This is what it really boils down to with Obamacare. I do think that many people do not understand the full conception of the risk (i.e. if you stay healthy, then you're fine, but if you get sick, then you are free-riding on the welfare state, which isn't fair), but the solution to that problem is not paternalism.
Here's a nuanced rebuttal to the "Ban Bossy" idea.
Here are more thoughts from Susan Patton.
Amazon Prime is getting more expensive.
Responses:
1. It does seem interesting, but I fear, as the author notes, that the book has assumed the conclusion by staying within the realm of Intellectuals (capital "i" intended).
2. I do think there's something to the idea of sex roles and that there's something to the idea that toys, games, etc., can contribute to them (note the article I sent you yesterday). But I'm unpersuaded that 1) there are no biological reasons for this and 2) there is no choice surrounding these decisions. Little girls want Barbies not just because of Mattel's marketing campaigns.
3. Stories like this are why I tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt more than my libertarian friends or other minorities who claim abuse from cops. There are plenty of cops out there who abuse their power (or even seek the job so they can wield power abusively over others), but I suspect that most of the police "scandals" that get blown up in the news are the result of impossible decisions made with no room for error.
4. I understand more than I thought I would when I saw the title of the article, but fewer than makes me comfortable, which I guess is the point of the article. I think you decorate well.
5. I'm glad things like this are appearing (I think of Steve Harvey's book/movie as well) because they can foster empathy, which is what you need for healthy relationships, but I wish they were less cynical.
R2R:
2. I continue to insist that the Kardashians can be that dumb. Once you get the ball rolling, all you need to do is hire a competent team of handlers to keep the ball rolling. If you want to tell me that they're smart because they didn't hire an incompetent team, fine.
5. Actually, one of the issues with pi that makes its study more than just a third-grade exercise is that you cannot calculate it with basic long division. You can't come up with two (relatively) straightforward numbers to put into the problem and solve. (And I only bore you with this math stuff because it's Pi Day.)
B
Friday, March 14, 2014
Happy Pi Day
Despite the criticisms, this seems like an interesting book.
I'm not sure she came to any conclusions but I appreciated the criticism of the study in this article. But there's no control group. Maybe they should have asked the girls before they played with Barbie because maybe playing with dolls had no effect.
a strange counter piece to your piece about the police officers giving the little girl a ticket
#5 especially befuddles me.
it's like The Game for women
responses
1. mouth is salivating already. fairfax isn't too far.
2. i've always liked kesha though i think in an irrational way. i think it's interesting that she equates feminism with not bashing other women. i could buy into that type of feminism. she always seemed smarter and more talented than people gave her credit for. to be fair, that's true of probably every celebrity that the media calls dumb (does anyone really think the kardashians can be that dumb and have their empire? they don't even have likeable personalities! also jessica simpson with her billion dollar fashion brand).kesha almost seemed normal person smart.
4. sad is what it is. i mean i thought, how old is it? but i would make sure it was right before i said it out loud on video in congress.
5. why did he learn so many of the numbers? i mean, even if there was some pi emergency without internet or calculators, he could just do long division.
I'm not sure she came to any conclusions but I appreciated the criticism of the study in this article. But there's no control group. Maybe they should have asked the girls before they played with Barbie because maybe playing with dolls had no effect.
a strange counter piece to your piece about the police officers giving the little girl a ticket
#5 especially befuddles me.
it's like The Game for women
responses
1. mouth is salivating already. fairfax isn't too far.
2. i've always liked kesha though i think in an irrational way. i think it's interesting that she equates feminism with not bashing other women. i could buy into that type of feminism. she always seemed smarter and more talented than people gave her credit for. to be fair, that's true of probably every celebrity that the media calls dumb (does anyone really think the kardashians can be that dumb and have their empire? they don't even have likeable personalities! also jessica simpson with her billion dollar fashion brand).kesha almost seemed normal person smart.
4. sad is what it is. i mean i thought, how old is it? but i would make sure it was right before i said it out loud on video in congress.
5. why did he learn so many of the numbers? i mean, even if there was some pi emergency without internet or calculators, he could just do long division.
Thursday, March 13, 2014
The Famous and the Infamous
Peter Chang is getting closer and closer to you.
Here's an update on Ke$ha-- excuse me, it's Kesha now.
This is supposed to be cute, but I never realized it was cute to give someone a ticket. But everyone seems to think it's funny, and that paints the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office in a good light, so it's a win.
