Of course it's apt to backfire. Check out the dogs and fire hoses; check out the "four dead in Ohio;" check out the World Trade Center. They all got your attention, didn't they? The results, for the folks involved (on either side) might not have been predictable, but things were shaken up. That's the goal. "The status quo is untenable; rattle the cage!"
It isn't about changing minds. It's about calling attention to the problem. None of the protesters at O'Hare (or in Selma, or in the halls of Columbia decades ago, name your protest) thought they were going to immediately change minds. They were just going to get headlines, perhaps awake some concern or even impatience...and then maybe things might change. Sometimes it works.
So, are you the “inevitable someone” critiquing my list? I’d be cool with that. But I did go back and look at my list and it seems pretty obviously personal to just me and not particularly applicable to anyone else. The list does start off with a pretty specific and quite currently political item which would be hard for me to overcome. Hard, but perhaps not impossible. Hey, Toni Collette calls me up, tells me she loves The Donald and would like to go out to dinner…who am I to argue?
If my deal breaker list makes me unattractive to someone, then that seems as if it is fulfilling its purpose. And using it for psychoanalysis might be kind of interesting…or maybe not. The items on the list don’t seem all that odd…to me at least. And no shame-casting here. Everyone! Please make your own list! No test on Friday! Ta!
Sure. That’s what I would like. If and when those disagreements arose, some discussion would certainly be warranted, both for their sake and mine. And if disagreements about moral issues deeply cared about aren’t somehow important…then what is? And I don’t understand the straw man reference in this context.
Well, vis-a-vis the “Dump Her” list. With any care and insight one need not get to the “Dump” stage. How about a “Just Don’t Get Involved” list? Such as: Trump voter; racist; rapist: unable to laugh at my foibles/their foibles/the world’s foibles; disrespect for my goofy likes and/or dislikes (no need to participate, but must politely tolerate); basic cleanliness problem; inability to leave town to see new stuff; habitually rude to service staff. Those will do for a start.
Pretty funny! Saw the movie, but don’t remember that scene. We must have enjoyed it though. One fun addition to my anecdote is that some time later she showed me her actual hand-written list of encounters. There were several asterisks in place of names. What a cutie!
I’m sorry, but have post a “special snowflake/anecdotal” addition. One night, very very early in my relationship with Femrex, she told me about the night that she and several friends (most of whom I knew) compared “body counts.” She ended the tale with “Poor X! She only had ____!” My jaw dropped and I had to ask “Cripes! Only? How many for you?” A little hesitation, but finally…good grief! Nearly five times mine own! What a turn on, for me at least. We’ve been together for over 40 years since, bless her experienced little heart! And I would count her as as fine an example of absolute moral purity as I’ve been lucky enough to know. No kidding.
So the adjective "Necessary" gives "Evil" some kind of stature? Surely at least one approach to defining the Big E would be to acknowledge that the action or philosophy in question is unnecessary. (And then try to define what "necessary" might mean in context).
Well, can you define what "obvious evil" is? Is it context sensitive? Can BSDI? I voluntarily participated in a a vicious, unjust war -- how much evil am I smeared with? A stubble? A beard? Other than rousing public opinion, just how useful is the word "evil"?
If I could I'd like to switch this around a little bit. Over a long period of time, as a very active politician, Biden has changed his stated views? That adds up to his being a liar and unprincipled? A question for you: can you name any other politician, similarly long-lived, who hasn't switched around a bit? Or even a lot? Who hasn't at least reacted to the ongoing changes in society and their party? Heck, why stick with politicians? Have you (or I, for that matter) maintained the exact same principled views over the last (for me) 50 years as an adult? And if not, are we liars?
And decline? If you're referring to a decline from youth to old age, no kidding. He sure has declined on that scale. However, he's in Israel now, in the public eye. Let's see if how he functions in this relatively stressful situation.
