domain:cafeamericainmag.com
TitaniumButterfly
7hr ago
Thanks btw; I actually missed the link and thought this was just a really tiny (but intriguing) prompt.
TitaniumButterfly
7hr ago
Is this a thing? Where can I find more?
Lorian_Aristedes
7hr ago
I don’t know where you live, but assuming it’s in the West, I would recommend searching out the more prestigious art colleges/universities in your state/province/region.
If it’s anything like my home then you’ll find that the graduate exhibitions display some pretty out there work, 90% of which is garbage with no value or meaning (you could argue that about the boomer hill paintings too).
Point is: the young are who drives the new directions in the art world. It might be limited to the “underground” world for 10 plus years but eventually someone will come along and commercialise/ruin it. So get in while it’s fresh!
EvanTh
7hr ago
Whether the air force is a branch of the army or not is really an organizational bureaucratic matter rather than constitutional interpretation.
Yes, this. The Army Air Force was originally part of the Army, and everything was clearly fine with the Constitution. Then the National Defense Act of 1947 changed some names for the Army Air Force and the rest-of-the-Army and hybridized the organizational structure of the Army and Navy, but how does that cause Constitutional problems?
/u/TrannyPornO has an article about getting cheap Ozempic from the gray market.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
8hr ago
This reminded me of something that is not quite on topic, but close enough.
Towards the end of summer 2018, I broke up with my girlfriend. Given my age and maturity at the time, I, of course, took care of the most important things first; I hid all of our photos that we had posted together on Facebook.
Well, not actually all of them. All of the one's that popped up on my "wall" at the time (I actually deleted Facebook for good about a year later, so my appreciation for both the terminology and function of the site is now out of date. Apologies if what I detail here isn't how it works anymore). These were typical couples photos; lots of couple-selfies of us eating things or being in places or even eating things in places.
As with any millennial breakup, however, I didn't actually unblock or unfriend my ex. No, no. You see, there is etiquette to the Facebook break-up. Although there can be a a period of mutual blocking, you never hard delete one another. But you also never interact with one another. You simply cyber-stalk one another to see who rebounds first.
Being a career technology dude, however, I noticed something interesting. Within just one or two days of my totally-not-crying deletion of the various wall photos, I became aware that my ex and her friends were no longer getting prioritized in my newsfeed. This was a stark contrast to just a month before where every damn day my newsfeed was filled with whatever new photos she had posted that day along, often, with the goings on of her friends (whom I had friended on facebook when we began dating). Quite the abrupt shift! I double checked to see if anyone hand blocked anyone else. Nope. Should I navigate to any of these profiles directly, I could still click on stuff without any new limitations (pro tip: don't get caught liking a photo from six years ago).
The realization didn't take long to formulate in my head. It seems to me that Facebook detected the pattern of "relationship status change followed by rapid hiding / deletion of photos only featuring two people ... those previously in a relationship" and then quickly, and easily, followed the random forest down to "breakup protocol." To help spare my feelings, it began to algorithmic shadow-censor the new things my ex and her friend's were doing (why the friends? Probably just in case my ex popped up in their photos. A likely outcome).
But then I realized something else that really gave me an "oh shit" moment (and, happily enough, made me forget about my ex). Facebook must have hundreds of these kind of behavioral decision trees. Breakups, divorces, graduations, new births, deaths in the family ..... deaths in the family .... wait, what kind of deaths? old age, cancer, car accident .... suicide.
It then became apparent to be that Facebook likely has a fairly reliable (though probabilistic) means of identifying social media posts that evidence suicidal ideation. Then, thinking back on my own situation, I wondered if there was some sort of correlation between breakups and suicidal ideation (it's my understanding that, yes, there generally is. I think job loss is the other big one.)
So, in 2018, instead of doing normal break up related stuff, I'm trying to piece together how accurately fascebook can predict suicide, or drug overdose, or alcoholism, or intent to harm others (I stumbled across a bunch of articles about how cops would try to find ways to infiltrate private instagram feeds because, apparently, gangs would literally announce their intended targets that way).
