The Metro is terrible, and here's how it happened.
For people growing up in the 50s, I Love Lucy was the single way they learned about Cuba, however distorted the show presented it.
It's nice to hear people who don't care about politics talking about politics because it reminds me that there is more to life.
This is a story that will make you like Justin Bieber more. It's still worth reading.
Responses:
1. The venom in those responses is excessive and excessively unhelpful. This stuff makes you just want to disengage, so I'm glad she wrote that article.
2. As long as the government isn't spending taxpayer dollars, I'm all for that idea.
3. Theirs is a nice story, and it's a great concept for a restaurant. We can check it out next week.
4. Do we know anyone who still lives in Los Angeles? If not, I like the idea of going to Annandale from time to time. We aren't usually disappointed. And that quesadilla looks intriguing.
5. Other than the lack of chairs and the sponsorship by Urban Outfitters, it seems like a nice life.
6. You have to give the people what they want.
R2R:
1. Only if something truly terrible happens.
2. I think I'm slowly getting caught up.
5. Curves probably still has a place in society, perhaps for the more fixed-mindset women out there. In my view, the real downside is the potential for inequality arguments. It costs a fair amount of money to participate in these classes. As most reasonable fitness buffs note, it is entirely possible to be fit without spending hundreds of dollars a year on classes, memberships, etc., in much the same way that it is possible to eat healthily without spending thousands of dollars a month at Whole Foods or on boutique smoothie chains. All that said, though, for as intense and crazy as my SoulCycle class was, and for as intense and insane as Cross Fit can sometimes be, it's all in service of a really good thing, which is affirmative dedication to physical health as both an aspiration and a way of life, rather than a chore.
R2R2R:
4. That makes sense. The reason I missed it was that, from now on, I associate the whole privilege conversation with bad, annoying people, and I happen to like John Mulaney.
R2R2R2R:
1. As I said, I suspect that the media in China will report it, assuming of course that it does not go against whatever reporting norms are imposed by the Communist Party there. Part of the reason I find it reasonable that such an event would not appear in a U.S. newspaper is that, in crappy countries (and for these purposes, China is a crappy country), disasters attributable to negligence or impoverished conditions are far more common, and the answers are not necessarily sensible to an outside audience (e.g. if 100 people died in a mine in the U.S., there would be in-depth media coverage, massive lawsuits, Congressional action, etc., in large part because we understand what our government and society will tolerate and, more specifically, we think we are too advanced for such accidents). So from a media narrative perspective, it's a "dog bites man" story. To be sure, the death of 100 people is certainly tragic, but the tragic nature of a story isn't why the media reports on it.
This all comes down to how you define news and the role of the media. To me, news includes (or ought to include) information that is relevant to our daily lives (e.g. weather and traffic), interesting from a cultural or social perspective (e.g. movie and restaurant reviews, community developments), and, most importantly, informative in service of the objective of fostering an informed people capable of self-government under the Constitution. On this last point, that would include developments in our respective local, state, and federal governments, as well as foreign developments that have an impact on our national interests (in a specific or general way). To me, 100 people dying in a mine in China would not fall within any of these spheres, but the San Bernardino shooting does, even if you do not live in San Bernardino or surrounding areas, because it will likely inform how politicians create policies related to immigration, terrorism, foreign affairs, gun control, etc. That does not diminish the (hypothetical) tragedy of the people who died in our (hypothetical) mine, but I have never viewed showing up in the newspaper as a sign of importance.
Of course, if you have a different view of the role of the media, that is completely reasonable (inasmuch as that view is reasonable), but I think we have to resist the temptation to interpret how the media (or any entity) does its job through our own subjective lens of how they should do it. In other words, we have to resist the taking the conclusion that the media "doesn't care" about the (hypothetical) mine and concluding something nefarious or ulterior.
B
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Monday, December 14, 2015
Sleeping Polar Bear
I like that this lady gives IBM the benefit of the doubt
is this a possible way to save the earth?
this place seems worth trying
Consider this your primer for Sichuan food. I've tried everything except the chicken, which is apparently specific to this restaurant. And this is probably more specifically useful as this is my back yard. Or rather than braving the Asian restaurant lingo, we can try making this.
I want this person's life
did you know there's a camera watching you while you sleep?
Responses
1. Heavens, you think someday we will earn as little as $118,200/year? *gasp*
Still, that would be quite disappointing if the welfare state includes people making that much money. As a taxpayer potentially supporting such new initiatives, it didn't make me feel very good that the guy who won the lottery just moved from one apartment to another. It's as if the city thought, well he shouldn't have to live like that but it's ok if the next tenant who lives in his old apartment will. Even the most liberal people realize that rent control is not a solution. It's a very expensive way to solve the problem for 1% of the population that needs help.
2. Maybe I'm douchey but this didn't seem too douchey to me? Or maybe it's normal for women to discuss their clothing in this esoteric, rich person way even when the women themselves aren't rich. Or maybe I read too much Gwyneth Paltrow. And Esquire.
In any case, I know Bear is not doing anything wrong! He looks great and he shops at Brooks Brothers!
3. All I can say is I'm quite surprised that I'm getting my information on the color of the year from you. My fashion bona fides may be slipping.
4. I think this article raises a good point in that shaming others for niceties is eroding our society much more than failing to pass emergency gun legislation ever could. Like saying there's no worth in sympathy cards, kind gestures or even *gasp* meaningful changes to one's Facebook profile picture. I guess the gym is the last bastion of community we have left!
5. I think gym as community is a good thing. I think gym as religion is slightly weird. I also think the gender disparity is very interesting. Boutique fitness classes are the new Curves. I feel like this might lead to something insidious in the future - maybe fat shaming? women with no disposable income? - but I can't see anything too negative about this trend currently.
6. This is very interesting and I applaud Zuckerberg for trying something new. Some people see it as greed but I see it as innovation that could ultimately really help people and spur more people to invest in charity in the future.
R2R
3. I figured you'd agree with her =P but I thought it was interesting that she said that INTJs always marry ENFPs. That's not exactly us but it's very close. =P We were destined!
4. It's the logical extension of privilege in my mind. Privilege is this idea that life is just super easy for some people and super hard for others. And if life is super hard for a kid - they are very small and have no money - then maybe we should make accommodations for them in life so that their lives are easier. We can start by accepting explanations of their lack of privilege as answers on a test. So instead of x=3, we would accept, I'm poor.
Even so, I thought it was a very cute joke.
6. My bear really is around the corner!
R2R2R
1. Are you sure that if 100 people die in China, the media will report it? That seems like something we should very much not be sure of.
But I guess the point is, I see these stories in small articles in Western papers. Maybe people don't care because China is not part of Europe. But it's a little jarring to see the big headlines for 14 people killed in San Bernadino, next to a tiny article about 100 people being killed in a mine in China.
R2R2R2R
1. True. If you're against bullying, you should be against all forms of bullying, no matter the victim or the bully.
R2R2R2R2R
I think we are ultimately on the same page here. I feel like I should write a similarly lengthy response but I think we are on the same page. We just need more empathy all around when it comes to dating. I know Pauline was very fixed mindset for awhile about whom she wanted to marry and she ended up with Justin, who fulfills just a few of those traits (male, Christian, Asian). But they seem very happy. So even though she was legendarily picky, she came around, as I kinda knew she would.
In a related-to-empathy but kinda-tangential note, I just clicked on one of those ubiquitour "she had the greatest reply to someone who said this" articles. And I am always looking for wit but it always turns out to be a mean retort and a mean reply. I need to stop clicking on these articles because they're just empathy holes. And they're not witty.
is this a possible way to save the earth?
this place seems worth trying
Consider this your primer for Sichuan food. I've tried everything except the chicken, which is apparently specific to this restaurant. And this is probably more specifically useful as this is my back yard. Or rather than braving the Asian restaurant lingo, we can try making this.
I want this person's life
did you know there's a camera watching you while you sleep?
Responses
1. Heavens, you think someday we will earn as little as $118,200/year? *gasp*
Still, that would be quite disappointing if the welfare state includes people making that much money. As a taxpayer potentially supporting such new initiatives, it didn't make me feel very good that the guy who won the lottery just moved from one apartment to another. It's as if the city thought, well he shouldn't have to live like that but it's ok if the next tenant who lives in his old apartment will. Even the most liberal people realize that rent control is not a solution. It's a very expensive way to solve the problem for 1% of the population that needs help.
2. Maybe I'm douchey but this didn't seem too douchey to me? Or maybe it's normal for women to discuss their clothing in this esoteric, rich person way even when the women themselves aren't rich. Or maybe I read too much Gwyneth Paltrow. And Esquire.
In any case, I know Bear is not doing anything wrong! He looks great and he shops at Brooks Brothers!
3. All I can say is I'm quite surprised that I'm getting my information on the color of the year from you. My fashion bona fides may be slipping.
4. I think this article raises a good point in that shaming others for niceties is eroding our society much more than failing to pass emergency gun legislation ever could. Like saying there's no worth in sympathy cards, kind gestures or even *gasp* meaningful changes to one's Facebook profile picture. I guess the gym is the last bastion of community we have left!
5. I think gym as community is a good thing. I think gym as religion is slightly weird. I also think the gender disparity is very interesting. Boutique fitness classes are the new Curves. I feel like this might lead to something insidious in the future - maybe fat shaming? women with no disposable income? - but I can't see anything too negative about this trend currently.
6. This is very interesting and I applaud Zuckerberg for trying something new. Some people see it as greed but I see it as innovation that could ultimately really help people and spur more people to invest in charity in the future.
R2R
3. I figured you'd agree with her =P but I thought it was interesting that she said that INTJs always marry ENFPs. That's not exactly us but it's very close. =P We were destined!
4. It's the logical extension of privilege in my mind. Privilege is this idea that life is just super easy for some people and super hard for others. And if life is super hard for a kid - they are very small and have no money - then maybe we should make accommodations for them in life so that their lives are easier. We can start by accepting explanations of their lack of privilege as answers on a test. So instead of x=3, we would accept, I'm poor.
Even so, I thought it was a very cute joke.
6. My bear really is around the corner!
R2R2R
1. Are you sure that if 100 people die in China, the media will report it? That seems like something we should very much not be sure of.
But I guess the point is, I see these stories in small articles in Western papers. Maybe people don't care because China is not part of Europe. But it's a little jarring to see the big headlines for 14 people killed in San Bernadino, next to a tiny article about 100 people being killed in a mine in China.
R2R2R2R
1. True. If you're against bullying, you should be against all forms of bullying, no matter the victim or the bully.
R2R2R2R2R
I think we are ultimately on the same page here. I feel like I should write a similarly lengthy response but I think we are on the same page. We just need more empathy all around when it comes to dating. I know Pauline was very fixed mindset for awhile about whom she wanted to marry and she ended up with Justin, who fulfills just a few of those traits (male, Christian, Asian). But they seem very happy. So even though she was legendarily picky, she came around, as I kinda knew she would.
In a related-to-empathy but kinda-tangential note, I just clicked on one of those ubiquitour "she had the greatest reply to someone who said this" articles. And I am always looking for wit but it always turns out to be a mean retort and a mean reply. I need to stop clicking on these articles because they're just empathy holes. And they're not witty.
Tuesday, December 8, 2015
Spoiler Alert
This doesn't seem like the best deployment of scarce resources, even if we could one day stand to benefit.
This is classic Skadden. It also makes me think I'm doing something way wrong...
Get your paint cans ready.
I thought this was a nice response to the anti-prayer folks out there.
I like the term "sweat equity" to describe this.
Mark Zuckerberg's big donation of his stock is a bit different from the usual mode of philanthropy.
Responses:
1. That's not that morbid. It recalls the no-zero-days mindset.
2. I might be able to tolerate that flight. :P
3. I can identify with what she said.
4. How does it relate to privilege?
5. The first one describes my schools from pre-school to 12th grade (at least the use of fear). The second one is fantastic.
6. Your bear is around the corner, bunny!
R2R:
1. I suspect if 100 people die in China, somewhere in China someone picks up the story. That said, I've never read Chinese media, so maybe not.
R2R2R:
5. Yes!
R2R2R2R:
1. I am not pro-bank. But I'm also not anti-bank, and I suspect that there are many people out there who would say, "Maybe that was unfair, but they had it coming." In the same way that I would object to the IRS or DOJ jerking an individual around for no reason, I object to the CFPB or the Fed jerking a bank around for no reason. The bank - indeed, any corporation - is just people. To be sure, I would also object to a bank jerking around an individual for no reason, although my objections would look different since it wouldn't be government abuse of power.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. The last statement proves too little or too much. For starters, it's not about judging other people. It's about observing the world and coming to conclusions about what works and what doesn't, for your own benefit and for the benefit of the people in the world with whom you interact. Yes, there is a harm principle element that governs when we do judge people (e.g. if you slap me for no reason, I judge you insofar as I tell you that your actions are inappropriate). But as much as I make fun of Swan for her position on what it means to be a Christian, I do so not because I think it's inappropriate for her to say that to her friends, but rather because she's wrong on the merits.
This isn't about judgment as much as it is about forming opinions. It seems inappropriate to go up to a stranger and explain to him why he's living his life incorrectly, but how is that different from proselytizing? In my view, the primary difference is the merits. But more to the point, the differences between being judgmental and having and expressing opinions are humility and empathy. It's the humility to consider that the world from someone else's perspective might look different, as well as the empathy to try to put yourself in the person's shoes. So if you encounter a non-believer, you don't walk up to him and say, "You're going to hell if you don't do what I, oh and I guess God and Jesus, say." You instead find a way to understand what he is about (i.e. empathy), and you find a way to overcome his reasonable skepticism about the implicit notion that somehow you have the answers and he does not (i.e. humility).