Whew. Well, I'm probably going to skate a bit too close to BSDI territory, but, other than the last two sentences of your post, aren't you simply describing normal politics? Exaggerating records. Following the party line. Taking out after those on the other side. Politicians are pretty much required to be an unholy mix of aggressive salesperson and governmental official. Has it ever been otherwise? When running for office, what the heck else are they supposed to do? We, the voters, are supposed to understand that and figure out what we want, even if it takes a bit of de-coding.
Your last two sentences are just junk. All you have to do is pay a little attention to Biden to see that he isn't "disconnected from his surroundings." Maybe a bit a softer spoken because of age, but since when is that a detriment in a politician? And who are you to say he "never had beliefs or aspirations for the country?" You simply can't make that call and should understand that.
I have always had the feeling that the decision to drop the bomb wasn't a very difficult one, at the time. The Germans were enemies, of course, but the Japanese were Hated. Really Hated. Maybe a racial thing; maybe a reaction to the depredations of the Japanese Empire at the time; maybe a fear of the real threat they had posed early on in the war. A poisonous combination of all of that? But Hated with a capital Hate. I really doubt that Truman, or anyone in a position of influence at the time, gave the dropping of the bomb that much thought. "We've got it. We'll use it. Next question?" Later, of course, much analysis, but at the moment, no problem. (As long as it worked.) Would we have used the bomb on Germany? I rather doubt it, but who can be sure? The timing didn't work out.
None of that is meant to suggest the decision was wrong; just that it wasn't hard, at the time. The point has been made many times that The Bomb wasn't even the worst that we did. Was it dropped to save millions of lives in a nasty invasion scenario? Was it dropped as the first shot in World War III (scare those Commies a bit)? I have read some analysis that says the fire-bombing of Dresden was more about the Russians than the German civilians. I don't know.
Dang! You are so good at this. Thank you! (On the other hand, my limited human ability to fathom the cosmos now has me convinced that every “crack” I hear in my house’s structure is a space-time fluctuation.)
Again, a great presentation. I have a couple of comments. For me, the film made an error in how Foster's character was portrayed. The point of sexism was made rather strongly in the film, which was a great thing to do, but she is presented very often as almost hysterical or completely cowed by the Powers That Be. Given who that lady was, and her accomplishments, her tear-filled, nearly desperate testimony at the hearing just didn't ring true to me. She knows what she saw. She understands the difficulties of presenting such things to a Senate committee. She went into that room totally prepared, and I think she would have been quite confident in her testimony, if incredibly frustrated that it wasn't going to go well. Foster is a fine actress; I don't fault her. I rather think that she was directed toward a more fragile and victimized affect in her performance. For my little two cents worth, it didn't work well.
I also had a bit of a problem with the old "we don't want to freak you out, so we'll adopt a human form" bit. Not that it didn't work, just that we've seen it before, many times. A movie that handled that question much better is "Arrival." Those were some damn disturbing aliens, but our plucky science team seemed to handle them pretty well.
And one more point, not so much about the movie. I actually have my doubts about whether finding life "out there" is going to be that big a deal. Headlines, sure, and then life "down here" will go on. You and I will be hugely impressed...and then go have dinner. Klaatu landing in D.C. is one thing, but this notion that humanity at large is actually concerned about being "alone" or learning that we are not "alone" doesn't strike me as a real important issue on a day-to-day basis. Most of the human population (again, perhaps not you and I, YMMV) already believe they are not "alone" and have lots of iconic religious figures to assure them of that fact.
But let me get back to how much I enjoyed this presentation and all of your presentations. Thank you!
Reading your list of tasks and asking myself if I designed bot to do all that what would it look like, I ended up with a vague mental picture that looked a lot like WALL-E. Is WALL-E humanoid? I guess YMMV, but not particularly to me (nice expressive "eyes" though). And, of course, you would only have to give bot the instructions once and get the service for a long time to come.