This is either a failure of math or a failure of constitutional legal history, but either way, it's a failure.
On the one hand, it's impressive, but on the other hand, 1) it's just listening to some guy name numbers and 2) it's supposed to be 40 minutes long.
Responses:
1. There is a decidedly paternalistic vibe in some of the ad campaigns and efforts directed to young people in favor of Obamacare (this ad takes that idea almost literally). But this tack (alongside the Jimmy Fallon appearance(s) and other entertainment ventures) seems to be just as bad. It reminds me of an episode of South Park where the kids have to go to an assembly at school where three young people, pretending to be cool and rapping and such, talk about the evils of smoking. At the end of the assembly, they say, "And if you don't smoke, you could grow up to be just like us!" The next scene is the kids frantically smoking as many cigarettes as possible.
2. I suspect proximity to his family and familiarity is one motivation (it's 2 hours from where he lives). I think your comment with respect to Asians has been broadly true of immigrants for a time in this country, but recent changes in thought with respect to identity politics have muted the impact of that way of thinking. I know that Asian parents are your primary source of knowledge and that you don't say that necessarily to the exclusion of other groups, immigrant or otherwise, but I think it bears mentioning because the ideas are more far-reaching than just the Asian community. In fact, the main reason that the Asian community appears to stand out in this regard is because the other immigrant groups that had this mindset 1) came from Europe so appear just to be white people now and 2) have so successfully assimilated that we don't even think of them as Irish-American, Italian-American, German-American, etc., anymore. It might take a few more generations for that to happen with Asian people since there is a superficial racial difference.
4. So far I haven't heard a credible argument against what Susan Patton actually said. She's right on a pure numbers basis. I could think of one or two criticisms (e.g. getting married at or before age 22 is risky), but even then, there is still some value in what she's saying that could benefit young people (e.g. targeting great schools with strong alumni networks in cities in which you are interested might be a good way to attain the benefits without marrying too young).
5. Don't bother - the only tips they offer are roasting vegetables, which we already know how to do, and grilling vegetables, which is essentially the same technique (i.e. dry-cooking vegetables at a very high temperature).
6. Do you like hipsters now?
R2R2R:
3. I ran out of chocolate...
B
Here's an update on Ke$ha-- excuse me, it's Kesha now.
This is supposed to be cute, but I never realized it was cute to give someone a ticket. But everyone seems to think it's funny, and that paints the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office in a good light, so it's a win.
This is either a failure of math or a failure of constitutional legal history, but either way, it's a failure.
On the one hand, it's impressive, but on the other hand, 1) it's just listening to some guy name numbers and 2) it's supposed to be 40 minutes long.
Responses:
1. There is a decidedly paternalistic vibe in some of the ad campaigns and efforts directed to young people in favor of Obamacare (this ad takes that idea almost literally). But this tack (alongside the Jimmy Fallon appearance(s) and other entertainment ventures) seems to be just as bad. It reminds me of an episode of South Park where the kids have to go to an assembly at school where three young people, pretending to be cool and rapping and such, talk about the evils of smoking. At the end of the assembly, they say, "And if you don't smoke, you could grow up to be just like us!" The next scene is the kids frantically smoking as many cigarettes as possible.
2. I suspect proximity to his family and familiarity is one motivation (it's 2 hours from where he lives). I think your comment with respect to Asians has been broadly true of immigrants for a time in this country, but recent changes in thought with respect to identity politics have muted the impact of that way of thinking. I know that Asian parents are your primary source of knowledge and that you don't say that necessarily to the exclusion of other groups, immigrant or otherwise, but I think it bears mentioning because the ideas are more far-reaching than just the Asian community. In fact, the main reason that the Asian community appears to stand out in this regard is because the other immigrant groups that had this mindset 1) came from Europe so appear just to be white people now and 2) have so successfully assimilated that we don't even think of them as Irish-American, Italian-American, German-American, etc., anymore. It might take a few more generations for that to happen with Asian people since there is a superficial racial difference.
4. So far I haven't heard a credible argument against what Susan Patton actually said. She's right on a pure numbers basis. I could think of one or two criticisms (e.g. getting married at or before age 22 is risky), but even then, there is still some value in what she's saying that could benefit young people (e.g. targeting great schools with strong alumni networks in cities in which you are interested might be a good way to attain the benefits without marrying too young).
