@rolfmoo's banner p

rolfmoo


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 14:13:28 UTC

				

User ID: 585

rolfmoo


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 14:13:28 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 585

I don't think it's true that hideous modern architecture is just the genuine aesthetic vision of a different culture. Most people hate it, Texan or Californian: it's the taste, or apparent taste, of a small number of highly privileged people (architects and their sponsors).

This would be true if all the odds were independent, but obviously the odds are not independent. This group isn't pulling at random from the whole population, or even from a certain statistically-distinguished fraction of the population. It's a group of people who congregated around a common interest, and selection effects there can be very powerful indeed.

Also, it's an April Fools joke.

NB: I apologise if this reply seems harsh - I've tried to avoid that but see above on why I don't think straight about this.

I think this exemplifies my problem, really: it's all talked about in vague terms that can make the frighteningly insane sound perfectly reasonable.

Never mind "temporary suspension of civil liberties to save lives", which covers almost anything: how long and how bad for how many? If saving those 500000 people costs two weeks of no nightclubs, OK, I'm listening; if it costs a decade of China-style welded-indoors lockdown, no deal, molon labe etc.

But this was just never discussed. It wasn't a matter of "we'll consider these restrictions if they're projected to save at least this many lives", it was "your fundamental civil liberties are gone, you want to know what our cost-benefit analysis is, it's fuck you that's what it is".

And there's certainly no admission of failure now. If as it turns out they were crazy all along, that's critical evidence against them for the future, and I at least reserve the right to say "I told you so, clearly nobody involved in this fiasco should work in their field ever again". But it's just quietly dropped for the next Current Thing like the world didn't go insane for a few years!

Those with power do as they will, and those without complain about violations of rights and freedoms

This is not the trajectory of world history over recent centuries. You do in fact have more rights and freedoms as an average modern American than as an average citizen of almost any premodern civilisation. All of this apparently gritty cynicism about how it's all about power and rights don't real is just historical denialism.

They might be hoping to reframe the whole issue. Nobody blames Photoshop when people make fake naked pictures of celebrities: maybe by making it a tool like Word and Excel, they're hoping that people will see it as neutral in whatever it's used for. I doubt this will work (if Photoshop were released today, would naughty pictures be blamed on Adobe?) but they might be willing to take the risk, gambling on Office's existing image as a neutral suite of tools.

I have a novel hypothesis / wildly unfounded cloud-yell on this: we are seeing a shift away from stories and towards content.

Let's take your Star Wars example. Original Star Wars was supposed to be a childlike fairy tale, and there's nothing wrong with that (see C.S. Lewis). But it had some kind of coherent sense and consistency. It had the Hero's Journey. Its creators imagined a world and told a story of what happened within it.

Contrast Modern Star Wars. What is it supposed to be? It's certainly not a fairy tale, and it's not even really much of a story: there's no internal consistency. Characters don't really do things for reasons: Luke Skywalker almost murders a child not because there's any way that makes sense, but just because the Mentor needs a Dark Secret. Rey wants to redeem Kylo Ren not because she has any personal motive to do so, but because we need a Redeemable Villain. The world doesn't exist as a fictional setting: stuff just happens, the First Order appears out of nowhere, the Republic vanishes, now the Final Order exists, now it doesn't.

What it is is Star Wars content. There are people on a screen with lightsabers and blasters and spaceships - are you not entertained?

Just so with current-Phase Marvel. Does anything about Thor: Love and Thunder make a lick of sense? Does it have a solid plot? No - but look, Thor is here! And Valkyrie!

It's not really about it being for children. There are plenty of good stories for children: some of the best stories are age-agnostic. Great literature is not necessarily particularly highbrow or intelligent: Shakespeare and Homer were optimising for making good stories, not for showing off how clever and grown-up they were.

But it is really reminiscent of the rise of streaming as a phenomenon: when you watch a stream, there's no narrative, no coherent set of ideas coming together, just stuff happening. It's easy to procrastinate with it and to have it on in the background because it's not a story, it's just stuff. And so with a lot of modern cinema. No stories, at best a couple of Big Moments (that you can React to and talk about on Twitter!) strung together with content.