The easy chair/recliner in my living room does a much better job of assuming my human shape than does my car seat. The car seat is fine, and after a long walk in the mountains, I love sitting down on it...but I'd prefer the La-Z-Boy back home. I think the car seat doesn't assume my reclining desires or my desire for lower leg raising. I do like the cup holders though.
I see your point. Joe Turkel in "The Shining." No need for the bartender to exist beneath the waist. The "Johnny Cab" in "Total Recall," except that we already have (for better or worse) self-driving vehicles and no one is putting humanoid joke-spitters in the driver's seat. But, yeah, the bartender thing might work.
Are you referring to a sexbot's "customer service," or to talking with people on the telephone/online who try to help me out of a software jam? No need for human form in the latter.
A question somewhat related to the ThTh1 sexbot story. Despite their constant appearance in science fiction stories and movies is there any possible reason for robots to have human form other than as sexbots?
Nothing to add to a lovely article except that (born in 1950) I was in that teenaged audience that looked forward to every new Yardbirds song because of the wild and wonderful things their guitarist was doing. What a progression of pure playing talent and technical effects he, and the group, were doing! It was one thing to know who the Beatles and the Stones were, and a slightly different (and I think more complimentary) thing to be following the work of a single guitarist. A tip of the old 45 to Mr. Beck!
On “Open Mic for the week of 12/18/2023”
Of course it's apt to backfire. Check out the dogs and fire hoses; check out the "four dead in Ohio;" check out the World Trade Center. They all got your attention, didn't they? The results, for the folks involved (on either side) might not have been predictable, but things were shaken up. That's the goal. "The status quo is untenable; rattle the cage!"
"
It isn't about changing minds. It's about calling attention to the problem. None of the protesters at O'Hare (or in Selma, or in the halls of Columbia decades ago, name your protest) thought they were going to immediately change minds. They were just going to get headlines, perhaps awake some concern or even impatience...and then maybe things might change. Sometimes it works.
On “Moral Codes and Alpha Bros”
So, are you the “inevitable someone” critiquing my list? I’d be cool with that. But I did go back and look at my list and it seems pretty obviously personal to just me and not particularly applicable to anyone else. The list does start off with a pretty specific and quite currently political item which would be hard for me to overcome. Hard, but perhaps not impossible. Hey, Toni Collette calls me up, tells me she loves The Donald and would like to go out to dinner…who am I to argue?
If my deal breaker list makes me unattractive to someone, then that seems as if it is fulfilling its purpose. And using it for psychoanalysis might be kind of interesting…or maybe not. The items on the list don’t seem all that odd…to me at least. And no shame-casting here. Everyone! Please make your own list! No test on Friday! Ta!
"
Sure. That’s what I would like. If and when those disagreements arose, some discussion would certainly be warranted, both for their sake and mine. And if disagreements about moral issues deeply cared about aren’t somehow important…then what is? And I don’t understand the straw man reference in this context.
"
Well, vis-a-vis the “Dump Her” list. With any care and insight one need not get to the “Dump” stage. How about a “Just Don’t Get Involved” list? Such as: Trump voter; racist; rapist: unable to laugh at my foibles/their foibles/the world’s foibles; disrespect for my goofy likes and/or dislikes (no need to participate, but must politely tolerate); basic cleanliness problem; inability to leave town to see new stuff; habitually rude to service staff. Those will do for a start.
"
Pretty funny! Saw the movie, but don’t remember that scene. We must have enjoyed it though. One fun addition to my anecdote is that some time later she showed me her actual hand-written list of encounters. There were several asterisks in place of names. What a cutie!
"
I’m sorry, but have post a “special snowflake/anecdotal” addition. One night, very very early in my relationship with Femrex, she told me about the night that she and several friends (most of whom I knew) compared “body counts.” She ended the tale with “Poor X! She only had ____!” My jaw dropped and I had to ask “Cripes! Only? How many for you?” A little hesitation, but finally…good grief! Nearly five times mine own! What a turn on, for me at least. We’ve been together for over 40 years since, bless her experienced little heart! And I would count her as as fine an example of absolute moral purity as I’ve been lucky enough to know. No kidding.
