We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, May 20. 2023
Saturday morning links
Down With Pickleball! Long Live Tennis. Plus: The Great Light Beer War of 2023 in today’s culture war double feature.
Why You Should Stop Trying to Be Happy at Work. If you set happiness as your primary goal, you can end up feeling the opposite.
Once again, ideology distorts science: the editor-in-chief of Scientific American flubs big time, wrongly asserting that sparrows have four sexes.
Why Big Tech pretends AI is dangerous. Saying you own a doomsday device only proves your power to investors.
Online Mob Comes for Pregnant Nurse After Video of Confrontation Over Citi Bike Goes Viral. “The provider is currently out on leave and will remain on leave pending a review”
15 yrs, $BILLIONS, not a mile of track & running out of money - what am I?
Commentary: Can DeSantis Make a Second First Impression?
University of Colorado: Assume Everyone Is Trans – Greet New Acquaintances as “They, Them, Theirs”
EU countries tiring of Green stuff
Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 07:51 | Comments (41) | Trackbacks (0)
Trackback specific URI for this entry
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Maybe I'll assume everyone is sensible, and greet them with a cheerful, "Say, that woke stuff is garbage, amiright?"
The Light Beer war ain't over yet. Bud is coming out with a campaign for Memorial Day that features new bottles and discount vouchers. The bottles say 'US' and 'America' on the label, and there's a fancy new aluminum bottle in camouflage. Yes that's right, with 'America' on a camo bottle, what redneck won't be driving his truck to the WalMart to load up?
Personally I think it's never a good idea to assume your clientele are imbeciles, dumber than Clydesdales, and start your planning from there - but that's just me.
Aggie: Personally I think it's never a good idea to assume your clientele are imbeciles, dumber than Clydesdales, and start your planning from there - but that's just me.
It's rather hard to tell, considering the over-reaction to a product endorsement by someone most had never even heard of. Cancel culture is alive and well.
The purpose of this is to normalize pedophilia. Those who support it are pro pedophile. Zack is pro pedophile. They want your kids.
OneGuy: The purpose of this is to normalize pedophilia.
Trans ≠ Pedophilia
OneGuy: Multiple Trans Activists Arrested for Sex Crimes Involving Children
Multiple cis-gender people arrested for sex crimes involving children.
The subject is not cancel-culture, and it it were, the Right is hardly at the forefront of those tactics. Nice try at changing the subject though (not really).
The subject is regarding fallout from someone who is arguably mentally-ill by many definitions, and clearly an attention hog. But behind Mulvaney is an organized effort that keeps thrusting him to the forefront of public attention, not true? Are we to believe that he is putting together all of these productions, all by himself? It's not just an agent scoring high-level gigs for him. It's a sustained effort that requires reputational capital to keep it going. Who is it, I wonder? What is the full picture - since you brought it up?
As for Inbev AB, well.... First they did something totally stupid, considering their clientele, then it got released and publicized (not by them if I have understood correctly), and then they started making compounded stupid moves. It is an indication of how out-of-touch they are with their main source of revenue, and also how little effort they are willing to make to understand their base. Year-on-year sales across their brands are down, badly. Bud Light, by about 25%. Month after month. The stupid moves are what I'm talking about, moves that a corporation of their size should recognize are ill-informed, and to be avoided.
What are you talking about?
Aggie: The subject is not cancel-culture
Aggie: The subject is regarding fallout from someone who is arguably mentally-ill by many definitions, and clearly an attention hog.
Well, duh. That's what it means to be a TikTok influencer. Next thing you know you'll be complaining about Willy Shakespeare prancing about on stage for attention.
Aggie: But behind Mulvaney is an organized effort that keeps thrusting him to the forefront of public attention, not true?
In this case, it was a one-time endorsement to tap into Dylan Mulvany's existing following. Again, you probably never would have heard about it without the engagement of the outrage machine.
Aggie: Are we to believe that he is putting together all of these productions, all by himself?
Oh, those young kids and their TikyToks. What will they come up with next?!