5. Don't bother - the only tips they offer are roasting vegetables, which we already know how to do, and grilling vegetables, which is essentially the same technique (i.e. dry-cooking vegetables at a very high temperature).
6. Do you like hipsters now?
R2R2R:
3. I ran out of chocolate...
B
of oreos and douchebags
i've already tried talking to you about many of these articles and then i realized i hadn't posted them yet!
so here goes.
I don't see how this is an ad for the ACA
there is something wrong when a kid works this hard and is this good despite his tough background and his dream is to go to Gardner Webb University. It does seem that Asians tend to do better than other minorities because asian parents work their butts off for their kids so their kids just focus on education and can succeed. In this story, the mother - well I mean it's unlikely that she can do a good job supporting him by herself. That's difficult. But that puts a huge burden on the child to support himself and do well acadmically. So the only people who can get out of the situation are kids like this guy, who have tremendous will power, hard work and skill.
bright lights, big hearts, can't lose
I definitely thought of that article about how liberals argue today. a guy making assertions is no more right than another guy making assertions. i won't quote the stupid article but that new book from Susan Patton is coming out - the woman from Princeton who says to spend your time looking for a mate. I think the person thought (and maybe this is true but she didn't say so in the article) that patton argued that you have to look for a husband because he's going to be the one to support you financially. the author stated that after her failed marriage she had to support herself so it was good to get an education. i don't think patton said not to get an education. and frankly, the women she's addressing are at princeton so even if the girls learned nothing at all, they would still have that on their resume. so the article is just stating something completely irrelevant to Ms. Patton's points (and she has a number of pretty controversial points so why debate one she didn't even make? like, "consider getting plastic surgery before college to improve your social status" for instance).
going to watch this later
yay D.C.!
this probably makes it less appetizing but more interesting.
did you read the article in the economist about how climate change seems to be slowing and how environmentalists overexplained it twice over? apparently they can explain away anything but aren't good at predicting things.
responses!
1. that was very sad i think. i thought this was posted as a response to my article above until i realized i hadn't posted this yet. =P although it reminded me of all those articles that said it was judge-y to say that two-parent households do better or that encouraging marriage is like forcing a woman to stay with her abuser. i don't actually understand how my family could have survived with only 1 parent.
2. i knew she was controversial. or controversial in that some people didn't think she had the right face for high fashion, though i'm sure all models have detractors like that. it's just that most models are already established in high fashion when the detractors come and aren't famous, like kate upton is.
3. i didn't know le diplomate was so popular but i can understand it. it really does look like disneyland.
4. well i think we've talked about the problems with "awareness" but it's nice that she's using the facebook page for a good cause. as for the fit mom, i mean, she asked what their excuses were and everyone was giving her plenty of excuses. i mean i'd look at her and i'd say, i'm lazy, and i'd be ok with myself for that. i wouldn't feel the need to attack her.
i guess that's the heart of the problem - someone says or does something you don't like - why do people feel the need to attack them? when did this come about? we used to bully people because of what they looked like.
5. i have to ponder this.
6. bears should stay in bed!
10. is it that bear mask pictured? i didn't know bears could be so terrifying.
r2r
3. did you try the chocolate with sounds experiment?
also arthur chu lost in jeopardy.
so here goes.
I don't see how this is an ad for the ACA
there is something wrong when a kid works this hard and is this good despite his tough background and his dream is to go to Gardner Webb University. It does seem that Asians tend to do better than other minorities because asian parents work their butts off for their kids so their kids just focus on education and can succeed. In this story, the mother - well I mean it's unlikely that she can do a good job supporting him by herself. That's difficult. But that puts a huge burden on the child to support himself and do well acadmically. So the only people who can get out of the situation are kids like this guy, who have tremendous will power, hard work and skill.
bright lights, big hearts, can't lose
I definitely thought of that article about how liberals argue today. a guy making assertions is no more right than another guy making assertions. i won't quote the stupid article but that new book from Susan Patton is coming out - the woman from Princeton who says to spend your time looking for a mate. I think the person thought (and maybe this is true but she didn't say so in the article) that patton argued that you have to look for a husband because he's going to be the one to support you financially. the author stated that after her failed marriage she had to support herself so it was good to get an education. i don't think patton said not to get an education. and frankly, the women she's addressing are at princeton so even if the girls learned nothing at all, they would still have that on their resume. so the article is just stating something completely irrelevant to Ms. Patton's points (and she has a number of pretty controversial points so why debate one she didn't even make? like, "consider getting plastic surgery before college to improve your social status" for instance).
going to watch this later
yay D.C.!
this probably makes it less appetizing but more interesting.
did you read the article in the economist about how climate change seems to be slowing and how environmentalists overexplained it twice over? apparently they can explain away anything but aren't good at predicting things.
responses!