And this is the bigger conundrum to me than just the collection of data. If the data available to a company could be used to make these reliable behavioral profiles and, in fact, probably is. Then, to what extent do we want them to take preventative measures for all of these potentially horrible outcomes? But think about what that is -- it's corporate sponsored Minority Report. Hell-the-fuck-no! The level of dystopia that comes with "Hi, we're the cops, facebook told us to visit you" is off the charts.
OliveTapenade
8hr ago
I've come to think of Avatar mostly as a passion project for James Cameron. He likes the blue aliens and the dumb 90s environmentalist message, and he's already made a bajillion dollars and has the credibility to do whatever he wants, so he's just doing what he likes.
I don't particularly like it myself, and I don't think it makes much sense or bears up to scrutiny, but he likes it, and that's all that matters. Probably this all resonates with something deeply personal and relevant to Cameron as an individual in a way that doesn't land for anyone else.
Well, there are worse things for an eccentric and wealthy director to do in the final phase of his career. Good for you, James. I sincerely hope he's enjoying yourself.
GBRK
8hr ago
That's an artifact of how we draw the groups. For example: america has pursued a strategy of making sure high-skill manufacturing and the production of prestigious goods happens internally while lower-skill manufacturing and production is exported elsewhere. But you can't do the former without the latter. Drawing the circle around our entire production chain would drop the average IQ and average wealth... and also make it obvious that the people on the higher-paying end of the chain benefit from having lower IQ people available to do more menial jobs.
Perhaps you mean something like, "Self-identified, self-organizing cultural group benefit from having a higher average IQ," but that's of minimal comfort because "American" (or for that matter "French" or "British" or "German") isn't and has never been the primary unifying cultural identity for all the people claiming it as a title. Individual subgroups-- whether ethnic, or religious, or ideological, or class-based, will look out for their own interests at the expense of others.
GBRK
8hr ago
Once we know how genetic variants that Nigerians have affect IQ in f2 hybrids in WEIRD countries, we can get much smaller samples of genomes of Nigerians in Nigeria and extrapolate what IQ they would have if brought to WEIRD countries.
Makes enough sense to me. That's exactly the kind of empirical question I want answered before I start accepting the conclusions of racial IQ science.
No, evolution doesn't work this way.
It doesn't work that way when there's no optimal phenotype. But sharks and dolphins have both converged in bodyplan quite a bit despite a massive disparity in how long they've been in the water. Yeah, there would be some noise-- it's highly unlikely that every population has exactly the same average IQ, and random mutations taking a while to filter out is a plausible source of noise. But if you want to postulate that there are different selection effects on intelligence, then optimal intelligence has to look different for any given group, which rejects the premise of a single "golden brain" that every group is optimizing for.
and had much weaker selection than past,
I'm embarrassed to be citing my dad here, but he is an expert (at least in plant genetics). And he's told me that population growth increases selection effects. Beneficial alleles reach fixation faster. (I used to think otherwise, that selection was strongest when populations shrunk, but he convinced me to believe otherwise.)
Therefore we can assume that the industrial age has been an era of increased selection. That doesn't mean selection specifically for IQ, but I wouldn't rule it out. I'm aware that implies we should find IQ differences between populations who were late or early to industrialize, and I'm not saying we haven't, or wont-- just, as always, I'm being cautious about assuming our data is valid until it starts pointing to a unified theory of how it all works out.
in probably existed at some point in past Poland and Italy had difference because Italy became agricultural earlier. Now effect of agriculture reached saturation.
This claim that "saturation" has or can be reached is predicate on my accepting this "golden brain" thing that I still haven't, and directly contradicts the "cold winter" theory you mention later.
Do you know Madagascar was populated long after agriculture and its population originated from mix of agricultural SE Asians and agricultural Africans?
No, l was more thinking about how it had an era of feudal kingdoms and metalworking, plus trade relations with the far east.
A large part seems to be explained by Cold Winter Theory.