Returning to the issue regarding idiosyncratic dating preferences, it certainly makes sense as an initial matter to assume that people structure their behavior in the face of information and a worldview that is formed by their experiences, and thus to presume that the decision to date or not to date a person because of some quirk is not necessarily wrong. But you would stop there, and I don't think that makes sense. We have the ability to make observations about the rationale of a person's decision, as well as to consider the all-too-true fact that many people have only a partial understanding of their own decision-making. We also have the ability to place the decision into our worldview, as well as place our decisions into theirs. We can reasonably evaluate these decisions even if we don't have all the information, as long as we reasonably investigate and remember that we don't have all the information (to the extent that we don't). And we can reasonably form conclusions about all of this, whether or not we think it prudent to share such opinions with the parties whose decisions we are evaluating.
As to whether a racist person should be more open-minded about his dating choices, I think the answer has to be yes because that means he is being less of a racist. I would not conclude that sincerely harboring racist feelings and nonetheless dating a person whom you hold in contempt for racist reasons counts as being less of a racist. But maybe the answer for that person is to take a step back from the question of whether he should keep dating approved-race people while he works through his racism and instead try to deal with the question of how to understand his feelings of hate, contempt, etc., for a whole class of people and how such hate juxtaposes with his alleged feelings of love towards the approved-race people. But I don't agree with the implicit idea that we should treat racist people as though they have a fixed mindset, or even assume that the only way to conclude that racism makes sense is if you have evil in your heart. I think that in itself is an unfair judgment without more.
So yes, I agree with the sentiment of your last sentence (indeed, in my previous post, I said, "...I think it's important that we acknowledge that we should not sit in judgment of others..."), but the belief that someone has made a bad decision is not judgmental without more.
B
This is classic Skadden. It also makes me think I'm doing something way wrong...
Get your paint cans ready.
I thought this was a nice response to the anti-prayer folks out there.
I like the term "sweat equity" to describe this.
Mark Zuckerberg's big donation of his stock is a bit different from the usual mode of philanthropy.
Responses:
1. That's not that morbid. It recalls the no-zero-days mindset.
2. I might be able to tolerate that flight. :P
3. I can identify with what she said.
4. How does it relate to privilege?
5. The first one describes my schools from pre-school to 12th grade (at least the use of fear). The second one is fantastic.
6. Your bear is around the corner, bunny!
R2R:
1. I suspect if 100 people die in China, somewhere in China someone picks up the story. That said, I've never read Chinese media, so maybe not.
R2R2R:
5. Yes!
R2R2R2R:
1. I am not pro-bank. But I'm also not anti-bank, and I suspect that there are many people out there who would say, "Maybe that was unfair, but they had it coming." In the same way that I would object to the IRS or DOJ jerking an individual around for no reason, I object to the CFPB or the Fed jerking a bank around for no reason. The bank - indeed, any corporation - is just people. To be sure, I would also object to a bank jerking around an individual for no reason, although my objections would look different since it wouldn't be government abuse of power.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. The last statement proves too little or too much. For starters, it's not about judging other people. It's about observing the world and coming to conclusions about what works and what doesn't, for your own benefit and for the benefit of the people in the world with whom you interact. Yes, there is a harm principle element that governs when we do judge people (e.g. if you slap me for no reason, I judge you insofar as I tell you that your actions are inappropriate). But as much as I make fun of Swan for her position on what it means to be a Christian, I do so not because I think it's inappropriate for her to say that to her friends, but rather because she's wrong on the merits.
This isn't about judgment as much as it is about forming opinions. It seems inappropriate to go up to a stranger and explain to him why he's living his life incorrectly, but how is that different from proselytizing? In my view, the primary difference is the merits. But more to the point, the differences between being judgmental and having and expressing opinions are humility and empathy. It's the humility to consider that the world from someone else's perspective might look different, as well as the empathy to try to put yourself in the person's shoes. So if you encounter a non-believer, you don't walk up to him and say, "You're going to hell if you don't do what I, oh and I guess God and Jesus, say." You instead find a way to understand what he is about (i.e. empathy), and you find a way to overcome his reasonable skepticism about the implicit notion that somehow you have the answers and he does not (i.e. humility).
Returning to the issue regarding idiosyncratic dating preferences, it certainly makes sense as an initial matter to assume that people structure their behavior in the face of information and a worldview that is formed by their experiences, and thus to presume that the decision to date or not to date a person because of some quirk is not necessarily wrong. But you would stop there, and I don't think that makes sense. We have the ability to make observations about the rationale of a person's decision, as well as to consider the all-too-true fact that many people have only a partial understanding of their own decision-making. We also have the ability to place the decision into our worldview, as well as place our decisions into theirs. We can reasonably evaluate these decisions even if we don't have all the information, as long as we reasonably investigate and remember that we don't have all the information (to the extent that we don't). And we can reasonably form conclusions about all of this, whether or not we think it prudent to share such opinions with the parties whose decisions we are evaluating.
As to whether a racist person should be more open-minded about his dating choices, I think the answer has to be yes because that means he is being less of a racist. I would not conclude that sincerely harboring racist feelings and nonetheless dating a person whom you hold in contempt for racist reasons counts as being less of a racist. But maybe the answer for that person is to take a step back from the question of whether he should keep dating approved-race people while he works through his racism and instead try to deal with the question of how to understand his feelings of hate, contempt, etc., for a whole class of people and how such hate juxtaposes with his alleged feelings of love towards the approved-race people. But I don't agree with the implicit idea that we should treat racist people as though they have a fixed mindset, or even assume that the only way to conclude that racism makes sense is if you have evil in your heart. I think that in itself is an unfair judgment without more.
So yes, I agree with the sentiment of your last sentence (indeed, in my previous post, I said, "...I think it's important that we acknowledge that we should not sit in judgment of others..."), but the belief that someone has made a bad decision is not judgmental without more.
B
Monday, December 7, 2015
Birthday Bear YLT
morbid
perhaps it'll be awhile before we head to paris, but when we do, this seems like a good option
Penelope Trunk is an ENTJ too. makes sense.
Perhaps this is the logical extension of "privilege" but I would be completely charmed with this response.
What do you think of these quotes?:
“I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.” —Stanley Kubrick (via psych-facts)
“Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence.” —Robert Frost (via purplebuddhaproject)
a bunny waiting for her bear
Responses
1. I can definitely relate to the author's sentiments. Perhaps we shouldn't treat people differently, but there's no way we can. We are going to prefer people we know over people we don't and people like us over people not like us. Of course, "people like us" doesn't have to exclusively be "race." I always feel bad for accidents that kill people in China - not because they're Chinese, but because it just seems like there are so many people in China that no one cares. If 1 miner dies in America, it's big news, but in china, 100 could die and it's just a byline. Another thing that is "unjust" is why people killed in these mass shootings can so much more sympathy than random people killed as bystanders or in car accidents. Those people also don't get donations, the way the friends and family of Paris' victims will. But there are many people who die every year and we have to be somewhat discriminating in how many tears we are willing to cry for all of them.
2. I guess it's good that we go to UVA, because it wasn't named after Thomas Jefferson. =P I can see certain people's monuments getting torn down - Hitler comes to mind - but most people are a mix of good and bad as most people don't exterminate people. Also, I don't think you have to be a good person to get a building named after you - you just have to donate money. I'm not sure anyone has ever vetted a person's moral bona fides before accepting their money, so why should Woodrow Wilson be any different? I think it would be a big problem to gain donors if students could revoke your naming of a building somewhere down the line without requiring a refund to the donor.
3. Mac and cheese seems like a natural thing to have at carb-heavy Thanksgiving.
4. That yoga-teacher is impressively calm. It's very sad that they had to shut down a free class that was really helpful for a disadvantaged population. If you were really mean and a little creative, you could use this logic to shut down all sorts of enjoyable and enriching activities for any populations you despised.
R2R
1. I honestly just posted that for the title. However, I am not going to be buying almonds for awhile....
2. Wouldn't put it past him. He doesn't have that many endorsements.And Special-K is solid. Back in my dieting years - something like 8-10, I ate a lot of Special-K.
3. I believe some people are very open-minded when it comes to looks. (Some people might also be desperate). But I'm sure it works best when the person doesn't look like a prune. Still, maybe it's something one can add to their repertoire like the pickup artist routine. Say what you will about pickup artists, but they seem to be a growth-mindset bunch.
5. Should I repost it in a few weeks?
R2R2R
1. You might be becoming too pro-bank... Meh, I find myself defending Big Pharma too. High-five!
4. I mean maybe it was for settlement talks though I'm not sure there's a hard and fast rule on that. I would imagine that these kids maybe had too much going for them - what with their lives and property being threatened and going to school and whatnot - to be able to contact a lawyer and get the process going.
R2R2R2R
4. I feel apprehensive before I go biking but I usually am very pleased after my bike ride. Getting started is such a difficult thing. It's really more than half the battle.
R2R2R2R2R
4. Well their spoiled children would care about the quality of their toys.
R2R2R2R2R2R
1. I think I would try as much as possible to defer to people's own idiosyncracies. I mean, it's bad for you to be racist, but if you're the one that's marrying the person, maybe marriage isn't the place where you should learn that people are people. Maybe you should take baby steps. Of course, we are definitely not going to be friends with these people.
I don't want to judge other people's choices in significant others because I know I wouldn't want to be judged on mine.
perhaps it'll be awhile before we head to paris, but when we do, this seems like a good option
Penelope Trunk is an ENTJ too. makes sense.
Perhaps this is the logical extension of "privilege" but I would be completely charmed with this response.
What do you think of these quotes?:
“I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.” —Stanley Kubrick (via psych-facts)
“Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence.” —Robert Frost (via purplebuddhaproject)
a bunny waiting for her bear
Responses
1. I can definitely relate to the author's sentiments. Perhaps we shouldn't treat people differently, but there's no way we can. We are going to prefer people we know over people we don't and people like us over people not like us. Of course, "people like us" doesn't have to exclusively be "race." I always feel bad for accidents that kill people in China - not because they're Chinese, but because it just seems like there are so many people in China that no one cares. If 1 miner dies in America, it's big news, but in china, 100 could die and it's just a byline. Another thing that is "unjust" is why people killed in these mass shootings can so much more sympathy than random people killed as bystanders or in car accidents. Those people also don't get donations, the way the friends and family of Paris' victims will. But there are many people who die every year and we have to be somewhat discriminating in how many tears we are willing to cry for all of them.
2. I guess it's good that we go to UVA, because it wasn't named after Thomas Jefferson. =P I can see certain people's monuments getting torn down - Hitler comes to mind - but most people are a mix of good and bad as most people don't exterminate people. Also, I don't think you have to be a good person to get a building named after you - you just have to donate money. I'm not sure anyone has ever vetted a person's moral bona fides before accepting their money, so why should Woodrow Wilson be any different? I think it would be a big problem to gain donors if students could revoke your naming of a building somewhere down the line without requiring a refund to the donor.
3. Mac and cheese seems like a natural thing to have at carb-heavy Thanksgiving.
4. That yoga-teacher is impressively calm. It's very sad that they had to shut down a free class that was really helpful for a disadvantaged population. If you were really mean and a little creative, you could use this logic to shut down all sorts of enjoyable and enriching activities for any populations you despised.
R2R
1. I honestly just posted that for the title. However, I am not going to be buying almonds for awhile....
2. Wouldn't put it past him. He doesn't have that many endorsements.And Special-K is solid. Back in my dieting years - something like 8-10, I ate a lot of Special-K.
3. I believe some people are very open-minded when it comes to looks. (Some people might also be desperate). But I'm sure it works best when the person doesn't look like a prune. Still, maybe it's something one can add to their repertoire like the pickup artist routine. Say what you will about pickup artists, but they seem to be a growth-mindset bunch.
5. Should I repost it in a few weeks?
R2R2R
1. You might be becoming too pro-bank... Meh, I find myself defending Big Pharma too. High-five!
4. I mean maybe it was for settlement talks though I'm not sure there's a hard and fast rule on that. I would imagine that these kids maybe had too much going for them - what with their lives and property being threatened and going to school and whatnot - to be able to contact a lawyer and get the process going.
R2R2R2R
4. I feel apprehensive before I go biking but I usually am very pleased after my bike ride. Getting started is such a difficult thing. It's really more than half the battle.
R2R2R2R2R
4. Well their spoiled children would care about the quality of their toys.
R2R2R2R2R2R
1. I think I would try as much as possible to defer to people's own idiosyncracies. I mean, it's bad for you to be racist, but if you're the one that's marrying the person, maybe marriage isn't the place where you should learn that people are people. Maybe you should take baby steps. Of course, we are definitely not going to be friends with these people.
I don't want to judge other people's choices in significant others because I know I wouldn't want to be judged on mine.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Weird Times
There's been some blowback against the outpouring of support from the world to Paris somehow, but I think it's hard for people to make coherent arguments for why they feel a certain way to rebut the charge of racism. I think this is a successful attempt at explaining why many feel for Paris more than Beirut, or Kenya, or other places.
Princeton is getting into the immature protesting nonsense fun.
I always wondered why people from other parts of the country never mentioned mac and cheese for Thanksgiving.
Apparently doing yoga (unless you are Indian) makes you a Western-centric imperialist.
Responses:
1. The fervor of the various "ignorant hipsters" that their food of choice is so much better than yours is matched only by the intensity of their wrongness 18 months later. It's a hilarious cycle.