1. that was very sad i think. i thought this was posted as a response to my article above until i realized i hadn't posted this yet. =P although it reminded me of all those articles that said it was judge-y to say that two-parent households do better or that encouraging marriage is like forcing a woman to stay with her abuser. i don't actually understand how my family could have survived with only 1 parent.
2. i knew she was controversial. or controversial in that some people didn't think she had the right face for high fashion, though i'm sure all models have detractors like that. it's just that most models are already established in high fashion when the detractors come and aren't famous, like kate upton is.
3. i didn't know le diplomate was so popular but i can understand it. it really does look like disneyland.
4. well i think we've talked about the problems with "awareness" but it's nice that she's using the facebook page for a good cause. as for the fit mom, i mean, she asked what their excuses were and everyone was giving her plenty of excuses. i mean i'd look at her and i'd say, i'm lazy, and i'd be ok with myself for that. i wouldn't feel the need to attack her.
i guess that's the heart of the problem - someone says or does something you don't like - why do people feel the need to attack them? when did this come about? we used to bully people because of what they looked like.
5. i have to ponder this.
6. bears should stay in bed!
10. is it that bear mask pictured? i didn't know bears could be so terrifying.
r2r
3. did you try the chocolate with sounds experiment?
also arthur chu lost in jeopardy.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Solutions and "Solutions"
I thought this was an interesting look at fatherhood.
Did you realize that Kate Upton was a controversial figure? I'm posting this mostly because I figured you had some insight both as a woman and as someone who follows fashion. The male take: she's pretty and seems chill. That's pretty much it.
Le Diplomate is apparently the place to be in DC.
This is how you deal with cyberbullying.
Here's an interesting wrinkle on the link between divorce and cohabitation.
Poor baby bear! This happens to me when I wake up early from naps too...
I keep seeing Jitlada in the media.
Yes, Olive Garden, because your logo was the problem.
Here is the real solution to my morning wake-up woes.
As nice as bear hugs are, it doesn't appear that the point is effectively being made here...
Responses:
1. Finally!
3. I'm trying this tonight. Also, this possibly explains why you order tomato juice on airplanes!
4a. This sorta reminds me of media arguments for why we should be able to access athletes all the time. The main difference, though, is that, with the exception of the specific contract clauses or league rules that say which media appearances an athlete is required to make (this was a mini-scandal during the run-up to the Super Bowl, for example), the better argument is that athletes are paid to put their bodies on the line in athletic competition, not to reveal their private lives to anyone who is interested. I suspect that the Bachelor/Bachelorette contract has language (however apparently unenforceable) about appearances and participation in interviews and such, and even if it doesn't, it seems obvious to me that signing up for a primetime reality TV show where you find your "true love" and then talk about it on the postgame show or whatever is pretty clearly the idea here, and if he has a problem with that, then I don't understand how he didn't have a problem with appearing on the show in the first place.
4b. That said, I thought your comments were spot on. It baffles me that the show ends with a ring rather than the way this one did, especially in light of all the failed relationships from the show. But the thing I'm most glad about is that I'm saying all of this from first principles or comments from late night shows. I'd rather claw my own eyes out and shove them into my ears than watch this show. It sounds awful on so many levels: quality of people involved on the show, destruction to the institution of marriage, creation of pages and pages of inane internet commentary (I tried to look up the comment to which you referred and almost started the eye-clawing process before closing the webpage), the fact that this nonsense is the biggest comment on either of our postings...
R2R:
3-4. I have a problem with the resignation culture. I think it's analogous to the shunning/silencing culture that many liberals have adopted. Actually, I think it comes from the same place. I rarely think someone should resign when they do. I actually make it a point never to weigh in on whether someone should resign or retire (in the case of athletes) because so many of the people who call for this are doing so for their own ends, not because the resignation will improve anything. (In the case of sports, it's often because the people (usually the media) want to report a storybook ending, not realizing that quitting your life's passion at age 40 or younger is an incredibly heart-wrenching decision that, for most players, is made for them by injury or just being fired by the team.)
