philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
philosoraptor
3yr ago
IME actual doctors are confidently wrong with some regularity too.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
or it's written by AI.
Say what you want about AI writing, it would almost certainly be better structured and less awkwardly worded than this, and leaving the title unexplained isn't the sort of error they'd typically make.
philosoraptor
2yr ago
I tried like 8 times to write a long one and it all seemed absurd.
That's telling you something.
philosoraptor
3yr ago
Yankee Stadium has 12,000 seats
As perhaps an example of your larger point, this seemed implausibly low to me (it's about 20% smaller than the smallest full-time[1] arena in the NHL, a league with a much smaller following than MLB), so I did a quick Google and turned up a figure of 54,251, about 4.5 times your number. Where are you getting 12,000 from?
[1] I'm excluding the university arena the Arizona Coyotes are temporarily housed in, as that's not meant to be a permanent arrangement.
Murphy's responses make a lot more sense if you assume that her true objections to the sex industry are really borne out of an aesthetic or disgust aversion, and specifically only when men are the patrons.
Okay, not the most substantive point but this error, which seemed to be pretty rare at one time, is everywhere lately and it drives me nuts. "Borne" is not a fancy alternate spelling of "born", as many people seem to have suddenly concluded. It's a different word with a different meaning ("carried", more or less). You could say, for example, that Murphy's responses are "borne up by a mighty wind of righteous indignation", or something like that, though that does seem a bit purple for either Yassine or myself now that I read back over it. But in this case the word you want is just "born".
In my neck of the woods, black doctors, especially those who've come onto the scene recently enough for this to potentially matter, are almost invariably relative newcomers from Nigeria (and often Irish-trained). They seem as competent as anyone - in any case I've been quite happy with mine.
They're thus unlikely to be affected much by lowered standards, actual or perceived, in the North American continent. Now you have me wondering if this might also be part of the answer to your question - clinics consciously avoiding potentially less qualified candidates from nearer to home, in a way that still makes them look "diverse".
philosoraptor
1yr ago
I quite vividly remember someone posting a comment about there being a siren and someone else saying "can't find any news confirming it" and not piping in with "it's me, I'm the news, posting from the spotty internet in the bomb shelter". And then it became just increasingly not the right moment for it (also I was quite sleep deprived and dealing with lots of other more immediate concerns).
Those posts from the shelter would probably have been awesome, actually, though I completely understand you having other concerns that were far higher priorities at a moment like that.
philosoraptor
2yr ago
Or telling an American in 1980 that 10 years later, the USSR would no longer exist.
They'd almost certainly be neither surprised nor happy about this, because the assumption would be that a nuclear war had taken place. People seem to have completely forgotten the grip that threat had on the culture around that time.
philosoraptor
10mo ago
That's not a debate, that's an ambush.
In what other ambush scenario does the side that's supposedly being ambushed get to decide whether, how, and when to engage?
philosoraptor
2yr ago
That's 7% of all interracial marriages that are black man/white woman compared to 9% of interracial marriages that are white man/asian woman. Hardly a substantial difference.
It's huge when you consider the relative proportions of Black vs Asian people in the US.
Which is it? Either it's an image of her, or it's an AI generated image.
Disingenuous, unless you think the concept of, say, drawing a picture of Taylor Swift is incoherent. You can generally tell whether a picture is of Taylor Swift, and among people who know her the same is presumably true of this girl.
I don't see how having an AI do it instead of a human changes anything morally relevant; at the very least you need to make the case that it does. You seem to just assume it as a default, but I see no reason for doing this.
philosoraptor
10mo ago
Principal photography on The Last Jedi was done in July 2016. Fisher was done all her scenes and finished an entire book tour in the remainder of the year, before dying from an out-of-the-blue heart attack around Christmas. She did not die "mid-filming".
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Hypothetically, if Canada did become the 51st state, would I be right in saying it would be the largest state in the union by landmass by quite a huge margin? Or am I too Mercator-projection pilled?
LOL. By landmass, Canada is the second-largest country in the world, after Russia. It's not just bigger than any US state, it's bigger than the US.
Even by population, it would be the largest, just slightly higher than California.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
This is silly, it's important to actually get the facts straight and one shouldn't respond as if attacked when corrected on the facts.
The suspicion is that those facts are being weaponized, and that the same people doing the "correcting" would be soft-pedalling them or even being actively misleading if they didn't fit the narrative they wanted to push (and, in fact, have a history of doing just that). You can't (well, okay, shouldn't) make arguments for years on end that rely on conflating "trans" and "intersex" and then get all huffy and indignant when people confuse the two in a way that you don't find politically convenient.
(Generic "you", not necessarily you personally.)
philosoraptor
2yr ago
I took the point to be adjacent to the one Scott made - wow, is it really that long ago? - last December about how the media rarely lies. I don't agree with how Scott frames the observation, which I would have phrased in terms of how the ways they lie are relatively subtle - but the observation itself, as distinct from the debate over the best language to characterize it, is solid.
