imeanreallytrulycomeon
I Mean, Come On!
imeanreallytrulycomeon

To be a racist you’d have to be irrationally prejudiced against a specific race. Not a set of beliefs. Being prejudiced against belief systems is, in fact, essential to brain function. I’m very prejudiced against Nazi thought, and I suspect that you are as well. I find Scientology very distasteful. If you were to

As a professional space writer, you may want to consider that the articles that you are paid to write and from which positive ad revenue determines the company’s continued existence may not be the best place to post jokes. Just a heads up that you can, in your own time, happily create burner accounts and post jokes

I tend to think of fascists in the Stalin / Mao / Kim vein as being mad with power. Some people react badly to power. They’re not designed for it, at some level. Actually I know exactly what level: there is nothing in their minds that supersedes their immediate self interest. With amplified power comes amplified fear,

Yes, you’re right. Avatar was huge. A sequel within five years wouldn’t have needed a dollar in advertising. I worry about Cameron when he talks about picking up where he left off. No, James. That ship has sailed. Now you need to start again. Introduce them to these characters. Don’t act as if everyone is going to

Here is the amazing thing about that. Nobody has ever offered a public apology for the very public slander of an entire recreation, and everyone who participated in it. This was a message proclaimed from church pulpits, from credulous media organizations, from trustworthy public figures.

The original Mao game is based on Mao Zedong’s habit of shifting favoritism from group to group, often with old favorites becoming suspected enemies. This was true of his inner circle as well as party policy toward the wider culture. At times certain skills and personality traits were courted, at others persecuted.

Exactly. This stuff is complicated. The attitude that “all surveillance is bad” is just as bad as “who cares”. These policies need to be discussed and negotiated at a national level. We need to decide what the rules are. What rights do law-abiding citizens have to their data, their privacy? Where do those rights

I understand what you’re saying. It’s not necessarily fair for people who live healthy lives to be required to subsidize the healthcare of those who take self-indulgent risks. But at the same time, I don’t think that the Constitution’s “promote the general welfare” description leaves itself open to an interpretation

If crotchety old David Warner was to appear in the background of a crowd scene in Game of Thrones then they’d have to create a new season just to appease the crowd of angry fans outside their offices demanding a reveal that Elderly Noble #7 was the real villain all along.

The numbers of veteran British character actors are a statistical anomaly, approcaching infinity as demand requires despite the very reasonable limitations of population, training, and age.

It’s not likely that you’ll get an honest answer to that question. The Assange Answer is ad hominem at best. At worst it’s a refusal to analyze or assess the documents on their own merit because of pure sanctimony, ignorance identical to the people who refuse to consider climate data purely because scientists en masse

I don’t love it. They’re in very real distress, even pain, which it’s wise to remember. That is why religious ideologies are dangerous. They train the mind to perceive your everyday existence as a threat, as an attack on them. That’s why we have terms like “militant atheism”. The act of enthusiastically or vigorously

In other words, climate change is gradually changing from an overwhelmingly strong theory into something more similar to a mathematical proof. There is a scarcity of counter-evidence that is very unusual in complex systems. Denial at this point can no longer be written off as ignorance or paranoia. It’s intentional

This is a very minor evolutionary pressure compared to, say, the increased use of contraceptives by people with high IQ. We live in an extraordinarily safe society even by human standards, even the worst of which are extraordinarily forgiving by the standards of the animal kingdom. Stupidity does not generally kill,

That is true, and when I said “pre-approved” that was what I was trying to convey. Whenever this gets mentioned there’s a loud chorus that free speech isn’t protected on private sites, which is true, but completely misses the point. We wouldn’t apply that logic anywhere else. Well, strictly speaking my good man, we’re

If the commenters are held to a higher standard than the journalists then we may be in trouble. On the other hand, credit to the Gawker-family of sites for actually allowing (pre-approved) comments. The thought of dialogue seems to terrify a great, great many media outlets.

On what basis, then, is someone entitled to describe themselves as a given race?

I agree with you that the vast majority of scientists lean left on the political spectrum. I’m a good example. But when you infer that this means that a particular political ideology is “smarter” and “better”, you’re assuming far too much.

I smiled at “Falling upward”. I believe that he understands nothing about the science of technology. That’s not his skill. He knows a great deal about how the ignorant think that an expert should sound. In that sense he’s the perfect fit for the modern era, and bound to make a great deal of money.

It’s part of a wider campaign on human relationships where we’re encouraged to think that nobody can possible like anyone without sexual desire. The end result is estrangement from each other, which weakens us, which is probably the point.