2. Does this mean we should expect J.J. Watt to endorse Special-K soon?
3. I remember hearing about this last year or the year before. It's a neat idea, but I wonder how long it lasts, as well as how it weighs against the other factors (e.g. physical appearance) that we consider.
4. I could go for that apple crisp. I enjoy apple turnovers, but I wonder about using applesauce instead of apples - I wonder if I'd miss the texture.
5. Maybe we can make this one our year-end posts.
R2R:
1. I mean that Ally Financial has to pay money based on this. Maybe you are less sympathetic, but we've represented this bank and clients like it, and I would hate to have to tell my clients that this was happening to them.
4. I suspect that there were some initial negotiations, first internal to the frat, and then with Rolling Stone. They also probably wanted this to take place after the spectacle of the scandal had died down so that Rolling Stone would be more amenable to a settlement. You know more about litigation than I do, but I imagine that when issues are heated, it's harder to negotiate.
6. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. And yes, these protesters seem to have an answer for everything and everyone. If you are white, then you are blinded by privilege, and if you are not, then you are a traitor and a sellout.
R2R2R:
3. It's such an easy setting involving people who typically know each other (Jerry Seinfeld and whichever guest he invites), and they talk about common interests and experiences in a humanizing way. I like reading Chuck Klosterman because he's good at making me care about stuff in a different way or care about stuff I didn't previously care about. I don't think pop stars are universally loathsome, but I attach a presumption because I don't trust most people to survive what pop stars have to survive with their normal social skills intact, and I am skeptical of the kind of people who want to become pop stars generally.
4. I like the way this guy thinks. The Gold's Gym in Rosslyn had a poster on the door that said "half of the battle is showing up." And I think that's true - not because showing up twice will equal a full workout, but because once you get yourself going, once you get started, that inertia makes it so much easier to finish. I don't think I've ever quit in the middle of a workout because it was too hard, but I've definitely decided not to go at all because I was tired/sore/busy/hungry/depressed. And every time I've gone when I've felt like staying home, I've finished and felt better for it. I like this mantra.
R2R2R2R:
4. We live in a world where people tried to boycott Chick-fil-A. Also, do you think these boycotters care about the quality of their kids' toys over the self-righteous stand du jour?
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. I agree, but some people decide to hide behind idiosyncrasy or quirkiness because they want to rationalize laziness, prejudice, or worse. Also, there is a difference between a dealbreaker, a quirk, an annoying habit, or just a thing that is not common between two people. I notice that you put in parentheses that the guy was bad at everything. While his lack of skill at bowling may have been symbolic for you, I tend to think that you would not have broken up with him over bowling if he was an otherwise competent person who just didn't bowl or didn't like bowling.
But more to the point, we as individuals in a society evaluate the decisions that other people make all the time, if only to affirm or question the decisions that we make ourselves. This is especially true when we consume media. Most people would think it odd to respond to Chandler or Seinfeld breaking up with someone over some triviality by saying, "It's his life, and I don't have an opinion - he can do what he wants," at least in part because the character is fictitious, but also because one big thing we all do is decide whether what the character did was good, bad, or otherwise. Some people may not object to the move, but they would instead say, "I think it's fine that he broke up with her because that was important to him," while others would call the character petty or shallow.
With real people, I think it's important that we acknowledge that we should not sit in judgment of others, but that is true in that we accept our friends and the autonomy of strangers. We shouldn't stop being friends with people because they break up with their significant others for petty reasons, but we can certainly think for ourselves whether that was good or bad based on the information we have, and we should certainly talk to our friends about their and our decisions, since that's one way to be smarter about living life. If I had a friend like Chandler, I would almost certainly call him out on his pettiness in dating. And as for my example with the cats, while it was meant in jest, I think it's also somewhat symbolic (based on male acquaintances I have who have or like cats), and I would never advise anyone to make a decision based solely on that fact.
B
Princeton is getting into the immature protesting nonsense fun.
I always wondered why people from other parts of the country never mentioned mac and cheese for Thanksgiving.
Apparently doing yoga (unless you are Indian) makes you a Western-centric imperialist.
Responses:
1. The fervor of the various "ignorant hipsters" that their food of choice is so much better than yours is matched only by the intensity of their wrongness 18 months later. It's a hilarious cycle.
2. Does this mean we should expect J.J. Watt to endorse Special-K soon?
3. I remember hearing about this last year or the year before. It's a neat idea, but I wonder how long it lasts, as well as how it weighs against the other factors (e.g. physical appearance) that we consider.
4. I could go for that apple crisp. I enjoy apple turnovers, but I wonder about using applesauce instead of apples - I wonder if I'd miss the texture.
5. Maybe we can make this one our year-end posts.
R2R:
1. I mean that Ally Financial has to pay money based on this. Maybe you are less sympathetic, but we've represented this bank and clients like it, and I would hate to have to tell my clients that this was happening to them.
4. I suspect that there were some initial negotiations, first internal to the frat, and then with Rolling Stone. They also probably wanted this to take place after the spectacle of the scandal had died down so that Rolling Stone would be more amenable to a settlement. You know more about litigation than I do, but I imagine that when issues are heated, it's harder to negotiate.
6. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. And yes, these protesters seem to have an answer for everything and everyone. If you are white, then you are blinded by privilege, and if you are not, then you are a traitor and a sellout.
R2R2R:
3. It's such an easy setting involving people who typically know each other (Jerry Seinfeld and whichever guest he invites), and they talk about common interests and experiences in a humanizing way. I like reading Chuck Klosterman because he's good at making me care about stuff in a different way or care about stuff I didn't previously care about. I don't think pop stars are universally loathsome, but I attach a presumption because I don't trust most people to survive what pop stars have to survive with their normal social skills intact, and I am skeptical of the kind of people who want to become pop stars generally.
4. I like the way this guy thinks. The Gold's Gym in Rosslyn had a poster on the door that said "half of the battle is showing up." And I think that's true - not because showing up twice will equal a full workout, but because once you get yourself going, once you get started, that inertia makes it so much easier to finish. I don't think I've ever quit in the middle of a workout because it was too hard, but I've definitely decided not to go at all because I was tired/sore/busy/hungry/depressed. And every time I've gone when I've felt like staying home, I've finished and felt better for it. I like this mantra.
R2R2R2R:
4. We live in a world where people tried to boycott Chick-fil-A. Also, do you think these boycotters care about the quality of their kids' toys over the self-righteous stand du jour?
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. I agree, but some people decide to hide behind idiosyncrasy or quirkiness because they want to rationalize laziness, prejudice, or worse. Also, there is a difference between a dealbreaker, a quirk, an annoying habit, or just a thing that is not common between two people. I notice that you put in parentheses that the guy was bad at everything. While his lack of skill at bowling may have been symbolic for you, I tend to think that you would not have broken up with him over bowling if he was an otherwise competent person who just didn't bowl or didn't like bowling.
But more to the point, we as individuals in a society evaluate the decisions that other people make all the time, if only to affirm or question the decisions that we make ourselves. This is especially true when we consume media. Most people would think it odd to respond to Chandler or Seinfeld breaking up with someone over some triviality by saying, "It's his life, and I don't have an opinion - he can do what he wants," at least in part because the character is fictitious, but also because one big thing we all do is decide whether what the character did was good, bad, or otherwise. Some people may not object to the move, but they would instead say, "I think it's fine that he broke up with her because that was important to him," while others would call the character petty or shallow.
With real people, I think it's important that we acknowledge that we should not sit in judgment of others, but that is true in that we accept our friends and the autonomy of strangers. We shouldn't stop being friends with people because they break up with their significant others for petty reasons, but we can certainly think for ourselves whether that was good or bad based on the information we have, and we should certainly talk to our friends about their and our decisions, since that's one way to be smarter about living life. If I had a friend like Chandler, I would almost certainly call him out on his pettiness in dating. And as for my example with the cats, while it was meant in jest, I think it's also somewhat symbolic (based on male acquaintances I have who have or like cats), and I would never advise anyone to make a decision based solely on that fact.
B
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Lay off the Almond Milk, You Ignorant Hipsters!
Lay Off the Almond Milk, You Ignorant Hipsters
Eat more deliciously - eat like a man!
Let's be intimate
yum fall!
Looking forward to looking back
Responses
1. I assume by that you mean, pay money as customers so that the bank can pay back money it allegedly owes minorities to people who may or may not be minorities, correct?
2. I had read this article as well and it's chilling. The Black Lives Matter movement is likely causing more black deaths - but at least they're at the hands of other black people!
3. I can understand. It's like my mixed feelings of the Billfold. Except the Billfold is not well written, researched or edited and they don't pay the writers well. =P
4. Do we know why it took so long? Is it guilt?
5. That dean has a hard job.
6. Wapo had an outlook piece defending the protesters (of course it did) but it didn't make an argument beyond the usual "feel our pain" and I guess "this is justified payback for the media not covering our news in the way that we would have liked."
I saw one article that gave the students a pass for not knowing the law, but I don't think that's acceptable. You are over 18 - you better know the law. These aren't children.
I guess it's a sidenote that the photographer is not a person who can claim "white privilege" but I'm not sure what to make of that. If he were black, I guess he'd be called a traitor.
R2R
3. Why does "Comedians Getting Coffee" make you soft? Also, why are all pop stars loathsome? I have no negative feelings towards Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, Mandy Moore, Ariana Grande, Taylor Swift and Jessica Simpson (except for perhaps the latter's music). And we do love Party in the USA. I guess that leaves Katy Perry and Selena Gomez, both of whom I'm tired of, but overall I'm pop-star-positive.
4. Link is fixed!
5. This is not a complete solution but it would work in moderate temperature areas to help some people. I guess it just gives us hope that people can make things happen.
R2R2R
4. But who would boycott Legos? Then you'd have to give your kid those cheapo blocks that don't work.
R2R2R2R
4. I guess it goes towards "what does it mean to be bad in bed?" And I think you're bad in bed if you're not communicating or if you don't care. Of course, I understand that the woman in this article seems like the type of person who would be upset if the man wasn't perfect from the get-go.
R2R2R2R2R
2. That seems to be the argument we have with respect to every liberal argument. I stipulate that the problem exists and is important but your method of solving it is nonsensical.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R
1. I think you can make choices in dating that seem flimsy to other people but are extremely important to you or that you interpret as being meaningful in a larger sense, whereas other people wouldn't. For instance, a man with cats to you is a yellow flag, but for me, it's immaterial. I would find it hard to date someone who loved the NY Giants/the Olive Garden/California or someone who went to Tech. I dumped a guy because he was bad at bowling (also, he was bad at everything). People are idiosyncratic and I don't think that's necessarily bad. I think it's bad when you dismiss people based on societal norms that typically exclude certain types of people (race, baldness, height, weight, occupation, education, wealth).
Eat more deliciously - eat like a man!
Let's be intimate
yum fall!
Looking forward to looking back
Responses
1. I assume by that you mean, pay money as customers so that the bank can pay back money it allegedly owes minorities to people who may or may not be minorities, correct?
2. I had read this article as well and it's chilling. The Black Lives Matter movement is likely causing more black deaths - but at least they're at the hands of other black people!
3. I can understand. It's like my mixed feelings of the Billfold. Except the Billfold is not well written, researched or edited and they don't pay the writers well. =P
4. Do we know why it took so long? Is it guilt?
5. That dean has a hard job.
6. Wapo had an outlook piece defending the protesters (of course it did) but it didn't make an argument beyond the usual "feel our pain" and I guess "this is justified payback for the media not covering our news in the way that we would have liked."
I saw one article that gave the students a pass for not knowing the law, but I don't think that's acceptable. You are over 18 - you better know the law. These aren't children.
I guess it's a sidenote that the photographer is not a person who can claim "white privilege" but I'm not sure what to make of that. If he were black, I guess he'd be called a traitor.
R2R
3. Why does "Comedians Getting Coffee" make you soft? Also, why are all pop stars loathsome? I have no negative feelings towards Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, Mandy Moore, Ariana Grande, Taylor Swift and Jessica Simpson (except for perhaps the latter's music). And we do love Party in the USA. I guess that leaves Katy Perry and Selena Gomez, both of whom I'm tired of, but overall I'm pop-star-positive.
4. Link is fixed!
5. This is not a complete solution but it would work in moderate temperature areas to help some people. I guess it just gives us hope that people can make things happen.
R2R2R
4. But who would boycott Legos? Then you'd have to give your kid those cheapo blocks that don't work.
R2R2R2R
4. I guess it goes towards "what does it mean to be bad in bed?" And I think you're bad in bed if you're not communicating or if you don't care. Of course, I understand that the woman in this article seems like the type of person who would be upset if the man wasn't perfect from the get-go.
R2R2R2R2R
2. That seems to be the argument we have with respect to every liberal argument. I stipulate that the problem exists and is important but your method of solving it is nonsensical.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R2R
1. I think you can make choices in dating that seem flimsy to other people but are extremely important to you or that you interpret as being meaningful in a larger sense, whereas other people wouldn't. For instance, a man with cats to you is a yellow flag, but for me, it's immaterial. I would find it hard to date someone who loved the NY Giants/the Olive Garden/California or someone who went to Tech. I dumped a guy because he was bad at bowling (also, he was bad at everything). People are idiosyncratic and I don't think that's necessarily bad. I think it's bad when you dismiss people based on societal norms that typically exclude certain types of people (race, baldness, height, weight, occupation, education, wealth).
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Social Studies
I can't believe that they have to pay money based on this flimsy... everything, really.
Perhaps social media is deadlier than we previously thought.
This comes a bit closer to describing my mixed but definitely positive feelings towards Grantland.