11. It seems sinister to me. To bring back the Jeopardy example, if the producers decided to change the rules to forbid what Chu is doing, I'd understand because it's a TV show first and foremost. But if the whining came from competitors, I'd suspect sour grapes. In the case of Obamacare, it's funny that liberals often have this problem of wanting something (universal healthcare, higher taxes, amnesty) but having no democratic support for it, but proceeding anyway because they are "enlightened" and know best. My problem with it, however brilliant (but more likely accidental), is that it's anti-democratic.
That last bit in the article was funny. Mostly funny in that being offended now appears to be a sport to find the most innocuous things and then claim the most offense from them somehow. Nobody's winning. But as for the name of our blog, I think you know what I like. :)
B
Did you realize that Kate Upton was a controversial figure? I'm posting this mostly because I figured you had some insight both as a woman and as someone who follows fashion. The male take: she's pretty and seems chill. That's pretty much it.
Le Diplomate is apparently the place to be in DC.
This is how you deal with cyberbullying.
Here's an interesting wrinkle on the link between divorce and cohabitation.
Poor baby bear! This happens to me when I wake up early from naps too...
I keep seeing Jitlada in the media.
Yes, Olive Garden, because your logo was the problem.
Here is the real solution to my morning wake-up woes.
As nice as bear hugs are, it doesn't appear that the point is effectively being made here...
Responses:
1. Finally!
3. I'm trying this tonight. Also, this possibly explains why you order tomato juice on airplanes!
4a. This sorta reminds me of media arguments for why we should be able to access athletes all the time. The main difference, though, is that, with the exception of the specific contract clauses or league rules that say which media appearances an athlete is required to make (this was a mini-scandal during the run-up to the Super Bowl, for example), the better argument is that athletes are paid to put their bodies on the line in athletic competition, not to reveal their private lives to anyone who is interested. I suspect that the Bachelor/Bachelorette contract has language (however apparently unenforceable) about appearances and participation in interviews and such, and even if it doesn't, it seems obvious to me that signing up for a primetime reality TV show where you find your "true love" and then talk about it on the postgame show or whatever is pretty clearly the idea here, and if he has a problem with that, then I don't understand how he didn't have a problem with appearing on the show in the first place.
4b. That said, I thought your comments were spot on. It baffles me that the show ends with a ring rather than the way this one did, especially in light of all the failed relationships from the show. But the thing I'm most glad about is that I'm saying all of this from first principles or comments from late night shows. I'd rather claw my own eyes out and shove them into my ears than watch this show. It sounds awful on so many levels: quality of people involved on the show, destruction to the institution of marriage, creation of pages and pages of inane internet commentary (I tried to look up the comment to which you referred and almost started the eye-clawing process before closing the webpage), the fact that this nonsense is the biggest comment on either of our postings...
R2R:
3-4. I have a problem with the resignation culture. I think it's analogous to the shunning/silencing culture that many liberals have adopted. Actually, I think it comes from the same place. I rarely think someone should resign when they do. I actually make it a point never to weigh in on whether someone should resign or retire (in the case of athletes) because so many of the people who call for this are doing so for their own ends, not because the resignation will improve anything. (In the case of sports, it's often because the people (usually the media) want to report a storybook ending, not realizing that quitting your life's passion at age 40 or younger is an incredibly heart-wrenching decision that, for most players, is made for them by injury or just being fired by the team.)
11. It seems sinister to me. To bring back the Jeopardy example, if the producers decided to change the rules to forbid what Chu is doing, I'd understand because it's a TV show first and foremost. But if the whining came from competitors, I'd suspect sour grapes. In the case of Obamacare, it's funny that liberals often have this problem of wanting something (universal healthcare, higher taxes, amnesty) but having no democratic support for it, but proceeding anyway because they are "enlightened" and know best. My problem with it, however brilliant (but more likely accidental), is that it's anti-democratic.
