat what he was about to say why no tell that to Chat and have Chat to predict what you're about to say? Send that. Let him respond, then respond to that with A.I.-composed text, and see how long before the 2 of you meet on a higher plane and laugh about everything. 

Guarantee: No part of this post was composed by A.I.

"So, buy books at an estate sale, remove the dust jackets, then organize by color? Fire the podcaster and rehire your book reviewers."

Says a commenter at the WaPo article "The multiuse home space trend is coming for your dining room/A DIY dining library can create the perfect space for reading, crafting, work or dining with friends. Here’s how to get one."

The article is verbiage about putting bookshelves in the dining room. The author is Jolie Kerr. Was she a podcaster? I look it up. Wikipedia says:

Jolie Kerr (born 1976) is an American writer and podcast host. Her book, My Boyfriend Barfed in My Handbag... and Other Things You Can't Ask Martha, was a New York Times best-seller.... Writing for The New York Times, Dwight Garner called My Boyfriend Barfed 'the Lorrie Moore short story, or the Tina Fey memoir, of cleaning tutorials...[a] wise and funny new book.' At NPR Linda Holmes praised Kerr as 'at her most irresistible when she's handling the kinds of awkward questions that do traditionally go unanswered in your women's magazines and your perky home-maintenance shows.... Kerr now hosts a podcast... called Ask A Clean Person.

I can see why WaPo wants a writer like that, but this books-in-the-dining room thing is pretty ridiculous, and it is upsetting that WaPo canned the book review.

"The absence of President Donald Trump in the new poll’s question may have led more people to say they are 'unsure,' as views about the president tend to color people’s opinions...."

I'm reading "We asked 1,000 Americans if U.S. strikes on Iran should continue" (WaPo)(gift link).

A Post poll shortly after the strikes began found 39 percent supported “President Trump ordering airstrikes against Iran,” while 52 percent opposed them and 9 percent were unsure. The new poll asked generally about the “U.S. military campaign against Iran,” finding 42 percent support it, 40 percent oppose it, and 17 percent are unsure. The absence of President Donald Trump in the new poll’s question may have led more people to say they are “unsure,” as views about the president tend to color people’s opinions of his actions and policies.

Polls! People are so easily manipulated by the wording of the question and/or the news report on the poll explains away results the editors disfavor. Here, the poll shows growing support for the war, but the article says maybe there is no growing support. It's just that the first poll had a lot of respondents who reacted to Trump's name and the second poll didn't say his name. Who knows? There might be even less support for the war and the big takeaway is that plenty of people loathe Trump. 

"People out there tweeting that this is destabilizing China may be wishing that were the case, but tweets are not reality. This is a shock China can absorb. It will end up in a stronger position on the other side."

Said Josh Freed, "head of climate and energy at Third Way, a center-left think tank."

"this" = the disruption of the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz.

Freed is quoted in "Why China could emerge a winner from Trump’s global energy shock/China’s evolution into an 'electrostate' may help insulate it from spiking oil prices" (WaPo)(gift link, so you can see the whole analysis).

The photo at the top of this article shows wind turbines in China, but China's plan has more to do with huge stockpiles of oil and the burning the abundant domestic coal.

Roughly one-third of China’s total energy consumption now comes from electricity, according to the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, 50 percent higher than the global average. More than a third of that electricity comes from solar, wind and hydropower....

So a third of a third of the energy — one ninth — comes from solar, wind and hydropower. I wonder how much comes from just solar and wind. Seems like hydropower is thrown in for more obfuscation. You can do your own research, but I think if you work it out you'll find that solar and wind amount to something like 7% of China's energy consumption. That's not much! They've been trying very hard for a long time and have a powerful incentive. 

Sunrise — 6:56, 7:16, 7:21, 7:23.

Write about anything you want in the comments.

Is it true that "Mojtaba Khamenei, Iran’s new supreme leader, struck a defiant tone on Thursday in his first known public comments since succeeding his slain father"?

That's what I'm reading in the NYT, but what proof is there that the man is even alive?

In written statements carried by Iranian state media, Mr. Khamenei said that Iran would pursue “an effective and regret-inducing defense” and that “the lever of blocking the Strait of Hormuz must also continue to be used.”

Written statements seem more like proof that the man is dead (or in a coma). 

The text of The New York Post article gestures at the uncertainty with the word "allegedly": "Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, allegedly released his first statement Thursday vowing to use the 'lever' of closing the Strait of Hormuz to international energy shipping — after reports circulated that he was in a coma and had his leg amputated after being severely injured in the US-Israeli strikes that killed his father and other family members."

The Post's headline is less careful: "Iran’s new impotent supreme leader releases first statement — after reports he’s in coma, had leg amputated." Did Khamenei release the statement or did others do the releasing and use his name?

"The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money. BUT..."

"... of far greater interest and importance to me, as President, is stoping an evil Empire, Iran, from having Nuclear Weapons, and destroying the Middle East and, indeed, the World. I won’t ever let that happen! Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DONALD J. TRUMP"

... at Truth Social.

Meanwhile, when I look at the NYT, the top stories are all centered on the price of oil.