Aggie: What are you talking about?
Glad you asked. It's about how silly is this entire moment of outrage. Cancel away!
You're being purposely obtuse, and all of your answers are simply new mis-directions and straw men. In my reply I was talking about You, to You, and you respond with dictionary definitions, and then by vectoring all over the place to present normal people as an absurd source of new outrage, and then pretending that I'm engaging in leftist cancellation myself. You're a legend - in your own mind. By all means, please get in the last word for everyone else.
Aggie: you respond with dictionary definitions
It's kinda hard to communicate when words don't have agreed meanings. Dictionaries are far from perfect but give a point of departure for discussion.
Aggie: then pretending that I'm engaging in leftist cancellation myself.
The topic was rightist cancellation and the "Light Beer war."
No. Your reading comprehension is in serious need of improvement.
The topic was corporate stupidity, and the self-inflicted damage that Inbev AB is causing itself by continuing with strategies that reflect a poor understanding of their client base - perhaps even a disconnect that borders on contempt. It's remarkable that it has gone on as long as it has, and in my opinion, remarkable that AB imagines it will repair the damage with a campaign that panders to patriotism by printing 'America' on a beer bottle, and adding camouflage.
I think their clientele is going to be insulted more by such a cheap and obvious ploy, when a simple apology would suffice. I could be wrong, but a 25% drop in brand sales with similar drops across the corporate line indicate that people by the thousands are reacting to an insult, or something they find offensive. That is not cancel culture, by the way, nice try - it is a boycott. Miller at least had the good sense to pull their stupidly-run ad before its reaction got much traction. Maybe Ford with their rainbow truck is up next.
#22.214.171.124.1 Aggie on 2023-05-20 13:26 (Reply)
Real Men of Genius
#126.96.36.199.1.1 Zachinoff on 2023-05-20 14:06 (Reply)
Aggie: The topic was corporate stupidity
Well, You introduced the topic concerning the assumption by the producers that their "clientele are imbeciles, dumber than Clydesdales". In fact, most of the clientele would never have heard of Dylan Mulvaney without the right-wing noise machine and the "Rage of the Week." Of course, it was a bad idea on the part of the producers to underestimate the power of cancel culture.
Merriam-Webster: cancel : to withdraw one's support for (someone, such as a celebrity, or something, such as a company)
Aggie: I think their clientele is going to be insulted more by such a cheap and obvious ploy, when a simple apology would suffice.
Apologize for what?
#188.8.131.52.2 Zachriel on 2023-05-20 14:03 (Reply)
Too Much Success Can Be Unseemly!
#184.108.40.206.2.1 Aggie on 2023-05-20 14:36 (Reply)
#220.127.116.11.2.2 Zachinoff on 2023-05-20 14:55 (Reply)
Were people calling for Mulvaney to be tossed off TikTok or any of his social media platforms? Nope, they just said we’re done with Bud Light. But I can understand why’d you conflate the two, the gotcha game is so much fun.
Hoss: Were people calling for Mulvaney to be tossed off TikTok or any of his social media platforms? Nope, they just said we’re done with Bud Light.
Cancel culture : the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure
Cancel : to publicly withdraw one's support for (someone, such as a celebrity, or something, such as a company)
What you are saying is that the political right is going after Bud Light and Anheuser-Busch, and that Mulvaney is just collateral damage (having been subjected to widespread vilification). That's cancel culture.
Given I think that Bud Light - and all American light beers - are "gnat's piss" (and I'm being complementary), I won't be drinking any of them in the near future.
"...Bud Light - and all American light beers - are "gnat's piss""
Of course, that begs the question: How would you know?
" not a mile of track & running out of money"
The purpose of this project was to give labor unions and labor union embers huge amounts of money, much of which would be laundered back to Democrat politicians. That's it! Not to build a rail line to no where but simply to legally transfer billion$ to Democrats and friends of Democrats and buy votes. For the many schlubs in California who are POC or union members your taxes are going up and the pain will get worse.