That last bit in the article was funny. Mostly funny in that being offended now appears to be a sport to find the most innocuous things and then claim the most offense from them somehow. Nobody's winning. But as for the name of our blog, I think you know what I like. :)
B
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
take a picture - or not
this is exactly the study you've been looking for
people are getting stupider
mood music for your comfort food?
so peng and swan and nancy all watch the Bachelor which is so strange to me. even my sister with her loathsome friends was confused - people watch the Bachelor? Who are these people? After reading this (which reminded me of playing to the spirit of Jeopardy article that you posted) it is so strange that people get mad that a guy who has been serially dating for a few weeks is supposed to propose marriage at the end of this? that's so insulting to marriage! and also just the weirdest thing to expect of reality show contestants. i mean, even people who win american idol or project runway can decline the prize at the end. (i read this article because of that yahoo article that said juan pablo was hated because of the comment he gave to the girl but i have no idea what the comment was! and the girl he rejected was like 'i'm glad my kids won't have a father like you!' to point out how bad of a guy he was (though i'm not sure that really proves anything except that this woman was made for reality tv).
responses:
2. that was such a well written response to people who don't address the arguments. i would send it to the feminists but that would seem too mean.
3-4. it does seem to me that people will be baiting others to say words that sound like the n-word. kinda like that alec baldwin story. which was sad. i found myself also thinking aw man alec baldwin, what a fall from grace, even though i had never read any of the articles. he mentioned bashir resigning from msnbc and there are so many resignations that i forgot which one he is. he just called palin an idiot, which is not nice but hardly surprising. maybe bashir shouldn't call himself a journalist but i'm not sure he needs to resign because of it. what i've learned with resignations though is that it seems like those people resigning are bad but much worse people refuse to resign.
6. this is my opinion as well. i haven't looked at global warming at all and i also don't think it's good to spew out carbon emissions but to the degree that actual science is involved, i would question anything that is "indisputable." or even if it wasn't "science."
7. i think it's interesting to think about archenemies and nemeses (and to think of this article written in 2004 when we thought w's archenemy is clinton. i think they're friends now. or at least acquaintances, which is still better than archenemy). i feel that val is my nemesis because i do hang out with her on occasion when necessary and i don't want to give her such a vaunted position as archenemy in my life. i will go ahunting for my archenemy.
11. i give the coaches a lot of credit for figuring out a ploy like that to advance their game. i think conservatives always think that of liberals -like when they thought obamacare was designed so badly so that it would fail and we'd get single payer - but i think we gave them way too much credit. here, it really does seem that everyone knew and knows what's going on.
from that article you posted on censoring charles krauthammer: is "youdlikethis" too forward for you?
"Heavy-handed New York Times?
people are getting stupider
mood music for your comfort food?
so peng and swan and nancy all watch the Bachelor which is so strange to me. even my sister with her loathsome friends was confused - people watch the Bachelor? Who are these people? After reading this (which reminded me of playing to the spirit of Jeopardy article that you posted) it is so strange that people get mad that a guy who has been serially dating for a few weeks is supposed to propose marriage at the end of this? that's so insulting to marriage! and also just the weirdest thing to expect of reality show contestants. i mean, even people who win american idol or project runway can decline the prize at the end. (i read this article because of that yahoo article that said juan pablo was hated because of the comment he gave to the girl but i have no idea what the comment was! and the girl he rejected was like 'i'm glad my kids won't have a father like you!' to point out how bad of a guy he was (though i'm not sure that really proves anything except that this woman was made for reality tv).
responses:
2. that was such a well written response to people who don't address the arguments. i would send it to the feminists but that would seem too mean.
3-4. it does seem to me that people will be baiting others to say words that sound like the n-word. kinda like that alec baldwin story. which was sad. i found myself also thinking aw man alec baldwin, what a fall from grace, even though i had never read any of the articles. he mentioned bashir resigning from msnbc and there are so many resignations that i forgot which one he is. he just called palin an idiot, which is not nice but hardly surprising. maybe bashir shouldn't call himself a journalist but i'm not sure he needs to resign because of it. what i've learned with resignations though is that it seems like those people resigning are bad but much worse people refuse to resign.
6. this is my opinion as well. i haven't looked at global warming at all and i also don't think it's good to spew out carbon emissions but to the degree that actual science is involved, i would question anything that is "indisputable." or even if it wasn't "science."
7. i think it's interesting to think about archenemies and nemeses (and to think of this article written in 2004 when we thought w's archenemy is clinton. i think they're friends now. or at least acquaintances, which is still better than archenemy). i feel that val is my nemesis because i do hang out with her on occasion when necessary and i don't want to give her such a vaunted position as archenemy in my life. i will go ahunting for my archenemy.