Skilled liars make as few statements that are straightforwardly false in a plain, literal way as they can and still spread whatever narrative they want to spread. One of the many advantages of this is that there's rarely a clear-cut smoking gun someone in the board's position can point to. Instead it's a matter of which facts they emphasize and which they omit, what they juxtapose with what in order to imply connections that may not actually exist, how they manipulate your emotions around aspects of their narrative, how they take advantage of people's trust in them, or at least willingness to give the benefit of the doubt, in situations that really are ambiguous.
So while I can see how the statement you quote is poor optics, I have no trouble imagining how it could be true.
philosoraptor
16d ago
It's a pretty standard way to refer to a case, so I'd vote against - but, in a place like this where you can't assume every watches the US Supreme Court closely, you 100% should also give some context the first time you refer to one. Not just the general subject matter, but what the central question is. Or where applicable, what you might remember from news media reporting about it (whether those reports are accurate or not).
philosoraptor
10mo ago
But I, like Kirk, was in an environment where I was never going to run a serious risk of being ostracized.
Are you seriously trying to suggest, at this of all times, that he wasn't running any risks?
philosoraptor
1yr ago
I've noticed this phenomenon among the right (necessary disclaimer: I completely acknowledge that this is true of the left as well, but they're not in power now so it's not as fun to scrutinize them) to boldly assert the truth of easily falsifiable claims. The "media ignore it entirely" is such a claim: CNN, CBS, ABC, and my favorite, an ominous report from the Washington Post. This story is obviously being covered...
This is a genuine case of "both sides do it", but yes, any time you see "why isn't anybody talking about _______?!?" on social media, the correct response will invariably be somewhere on a spectrum from "They are!" to "Are you living under a rock? No-one seems to be talking about anything else".
philosoraptor
1yr ago
It was, but that's just it; it was controversial, as in there was genuine disagreement, as distinct from being universally condemned.
philosoraptor
2yr ago
There's been infinite debates on "mansplaining" but I believe there is a kernel of truth to it and it's revealed through behavior.
My own experience is very strongly that this has nothing to do with gender at all. In fact, nobody, nobody, is more prone to condescendingly explaining things to people who already understand them (and frequently just finished making that unmistakably clear) than the kind of feminists who talk about "mansplaining"!
philosoraptor
6mo ago
I can only assume people are wildly misunderstanding what actually happened, though it seems to me the OP explains it quite clearly. There seems to be a lot of projecting of people's vaguely similar hobby horses going on.
philosoraptor
10mo ago
That's still pretty damn competent as recent perpetrators of high-profile public shootings go.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Abortion will still be a sore spot for Trump and Kamala will focus tehre
I'm not sure why it's a sore spot, but then I may not have kept up with the "debate" on that topic. Can't Trump honestly (for Trump) say something like:
"What are you talking about? I've been saying all along abortion should be left up to the states to legislate, and oh, look, now the Supreme Court says I was right all along, it should be left up to the states. Which contrary to your side's usual fear-mongering, is all the ruling says. I already won! The federal government is out of the abortion business. Don't take my word for it, ask the Supreme Court, that's the law of the land now. There's nothing either of us can do about it, even if I wanted to, which I don't!"
That's actually less exaggerated and blustery than the average policy-related thing Trump says; as far as I know it's basically true. He's probably the least anti-abortion Republican president in living memory, yet has (indirectly) given that side its biggest win of my lifetime. It seems to me neither side can attack him convincingly on this topic. What am I missing?
philosoraptor
2yr ago
Reporters don’t typically have the statistical training to understand the intricacies of concepts like “correlated errors”, so all they saw was an election nerd trying to make headlines by scaring Democrats into thinking the election was closer than it really was. They too were eventually forced to eat their words when Trump won.
I mostly remember them doubling down and implying that Silver was somehow super-extra-wrong and had lost credibility by saying Trump had only a 30% chance... never mind that most other pollsters were much further off (many had it more like 1%) and didn't get the same treatment.
What is your overall point? What is the "Morning Chestnut Problem"? What do Japanese sources say about Yasuke that differs from English ones, specifically? How did his depiction go over in Japan?
After all those words, on a topic I do have some interest in, I feel only marginally closer to understanding any of these things. Almost all your explanations feel incomplete, and the lack of structure or things like clear thesis statements doesn't do you any favours either. Impose some structure and make sure all your thoughts actually resolve, and I could overlook the awkward prose.
Your thoughts on Wikipedia are certainly familiar ones here. What most strikes me about your first (English-language) Wikipedia link is the hypocrisy of the principles expressed there when contrasted with how they actually handle any topic relevant to the US culture war.
More options
Context Copy link