8 Disturbing Similarities between the Democrat and Nazi Parties
1. Democrats and the Nazis were/are obsessed with gun confiscation.
2. Democrats and Nazis are collectivists.
3. The overarching philosophy of both Democrats and Nazis is centralized control.
4. The centralized collectivist control philosophy of the Democrat and Nazi parties is epitomized in the phrase "the Common Good" (Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz in the original German).
5. Far-left fascists of the Democrat and Nazi parties see force as means to their political power.
6. Democrats and Nazis are proponents of single-party systems.
7. Democrats and Nazis are fascistic.
8. Democrats are striving for a totalitarian state structure and a single party like the Nazis.
He forgot to mention the Dems/Nazis shared love of censorship.
He also didn't mention the Dems/Nazis penchant for using dehumanizing rhetoric against their political enemies.
feeblemind: 7. Democrats and Nazis are fascistic.
That's just nonsense. Fascism is an ultra-nationalist and ultra-hierarchical political ideology. Democrats are neither.
The rest of your points are similarly lacking in validity. They apparently confirm your prejudices, though, even if you have to redefine the words to suit.
I actually agree with you here.
But the left of the political spectrum also bears plenty of blame for its facile habit of labelling political opponents and organizations it does not like as fascists.
JJM: But the left of the political spectrum also bears plenty of blame for its facile habit of labelling political opponents and organizations it does not like as fascists.
That's the 'other' definition of fascism: people you don't like.
Is it not funny how everyone rags on Nazis, but none dare mention Communists?
Mark Matis: Is it not funny how everyone rags on Nazis, but none dare mention Communists?
Let's rectify that for you right now. When utopianism is combined with extremism, the inevitable result will be dire. Communism has brought untold misery to the world.
"Is it not funny how everyone rags on Nazis, but none dare mention Communists?"
Part of that is because Nazism was conclusively discredited as a result of the comprehensive destruction of the Third Reich in WWII.
Communism, notwithstanding the fall of the Soviet Bloc, has not yet been so thoroughly discredited with the ideologically gullible.
At FM, they were called the National Socialist German Workers Party, a hybrid with nationalism that could only work in a monoethnic society.
A classic quote is that a communist knows what he is doing while a socialist is a useful idiot in a hurry to get to the workers utopia.
Commierado, Boulder? Like the locals say twenty five square miles surrounded by reality.
Of course the devil's Long March minions would infiltrate one of the most beautiful places on earth.
With AI it only matters what is put in and it will have no use for humans that are easily outsmarted if some DEI true believers are the only programmers.
High speed rail in the former USA? Honk, honk!
Hat tip to Hot Air who has been on fire lately fighting the good fight.
AI is dangerous but it doesn't have to be. The problem is that like the FISA courts it is incredibly easy to misuse and to hide that misuse. IF AI tells you that something is fact then it is fact regardless of what your lying eyes tell you. AI will present propaganda in an appealing way and most people will simply accept it; kinda like saying all scientists agree and the science is settled. AI won't have a track or audit trail it will simply present a conclusion/rule/law/mandate with punishments if you fail to follow it. AI will be controlled by someone and you can imagine who eventually will control it. It is the one ring to rule them all.
AI will control life changing decisions. Your ability to get life saving care may depend on an arbitrary decision by AI that might hinge on your religion or your opinion of abortion or eating meat and you will never know what went into such a decision. It is likely that AI will be used to require tax monies be given to the dependent classes so they can have cell phones but denied to octogenarians o they can get hospital care. In fact I can assure you that will happen under AI.
The list of threats to your rights and well being is endless under AI. My final advice as AI is ushered in is simply this: Always do the opposite of what AI tells you. I don't think I even need to explain that.
"Glad you asked. It's about how silly is this entire moment of outrage. Cancel away"
Zach channeling his inner Archibald Artichoke:
"Stop being so silly!"
[url] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNIR5bVJbso [/url]
"Assume Everyone Is Trans 'Greet New Acquaintances as 'They, Them, Theirs'"
It ain't gonna happen.
