Of the Oscar films, I've seen only Conclave, Emilia Perez, and Dune. I know a lot of y'all love Dune, but I thought it was boring as hell and I have no idea why it's nominated for anything that doesn't have to do with visuals, except that the Oscars has a long history of loving really big productions that aren't particularly good as movies (see, e.g., Titanic, or the movie about the tall blue people that was supposed to be some sort of allegory). Emilia Perez is a mess of a film from the choices to make it a musical like those dudes are friggin' Jacques Demy to the casting of Selena Gomez, with all that messiness masking a pretty trite plot and mostly meh performances. Conclave was fun to watch, the performances were excellent, the twist at the end was unnecessary, but overall, worth the price of admission (or stream). I do think by the end it felt a lot like a love letter to the Catholic Church, which is an institution of which I'm not a fan, but whatever, a conclave of cardinals is a pretty good setting for a political drama. Having not seen any of the other films nominated (and having no interest in any of them but maybe Nickel Boys), I am gonna have to root for Conclave.
There was a lot going on; makes for easy storytelling.
I mean, we feel like there's a lot going on now, but mostly there are just posts, so it'll be hard to do movies from this period, but the 1940s through the 1980s? Shite was happening.
(To be clear, the US will keep doing the bad things they were doing with USAID, without doing any of the good things, should USAID actually cease to exist, but still, the reasons for the left to celebrate don't come along often.)
Much discussion among leftists these days about whether we can celebrate the end of USAID or if the circumstances of its demise are just too dire. See also, the FBI.
In Brazil, the combination of monetary policy and tariffs under the ISI seems to have accomplished exactly what it set out to, even if it took a while.
She mentions that the helicopter should have been at 200 feet instead of 350-400, that the controller should have told them where to look, not just "do you see the plane?", and that the size of the Blackhawks crew may have played a role.
I don't think anyone but the FAA's lawyers have bothered trying to defend it. Maybe whoever was contracted to build it. The air traffic controller subreddit is full of stories about people who either aged out, or almost aged out, because it took them so many times to pass it. It was a really bad metric, and should be a lesson in metric building.
It's worth noting that this was not designed to increase diversity, it was just really poorly designed assessment of multiple traits. Also, they stopped using it in 2018.
The answer key with the weightings for each question used to be online, but it looks like the link is dead.
I'm excited to see talk like this, but we do have a big problem: a whole bunch of our Third Estate is on the side of the First Estate. Hell, Trump's whole thing is getting the Third Estate on his side as a bona fide member of the First Estate.
There is a route to reigniting the revolutionary potential of the Third Estate, though I'm afraid a Democratic Party led by and subservient to the First Estate won't be much help.
They famously built one (I think it cost more than $11.6 million) that was finished early in the pandemic, but it was so poorly constructed that they just scrapped it.
I've read this paper. As I've said, there are people publishing lab leak arguments in the literature. This should a.) be pretty strong evidence that your narrative about suppression of this theory among scientists is wrong, and b.) not be taken as indicating that there is not a consensus.
It's important for scientists to publish ideas that challenge consensus, and they are doing so. Here you have a paper using a novel risk assessment method (novel as in, it's the authors' own method). I don't yet know of a reply to this paper, though I'm sure they're coming.
Oh wait, I think I see where the source of our disagreement lies: you think her having ideas that were very popular among Sanders' voters, but not the mainstream of either party, is a sign that she's terminally online, whereas I'm saying using online terminology like "woke gender ideology" is. The policy of opposing programs or grants or whatever that promote views of gender the Trump administration doesn't like, while bad, is not in itself a sign of terminal onlineness, nor is opposition to social safety net policies, but calling these things "woke gender ideology" and "Marxist equity" are.
The liberal equivalent might be her saying, "1312" in a memo suspending funding for police, or "eat the rich" in a press release about increasing taxes for the 1%.
(If you think those links look awful, you should have seen how it looked when I first posted it. Forgive me; I'm old, and these computing boxes confuse me.)
Ah yeah, I didn't remember where she said that stuff, but now I vaguely do. I'm still not quite sure how that's equivalent to "woke gender ideology," or an official memo, but you've brought an example, and I suspect we're simply not going to agree on their equivalence, so I'll leave it an acknowledgement that you at least brought a relevant counter.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “The 97th Oscars’ Best Picture Race: As Wide Open As It Gets”
[SPOILER ALERT, sorta]
Of the Oscar films, I've seen only Conclave, Emilia Perez, and Dune. I know a lot of y'all love Dune, but I thought it was boring as hell and I have no idea why it's nominated for anything that doesn't have to do with visuals, except that the Oscars has a long history of loving really big productions that aren't particularly good as movies (see, e.g., Titanic, or the movie about the tall blue people that was supposed to be some sort of allegory). Emilia Perez is a mess of a film from the choices to make it a musical like those dudes are friggin' Jacques Demy to the casting of Selena Gomez, with all that messiness masking a pretty trite plot and mostly meh performances. Conclave was fun to watch, the performances were excellent, the twist at the end was unnecessary, but overall, worth the price of admission (or stream). I do think by the end it felt a lot like a love letter to the Catholic Church, which is an institution of which I'm not a fan, but whatever, a conclave of cardinals is a pretty good setting for a political drama. Having not seen any of the other films nominated (and having no interest in any of them but maybe Nickel Boys), I am gonna have to root for Conclave.