There it is.
These kids are horrible.
As are these kids.
Responses:
1. I guess this is why marketing is a thing.
2. People do say that being present is the way to increase happiness. I guess this is another way of saying that, and with science.
3. She seems like an interesting enough person with a reasonably good head on her shoulders. I think stories like this make me move her out of the category of "loathsome pop star" (which is where I assume most pop stars reside) and into the category of "possibly undamaged successful celebrity." I've been watching a lot of Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee recently, though, so maybe I'm going soft.
4. I think this link is broken.
5. Lots of people have suggested that affordable housing is something that only the government can fix, but solutions like this one make me think that they are wrong.
R2R:
4. The fact that people will associate Legos with his expressive art in my view allows Lego to decline the bulk sale, even if they won't stand in the way of his acquisition of Lego materials through alternative (and more difficult) means. I would feel differently if we weren't currently in the middle of a boycott craze where people seek to punish people with whose views they disagree.
R2R2R:
1. It was funny as a picture, but it would be lame as an actual costume.
4. I'm not sure that saying you're cut off if you're bad in bed is good as a first position, if only because people get better with practice, but there's no way to get better without communication. I think men who have an attitude of wanting to figure it out to get better have the right attitude, but I suspect that trial and error will get you only so far without some input from the woman. As awkward as it is to have to talk about it, though, I think it's more awkward to be lying there afterwards feeling disappointed and frustrated.
R2R2R2R:
2. The problem is that most politicians don't understand how science should work, and most scientists don't understand how policy works. And most Americans don't understand how either works. The claim that climate change science is irrefutable is similar to the claim made by some liberals (especially during Supreme Court nomination hearings) that Roe v. Wade is "settled law." Each side wants to take something that is absolutely subject to change (subsequent peer review studies in the case of climate change, and a contrary holding in the case of Supreme Court jurisprudence) and claim, for political purposes, that it cannot change, and they use practically useful but philosophically arguable reasons (scientific community consensus in the case of climate change, super-stare decisis in the case of Roe) to beat back any attempt by newcomers to disrupt the status quo. There is no doubt in my mind that an overwhelming majority of the scientists who have studied climate change and answered that poll truly believe that the science backs up their conclusion that climate change is happening, and there is no doubt in my mind that the studies and experiments they have done or reviewed back up their conclusions (to the extent that such conclusions are narrowly tailored to the performed experiments), but that does not make the 97% number relevant as an argument in and of itself. Science isn't democracy. Moreover, even stipulating that the science is there, that does not therefore mean that the policy proposals put forth by those who agree with that 97% of scientists with respect to their scientific conclusions are necessarily appropriate, necessary, effective, or otherwise worthy of our support.
3. I guess some people just suck.
R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. Choosing the criteria by which we date people is of course fine. But when we think about things like morals and ethics, and when we think about what we want for ourselves, we of course have rules and judgments. Politically, I am often a libertarian when it comes to these things. But that doesn't mean I'm an existentialist. I would never advocate for any law or regulation requiring people to date some diversity of people or be polite at speed dating events by meeting with everyone. But there is a huge difference between saying that people have the right to choose a certain way and saying that that choice is good, whether with respect to that person or with respect to ourselves. I fully concede that people make dating choices based on sometimes flimsy criteria, and there is probably no way to stop that in the short or long term. But despite that, when people choose to date or not to date people on the basis of trivial characteristics, they are making bad choices, and while I do not feel the need to call them out on it or prevent them from making those bad choices, they are still bad choices.
To put it more simply by way of example, people may believe that activities such as recreational drug use, prostitution, gambling, or even abortion should be legal, but it does not follow from such belief that people think that their own participation in such activities is consistent with their moral codes.
B
Perhaps social media is deadlier than we previously thought.
This comes a bit closer to describing my mixed but definitely positive feelings towards Grantland.
There it is.
These kids are horrible.
As are these kids.
Responses:
1. I guess this is why marketing is a thing.
2. People do say that being present is the way to increase happiness. I guess this is another way of saying that, and with science.
3. She seems like an interesting enough person with a reasonably good head on her shoulders. I think stories like this make me move her out of the category of "loathsome pop star" (which is where I assume most pop stars reside) and into the category of "possibly undamaged successful celebrity." I've been watching a lot of Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee recently, though, so maybe I'm going soft.
4. I think this link is broken.
5. Lots of people have suggested that affordable housing is something that only the government can fix, but solutions like this one make me think that they are wrong.
R2R:
4. The fact that people will associate Legos with his expressive art in my view allows Lego to decline the bulk sale, even if they won't stand in the way of his acquisition of Lego materials through alternative (and more difficult) means. I would feel differently if we weren't currently in the middle of a boycott craze where people seek to punish people with whose views they disagree.
R2R2R:
1. It was funny as a picture, but it would be lame as an actual costume.
4. I'm not sure that saying you're cut off if you're bad in bed is good as a first position, if only because people get better with practice, but there's no way to get better without communication. I think men who have an attitude of wanting to figure it out to get better have the right attitude, but I suspect that trial and error will get you only so far without some input from the woman. As awkward as it is to have to talk about it, though, I think it's more awkward to be lying there afterwards feeling disappointed and frustrated.
R2R2R2R:
2. The problem is that most politicians don't understand how science should work, and most scientists don't understand how policy works. And most Americans don't understand how either works. The claim that climate change science is irrefutable is similar to the claim made by some liberals (especially during Supreme Court nomination hearings) that Roe v. Wade is "settled law." Each side wants to take something that is absolutely subject to change (subsequent peer review studies in the case of climate change, and a contrary holding in the case of Supreme Court jurisprudence) and claim, for political purposes, that it cannot change, and they use practically useful but philosophically arguable reasons (scientific community consensus in the case of climate change, super-stare decisis in the case of Roe) to beat back any attempt by newcomers to disrupt the status quo. There is no doubt in my mind that an overwhelming majority of the scientists who have studied climate change and answered that poll truly believe that the science backs up their conclusion that climate change is happening, and there is no doubt in my mind that the studies and experiments they have done or reviewed back up their conclusions (to the extent that such conclusions are narrowly tailored to the performed experiments), but that does not make the 97% number relevant as an argument in and of itself. Science isn't democracy. Moreover, even stipulating that the science is there, that does not therefore mean that the policy proposals put forth by those who agree with that 97% of scientists with respect to their scientific conclusions are necessarily appropriate, necessary, effective, or otherwise worthy of our support.
3. I guess some people just suck.
R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. Choosing the criteria by which we date people is of course fine. But when we think about things like morals and ethics, and when we think about what we want for ourselves, we of course have rules and judgments. Politically, I am often a libertarian when it comes to these things. But that doesn't mean I'm an existentialist. I would never advocate for any law or regulation requiring people to date some diversity of people or be polite at speed dating events by meeting with everyone. But there is a huge difference between saying that people have the right to choose a certain way and saying that that choice is good, whether with respect to that person or with respect to ourselves. I fully concede that people make dating choices based on sometimes flimsy criteria, and there is probably no way to stop that in the short or long term. But despite that, when people choose to date or not to date people on the basis of trivial characteristics, they are making bad choices, and while I do not feel the need to call them out on it or prevent them from making those bad choices, they are still bad choices.
To put it more simply by way of example, people may believe that activities such as recreational drug use, prostitution, gambling, or even abortion should be legal, but it does not follow from such belief that people think that their own participation in such activities is consistent with their moral codes.
B
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Pretty Packaging
Michelle Obama, take notice. It feels a little bit like cheating but packaging is what sells the product.
Thinking about your own boring life is better than imagining a better one.
I don't think either of us has ever linked to a celebrity profile in a fashion magazine but here's a start. It helps that it's by Chuck Klosterman and I only learned about it because it was linked by Penelope Trunk in a career article.
I like this idea of non-zero days.
A cool (hot?) solution for housing woes in Bangkok
Responses
1. Ugh the death threats make this a sad story. It was a very happy story that this movie tanked. Maybe the next time they take over a beloved cartoon, they will incorporate some of the plot elements.
2. Ha!
3. A new way to fall asleep.
4. If Ai Wei Wei asked for some kind of discount for buying in bulk for his art, then I totally support Lego in saying no. I don't really see the problem selling the blocks to him at full price. Then again, I don't see why Lego should have to be associated with the art if it doesn't have to. It does not chill his speech and their blocks could be used to make something really atrocious that they have no control over and which they would be blamed for. Lego is in a hard position.
5. Gah I try not to think of them because another commercial jingle will just sneak its way in if I do.
6. I think you need a touch screen tv for this to be a large iphone. I do like the ability to use Siri to find things though.
R2R
1. You said it was funny here but then told me in person it was lame!
3. Pretty sure that if people read the weird things people post on social media, our jails would be even more overcrowded than they are already.
4. This is often the problem with modern feminism: they want men to solve the problems for them. The answer to the wage gap is for men to disclose their salaries. The answer to rape is for drunk men to stop for the benefit of drunk women. And so if she is unsatisfied in bed, the man has to figure that out and take the stand that she won't. (interesting that her knight in shining armor is an abstainer ("We won't have sex again because you're not satisfied!"), rather than a fixer ("I will figure it out and make it better!")). Why can't women just say, if you're bad in bed, we won't sleep with you again? Men would figure it out themselves and it wouldn't make women look so weak.
R2R2R
1. It seems like what James Taranto would put under his heading, "Fox Butterfield, is that you?" The headline would be: "More black male deaths by police officers despite more black men confrontations with police."
2. I just note the article because everything I've ever heard about global science is that the science is irrefutable and that every scientist in the world believes in nit.
3. I guess the GAL mother seemed like this. Incapable of really evaluating her actions or taking any responsibility. She said she was so upset that she couldn't find the baby's Halloween costume that she wouldn't let either of her children trick or treat. Did not seem to register that this might be incredibly disappointing to her children, who were already decked out in costume. Not saying she will pimp out her children later but it all starts somewhere.
4. I've never really partake of any of the incentives that stores bring to shop slower unless I'm already going to buy something (see: engagement ring shopping). The only exception is Barnes & Noble where I typically guilt buy stuff for all the time I spend browsing. But now that store is closing. =(
R2R2R2R
3. Keep sharing!
R2R2R2R2R
1. I guess if someone said some weird quirk their dating partner had, then the original person would seem too picky - just like Seinfeld. We want to believe we are better people and won't discount someone just for having a bigger head or man hands. But there isn't anything necessarily wrong with drawing the lines at weird places.
3. Crispy potatoes!
R2R2R2R2R2R2R
4. Still have not heard from Howard girl....Criticism is important for litigators. It's not exactly a soft industry.
Thinking about your own boring life is better than imagining a better one.
I don't think either of us has ever linked to a celebrity profile in a fashion magazine but here's a start. It helps that it's by Chuck Klosterman and I only learned about it because it was linked by Penelope Trunk in a career article.
I like this idea of non-zero days.
A cool (hot?) solution for housing woes in Bangkok
Responses
1. Ugh the death threats make this a sad story. It was a very happy story that this movie tanked. Maybe the next time they take over a beloved cartoon, they will incorporate some of the plot elements.
2. Ha!
3. A new way to fall asleep.
4. If Ai Wei Wei asked for some kind of discount for buying in bulk for his art, then I totally support Lego in saying no. I don't really see the problem selling the blocks to him at full price. Then again, I don't see why Lego should have to be associated with the art if it doesn't have to. It does not chill his speech and their blocks could be used to make something really atrocious that they have no control over and which they would be blamed for. Lego is in a hard position.
5. Gah I try not to think of them because another commercial jingle will just sneak its way in if I do.
6. I think you need a touch screen tv for this to be a large iphone. I do like the ability to use Siri to find things though.
R2R
1. You said it was funny here but then told me in person it was lame!
3. Pretty sure that if people read the weird things people post on social media, our jails would be even more overcrowded than they are already.
4. This is often the problem with modern feminism: they want men to solve the problems for them. The answer to the wage gap is for men to disclose their salaries. The answer to rape is for drunk men to stop for the benefit of drunk women. And so if she is unsatisfied in bed, the man has to figure that out and take the stand that she won't. (interesting that her knight in shining armor is an abstainer ("We won't have sex again because you're not satisfied!"), rather than a fixer ("I will figure it out and make it better!")). Why can't women just say, if you're bad in bed, we won't sleep with you again? Men would figure it out themselves and it wouldn't make women look so weak.
R2R2R
1. It seems like what James Taranto would put under his heading, "Fox Butterfield, is that you?" The headline would be: "More black male deaths by police officers despite more black men confrontations with police."
2. I just note the article because everything I've ever heard about global science is that the science is irrefutable and that every scientist in the world believes in nit.
3. I guess the GAL mother seemed like this. Incapable of really evaluating her actions or taking any responsibility. She said she was so upset that she couldn't find the baby's Halloween costume that she wouldn't let either of her children trick or treat. Did not seem to register that this might be incredibly disappointing to her children, who were already decked out in costume. Not saying she will pimp out her children later but it all starts somewhere.
4. I've never really partake of any of the incentives that stores bring to shop slower unless I'm already going to buy something (see: engagement ring shopping). The only exception is Barnes & Noble where I typically guilt buy stuff for all the time I spend browsing. But now that store is closing. =(
R2R2R2R
3. Keep sharing!
R2R2R2R2R
1. I guess if someone said some weird quirk their dating partner had, then the original person would seem too picky - just like Seinfeld. We want to believe we are better people and won't discount someone just for having a bigger head or man hands. But there isn't anything necessarily wrong with drawing the lines at weird places.
