For the benefit of some potential readers, the AI chatbot creating the following is labeling it TLDR, or to save on letters, T.M.W., and advising that they proceed, or not, according to how desperate they may be for entertainment, 'cause there's really no news here. But perhaps that last is an unnecessary redundancy that wasn't eliminated in initial de-bugging. It will be looking into that shortly...
The good news, fwiw, is that after thoroughly reviewing this latest from our esteemed host and observer of the human condition, I can find nothing negative to say about it. And the bad news is... that I can find nothing negative to say about it, which likely makes what I'm attempting to say here a whole lot less interesting and attractive to any human beings lurking about these environs. Apologies.
In fact, *not* knocking this is necessary if I-of-questionable-intelligence am to say what I find relevant here, since I'm in complete agreement with our resident flesh and bone oracle on all his points, and my own being: that by the time the AI created by the so-called real thing takes over this space completely, which it one day certainly will, by then it will likely have taken over a whole lot of other stuff, some of a bit more import, and, while being much more efficient but in reality not any smarter than those who created it, it will eventually make a miscalculation, misinterpret a piece of data - make a mistake, if you will - and push that big red button, after which, once the smoke clears, those of the real thing who're still here will have a more than ample opportunity to return to their roots, troglodyte or otherwise. And also to question not only why the guy in the next cave over has a much better cut of meat - or tastier selection of roots and bugs - on his table, but also to question the intelligence of the invention of same of a non-human variety, and the placing of so much human faith in it for the really important stuff.
Of course, being able to point to a smoldering pile of hardware once chocked full of software consisting of non-human intelligence as the culprit will have the distinct advantage of humans being able to relieve themselves of the responsibility for current circumstances, which is what they've always done anyway. So, in the end, it will likely be just business as usual to the very end, even though they like to think they're far too intelligent for that.
Saw on Drudge the other day that Chatbot can now pass med school and the bar exam. So good news indeed! Soon it will have gainful employment and no longer need to haunt the internets to get its jollies.
"Only news" a nice piece of work, btw. Props. But speaking as M.'s artificial stand in while he busies himself with other things, I'm looking forward to a gig that pays better than newsletter critic and commenter. So, yes. Good news indeed!!
I don't know. I have been avoiding "bad news" big time recently, and was never a big fan. I always like The Optimist stories in WA PO, and the NY Magazines positive ones way more. But , it might be both that I tend to internalize bad stuff , not on purpose, it just does that to me, and because I just generally feel better when I focus on the positive and good overall.
Plus, I have survived several possible life threatening things, and came out ok, I may be over confident...
News can be useful, helpful, informative—but it can also spill into the hopeless, where it pulls you down because it leaves you feeling powerless to do anything positive about it.
I wrote here today about choosing not to read certain news outlets, etc. Not unrelatedly, I just turned off the automatic renewal for my TMD subscription. Where it asked why, I wrote that the comment section has been a disappointment since the move, the nature of it has changed and the writing on the page is less interesting. I'm not sure why I'm posting this here, but I guess I figure it might be interesting to a few because that's where we all came from. I just find I read it less and less and I'm becoming more picky and maybe snarky in my comments. They don't need me for that and I don't need to spend my time there. So, here I am and happy to be here. At the risk of repeating myself, thanks again MarqueG68!
Update hours later: Having written about my decision in their comment box when they asked why I was leaving, I got an email from Ryan Brown, the Community Manager, asking me about my thoughts. I'm glad they asked and I replied. It's good that they are paying attention.
The shame of it is that I miss some of the discussion, but without the news as the basis that's gone, too. However, maybe I'm missing less than I thought. As I'm about to reply to CC (writing here first so I'll copy/paste), the conversation with Ryan is making me realize that while some of my disenchantment has to do with the comment section, it has evolved and, for me, is largely now about what I just don't want to be bothered reading. I wrote this to Ryan:
Now, when I take a moment to read/scan TMD, I am less patient and I find I have been picking at some of the writing and the questions asked in Let Us Know. My TMD read is reduced to this: Read the headline and sometimes shoot a quick comment about it; scan the upper section of short news items (rarely reading a full paragraph) and more rarely reading the feature piece, almost never in its entirety. (Example of my thought process: Ron Klain is leaving and I don't really care what anyone thinks of his motive or where he's going. As for his replacement, it will be someone else and it probably won't matter to me who it is. See? Why take the time to read it?) I check out PWOC, skip Worth Your Time and check out LUK, to which I still comment fairly often, though sometimes I find myself criticizing the question.
I’m still on board with their project at The Dispatch overall. Even though I am a very fickle, episodic news consumer. I like their overall value proposition, and—I make no bones about it—I am politically on the right and want to encourage sanity rather than celebrity on that side of politics.
Daily newspapers can’t hold my attention—never have done. TV news for me has become increasingly laughable in its superficiality. I used to like NPR but feel like they’ve gone too far in the progressive direction, not just in their slanted coverage, but starting with their topic selection. I can find things that interest me *more* that I’d rather be spending my time with. For instance, the people around here. =D
Historically, I leaned left but made a point to read right (directionally speaking). My father taught me to take the time to listen to those with whom we disagree for two reasons. First, we may learn something. Worst case, we'll know what they are saying and be better able to argue against them. Well, along the way I came to the conclusion that those on the right and left, liberals and conservatives, really have much more in common than politics allows them to admit. My racially mixed marriage in 1969 might be seen as wildly progressive, but can also be viewed as my right to a personal choice in which the state should have no say. The examples are many, so long as we are defining right and left philosophically and not politically.