"
Not just Ralph Fiennes! Ralph Fiennes speaking Italian!
"
There was a lot going on; makes for easy storytelling.
I mean, we feel like there's a lot going on now, but mostly there are just posts, so it'll be hard to do movies from this period, but the 1940s through the 1980s? Shite was happening.
On “Open Mic for the week of 2/3/2025”
I think Kerry was part of amending the FAA to include USAID language in '04, so I'm sure he used it exactly as he wanted.
"
Right, the circumstances make it less enjoyable to watch.
"
Specifically, I believe the Foreign Assistance Act was later amended to include USAID.
"
This is true, but Congress later made it, er, official.
"
(To be clear, the US will keep doing the bad things they were doing with USAID, without doing any of the good things, should USAID actually cease to exist, but still, the reasons for the left to celebrate don't come along often.)
"
Much discussion among leftists these days about whether we can celebrate the end of USAID or if the circumstances of its demise are just too dire. See also, the FBI.
"
In Brazil, the combination of monetary policy and tariffs under the ISI seems to have accomplished exactly what it set out to, even if it took a while.
"
Looks like Mexico caved.
On “Terror On The Potomac: The DCA Collision”
This is an interesting take from a (former?) Blackhawk pilot:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/31/us/video/black-hawk-helicopter-pilot-elizabeth-mccormick-plane-crash-digvid
She mentions that the helicopter should have been at 200 feet instead of 350-400, that the controller should have told them where to look, not just "do you see the plane?", and that the size of the Blackhawks crew may have played a role.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/27/2025”
I don't think anyone but the FAA's lawyers have bothered trying to defend it. Maybe whoever was contracted to build it. The air traffic controller subreddit is full of stories about people who either aged out, or almost aged out, because it took them so many times to pass it. It was a really bad metric, and should be a lesson in metric building.
"
The answers and question weights were put online as early as 2015.
"
It's worth noting that this was not designed to increase diversity, it was just really poorly designed assessment of multiple traits. Also, they stopped using it in 2018.
The answer key with the weightings for each question used to be online, but it looks like the link is dead.
"
Ah, damn. What a life, though.
On “Trump’s Unforced Error”
Glad I went with this instead of my original comment, "You say you want a Revolution? Well, you know..."
"
I'm excited to see talk like this, but we do have a big problem: a whole bunch of our Third Estate is on the side of the First Estate. Hell, Trump's whole thing is getting the Third Estate on his side as a bona fide member of the First Estate.
There is a route to reigniting the revolutionary potential of the Third Estate, though I'm afraid a Democratic Party led by and subservient to the First Estate won't be much help.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/27/2025”
I'm really excited for the new Constitution to ban "Woke Gender Ideology," "Marxist equality," anti-fascism, and DEI.
"
They famously built one (I think it cost more than $11.6 million) that was finished early in the pandemic, but it was so poorly constructed that they just scrapped it.
"
I've read this paper. As I've said, there are people publishing lab leak arguments in the literature. This should a.) be pretty strong evidence that your narrative about suppression of this theory among scientists is wrong, and b.) not be taken as indicating that there is not a consensus.
It's important for scientists to publish ideas that challenge consensus, and they are doing so. Here you have a paper using a novel risk assessment method (novel as in, it's the authors' own method). I don't yet know of a reply to this paper, though I'm sure they're coming.
On “Memo: All Federal Grant, Loan, and Financial Assistance “Temporarily Paused””
I'm sure they are, but for better or worse, we'll never know whether they would have used the "I am once again asking you" meme in an official memo.
"
Oh wait, I think I see where the source of our disagreement lies: you think her having ideas that were very popular among Sanders' voters, but not the mainstream of either party, is a sign that she's terminally online, whereas I'm saying using online terminology like "woke gender ideology" is. The policy of opposing programs or grants or whatever that promote views of gender the Trump administration doesn't like, while bad, is not in itself a sign of terminal onlineness, nor is opposition to social safety net policies, but calling these things "woke gender ideology" and "Marxist equity" are.
The liberal equivalent might be her saying, "1312" in a memo suspending funding for police, or "eat the rich" in a press release about increasing taxes for the 1%.
On “Open Mic for the week of 1/27/2025”
(If you think those links look awful, you should have seen how it looked when I first posted it. Forgive me; I'm old, and these computing boxes confuse me.)
On “Memo: All Federal Grant, Loan, and Financial Assistance “Temporarily Paused””
Ah yeah, I didn't remember where she said that stuff, but now I vaguely do. I'm still not quite sure how that's equivalent to "woke gender ideology," or an official memo, but you've brought an example, and I suspect we're simply not going to agree on their equivalence, so I'll leave it an acknowledgement that you at least brought a relevant counter.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.