3. Crispy potatoes!
R2R2R2R2R2R2R
4. Still have not heard from Howard girl....Criticism is important for litigators. It's not exactly a soft industry.
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Oops
It was a rough opening weekend for Jem and the Holograms.
I think she should be the winner.
Bob Ross is now available online.
What do you think of LEGO's position here?
Earworms seem to be a recurring theme on YLT.
Reviews on the new Apple TV are out.
Responses:
1. Moose! Get that out of here! (But formal apology was funny.)
2. I would not like to spend my Saturday night in jail.
3. Maybe the way social media can redeem itself is by allowing people to review the unhinged ravings of these people and get them some help (and/or just stop them) before they turn into rampage killers.
4. This article probably comes closer to describing the unpleasant experiences of many women that do not constitute rape but are potentially being shoehorned into that description, and it is certainly a problem. Experts always say that communication is one of the most important aspects of sex, and while I don't doubt that there are enough times where a terrible boyfriend or husband will sexually assault his significant other, I would think that sex within the confines of a relationship would at least open up the possibility of communication taking place. Nobody is talking about likes and dislikes or preferred methods of consent in the course of a drunken hookup. (I would further note that the sort of communication necessary for many women to enjoy sex often doesn't happen in the confines of a relationship either, and that's something worth considering.) It's a shame to me that women hear these judgments and feel bad because the sort of guys that would be interested in listening and communicating and being part of a mutually enjoyable experience probably aren't paying attention to this gossip.
This statement is a problem, though: “What I want is not for me to have that burden. I want one of my male partners, who are wonderful men who care about me, to have just once been like, ‘No, this is unacceptable to me. I’m not going to continue to have sex with you when you’re not getting off!’ And I can’t imagine that happening.” What she wants is the thing that will never happen unless she at least communicates her dissatisfaction, for two reasons: 1) guys often believe (rightly) that confidence in the bedroom is a turn-on, and thus will be loathe to display weakness or what they perceive as weakness, which will often constitute "is this okay?" questions; and 2) guys worth having will be responsive to the needs of their partners, and if only to ensure return visits to the bedroom, will be happy to respond to any direct requests or feedback.
Also, the abortion piece is in my view irrelevant to the overall problem.
5. That's very charitable of her.
R2R:
1. I actually don't have much qualm with their actions, and while I will only rarely question the decision of a woman to call 911 when she feels danger (better safe than sorry), I think this all could have been solved in short order if the guys just stayed and talked to the cops in a civil manner. These cops clearly weren't trying to shoot people (my evidence being that they didn't shoot anyone). I don't really like the argument that, because there have been a few instances elsewhere that resulting in deaths by police officer, then running, fighting, resisting arrest, or otherwise being confrontational with a police officer is therefore a reasonable response.
2. This is the substitute for inability to explain science to people, as well as a way to discredit people's arguments without responding to them. I am saying nothing about the arguments of the 3% or the 97%, but the problem is that that statistic isn't either. I think there are good arguments for acting reasonably in the face of uncertain data (an analogy might be drinking lightly/moderately during pregnancy), and a cleaner environment is unquestionably a good thing, which is why I think the approach in this article is noteworthy.
3. I want to understand the mom's frame of mind at each stage of this: when she first got the call, when she brought in her kids, and when she was deciding to write a book about it. Is it all just short-term decisions to profit without any coherent long-term morality considerations? I only ask because she seemed more than happy to engage, but now she's writing this book, and the implicit moral position behind the value of the book is that Louisville did something wrong, which has to mean on some level that she did something wrong. But maybe she has just declined to think about this - I'll never know because I'm not buying her book.
4. How did you not respond to 4???
R2R2R:
5. We can celebrate alone together!
R2R2R2R:
3. I just didn't want the grievance... But really, it wasn't a terrible experience - the band played some songs I like. But the whole idea of it is kinda ridiculous. Also, if you want to start enforcing YLT, you're going down a dangerous path.
R2R2R2R2R2R:
4. The manager would have to use judgment, which is the one skill that people seem to be forgetting about. I listened to a podcast recently where the guest was talking about how as a society we've gone too far in the direction of rules to the point that we no longer know how to exercise good judgment. For example, it used to be that good teachers knew how to reach their students in somewhat individualized ways, paying attention to some more than others and tailoring incentives and penalties to the particular student, with some overall general rules to which everyone is subject. But nowadays many teachers are implicitly (or explicitly) barred from doing so, out of fear than an angry parent will sue or otherwise cause problems if her child is treated differently. A manager has to evaluate each situation within reasonable parameters to decide what accommodations would benefit the firm and the employee. It's fine if circumstances change, and it's also fine if someone asks primarily because they now realize that "yes" is a possible answer to a question they've been dying to ask, but the default to equal treatment in every way ultimately does more harm than good: it either eliminates the possibility of help because now nobody can get help or requires the firm to spend too much money on one form of compensation to the detriment of other forms (e.g. money) or their bottom line.
B
I think she should be the winner.
Bob Ross is now available online.
What do you think of LEGO's position here?
Earworms seem to be a recurring theme on YLT.
Reviews on the new Apple TV are out.
Responses:
1. Moose! Get that out of here! (But formal apology was funny.)
2. I would not like to spend my Saturday night in jail.
3. Maybe the way social media can redeem itself is by allowing people to review the unhinged ravings of these people and get them some help (and/or just stop them) before they turn into rampage killers.
4. This article probably comes closer to describing the unpleasant experiences of many women that do not constitute rape but are potentially being shoehorned into that description, and it is certainly a problem. Experts always say that communication is one of the most important aspects of sex, and while I don't doubt that there are enough times where a terrible boyfriend or husband will sexually assault his significant other, I would think that sex within the confines of a relationship would at least open up the possibility of communication taking place. Nobody is talking about likes and dislikes or preferred methods of consent in the course of a drunken hookup. (I would further note that the sort of communication necessary for many women to enjoy sex often doesn't happen in the confines of a relationship either, and that's something worth considering.) It's a shame to me that women hear these judgments and feel bad because the sort of guys that would be interested in listening and communicating and being part of a mutually enjoyable experience probably aren't paying attention to this gossip.
This statement is a problem, though: “What I want is not for me to have that burden. I want one of my male partners, who are wonderful men who care about me, to have just once been like, ‘No, this is unacceptable to me. I’m not going to continue to have sex with you when you’re not getting off!’ And I can’t imagine that happening.” What she wants is the thing that will never happen unless she at least communicates her dissatisfaction, for two reasons: 1) guys often believe (rightly) that confidence in the bedroom is a turn-on, and thus will be loathe to display weakness or what they perceive as weakness, which will often constitute "is this okay?" questions; and 2) guys worth having will be responsive to the needs of their partners, and if only to ensure return visits to the bedroom, will be happy to respond to any direct requests or feedback.
Also, the abortion piece is in my view irrelevant to the overall problem.
5. That's very charitable of her.
R2R:
1. I actually don't have much qualm with their actions, and while I will only rarely question the decision of a woman to call 911 when she feels danger (better safe than sorry), I think this all could have been solved in short order if the guys just stayed and talked to the cops in a civil manner. These cops clearly weren't trying to shoot people (my evidence being that they didn't shoot anyone). I don't really like the argument that, because there have been a few instances elsewhere that resulting in deaths by police officer, then running, fighting, resisting arrest, or otherwise being confrontational with a police officer is therefore a reasonable response.
2. This is the substitute for inability to explain science to people, as well as a way to discredit people's arguments without responding to them. I am saying nothing about the arguments of the 3% or the 97%, but the problem is that that statistic isn't either. I think there are good arguments for acting reasonably in the face of uncertain data (an analogy might be drinking lightly/moderately during pregnancy), and a cleaner environment is unquestionably a good thing, which is why I think the approach in this article is noteworthy.
3. I want to understand the mom's frame of mind at each stage of this: when she first got the call, when she brought in her kids, and when she was deciding to write a book about it. Is it all just short-term decisions to profit without any coherent long-term morality considerations? I only ask because she seemed more than happy to engage, but now she's writing this book, and the implicit moral position behind the value of the book is that Louisville did something wrong, which has to mean on some level that she did something wrong. But maybe she has just declined to think about this - I'll never know because I'm not buying her book.
4. How did you not respond to 4???
R2R2R:
5. We can celebrate alone together!
R2R2R2R:
3. I just didn't want the grievance... But really, it wasn't a terrible experience - the band played some songs I like. But the whole idea of it is kinda ridiculous. Also, if you want to start enforcing YLT, you're going down a dangerous path.
R2R2R2R2R2R:
4. The manager would have to use judgment, which is the one skill that people seem to be forgetting about. I listened to a podcast recently where the guest was talking about how as a society we've gone too far in the direction of rules to the point that we no longer know how to exercise good judgment. For example, it used to be that good teachers knew how to reach their students in somewhat individualized ways, paying attention to some more than others and tailoring incentives and penalties to the particular student, with some overall general rules to which everyone is subject. But nowadays many teachers are implicitly (or explicitly) barred from doing so, out of fear than an angry parent will sue or otherwise cause problems if her child is treated differently. A manager has to evaluate each situation within reasonable parameters to decide what accommodations would benefit the firm and the employee. It's fine if circumstances change, and it's also fine if someone asks primarily because they now realize that "yes" is a possible answer to a question they've been dying to ask, but the default to equal treatment in every way ultimately does more harm than good: it either eliminates the possibility of help because now nobody can get help or requires the firm to spend too much money on one form of compensation to the detriment of other forms (e.g. money) or their bottom line.
B
Thursday, October 22, 2015
On carrying fake guns on Halloween
Halloween costume idea: formal apology
Also we could be: Pulp Fiction (although you need plastic guns to complete the look and then you would get arrested)
This is kind of an old article about profiling rampage murderers but I found it interesting.
I thought I'd hate this article but I thought it was pretty interesting.
This was a nice story - or at least it had a happy ending.
Responses
1. I mean, don't run, and don't loiter around ATM's. Also it is weird for someone to open the door for you and not go in after you. Why are they just hanging around being an unpaid door opener? That's like the guy who cleans your windshield for "free."
2. this: "At least 97 percent of active climate scientists say that climate-warming trends are the result of human activity." I thought it was 100% and that's why you can't doubt it. What's up with that 3%? And what do the inactive climate scientists say?
3. ""I believe that McGee came to my mom and said something to her about it, and my mom came to me and I was like 'OK,' and we went in another room and we had sex," Lindsay Powell said."
This is sad on top of sad. I mean, if someone asked to sleep with my daughter, I would not say ok. And you can't even say the money was a motivating factor because it was only $100. That's like drug addict-turned-prostitute money. So, I mean, the finances make absolutely no sense. I also kinda wonder how this has been hush hush for so long. I mean, how could that many 16- and 17-year old boys keep this a secret?
All we know for sure is that Powell is the worst mother of the year:
"Powell insists her three daughters were all at least 18 the first time they were paid to have sex. "
5. Yeah, my next pair of glasses is definitely going to come from a store. I fall under the extremely nearsighted category and even being a little off is a big deal.
R2R
1. Just close your eyes!
3. Cats ARE dumb.
5. So a minimal celebration it is! Should we celebrate alone?
R2R2R
3. I don't understand this. You talked about it in not a very positive way when you first heard of it. Then you read this article and you make me read this article. When did your opinion of this band change? Why are you posting articles talking about things you don't like? Would I like this? Remember the name of the blog!
4. What you were missing is the marketing campaign.
R2R2R2R
1. Maybe it's the Friends/Seinfeld effect where they would always reject people for the stupidest reasons and the audience is supposed to think, oh what a stupid reason! You shouldn't discount that person because of her big hands! But then we realize we are the same so we make them out to be psychos.
3. =D
R2R2R2R2R
4. How would a manager determine if someone really needs an accommodation that they hadn't received before? If they were fine before the other person getting special treatment, why couldn't they be fine now? Aren't they all reactions to the company possibly being more lenient?
R2R2R2R2R2R
4. We shall soon see how receptive to criticism this distant law student is....
Also we could be: Pulp Fiction (although you need plastic guns to complete the look and then you would get arrested)
This is kind of an old article about profiling rampage murderers but I found it interesting.
I thought I'd hate this article but I thought it was pretty interesting.
This was a nice story - or at least it had a happy ending.
Responses
1. I mean, don't run, and don't loiter around ATM's. Also it is weird for someone to open the door for you and not go in after you. Why are they just hanging around being an unpaid door opener? That's like the guy who cleans your windshield for "free."
2. this: "At least 97 percent of active climate scientists say that climate-warming trends are the result of human activity." I thought it was 100% and that's why you can't doubt it. What's up with that 3%? And what do the inactive climate scientists say?
3. ""I believe that McGee came to my mom and said something to her about it, and my mom came to me and I was like 'OK,' and we went in another room and we had sex," Lindsay Powell said."
This is sad on top of sad. I mean, if someone asked to sleep with my daughter, I would not say ok. And you can't even say the money was a motivating factor because it was only $100. That's like drug addict-turned-prostitute money. So, I mean, the finances make absolutely no sense. I also kinda wonder how this has been hush hush for so long. I mean, how could that many 16- and 17-year old boys keep this a secret?
All we know for sure is that Powell is the worst mother of the year:
"Powell insists her three daughters were all at least 18 the first time they were paid to have sex. "
5. Yeah, my next pair of glasses is definitely going to come from a store. I fall under the extremely nearsighted category and even being a little off is a big deal.
R2R
1. Just close your eyes!
3. Cats ARE dumb.
5. So a minimal celebration it is! Should we celebrate alone?
R2R2R
3. I don't understand this. You talked about it in not a very positive way when you first heard of it. Then you read this article and you make me read this article. When did your opinion of this band change? Why are you posting articles talking about things you don't like? Would I like this? Remember the name of the blog!