I would be interested in seeing validation with within-ethnicity IQ variation over climate range... whether Southern Whites are actually dumber than Northern Whites, for example. At a glance I can't rule it out-- California and Louisiana have similar average IQs despite very different ethnic distributions.
Gaashk
8hr ago
I would be more interested in watching the Vernor Vinge version of Avatar, where it's heavily implied they're a downgraded planet that used to be in a higher zone. As it is, I only watched the first movie.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
9hr ago
The average man on the street would surely think that it's fine for a state to have an air force, it's basically like a navy or an army (or a force of underground tunnelling vessels were such things invented). Nothing about the US constitution is opposed to air forces on a values level. Whether the air force is a branch of the army or not is really an organizational bureaucratic matter rather than constitutional interpretation. Legislators are allowed to make laws on it.
It's not like the right to bear arms or free speech vs hate speech. If you want to make constitutional arguments, make the strongest arguments that are most easily believable and inspire the most support. Who is going to get energized for the cause of making the air force subordinate to the army?
This seems counter to the actual world in which non-states are efficiently managing extremely capital-intensive technologies.
Corporations develop them but states manage them. States don't like human cloning, it's banned. States want to keep nuclear technology secret, it's secret. The EU decides that we need to click through pop-ups about cookies, millions of man-hours are wasted... The US allocates GPU access around the world, there are tiers of who can and who cannot have them.
I think this is confusing what it means to be a Classical Liberal.
If there are problems with implementing and sustaining an ideology (and there are problems with all ideologies), surely that's relevant in discussing its merits?
Forty-Bot
9hr ago
https://yosefk.com/blog/patents-how-and-why-to-get-them.html has a good overview of patents in the US
Loquat
9hr ago
Bro, I've worn my hair in a ponytail nearly every day for the last 20-odd years, and never had an issue with traction alopecia. Just don't pull it super-tight and you'll be fine.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
9hr ago
It’s just extremely disingenuous to suggest that warlords raping 8 year old boys is the same as Prince Andrew having sex with a 17 year old who may or may not have been a prostitute.
Those things aren't the same. However it is important to take a political stand in honest defence of values even if standing up for those values has short-term costs and ruffles feathers.
If we're gonna accept light statutory rape amongst elites (if it is even limited to light statutory rape, since the documentation and evidence of whatever's really going on remains concealed), why not medium statutory rape amongst grooming gangs? Where does it end? There are laws and those laws should be enforced. Laws and proper behaviour mustn't seem to be 'for suckers'.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
10hr ago
Fixed. Apologies.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
11hr ago
The slate star codex subreddit, astral codex ten open thread, and data secrets lox are all pretty good.
Jiro
11hr ago
It's not in there in the same way that radio, television, and the Internet are not in freedom of speech or the press. Do we really need to have a new amendment just to keep the government from censoring the radio? The founders thought that the categories they were using were exhaustive, even if the future proved that to be wrong.
A proposed amendment could even use more generic language
How would that work? Remember, your idea doesn't go by wording--if the air force were called a Flying Navy that wouldn't make a difference. So no matter how generic the law made the category, you could always claim "this new thing isn't enough like the category they described, so it isn't included". Suppose the Constitution said that freedom of speech applies to all communications media. When radio was invented, you could still say that the Constitution doesn't apply to radio. Sure, the words "communications medium" now include radio, but we're not going by words, we're going by meaning, and the Founders clearly didn't mean to include radio.
DradisPing
11hr ago
He knows how to write a compelling screenplay which he can then direct. Most directors can't even do that, so it seems a bit unfair to call out James Cameron specifically.
Avatar would have more of a cultural impact if he worked with some good sci fi writers to do some spinoff novels to expand the world. Unfortunately he wants to do it all himself between his submarine adventures so it's a little more simplistic than is ideal.
ControlsFreak
12hr ago
I like how you fail to quote the remainder of that paragraph. The criticism of such a position. But I would go further. The clauses which distinguish between Armies and Navies aren't really providing separate "powers"; that bit was mostly done already. There's some notion of "powers" here, but it's more that they're outlining substantially different modes of operation within the government, speaking even of constraints.