On “From Matt Yglesias: Israel, Palestine, and the need for principled free speech”
So the adjective "Necessary" gives "Evil" some kind of stature? Surely at least one approach to defining the Big E would be to acknowledge that the action or philosophy in question is unnecessary. (And then try to define what "necessary" might mean in context).
"
Well, can you define what "obvious evil" is? Is it context sensitive? Can BSDI? I voluntarily participated in a a vicious, unjust war -- how much evil am I smeared with? A stubble? A beard? Other than rousing public opinion, just how useful is the word "evil"?
On “Of Course They Cheered The Murders”
Boxing, football, army movies, Statham movies, January 6th for a large majority of Republicans. Am I missing a joke here?
On “An Anxious Man’s Advice to Dems: Don’t Psych Yourself Out”
If I could I'd like to switch this around a little bit. Over a long period of time, as a very active politician, Biden has changed his stated views? That adds up to his being a liar and unprincipled? A question for you: can you name any other politician, similarly long-lived, who hasn't switched around a bit? Or even a lot? Who hasn't at least reacted to the ongoing changes in society and their party? Heck, why stick with politicians? Have you (or I, for that matter) maintained the exact same principled views over the last (for me) 50 years as an adult? And if not, are we liars?
And decline? If you're referring to a decline from youth to old age, no kidding. He sure has declined on that scale. However, he's in Israel now, in the public eye. Let's see if how he functions in this relatively stressful situation.
"
Whew. Well, I'm probably going to skate a bit too close to BSDI territory, but, other than the last two sentences of your post, aren't you simply describing normal politics? Exaggerating records. Following the party line. Taking out after those on the other side. Politicians are pretty much required to be an unholy mix of aggressive salesperson and governmental official. Has it ever been otherwise? When running for office, what the heck else are they supposed to do? We, the voters, are supposed to understand that and figure out what we want, even if it takes a bit of de-coding.
Your last two sentences are just junk. All you have to do is pay a little attention to Biden to see that he isn't "disconnected from his surroundings." Maybe a bit a softer spoken because of age, but since when is that a detriment in a politician? And who are you to say he "never had beliefs or aspirations for the country?" You simply can't make that call and should understand that.
"
Biden = stupid?
Biden = immoral?
Biden = incompetent?
I understand political differences, but what the heck are you talking about?
On “Video Throughput: Lunar Excursion Module”
Lovely Explanatory Movie! Thanks!
On “Quibbling Over Nomenclature Regarding the Atomic Bombings”
I have always had the feeling that the decision to drop the bomb wasn't a very difficult one, at the time. The Germans were enemies, of course, but the Japanese were Hated. Really Hated. Maybe a racial thing; maybe a reaction to the depredations of the Japanese Empire at the time; maybe a fear of the real threat they had posed early on in the war. A poisonous combination of all of that? But Hated with a capital Hate. I really doubt that Truman, or anyone in a position of influence at the time, gave the dropping of the bomb that much thought. "We've got it. We'll use it. Next question?" Later, of course, much analysis, but at the moment, no problem. (As long as it worked.) Would we have used the bomb on Germany? I rather doubt it, but who can be sure? The timing didn't work out.
None of that is meant to suggest the decision was wrong; just that it wasn't hard, at the time. The point has been made many times that The Bomb wasn't even the worst that we did. Was it dropped to save millions of lives in a nasty invasion scenario? Was it dropped as the first shot in World War III (scare those Commies a bit)? I have read some analysis that says the fire-bombing of Dresden was more about the Russians than the German civilians. I don't know.
War sucks, man.