4. What you were missing is the marketing campaign.
R2R2R2R
1. Maybe it's the Friends/Seinfeld effect where they would always reject people for the stupidest reasons and the audience is supposed to think, oh what a stupid reason! You shouldn't discount that person because of her big hands! But then we realize we are the same so we make them out to be psychos.
3. =D
R2R2R2R2R
4. How would a manager determine if someone really needs an accommodation that they hadn't received before? If they were fine before the other person getting special treatment, why couldn't they be fine now? Aren't they all reactions to the company possibly being more lenient?
R2R2R2R2R2R
4. We shall soon see how receptive to criticism this distant law student is....
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Common Sense
How is this story anything other than "don't run from the police"? If this kid didn't run, none of this would have happened.
Republican environmentalism is not that crazy of an idea, and it's certainly not an oxymoron.
The Louisville basketball team may be in big trouble. Can we please go ahead and pay players now?
This makes a lot of sense when you think about it, but it's still an interesting finding.
You may find this useful when buying your next pair of glasses (or would have found it useful before).
Responses:
1. It's a clever idea, but I'm not sure how I feel about the ability to check without consent.
2. It's Buzzfeed at its best.
3. All the cats were dumb. All the dogs were awesome.
4. The positive spin was editing. Who knows how the whole conversation went?
5. It's nice that societal expectations and norms have changed such that women can eat alone if they choose, but I'm not sure how much celebration is in order. As long as it's about choice, then I usually think it's at least minimally positive.
6. The first one seems more appealing than the second, if only because dark meat is better than boneless chicken breast. But I'm sure both are yummy.
R2R:
3. I'm sorry for sharing the events of my life with you... :/
4. I thought I was missing something, and I clearly still am given your response. I too thought America was the sort of place where you could have choices. I would also like to try one of these $11 breakfast sandwiches...
R2R2R:
1. I think some people want to justify their often irrational decisions with respect to rejecting other people. If the guy was just a little awkward, then everyone is (at least) just a little awkward, and that's hardly a justification for moving on, so make him a creep and you have grounds for dismissal. Dating is one of the few arenas where pure unfiltered critical, and often irrational, judgment is totally necessary and appropriate, but when that fact is juxtaposed with a person's current and enduring state of singleness, sometimes rationalizing the lack of merit in the opposite sex makes it easier to live with oneself.
3. Death awaits those who stand between a bunny and her crispy potatoes!
R2R2R2R2R:
4. It's ultimately a judgment call that the manager has to make based on available resources, staffing needs, the quality of the employee, etc. Basically, you have to decide if these people are popping up to ask because they are also in need and saw that the firm might be receptive to their request or because they just don't like that someone else
R2R2R2R2R2R:
4. If people respond poorly to criticism - and this has been known to happen from time to time - then you know that they aren't interested in getting better or making your visit worthwhile, and that means it's time to go and never come back. I think most restaurant managers are comfortable accepting criticism that comes from the right place, and they chose the wrong line of work if customer service isn't important to them.
B
Republican environmentalism is not that crazy of an idea, and it's certainly not an oxymoron.
The Louisville basketball team may be in big trouble. Can we please go ahead and pay players now?
This makes a lot of sense when you think about it, but it's still an interesting finding.
You may find this useful when buying your next pair of glasses (or would have found it useful before).
Responses:
1. It's a clever idea, but I'm not sure how I feel about the ability to check without consent.
2. It's Buzzfeed at its best.
3. All the cats were dumb. All the dogs were awesome.
4. The positive spin was editing. Who knows how the whole conversation went?
5. It's nice that societal expectations and norms have changed such that women can eat alone if they choose, but I'm not sure how much celebration is in order. As long as it's about choice, then I usually think it's at least minimally positive.
6. The first one seems more appealing than the second, if only because dark meat is better than boneless chicken breast. But I'm sure both are yummy.
R2R:
3. I'm sorry for sharing the events of my life with you... :/
4. I thought I was missing something, and I clearly still am given your response. I too thought America was the sort of place where you could have choices. I would also like to try one of these $11 breakfast sandwiches...
R2R2R:
1. I think some people want to justify their often irrational decisions with respect to rejecting other people. If the guy was just a little awkward, then everyone is (at least) just a little awkward, and that's hardly a justification for moving on, so make him a creep and you have grounds for dismissal. Dating is one of the few arenas where pure unfiltered critical, and often irrational, judgment is totally necessary and appropriate, but when that fact is juxtaposed with a person's current and enduring state of singleness, sometimes rationalizing the lack of merit in the opposite sex makes it easier to live with oneself.
3. Death awaits those who stand between a bunny and her crispy potatoes!
R2R2R2R2R:
4. It's ultimately a judgment call that the manager has to make based on available resources, staffing needs, the quality of the employee, etc. Basically, you have to decide if these people are popping up to ask because they are also in need and saw that the firm might be receptive to their request or because they just don't like that someone else
R2R2R2R2R2R:
4. If people respond poorly to criticism - and this has been known to happen from time to time - then you know that they aren't interested in getting better or making your visit worthwhile, and that means it's time to go and never come back. I think most restaurant managers are comfortable accepting criticism that comes from the right place, and they chose the wrong line of work if customer service isn't important to them.
B
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Feminism and fried chicken
The breathalyzer gets revamped.
aww man I miss funny Buzzfeed. I feel a little bad that it seems like a lot of black people get wrong-numbered.
the cats are the weakest links. as always.
Not sure what the positive spin we're supposed to put on this is.
Also not sure what to think about this:
The latest Kate Spade ad is out featuring the always charming Anna Kendrick, and this time it has a very special guest star: Gloria Steinem. On top of the fact that the ad is really charming, it also has a really important message. As the ad plays out, you learn that Kendrick’s date cancels on her and she ends up dining alone—and spying on fellow lone diner, who happens to be Steinem. SPOILER ALERT: Kendrick and Steinem end up sitting together and talking about how awesome it is for women to do independent activities. “When I started out, you couldn’t go into a certain number of hotels alone if you were a female. You couldn’t be seated alone. There was something scandalous about it,” Steinem said in the video interview for Kate Spade. “Finally if you were seated alone, it was by the kitchen. So it’s actually a civil right to dine alone.” Next time you can’t find a dining buddy, just grab a book and remember that 40 years ago, you wouldn’t have had that luxury.
Yay! Men don't give up their seats for us anymore and we can dine alone! Progress!
What say you to this or this?
Responses
1. That sounds like a really good bill, or if not, a really good conversation. It's too bad that it won't pass. Unfortunate that the article was written in the most biased way possible.
2. "on the lamb"! Hilarious! I don't know why you can't just be someone who tries to eat mostly vegetables. You can reduce your own meat consumption without being a jerk. That would probably convince other people to do the same rather than just not invite you to anything.
3. I can't believe you posted this. Grievance! Why?
4. Best comments of the first article:
Comment 1: Didn't Bernie Sanders get riled up about this last night?
Comment 2: That was Col. Sanders..
Anyway, I can't believe you posted these 2 non-articles either. It's America! It's in our nature to make something better. Do they also find fault when Apple upgrades its phones? Or when we find better ways to do things? Why not better food, better breakfast sandwiches? Some of us eat every day and want variety.
I wonder if we should really be concerned with our media's lack of transparency over these 2 articles because they both namecheck this soon-to-open BEC place to show that it will sell $11 breakfast sandwiches. This isn't new or crazy like the $100 hamburger. That's an expensive breakfast sandwich but I doubt it's the most expensive in the city. So why have this article except that BEC has an in with Wapo and NYT?
R2R
1. Though I feel that dating stories are hilarious good fun, it seems that people are primed to be hyperbolic when discussing their dates. It's not just that he's got an undesirable seedy job - he's a sex fiend! He's not just awkward - he's a psychopath! Can't we all just not get along?
3. The crispy potato topping!
R2R2R
2. Ok I give you mind-blowing.
4. Well, maybe they thought they needed it. Perhaps they're exceptionally bad at managing their time or affairs. What say you if they ask for time for that?
R2R2R2R
4. You've really made me rethink my Yelp-ing. I mean, maybe I should just tell the manager in person on a bad visit. That would mean we could possibly eat at Stone Street Tavern again (ugh). Though I guess I would feel bad for looking complain-y or maybe they'd yell at me. Don't know how likely those would be. But then if they made me feel bad, I would definitely post a poor review and not feel bad. And I hope no one gets fired!
From now on, we're going confrontational!
aww man I miss funny Buzzfeed. I feel a little bad that it seems like a lot of black people get wrong-numbered.
the cats are the weakest links. as always.
Not sure what the positive spin we're supposed to put on this is.
Also not sure what to think about this:
The latest Kate Spade ad is out featuring the always charming Anna Kendrick, and this time it has a very special guest star: Gloria Steinem. On top of the fact that the ad is really charming, it also has a really important message. As the ad plays out, you learn that Kendrick’s date cancels on her and she ends up dining alone—and spying on fellow lone diner, who happens to be Steinem. SPOILER ALERT: Kendrick and Steinem end up sitting together and talking about how awesome it is for women to do independent activities. “When I started out, you couldn’t go into a certain number of hotels alone if you were a female. You couldn’t be seated alone. There was something scandalous about it,” Steinem said in the video interview for Kate Spade. “Finally if you were seated alone, it was by the kitchen. So it’s actually a civil right to dine alone.” Next time you can’t find a dining buddy, just grab a book and remember that 40 years ago, you wouldn’t have had that luxury.
Yay! Men don't give up their seats for us anymore and we can dine alone! Progress!
What say you to this or this?
Responses
1. That sounds like a really good bill, or if not, a really good conversation. It's too bad that it won't pass. Unfortunate that the article was written in the most biased way possible.
2. "on the lamb"! Hilarious! I don't know why you can't just be someone who tries to eat mostly vegetables. You can reduce your own meat consumption without being a jerk. That would probably convince other people to do the same rather than just not invite you to anything.
3. I can't believe you posted this. Grievance! Why?
4. Best comments of the first article:
Comment 1: Didn't Bernie Sanders get riled up about this last night?
Comment 2: That was Col. Sanders..
Anyway, I can't believe you posted these 2 non-articles either. It's America! It's in our nature to make something better. Do they also find fault when Apple upgrades its phones? Or when we find better ways to do things? Why not better food, better breakfast sandwiches? Some of us eat every day and want variety.
I wonder if we should really be concerned with our media's lack of transparency over these 2 articles because they both namecheck this soon-to-open BEC place to show that it will sell $11 breakfast sandwiches. This isn't new or crazy like the $100 hamburger. That's an expensive breakfast sandwich but I doubt it's the most expensive in the city. So why have this article except that BEC has an in with Wapo and NYT?
R2R
1. Though I feel that dating stories are hilarious good fun, it seems that people are primed to be hyperbolic when discussing their dates. It's not just that he's got an undesirable seedy job - he's a sex fiend! He's not just awkward - he's a psychopath! Can't we all just not get along?
3. The crispy potato topping!
R2R2R
2. Ok I give you mind-blowing.
4. Well, maybe they thought they needed it. Perhaps they're exceptionally bad at managing their time or affairs. What say you if they ask for time for that?
R2R2R2R
4. You've really made me rethink my Yelp-ing. I mean, maybe I should just tell the manager in person on a bad visit. That would mean we could possibly eat at Stone Street Tavern again (ugh). Though I guess I would feel bad for looking complain-y or maybe they'd yell at me. Don't know how likely those would be. But then if they made me feel bad, I would definitely post a poor review and not feel bad. And I hope no one gets fired!
From now on, we're going confrontational!
Hunger Pangs
This is one proposal that seems to have some common sense in it, its chances of passing notwithstanding.
In addition to being annoying, vegetarians also appear to be unprincipled.
This is the band I saw with the Tims, and apparently they've been written up in the Wall Street Journal.
I'm posting this because it's about breakfast sandwiches, but I'm left mostly confused as to why this is a problem. (This article was mentioned in the above, and it's even worse.)
Responses:
1. I don't have a lot of thoughts about these people except to say that there are bad people everywhere, and I am sorry they had to experience them. I don't think the guy is a sex fiend - he probably likes porn, but he could get to his idea with just that and an appreciation for Pandora. The Chicago guy seemed like the annoying know-it-all friend that everyone has - not great, but certainly not a sociopath. The New Orleans guy was an idiot - I would have much preferred a blurb from her about how her stupid date was too busy being a vapid asshole to get to know her. As for waterboarding, I think the question of whether it is torture is beside the point because it's either definitional (in which case we are just talking about language, not whether it should be proscribed) or conclusory (i.e. if it's torture, then it has to be illegal, regardless of whether it should be on the merits). But if you're asking whether I think it should be allowed, then I don't really have a strong opinion. :)
2. There are some good choices in there. The Atlanta Motor Speedway is not one of them.
3. I'm not sure the tactics he deployed are persuasive or otherwise effective. As for the recipes, I certainly enjoy shepherd's pie and slow-roasted pork shoulder, but 1) my Southern and Puerto Rican heritages have yielded me two foolproof ways of roasting a pork shoulder to perfection, and 2) I'm not sure what value he adds with his shepherd's pie recipe.
4. I will build a tree house. Decorating it every year for Christmas? As impressive as this one is, that might be a bridge too far...