I also believe intelligence gives rise to moral worth, I'd happily eat a chicken

I technically agree, but there's such a huge difference between even the least intelligent 1% of humans and chickens that it doesn't matter. Everest is a lot higher than Ben Nevis, but they're both obviously mountains and not molehills.

Just download songs and put them on your phone? How hard is that?

I used to do this, and then I got a trial Spotify subscription and never went back - what they really sell is convenience. The value to me of my time and attention is greater than their fee.

It's very different. The fact that sometimes you have to take into account that people are wrong about things doesn't change a damn thing about whether or not those things are, in fact, true. You shouldn't try to argue theology with a schizophrenic who thinks they're Jesus, but they still aren't.

This Yudkowsky essay is about precisely this question.

Really quickly by the criminally murderously slow standards of medicine, yes. But they were developed in January 2020 and took most of a year to be rolled out, while the bodies continued to mount up in the meantime, for "safety". Safety from the illness they prevent just doesn't appear on the balance sheet.

You should have been able to volunteer to take the risk of an untested vaccine in January, after the "well it doesn't kill monkeys" stage - if you're 85 that's a good idea! We could have had mountains of human data fast at very low expected risk, spun up vaccine distribution months earlier (the insanity surrounding that is a whole other rant) and nipped the whole thing in the bud.

Once you have mRNA vaccine synthesis, having a pandemic at all is a fucking embarrassment for the human race.

I'll happily take that trade! Pure mathematics is nice, but I'll trade it for all the other beautiful things in a heartbeat. Political views: dissident SJW/liberal, strongly pro-trans-rights, anti-racist, pro-freedom of speech, pro-vaccine/anti-lockdown.

I never understood why building ugly things was supposed to be a left/liberal position. It's not the highly-privileged architects who have to live in the damn things.

And yes, aesthetics are technically subjective, but this is one of those weaselly things. Perhaps there really are architects who deeply appreciate the local Concrete Abomination and find it transcendentally beautiful and aren't just saying that as part of a complicated signalling equilibrium! People are weird sometimes! But the public in general overwhelmingly prefers beautiful things in the polls, and they're almost never built any more.

It's an undemocratic injustice foisted disproportionately on marginalised groups by a predominantly-white elite. Tear down the brutalist monstrosities and replace them with cathedrals for social justice.

(Also, they're ugly as sin and I hate them.)

Literally exactly zero isn't necessary - it just has to be a rounding error, like "it happened because the CCTV camera just happened to explode while all the guards were sneezing" or whatever, as opposed to the current rate of "who cares".

I'm arguing in favour of the vaccine. It has a much better safety profile than a lot of things - it's just because it happens to take the form of medicine that we want a frankly ridiculous safety standard.

You... do know this is primarily a reactionary forum and is consequentially going to have a right-wing skew

You were the Chosen One, /r/TheMotte! It was said that you would destroy the screaming tribal shit-flinging, not join in! etc. etc.

This place is way to the right of me in some directions I find really weird, but I'm still here because it's supposed to be a place for the grown-ups in the room, where you don't get targeted for a difference of opinion. If it's going to just be another reactionary forum with a slightly higher average IQ for a while, what's the point?

I believe in the logic of evolutionary psychology more than I believe self-reported contentment questionnaires.

Then you believe in something very shaky.

A lot of people find puppies cuter than babies. Hell, on a deeper level, people aren't physically repulsed by condoms. Evolution just isn't capable of psychological engineering that precise: you're not a deeply robustly programmed creature of family, you're a hacked-together mess of impulses and inclinations and psychological systems that boot from the limited information of the genome to a giant mess of crappy wetware compute.

Cobra Kai is fun, not brainless, and sincere, and moreover it has competent storytelling and characterisation, which is an absolute breath of fresh air by the standards of a lot of current "rebooted" franchises.