If you aren't sure which one it comes under, that's different from not thinking it counts at all.
I mean, you're the one saying that it counts under one of them. Which one? Why? Do you think it's both somehow? How?
It seems unlikely that the founders would think the Constitution doesn't allow for an air force at all just because you're not sure exactly which thing it's most similar to.
Not "just because". Primarily, it doesn't allow for it, because it's just not in there! It's nowhere to be found! Instead, you're trying to say, "Well... I think it's kinda like these other things... but I can figure out which one or how, what rules will apply, etc., because, well, it's not in there anywhere." The straining gets more obvious every time you try to patch the hole without actually amending the Constitution and patching the hole. Wouldn't it be vastly mentally easier to just amend the Constitution and patch the hole rather than try to continue juggling such epicycles in your head? A proposed amendment could even use more generic language that actually enables future military forces of
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
12hr ago
I mean, if that's what you want to do, be my guest. The storytelling in Avatar is... simplistic at best.
CanofWorms
12hr ago
The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver. I really enjoyed Demon Copperhead and I'm quiet enjoying Poisonwood as well.
CanofWorms
12hr ago
I grew out my hair during COVID when I turned 30. So I wasn't middle-aged, but I wasn't a young college kid either.
There really is no way to keep from going insane. You kind of just have to commit to feeling ugly and unkempt for around 12 months, after which, hopefully, you'll be able to sort of pull your hair back into a ponytail.
It worked out OK for me since I was able to grow my hair out while working from home during COVID, but I recall going on a business trip when my hair was around 5 to 6 inches long and people definitely commented on my "salad bowl" look. Not my favorite work trip.
Additionally, you're right about maintaining long hair being a complete pain in the ass. I still have long hair, but I will likely cut it once I get married. I met my partner after growing my hair out and she has pressured me to keep it long until we tie the knot (wedding photos, I suppose). Considering I haven't even proposed to her yet, I'm likely stuck with my long hair for at least another year.
CanofWorms
12hr ago
Awesome. For as stupid as a person is to walk into a police HQ intoxicated or high on drugs, I find it deeply unfair for the police to throw the "felony book" at him. Particularly when he was there to, presumably, assist the police in an investigation.
Grant_us_eyes
12hr ago
Is this where we start bitching about how the two Avatar movies make no goddamn sense whatsoever and how James Cameron is a fucking hack who doesn't know how to write?
Because I'll do it. I'll fucking well do it.
Props for the essay, but it's stuff I've seen before. Hell, it's pretty much my original take away from the first movie.
And Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri did it all better anyways.
The sequences are one off my favourite thing about the series. I really enjoyed The Mauritius Command > Desolation Island > Fortune of War > The Surgeon's Mate where it takes 4 novels for the protagonists to finally return to England for a debrief. I also like how where the novels begin and end is fairly inconsequential as the series covers most of a career over the Napoleonic wars and the War of 1812.
I'd hope instead that as AI improves, film production costs will drop and it would become viable to make a film or tv series that can adequately portray naval life in the Age of Sail. It's historically been notoriously expensive to film things like this and I think it led to the end of the Hornblower TV Film series. (Which btw is up on YouTube)
My dream is to either have an updated streaming TV/Film series with a new cast, or complete AI generation with digital likenesses of Crowe and Bettany (which someone else wished for on The Motte a few weeks ago). There's so much material to mine in a 20 novel series, but I can see how it might not have mass appeal.
Edit:
I know. Others have said that Maturin has the most character development in the series and is perhaps the real lead character. His fallibility is why I like him. He is a leading physician and naturalist, invited to lecture at the Royal Society and salons in France. Perhaps the greatest Intelligence Agent of his age.
And he is a simp for a very very particular type of woman, physically uncoordinated to the point where he would be drowned (or worse) many times over if he wasn't beloved by the crew and a drug addict. An idealist and despairing cynic with a deep deep hatred of authoritarianism. He is naive and ruthless all at once. Great character, and I have to sadly say that Paul Bettany didn't do him justice (probably for screenplay reasons).
More options
Context Copy link