11. i give the coaches a lot of credit for figuring out a ploy like that to advance their game. i think conservatives always think that of liberals -like when they thought obamacare was designed so badly so that it would fail and we'd get single payer - but i think we gave them way too much credit. here, it really does seem that everyone knew and knows what's going on.
from that article you posted on censoring charles krauthammer: is "youdlikethis" too forward for you?
"Heavy-handed New York Times?
It often pops up when you read the New York Times website: “Recommended for You.”
I don’t really need the Times to steer me to certain pieces, but some people find this absurd. As Public Editor Margaret Sullivan writes:
“One, Patti Reid, wrote, ‘I find this offensive and ridiculous, since I feel competent to choose articles to read on my own.’ Others express privacy concerns – they don’t want their preferences tracked; and others protest the commercial applications that allow advertisers to present ads tailored to readers’ apparent preferences. A New York reader, D.B. Smith, wrote: ‘I subscribe to the NYT — I PAY money every week for access.’ He said he was annoyed that The Times tries to ‘monetize my patronage.’”
As for Sullivan, “I agree with readers that this is lamentable.”
Of course, lots of websites do this. Maybe a little humility is in order, as in “You Might Also Like”…?
Saturday, March 1, 2014
Sports!
This story has gone from somewhat intriguing and revealing to obnoxious pretty fast. Richard Petty, retired NASCAR great, said Danica Patrick could only win a race if nobody else showed up, and noted that most of the attention she gets is because she's a woman.
It reminds me of when I told someone I didn't like the WNBA because they couldn't dunk, and the response was, "Neither can you." I was confused - when did I ever say I wanted to watch myself play basketball on TV? The response was completely beside the point. If I can't beat a WNBA professional basketball in a one-on-one game - and I absolutely cannot - does that mean that I have to watch the WNBA now? Similarly, if 76-year-old Richard Petty does race Danica and he loses, does that mean that Danica Patrick is a better driver now than Richard Petty ever was? There's precedent for these sorts of Battle of the Sexes moments, but I really don't think there's anything to learn from them.
It seems like the point is humiliating Richard Petty rather than addressing his argument. This seems to be a common theme among the liberal-minded.
This rule is being considered by the NFL. I actually think it's a bad idea.
I found myself nodding in agreement to like 85% of this.
I want wildly fast internet... I'm told Austin is getting it soon, which just isn't fair.
I've struggled to describe my position on climate change. On the one hand, I think that global warming could very well be real, and there could very well be important negative consequences if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated. That said, I reject many of the proffered solutions and wonder whether we really understand the issue and the science as well as we claim. Moreover, I object to the idea of "settled science," which seems to me to be an oxymoron. Happily, Charles Krauthammer describes my position for me. (Of course, as if on schedule, assorted climate change proponents petitioned to keep this article from being published.)
Who is your nemesis? What about archenemy? I need to think about this...
The pushback against Sheryl Sandberg continues. I tend to think there is some value to this position, but I protest the implied notion that these two positions cannot co-exist.
Arthur Chu's winning streak continues, and so does the bizarre analysis of why people can't stand it. This idea is the first one I found compelling, though mostly becuase the author kinda acknowledges that it's not a compelling argument. But it reminds me of a story a friend told me about her mom. She was playing squash with someone, and the court they used had a dead corner, where if you hit it there, the ball would just die (and her mom would win the point). Her mom was new to the game, so she was more than happy to exploit this to win, to the frustration of her opponent. The friend told me this story with apparent glee, but I was at best neutral, and more likely negative on the story. "It's not within the spirit of the game," I protested, even though no rules were broken.
If there's an argument for anything at all, it's for amending the rules to reflect more accurately the "spirit" of the game. But when such proposals occasionally come up in other contexts, the ensuing blowback occasionally reveals the idiocy of the suggested change.
Responses to "Spa-ing":
1. Anyone with the discipline to go through all those questions already has his life together.
2. To kids everywhere: the bar has been raised.
4. I've heard good things. FX is pretty solid.
6. Isn't the origin story really just the last two sentences of the penultimate paragraph?
7. That sounds awesome.
Responses to "Cooking...":
2. There's a risk of overplaying their hand. That said, people are starting to attack individuals who are noting the struggles they've had with finding coverage under Obamacare. That makes me a bit uneasy.