R2R2R:
2. The idea that a father would be that magnanimous (there goes that word again) to a person with whom he likely found himself in competition, for better or worse, on one of the most important days of his life as a father where he discharges his final duty, is mind-blowing to me. Most stepfathers would have in their heads negotiated away any desire to walk their stepdaughters down the aisle, and I'm sure this one was plenty surprised.
4. I think some of these people thought that it was fair to ask for help when they didn't need it. I think of it as thinking you have a right to receive food stamps because poor people, who are poor through some unknown combination of bad luck and bad decisions (such combination varying depending on whom you encounter), get food stamps.
R2R2R2R:
4. I think it depends on the purpose of the speech and the foreseeable effects. Complaining to the manager won't get someone fired unless people are complaining all the time. Most managers understand that mistakes are made every now and then. Posting on Yelp has a more diffuse but also more public impact, but they have the added value of avoiding confrontation. In my view, if the purpose of the speech is to improve the next interaction, then speaking to the manager and not exaggerating is the way to go. They know how to run their restaurants better than they do, and I imagine that the only time someone gets fired is if he makes a huge mistake or else he's been making smaller mistakes for weeks. Also, most people who have a bad experience just never return, and I think managers appreciate feedback as long as the feedback is constructive. My fear with Yelp in some cases is that some reviews are so harsh that they risk having a bad publicity effect that overwhelms any attempts on the part of the manager to improve. I have definitely passed over restaurants that have one or two horrible reviews, and in retrospect realized that there are any number of reasons why those reviews could be flawed or, even if true, irrelevant to my experience. I have also seen plenty of attempts by managers to contact the reviewers in an attempt to solve the problem and make things right. So in summary, yes, I think talking to the manager is the best solution.
B
In addition to being annoying, vegetarians also appear to be unprincipled.
This is the band I saw with the Tims, and apparently they've been written up in the Wall Street Journal.
I'm posting this because it's about breakfast sandwiches, but I'm left mostly confused as to why this is a problem. (This article was mentioned in the above, and it's even worse.)
Responses:
1. I don't have a lot of thoughts about these people except to say that there are bad people everywhere, and I am sorry they had to experience them. I don't think the guy is a sex fiend - he probably likes porn, but he could get to his idea with just that and an appreciation for Pandora. The Chicago guy seemed like the annoying know-it-all friend that everyone has - not great, but certainly not a sociopath. The New Orleans guy was an idiot - I would have much preferred a blurb from her about how her stupid date was too busy being a vapid asshole to get to know her. As for waterboarding, I think the question of whether it is torture is beside the point because it's either definitional (in which case we are just talking about language, not whether it should be proscribed) or conclusory (i.e. if it's torture, then it has to be illegal, regardless of whether it should be on the merits). But if you're asking whether I think it should be allowed, then I don't really have a strong opinion. :)
2. There are some good choices in there. The Atlanta Motor Speedway is not one of them.
3. I'm not sure the tactics he deployed are persuasive or otherwise effective. As for the recipes, I certainly enjoy shepherd's pie and slow-roasted pork shoulder, but 1) my Southern and Puerto Rican heritages have yielded me two foolproof ways of roasting a pork shoulder to perfection, and 2) I'm not sure what value he adds with his shepherd's pie recipe.
4. I will build a tree house. Decorating it every year for Christmas? As impressive as this one is, that might be a bridge too far...
R2R2R:
2. The idea that a father would be that magnanimous (there goes that word again) to a person with whom he likely found himself in competition, for better or worse, on one of the most important days of his life as a father where he discharges his final duty, is mind-blowing to me. Most stepfathers would have in their heads negotiated away any desire to walk their stepdaughters down the aisle, and I'm sure this one was plenty surprised.
4. I think some of these people thought that it was fair to ask for help when they didn't need it. I think of it as thinking you have a right to receive food stamps because poor people, who are poor through some unknown combination of bad luck and bad decisions (such combination varying depending on whom you encounter), get food stamps.
R2R2R2R:
4. I think it depends on the purpose of the speech and the foreseeable effects. Complaining to the manager won't get someone fired unless people are complaining all the time. Most managers understand that mistakes are made every now and then. Posting on Yelp has a more diffuse but also more public impact, but they have the added value of avoiding confrontation. In my view, if the purpose of the speech is to improve the next interaction, then speaking to the manager and not exaggerating is the way to go. They know how to run their restaurants better than they do, and I imagine that the only time someone gets fired is if he makes a huge mistake or else he's been making smaller mistakes for weeks. Also, most people who have a bad experience just never return, and I think managers appreciate feedback as long as the feedback is constructive. My fear with Yelp in some cases is that some reviews are so harsh that they risk having a bad publicity effect that overwhelms any attempts on the part of the manager to improve. I have definitely passed over restaurants that have one or two horrible reviews, and in retrospect realized that there are any number of reasons why those reviews could be flawed or, even if true, irrelevant to my experience. I have also seen plenty of attempts by managers to contact the reviewers in an attempt to solve the problem and make things right. So in summary, yes, I think talking to the manager is the best solution.
B
Monday, October 12, 2015
Life Goals
I found this very entertaining especially with its state stereotypes. Some thoughts - I don't think that guy is a "sex fiend" but it's probably a legitimate dealbreaker if he's that into porn. The Chicago date didn't seem that bad. Also, how do you feel about waterboarding?
Speaking of state stereotypes
I have a bit of a bias against Jamie Oliver because I didn't like his TED talk. I mean he showed a video where he was talking with an overweight mother surrounded by the food she feeds them and said "You're killing your children." So just a big manipulative. Even so, his website is on point and I'm super excited about this Shepherd's Pie Recipe.This pork shoulder looked pretty good too.
Life goals
He's got a good walk to him.
Responses!
1. I mean, if that's the woman's most important political issue, then it seems reasonable for her to choose her life partner to some degree based on agreement on that issue.Perhaps the bigger issue is she's unlikely to choose this guy even as a friend and is probably misconstruing all his political arguments.
2. True. I hate making phone calls to companies. The Billfold has a "Do 1 Thing Thursday" feature where people do the thing that they've been procrastinating about and it's a lot of "call [cable company/bank/store]."
3. It's just well-reasoned. It's hard to have a strong opinion when it all makes so much sense.
4. Love this: “I basically grew up on the stuff,” he said, adding that he planned to order extra for dinner and return for lunch on Wednesday. “It definitely lived up to my dreams.”
It's so nice that Chikfila really thought about its customers. I mean it could just be "open a store in NYC and make millions!" but they really took the time to make it a good experience. Good on you, Chikfila!
5. I saw this article weeks ago and was surprised that I hadn't posted it. This reminds me of that time when I think TC Williams' Math Team beat our math team in some competition and it was front page of the Washington Post. But that was the only year we'd lost and it never so much as made the community paper.
A few points:
I like how the inmates came up with a creative defense. I feel like if they were millenials, they would have rejected the side out of principle.
I like how this brings up the idea that maybe criminals are smart. I mean, you could say that they can't be that smart if they get caught, but they have all that time to work on debate and legal arguments. It is totally in their self-interest.
R2R
1. Yay! I can't wait for our weekly dinners! Hottest ticket in town.
2. Mind-blowing?
3. Yes, if you are obese, that's on you. But if you're just a bit heavier than normal, then it's harder to lose that weight.
4. I think that people have a right to request leave to care for people that aren't their kids. That's fair. You might need to take care of elderly relatives, for example. Of course, it seems a little rough for them to ask for a flexible schedule if you're not a single mother with a difficult child. It's hard to draw the line on what's fair though.
5. We can be productivity buddies!
R2R2R
4. Do you think I should complain to the manager instead of posting on Yelp? It's just on sitcoms, when you complain to the manage,r you get them fired and that's much worse than a bad review because you ruined one person's life.
5. Ooh I forgot to respond. I've always judged people based on whether I think they know the correct grammatical rules.So a their/there misuse is a red flag whereas lack of capitalization is not a big deal (particularly for me because I do that all the time). I know this article makes it seem like Bear would be the most popular of them all on online dating but I think too-correct grammar and punctuation can be a turn-off to some. =P
Speaking of state stereotypes
I have a bit of a bias against Jamie Oliver because I didn't like his TED talk. I mean he showed a video where he was talking with an overweight mother surrounded by the food she feeds them and said "You're killing your children." So just a big manipulative. Even so, his website is on point and I'm super excited about this Shepherd's Pie Recipe.This pork shoulder looked pretty good too.
Life goals
He's got a good walk to him.
Responses!
1. I mean, if that's the woman's most important political issue, then it seems reasonable for her to choose her life partner to some degree based on agreement on that issue.Perhaps the bigger issue is she's unlikely to choose this guy even as a friend and is probably misconstruing all his political arguments.
2. True. I hate making phone calls to companies. The Billfold has a "Do 1 Thing Thursday" feature where people do the thing that they've been procrastinating about and it's a lot of "call [cable company/bank/store]."
3. It's just well-reasoned. It's hard to have a strong opinion when it all makes so much sense.
4. Love this: “I basically grew up on the stuff,” he said, adding that he planned to order extra for dinner and return for lunch on Wednesday. “It definitely lived up to my dreams.”
It's so nice that Chikfila really thought about its customers. I mean it could just be "open a store in NYC and make millions!" but they really took the time to make it a good experience. Good on you, Chikfila!
5. I saw this article weeks ago and was surprised that I hadn't posted it. This reminds me of that time when I think TC Williams' Math Team beat our math team in some competition and it was front page of the Washington Post. But that was the only year we'd lost and it never so much as made the community paper.
A few points:
I like how the inmates came up with a creative defense. I feel like if they were millenials, they would have rejected the side out of principle.
I like how this brings up the idea that maybe criminals are smart. I mean, you could say that they can't be that smart if they get caught, but they have all that time to work on debate and legal arguments. It is totally in their self-interest.
R2R
1. Yay! I can't wait for our weekly dinners! Hottest ticket in town.
2. Mind-blowing?
3. Yes, if you are obese, that's on you. But if you're just a bit heavier than normal, then it's harder to lose that weight.
4. I think that people have a right to request leave to care for people that aren't their kids. That's fair. You might need to take care of elderly relatives, for example. Of course, it seems a little rough for them to ask for a flexible schedule if you're not a single mother with a difficult child. It's hard to draw the line on what's fair though.
5. We can be productivity buddies!
R2R2R
4. Do you think I should complain to the manager instead of posting on Yelp? It's just on sitcoms, when you complain to the manage,r you get them fired and that's much worse than a bad review because you ruined one person's life.
5. Ooh I forgot to respond. I've always judged people based on whether I think they know the correct grammatical rules.So a their/there misuse is a red flag whereas lack of capitalization is not a big deal (particularly for me because I do that all the time). I know this article makes it seem like Bear would be the most popular of them all on online dating but I think too-correct grammar and punctuation can be a turn-off to some. =P
Thursday, October 8, 2015
Big Plans
Having encountered this phenomenon before, it's not altogether surprising, even if it's still disappointing.
They could charge $50 for this and still have a line out the door.
James Taranto talks about guns and the media.
The NYC Chick-fil-A store was in the works for quite some time.
This program raises some interesting questions about how we should think about prison in America.
Responses:
1. This is the best idea I've heard in a while. Once we have a dining room table, we have to do this at least once a month. I would say Friday night and Sunday night are the big possibilities, though every Friday night might be tricky with our work schedules. Also, we could mix up the menu! I have so many ideas...
2. That's mind-blowing. I am glad that there are nice, good people out there.
3. See my comment below, but fair enough. The penultimate paragraph is the one that I'm concerned about: "'There's a huge weight bias against people with obesity,' she said. 'They're judged as lazy and self-indulgent. That's really not the case. If our research is correct, you need to eat even less and exercise even more' just to be same weight as your parents were at your age." Fair enough, but I don't think the judgment and bias are causing diabetes and hypertension.
4. These decisions are difficult, but ultimately the company had to decide whether she was adding value commensurate with her compensation. If not, then it's hard to retain her. I don't know the circumstances of her weak performance, but if the woman (and/or her former colleagues) cared about her as a person, then they should have taken a collection or offered to help her personally. To me, it's an abuse of power to use your power within a company (certain one that you do not own) to provide charity for other people. The mother was doing the best she could, but she was unable to do her job satisfactorily. All that said, her colleagues were wrong for being busybodies - sure, they weren't receiving the same accommodations, but that is beside the point. I'm sure that if they began to struggle with their job performance because of problems at home, they would have appreciated personal consideration from the company, but they shouldn't receive it just because someone else does. It would be as if everyone started requesting paternity/maternity leave each year, regardless of whether they had kids.
5. It seems like a very good system, primarily because it includes everything without allowing things to slip through the cracks with time. I recently listened to a podcast where the guest advocated a related (though not quite similar) method. I'm trying something similar with my Reminders app, but the nice thing about the journal is that you have a record of your productivity. Maybe I'll try it for 2016.
R2R:
4. I think the real issue I have with rating people is that those ratings reduce you to a number and follow you around indefinitely. It's certainly appropriate to want to steer clear of a person who does something inappropriate on a date (or in life generally), but I think it's also appropriate to expect that person to have a chance to reform. Separately, I think businesses sometimes struggle with the same issue, which is why I could propose weighted rankings for Yelp, etc., where more recent rankings are more important than more distant ones. Finally, I also worry that people are defaulting to telling "the world" (via the internet) when something goes wrong rather than telling the offender. How many ladies tell the guy what he did wrong (or vice versa)? How many people complain to the restaurant manager before turning to Yelp?
5. No response to the fifth article?
R2R2R:
1. I think my response is more that this is likely to give people who aren't losing weight but should coverage, not unlike being "big-boned," having a "glandular problem," etc. Obviously I hope the research continues and leads to a better understanding of our bodies and the obesity problem, but 1) I question the motives whenever a scientific development is reported by the media and 2) I question attempts by people to suggest that being unhealthily overweight is okay.
