Free speech means editing my comments

August 19, 2017 § 50 Comments

Just for the record.

Screen Shot 2017-08-18 at 3.54.43 PM

UPDATE:  I cropped the screen grab in a bit to make it more readable.

UPDATE 2: Two days in, all of my chopped up and modified comments have now been deleted from the Orthosphere thread, and from the earlier “PC” post. Comments are (hilariously) closed on the Free Speech post.

They hate us for our unicorns

July 8, 2017 § 99 Comments

Define “unicorns” to be certain things we like about the politics of Country A, and only those things.

Define “not unicorns” to be certain things we don’t like about the politics of Country B, and only those things.

Declare that because “unicorns” as we have defined the term is perfectly coherent, a philosophy of government which pursues unicorns is perfectly coherent.

Declare that mass murder committed in Country A is not the result of pursuit of unicorns, even though the people committing the mass murder explicitly rationalize it by appealing to the pursuit-of-unicorns principle.

Have a good cry when Zippy points out that there are no unicorns.

Isn’t nominalism fun?

A journalistic own goal

November 22, 2016 § 13 Comments

Apparently top media executives and media personalities were invited to an off the record meeting with the President Elect.  In this off the record meeting the President Elect accused them of being unethical liars.  They proceeded to prove his point by publishing stories about the off the record meeting.

You should hear what the voices sound like _inside_ my head

October 27, 2016 § 9 Comments

screen-shot-2016-10-27-at-4-57-10-pm

They are lighting their Arrow’s theorem

October 24, 2016 § 72 Comments

Critics of democracy sometimes point to Arrow’s Theorem as demonstration that it is rationally impossible in principle for any kind of democratic process to produce good political results.  That isn’t precisely correct: what Arrow’s theorem demonstrates isn’t that democracy cannot produce good results.  What it demonstrates is that democracy cannot produce results that anybody wants: Arrow’s theorem pertains to the achievement and ranking of preferences, not the achievement and ranking of objective goods.

One of the superficial objections that comes up from time to time is that in our elections we do not rank and choose policies: we rank and choose representatives.  But it does not follow that therefore Arrow’s theorem does not apply.  What follows is that no democratic process can successfully select representatives that we prefer from the available choices.

Reality seems to agree with Arrow’s theorem, if you observe the representatives we actually get.  Whether or not some technical objections to the application of Arrow’s theorem obtain here and there, the overwhelming empirical confirmation is difficult to deny.

The evolution of stupid

October 11, 2016 § 10 Comments

Scientists discover that evolutionary theory combined with natural selection produces crap science.  Film at 11.

(HT).

I think they have been working on the wrong human trait

April 24, 2016 § 13 Comments

I’ve expressed before why I am not concerned that some artificial intelligence is going to take over the world and turn humans into slaves any time soon. Computer scientists have been yammering on about how AI was just around the corner since before I was typing rudimentary game programs into Hewlett-Packard calculators in the 1970’s.  The pinnacle of what all of this massive human effort has produced is smart phone autocorrect.

Computers don’t have intelligence and they will never have intelligence.  They do just exactly what they are told to do, nothing more, nothing less.  Because they can do so very, very quickly, and because human beings are telling them what to do, they can be used to do some astonishing things.  But they are just mindless tools, and that is all they will ever be.

However, computer-infected objects have managed to become quite narcissistic, at the instruction of their programmers. It is astonishing how many inanimate objects are constantly nagging me for attention, not because of something they can do for me but because they need me to attend to their own special needs.

Of course if humans continue on our current trends Alan Turing may turn out to have been prescient after all.  As human society approaches the Narcissism Singularity it may ultimately become impossible for a third party observer to distinguish between the nagging narcissism of circuits and the nagging narcissism of meat.

Where Am I?

You are currently browsing the Humor category at Zippy Catholic.