On “Ripples in the Galaxy”
Dang! You are so good at this. Thank you! (On the other hand, my limited human ability to fathom the cosmos now has me convinced that every “crack” I hear in my house’s structure is a space-time fluctuation.)
On “Video Thoughput: The Science of Contact”
Again, a great presentation. I have a couple of comments. For me, the film made an error in how Foster's character was portrayed. The point of sexism was made rather strongly in the film, which was a great thing to do, but she is presented very often as almost hysterical or completely cowed by the Powers That Be. Given who that lady was, and her accomplishments, her tear-filled, nearly desperate testimony at the hearing just didn't ring true to me. She knows what she saw. She understands the difficulties of presenting such things to a Senate committee. She went into that room totally prepared, and I think she would have been quite confident in her testimony, if incredibly frustrated that it wasn't going to go well. Foster is a fine actress; I don't fault her. I rather think that she was directed toward a more fragile and victimized affect in her performance. For my little two cents worth, it didn't work well.
I also had a bit of a problem with the old "we don't want to freak you out, so we'll adopt a human form" bit. Not that it didn't work, just that we've seen it before, many times. A movie that handled that question much better is "Arrival." Those were some damn disturbing aliens, but our plucky science team seemed to handle them pretty well.
And one more point, not so much about the movie. I actually have my doubts about whether finding life "out there" is going to be that big a deal. Headlines, sure, and then life "down here" will go on. You and I will be hugely impressed...and then go have dinner. Klaatu landing in D.C. is one thing, but this notion that humanity at large is actually concerned about being "alone" or learning that we are not "alone" doesn't strike me as a real important issue on a day-to-day basis. Most of the human population (again, perhaps not you and I, YMMV) already believe they are not "alone" and have lots of iconic religious figures to assure them of that fact.
But let me get back to how much I enjoyed this presentation and all of your presentations. Thank you!
On “Charity, Clout, and Moral Outrage: On MrBeast and Seeing”
Excellent choice.
On “Throughput: AI Sexbot Edition”
Reading your list of tasks and asking myself if I designed bot to do all that what would it look like, I ended up with a vague mental picture that looked a lot like WALL-E. Is WALL-E humanoid? I guess YMMV, but not particularly to me (nice expressive "eyes" though). And, of course, you would only have to give bot the instructions once and get the service for a long time to come.
The easy chair/recliner in my living room does a much better job of assuming my human shape than does my car seat. The car seat is fine, and after a long walk in the mountains, I love sitting down on it...but I'd prefer the La-Z-Boy back home. I think the car seat doesn't assume my reclining desires or my desire for lower leg raising. I do like the cup holders though.
"
I see your point. Joe Turkel in "The Shining." No need for the bartender to exist beneath the waist. The "Johnny Cab" in "Total Recall," except that we already have (for better or worse) self-driving vehicles and no one is putting humanoid joke-spitters in the driver's seat. But, yeah, the bartender thing might work.
"
Are you referring to a sexbot's "customer service," or to talking with people on the telephone/online who try to help me out of a software jam? No need for human form in the latter.
"
A question somewhat related to the ThTh1 sexbot story. Despite their constant appearance in science fiction stories and movies is there any possible reason for robots to have human form other than as sexbots?
On “Jeff Beck, RIP”
Nothing to add to a lovely article except that (born in 1950) I was in that teenaged audience that looked forward to every new Yardbirds song because of the wild and wonderful things their guitarist was doing. What a progression of pure playing talent and technical effects he, and the group, were doing! It was one thing to know who the Beatles and the Stones were, and a slightly different (and I think more complimentary) thing to be following the work of a single guitarist. A tip of the old 45 to Mr. Beck!
On “The Best To You Each Morning: The Cereal In America Story”
I voted "FOR" the Trix rabbit.
On “TSN Open Mic for the week of 12/26/2022”
Took me a minute or two, but I finally got it. Ooooo. Nasty. But funny as hell.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.