R2R2R2R:
1. Exactly. Recycling isn't per se better, and it is important for us to think critically about our usage decisions. To be sure, I still sometimes use reusable bags (especially when I'm buying a lot of things). Environmentalism for many people (and science for many others) is a religion, with believers and non-believers.
B
They could charge $50 for this and still have a line out the door.
James Taranto talks about guns and the media.
The NYC Chick-fil-A store was in the works for quite some time.
This program raises some interesting questions about how we should think about prison in America.
Responses:
1. This is the best idea I've heard in a while. Once we have a dining room table, we have to do this at least once a month. I would say Friday night and Sunday night are the big possibilities, though every Friday night might be tricky with our work schedules. Also, we could mix up the menu! I have so many ideas...
2. That's mind-blowing. I am glad that there are nice, good people out there.
3. See my comment below, but fair enough. The penultimate paragraph is the one that I'm concerned about: "'There's a huge weight bias against people with obesity,' she said. 'They're judged as lazy and self-indulgent. That's really not the case. If our research is correct, you need to eat even less and exercise even more' just to be same weight as your parents were at your age." Fair enough, but I don't think the judgment and bias are causing diabetes and hypertension.
4. These decisions are difficult, but ultimately the company had to decide whether she was adding value commensurate with her compensation. If not, then it's hard to retain her. I don't know the circumstances of her weak performance, but if the woman (and/or her former colleagues) cared about her as a person, then they should have taken a collection or offered to help her personally. To me, it's an abuse of power to use your power within a company (certain one that you do not own) to provide charity for other people. The mother was doing the best she could, but she was unable to do her job satisfactorily. All that said, her colleagues were wrong for being busybodies - sure, they weren't receiving the same accommodations, but that is beside the point. I'm sure that if they began to struggle with their job performance because of problems at home, they would have appreciated personal consideration from the company, but they shouldn't receive it just because someone else does. It would be as if everyone started requesting paternity/maternity leave each year, regardless of whether they had kids.
5. It seems like a very good system, primarily because it includes everything without allowing things to slip through the cracks with time. I recently listened to a podcast where the guest advocated a related (though not quite similar) method. I'm trying something similar with my Reminders app, but the nice thing about the journal is that you have a record of your productivity. Maybe I'll try it for 2016.
R2R:
4. I think the real issue I have with rating people is that those ratings reduce you to a number and follow you around indefinitely. It's certainly appropriate to want to steer clear of a person who does something inappropriate on a date (or in life generally), but I think it's also appropriate to expect that person to have a chance to reform. Separately, I think businesses sometimes struggle with the same issue, which is why I could propose weighted rankings for Yelp, etc., where more recent rankings are more important than more distant ones. Finally, I also worry that people are defaulting to telling "the world" (via the internet) when something goes wrong rather than telling the offender. How many ladies tell the guy what he did wrong (or vice versa)? How many people complain to the restaurant manager before turning to Yelp?
5. No response to the fifth article?
R2R2R:
1. I think my response is more that this is likely to give people who aren't losing weight but should coverage, not unlike being "big-boned," having a "glandular problem," etc. Obviously I hope the research continues and leads to a better understanding of our bodies and the obesity problem, but 1) I question the motives whenever a scientific development is reported by the media and 2) I question attempts by people to suggest that being unhealthily overweight is okay.
R2R2R2R:
1. Exactly. Recycling isn't per se better, and it is important for us to think critically about our usage decisions. To be sure, I still sometimes use reusable bags (especially when I'm buying a lot of things). Environmentalism for many people (and science for many others) is a religion, with believers and non-believers.
B
Tuesday, October 6, 2015
Now with more Gluten
I hope this will be something we incorporate
every now and then, a good story
squarely on the side of accepting all body types
where do you weigh in on this? I mean, yeah the employee was in a tough situation but the company can't float her forever either. Maybe they could have floated her a little longer, which is I guess the regret she talks about.
I haven't seen the video yet but it seems to have a positive response. Way more positive than you'd expect for a to-do list method.
Responses
1. I was seriously hoping the tontine was a french pastry.It seems like a good idea and as long as the group was big enough, the idea of you taking the shares of your fallen comrades seems more abstract and less vile. But I feel that as an Asian woman, no one would want me in their tontine! (we live so long).
Also what a sad family:
"The idea didn’t catch on at first, and Tonti eventually landed in the Bastille (while his son, an explorer, would eventually help found the city of Detroit)."
2. That was sad! If it's going to be sad like that, it should at least have funny animated gifs!
3. Yeah, I've been hearing about this and we talked about it briefly on our FaceTime call.
4. I was going to add this to my YLT! (I was entitling it "The Circle is coming!") I've heard so many things decrying this. However, I had already seen an app (I think it's called Lulu) that lets you rate people with online dating profiles so that they don't continue to keep getting terrible dates, and that seemed like a reasonable thing to do. Then again, there is also that site about celebrities being nice and it really lets anyone post anything about someone without verification and it seems useless and mean. I mean, it was only a matter of time before this app happened. Although maybe it'd be more useful if it was a composite of all your rankings - like your Uber ranking, if your company is ranked on Yelp, your Lulu rating, etc.
R2R
1. I dunno, I found that compelling. It might actually be tougher to lose weight now.Not saying you shouldn't keep trying, because there is no other option. But some things just were easier for our parents!
R2R2R
1. I get that too. I've been thinking about recycling lately because someone at community group said they were a big climate change fanatic and everyone's like "I recycle!" But I'm not sure recycling is all that big a deal. First of all, if you reduce, then the companies will make less and that will save all that energy from creating. If you reuse, then that saves all the energy of recycling and doesn't go to waste. If you recycle, then it takes all that energy to sort and recycle the object. I've heard that scrap aluminum or paper doesn't make that much money some years and there are rumors that it just gets thrown in the trash anyway. Even if that's not true, I've heard that in some instances it takes less energy to harvest from new materials than to recycle old ones. I guess the benefit is still that you're making less trash but if you just reduce and reuse, then whether you recycle or not doesn't seem like such a terrible thing.
Likewise, though I think reusable bags make a ton of sense, mostly logistically, sometimes you need a plastic bag.
R2R2R2R
2. Yeah I think bread needs a resurgence. With all the gluten-free and paleo people, good bread has taken a backseat! Come back, bread! We love you!
R2R2R2R2R2R2R
1. Fair.
4. It will be brung. Brought. Brang.
every now and then, a good story
squarely on the side of accepting all body types
where do you weigh in on this? I mean, yeah the employee was in a tough situation but the company can't float her forever either. Maybe they could have floated her a little longer, which is I guess the regret she talks about.
I haven't seen the video yet but it seems to have a positive response. Way more positive than you'd expect for a to-do list method.
Responses
1. I was seriously hoping the tontine was a french pastry.It seems like a good idea and as long as the group was big enough, the idea of you taking the shares of your fallen comrades seems more abstract and less vile. But I feel that as an Asian woman, no one would want me in their tontine! (we live so long).
Also what a sad family:
"The idea didn’t catch on at first, and Tonti eventually landed in the Bastille (while his son, an explorer, would eventually help found the city of Detroit)."
2. That was sad! If it's going to be sad like that, it should at least have funny animated gifs!
3. Yeah, I've been hearing about this and we talked about it briefly on our FaceTime call.
4. I was going to add this to my YLT! (I was entitling it "The Circle is coming!") I've heard so many things decrying this. However, I had already seen an app (I think it's called Lulu) that lets you rate people with online dating profiles so that they don't continue to keep getting terrible dates, and that seemed like a reasonable thing to do. Then again, there is also that site about celebrities being nice and it really lets anyone post anything about someone without verification and it seems useless and mean. I mean, it was only a matter of time before this app happened. Although maybe it'd be more useful if it was a composite of all your rankings - like your Uber ranking, if your company is ranked on Yelp, your Lulu rating, etc.
R2R
1. I dunno, I found that compelling. It might actually be tougher to lose weight now.Not saying you shouldn't keep trying, because there is no other option. But some things just were easier for our parents!
R2R2R
1. I get that too. I've been thinking about recycling lately because someone at community group said they were a big climate change fanatic and everyone's like "I recycle!" But I'm not sure recycling is all that big a deal. First of all, if you reduce, then the companies will make less and that will save all that energy from creating. If you reuse, then that saves all the energy of recycling and doesn't go to waste. If you recycle, then it takes all that energy to sort and recycle the object. I've heard that scrap aluminum or paper doesn't make that much money some years and there are rumors that it just gets thrown in the trash anyway. Even if that's not true, I've heard that in some instances it takes less energy to harvest from new materials than to recycle old ones. I guess the benefit is still that you're making less trash but if you just reduce and reuse, then whether you recycle or not doesn't seem like such a terrible thing.
Likewise, though I think reusable bags make a ton of sense, mostly logistically, sometimes you need a plastic bag.
R2R2R2R
2. Yeah I think bread needs a resurgence. With all the gluten-free and paleo people, good bread has taken a backseat! Come back, bread! We love you!
R2R2R2R2R2R2R
1. Fair.
4. It will be brung. Brought. Brang.
Friday, October 2, 2015
Two More Steps Forward
Is it time to bring back the tontine?
Here are some good lawyer tips.
We will have to pay closer attention to our data usage with the new iOS.
This is not a good development for society.
This should hopefully lead to a better society, though.
Responses:
1. Of course millennials would bitch and moan about how it's not fair. If it's not this, then it's housing prices, real wages, or something else.
2. The title in the link is different from the title of the article. In any case, it's a nice list.
3. Now that is aspirational. And inspirational.
4. That is also inspiring. If we didn't have these pesky millennials complaining about how everything is too hard, then that would be 3 for 3!
R2R:
1. The thing that mostly bothers me - as well as the author, I suspect - is how the users of reusable bags treat the non-users as anti-environment, ignorant, or otherwise a nuisance for asking questions and daring to think about this question in a more holistic way. Also, the notion that reusable bags are so clearly the easiest solution while at the same time requiring plastic bag bans or taxes is puzzling to me.
R2R2R:
2. Better, more delicious bread buns are the answer. Also, you should note that all of the bun alternatives I listed earlier (chicken, donuts, and of course mac and cheese) are delicious and delicious as buns. But I worry that going down the road of replacing bread with more flavor, which has been a trend in fast food and pizza, just makes good bread less of the focus.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. It's a problem insofar as there are social consequences to saying offensive things. Subjective offense has existed as a helpful concept for a long time, but we have not subjected people to social (or, God forbid, civil or criminal) penalties for saying something subjectively offensive. That said, we have for a while subjected our friends and family members to penalties for knowingly or recklessly saying subjectively offensive things. If Adam has a bad breakup with Becky, and Cindy is friends with Becky, Becky would likely have a strong claim of offense against Cindy if Cindy decided to start talking about Adam in a positive way or named her new puppy Adam or something like that. But she would have no claim against a new acquaintance Denise who did the same thing. The difference between being objectively offended and subjectively offended is that, when it comes to society at large, we expect people who are subjectively offended to cope with it themselves or else seek a therapist, but we also expect our friends and loved ones to know us and know how we tick so that they can provide a safe space for us in our time of need. Basically these trigger people are trying to turn the entire world into a safe space tailored just for them, which in my view is ridiculous on its face.
4. Bring it.
B
Here are some good lawyer tips.
We will have to pay closer attention to our data usage with the new iOS.
This is not a good development for society.
This should hopefully lead to a better society, though.
Responses:
1. Of course millennials would bitch and moan about how it's not fair. If it's not this, then it's housing prices, real wages, or something else.
2. The title in the link is different from the title of the article. In any case, it's a nice list.
3. Now that is aspirational. And inspirational.
4. That is also inspiring. If we didn't have these pesky millennials complaining about how everything is too hard, then that would be 3 for 3!
R2R:
1. The thing that mostly bothers me - as well as the author, I suspect - is how the users of reusable bags treat the non-users as anti-environment, ignorant, or otherwise a nuisance for asking questions and daring to think about this question in a more holistic way. Also, the notion that reusable bags are so clearly the easiest solution while at the same time requiring plastic bag bans or taxes is puzzling to me.
R2R2R:
2. Better, more delicious bread buns are the answer. Also, you should note that all of the bun alternatives I listed earlier (chicken, donuts, and of course mac and cheese) are delicious and delicious as buns. But I worry that going down the road of replacing bread with more flavor, which has been a trend in fast food and pizza, just makes good bread less of the focus.
R2R2R2R2R2R2R:
1. It's a problem insofar as there are social consequences to saying offensive things. Subjective offense has existed as a helpful concept for a long time, but we have not subjected people to social (or, God forbid, civil or criminal) penalties for saying something subjectively offensive. That said, we have for a while subjected our friends and family members to penalties for knowingly or recklessly saying subjectively offensive things. If Adam has a bad breakup with Becky, and Cindy is friends with Becky, Becky would likely have a strong claim of offense against Cindy if Cindy decided to start talking about Adam in a positive way or named her new puppy Adam or something like that. But she would have no claim against a new acquaintance Denise who did the same thing. The difference between being objectively offended and subjectively offended is that, when it comes to society at large, we expect people who are subjectively offended to cope with it themselves or else seek a therapist, but we also expect our friends and loved ones to know us and know how we tick so that they can provide a safe space for us in our time of need. Basically these trigger people are trying to turn the entire world into a safe space tailored just for them, which in my view is ridiculous on its face.
4. Bring it.
B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)