3. This might need to happen for me soon...
6. I have a bit more sympathy for the Red Cross because it's better to be safe than sorry. That said, the AIDS epidemic has receded, and it may be time to reconsider the policy. But that said, note the overheated rhetoric. Do they really think that the policy was the result of homophobia on the part of the FDA?
7. Co-sign.
8. I have a problem with this response, even though I also have a problem with guys complaining about getting friend-ed. Yes, it's a self-centered response, but there is actual disappointment there, and treating a guy who was rejected by a girl with ridicule and scorn is a pretty immature response in its own right. Girls can hold their ground with respect to their lack of reciprocal romantic feelings for a guy and also recognize that disappointment is real. This is such a hostile response.
9. We should all be a lot nicer to bunnies, apparently.
B
It reminds me of when I told someone I didn't like the WNBA because they couldn't dunk, and the response was, "Neither can you." I was confused - when did I ever say I wanted to watch myself play basketball on TV? The response was completely beside the point. If I can't beat a WNBA professional basketball in a one-on-one game - and I absolutely cannot - does that mean that I have to watch the WNBA now? Similarly, if 76-year-old Richard Petty does race Danica and he loses, does that mean that Danica Patrick is a better driver now than Richard Petty ever was? There's precedent for these sorts of Battle of the Sexes moments, but I really don't think there's anything to learn from them.
It seems like the point is humiliating Richard Petty rather than addressing his argument. This seems to be a common theme among the liberal-minded.
This rule is being considered by the NFL. I actually think it's a bad idea.
I found myself nodding in agreement to like 85% of this.
I want wildly fast internet... I'm told Austin is getting it soon, which just isn't fair.
I've struggled to describe my position on climate change. On the one hand, I think that global warming could very well be real, and there could very well be important negative consequences if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated. That said, I reject many of the proffered solutions and wonder whether we really understand the issue and the science as well as we claim. Moreover, I object to the idea of "settled science," which seems to me to be an oxymoron. Happily, Charles Krauthammer describes my position for me. (Of course, as if on schedule, assorted climate change proponents petitioned to keep this article from being published.)
Who is your nemesis? What about archenemy? I need to think about this...
The pushback against Sheryl Sandberg continues. I tend to think there is some value to this position, but I protest the implied notion that these two positions cannot co-exist.
Arthur Chu's winning streak continues, and so does the bizarre analysis of why people can't stand it. This idea is the first one I found compelling, though mostly becuase the author kinda acknowledges that it's not a compelling argument. But it reminds me of a story a friend told me about her mom. She was playing squash with someone, and the court they used had a dead corner, where if you hit it there, the ball would just die (and her mom would win the point). Her mom was new to the game, so she was more than happy to exploit this to win, to the frustration of her opponent. The friend told me this story with apparent glee, but I was at best neutral, and more likely negative on the story. "It's not within the spirit of the game," I protested, even though no rules were broken.
If there's an argument for anything at all, it's for amending the rules to reflect more accurately the "spirit" of the game. But when such proposals occasionally come up in other contexts, the ensuing blowback occasionally reveals the idiocy of the suggested change.
Responses to "Spa-ing":
1. Anyone with the discipline to go through all those questions already has his life together.
2. To kids everywhere: the bar has been raised.
4. I've heard good things. FX is pretty solid.
6. Isn't the origin story really just the last two sentences of the penultimate paragraph?
7. That sounds awesome.
Responses to "Cooking...":
2. There's a risk of overplaying their hand. That said, people are starting to attack individuals who are noting the struggles they've had with finding coverage under Obamacare. That makes me a bit uneasy.
3. This might need to happen for me soon...
6. I have a bit more sympathy for the Red Cross because it's better to be safe than sorry. That said, the AIDS epidemic has receded, and it may be time to reconsider the policy. But that said, note the overheated rhetoric. Do they really think that the policy was the result of homophobia on the part of the FDA?
7. Co-sign.
8. I have a problem with this response, even though I also have a problem with guys complaining about getting friend-ed. Yes, it's a self-centered response, but there is actual disappointment there, and treating a guy who was rejected by a girl with ridicule and scorn is a pretty immature response in its own right. Girls can hold their ground with respect to their lack of reciprocal romantic feelings for a guy and also recognize that disappointment is real. This is such a hostile response.
9. We should all be a lot nicer to bunnies, apparently.
B
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)