What do you think I'm arguing here?
I think you're arguing that :
I have concluded that almost everyone (including our Motte effort-posters) forms a conclusion based not on actually trying to analyze videos and consider evidence, but rather, how they feel about ICE, ICE protesters, immigrants, and Trump.
And, by conjunction, that people's current assessments are at minimum overconfident or not based on available facts on this particular case. If you can't be bothered to defend it or provide evidence about other people's assessments -- or even highlight the specific ones you think are overconfident and how! -- I don't particularly care what those underlying positions are, and I'm certainly not going to speak on them. There's a fun space for Bulverism, and I'm trying to resist it, and I'm definitely not going to consider it useful to spell out.
And I know you know I didn't speak on your ground-level positions, or make claims about your underlying biases or perceptions related to this particular shooting, because you would have quoted me if I did.
The claim of motivated reasoning could be defended. I don't think it's a particularly strong one in this case, but I haven't exactly had time to evaluate a ton of the evidence for or against. You know what you haven't done? Present any evidence that the poster you responded to here made a claim incompatible with the available evidence. Instead we get hypotheticals that don't exist.
I could debate those! LaVoy Finicum has more overlap with Good than Babbit does, in that they weren't anywhere near a federal politician, they were doing a pretty overtly illegal protest of the type that no one really expects to get arrested nevermind shot over, they had a deadly weapon but it was contestable whether they were a 'real' threat to life before the first bullet rather than just doing something incredibly stupid that could hurt someone, yada yada.
It'd be a useless debate -- Red Tribers could quite aptly point to the many ways the Feds pushed before and misbehaved after the shooting, Blue Tribers can (and regularly do) just say Guns Are Different -- but before we even get there, we have to confront the bit where Finicum wasn't a Red Tribe cause celebre. Not even here. Literally, in the sense that the only person to ever use his name on this site other than me was to say "No one cares." (tbf, two indirect references, [ed: one of which I can't find now]). He had eight mentions in the entire history of TheMotte over at Reddit, four of them were me being ambivalent, and the here's the other four. Nobody's certain from day one that Finicum must be innocent, and that his shooter must be hanged.
But it doesn't matter that it's useless, if that's what it takes to avoid someone pretending "This is inane and mindkilling, but here is where even the Motte is now", while being more insistent to actual bring an actual specific fault of analysis than the broad majority of people you're criticizing. Does it matter for that analysis?
- Prev
- Next

Congratulations! and some sympathies re: Java/gradle/maven
Containerization's one of those things that I've got badly mixed feelings on. Too many businesses (and open source communities!) use it as an alternative to actually understanding and managing their dependency graph or actually setting up sane requirements. But the whole 'full isolation and discrete permissions' is good! But it's trivially easy to set up a container that doesn't actually live up to that. Most of big formats have surprisingly good behavior. But the performance overhead for using networking for every form of interprocess communication can get pricey, and even if you don't care about performance the implementation and documentation is near-universally pants.
But if you need to be able to take a server functionality out behind the shed and Ol' Yeller it, it's hard to beat, and much more practical for that purpose than having twenty VMs rolling around.
More options
Context Copy link