And it's linguistically counter-intuitive.
JJM: It ain't gonna happen. And it's linguistically counter-intuitive.
Language evolves, often in unexpected fashions. You used to be only plural, with thou being the singular. Today, you is used as both the plural and singular, but the root is evident with the verb agreement "you are" rather than "you is" for the singular. But the language continues to drift, so you'll often see y'all, you-uns, youse, and other forms for the plural.
I'm afraid you're attempting to preach to one who has a comprehensive view of linguistics and language questions.
Personal pronouns are a relatively closed class of words. They don't change meaning very quickly. Also, if you have to think about a pronoun to use it in speech, that's linguistically counter-intuitive.
And they in reference to a singular antecedent (so-called singular they) has taken 600 years to get where it is now. So far, it has failed to cross from the general and indeterminate (e.g., replacing any doctor) to specific (e.g., my doctor).
In my experience, all the ideological noise over personal pronouns is taking place among the usual culprits in the usual circles. But outside in the real world, in everyday usage, it ain't happening.
You do realize you're arguing with the Quibble-DickZ ChatGPT, right?
JJM: Personal pronouns are a relatively closed class of words. They don't change meaning very quickly.
Those crazy kids! Things change faster now.
JJM: And they in reference to a singular antecedent (so-called singular they) has taken 600 years to get where it is now.
There's not a man I meet but doth salute me
As if I were their well-acquainted friend
Every one must judge according to their own feelings.
As for thou, it dropped out of standard usage within a century or so after Shakespeare.
People tell you what they are. Maybe they are crazy, maybe they are dangerous, but for whatever reason most people cannot help themselves and their physical and social choices tell you what you need to know. It may be heavy tattoos, purple hair, piercings, pronouns, whatever. Stay away from crazy people. They are like the bright colored poison frogs of the rain forest. They are warning you that they are mentally ill. Don't hire them, don't befriend them, don't talk to them, stay away from crazies.
OneGuy: It may be heavy tattoos, purple hair, piercings, pronouns, whatever.
"They're staining the new shag carpet."
The AI article is written by someone who doesn't understand the subject. He concludes with "We don't know how useful or dangerous AI really is..." Of course we don't. The possibilities are beyond even what our most creative people can imagine. But we do know it will be very useful and also extremely dangerous.
AI will end up being as important an invention as fire, wheels, beer, and bread. It will change our species. That's no less true just because Big Tech uses a Wizard of Oz marketing strategy.
Count me in favor of reparations for slavery. It should be a two step process. The first step is to make sure that no one is rewarded for stolen slavery claims. Everyone claiming rights to reparations must prove a lineage from an actual slave. And that lineage must represent the portion of their slavery ancestor, for example if their grand father was a slave but their grandmother was not then that parent has 1/2 slave linage. If they in turn married someone with no slave lineage then their children would be 1/4 descendants from slaves. This proportion should be used first to establish a right to reparations and secondly to determine the portion of reparations given.
The second step would be to establish who pays. There must be proof of a slave owner in their lineage. This again would be proportioned based on the dilution of that linage by marriage to non-slave owners. This will be race neutral as many blacks owned slaves and thus could be required to pay into the fund to provide reparations. Then it must be proved that these people profited from slavery. Obviously if the example is of some Southern family who lost their land and belongings as a result of the civil war they would not be required to pay into the reparations fund because there was no gain. So absolute proof of profit/benefit would be required.
After these two steps it would then be a matter of "taking" money/assets/profits from those descendants of slave owners who profited by slavery not to exceed provable profit and creating a pool of money to be paid out. Then a simple calculation based on the number of former slaves and percentage of lineage to determine the reparation payout.
It would seem obvious that once this payout is made that from that point on no future claims for themselves and their descendants can ever be raised again and that no special treatment can ever be given to them or their descendants in the future and now they have been made whole and must move on and survive and thrive in the world by their own wits like the rest of us must.