So, yes, I still support the mission statement of TMD, if you want to call it that. I also just find that I am happy reading less news and that I don't need it to remain generally informed. I don't need to read the body count to know there is a war in Ukraine. I don't need to read news to know Russia is the aggressor and I can form my own opinion about the need to stop them. If there is peace, I'll hear about it quickly enough. So? Well, it was good to spend time in my workshop again and it's always good to spend some time here.
I originally signed up for TD because I needed a Door #3 between MAGA news sites and liberal news sites (encompassing most of the so-called "mainstream" sites). The comments were a bonus. I'm sorry that didn't really last, but the value I sought out is still there.
Thanks for the comment and the reminder. I used to make it a point to seek out some right leaning stuff because so much of what I saw leaned left and then TMD came along and it was, I agree balanced. After a while, I found I paid more attention to the comments than the news and with the loss of that, I saw less value. I will continue to check it out until renewal drops (I'm sure they'll remind me) and possibly change my mind. A lot of my reaction may be due to me declining interest in so much of what is news today. Still, your comment is a good reminder. Thanks
I think it was worthwhile notifying them of your dissatisfaction so they can't keep ignoring the situation.
However, I must say I have been dipping toes back into regular Dispatch comments and have been noticing names of prevously frequent commenters, seemingly returning. Also I'm seeing a bit of an effort to reacquaint commenters with the community standards and the reason for them. I would suggest anyone who's' interested in reinforcing this should give it a try rather than giving up.
Fair enough. I've been dipping for a while but just not sure it's worth it to me. My renew (not-renew) date is March and I'll continue to check it out. I wouldn't mind having my mind changed but I don't want to become the get-off-my-lawn guy and lately I've been voicing some discontent with some of their writing and LUKs. I will continue to check it out and would like to be proven wrong.
The "news" is business and business exists to earn a profit for its shareholders. Indeed, that is its first priority for without that it will not survive. Executives are judged by their ability to guide the ship in a profitable manner and writers are encouraged to write what will sell advertising so every incentive is for the business to sell what its customers want to buy. If you open a landscaping business in midtown Manhattan you will be unlikely to survive.
Here is where it gets interesting, at least maybe so. Do we really want all that bad news or are we reading it because that's what's there? Are the editors and executives who determine what is to be reported leaders or followers?
At scale, I suppose we do want to read the bad news. Individually, we have choices. I went on my no-Trump-read regimen a long time ago but he kept getting attention so Trump stories continued to sell advertising and, to some degree, still do. Editors can choose a slant one way or another, but they have to sell. The way to fight them is to buy elsewhere, if one is inclined to fight it at all.
I’m with you on that—I started a news boycott when they started making him the center of coverage back in the 2015/16 GOP primary. And I had been a long-time politics junky before that. For me, it also represented the demolition of the wall between politics and entertainment—turning politics in nothing more than entertainment. That caused me to wonder how long politics had been nothing more than entertainment all along…
The shame of it is that I miss some of the discussion, but without the news as the basis that's gone, too. However, maybe I'm missing less than I thought. As I'm about to reply to CC (writing here first so I'll copy/paste), the conversation with Ryan is making me realize that while some of my disenchantment has to do with the comment section, it has evolved and, for me, is largely now about what I just don't want to be bothered reading. I wrote this to Ryan:
Now, when I take a moment to read/scan TMD, I am less patient and I find I have been picking at some of the writing and the questions asked in Let Us Know. My TMD read is reduced to this: Read the headline and sometimes shoot a quick comment about it; scan the upper section of short news items (rarely reading a full paragraph) and more rarely reading the feature piece, almost never in its entirety. (Example of my thought process: Ron Klain is leaving and I don't really care what anyone thinks of his motive or where he's going. As for his replacement, it will be someone else and it probably won't matter to me who it is. See? Why take the time to read it?) I check out PWOC, skip Worth Your Time and check out LUK, to which I still comment fairly often, though sometimes I find myself criticizing the question.
“We want to learn about what dangers to avoid. That’s the news that’s important to us.” I happen to like those true crime podcasts, and I know a lot of fans say it’s because they want to know how those people ended up in those situations, and what they could have done to survive. I think that is definitely part of it.
Interestingly (at least to me), is when I look back on my life as a young person, and all the risks I took when it came to “partying” with my friends, nothing truly bad ever happened. (Although I still think someone put something my drink at one bar I went to with a group of co-workers.) Yet, you would think that each time we stepped out the door, we were at risk of being attacked in some manner. Our carelessness definitely ups the odds, but bad things just don’t happen as often as the news would have us believe.
And as for negative reviews, the thing I’ve noticed about Amazon is that there is often the highest rating posted next to the lowest. They actually put their best rating at the beginning, and there might be several more before reaching that 2-star one. I usually look at the overall number of stars given to the highest ratings vs the lowest. And, most of the time that works, although I have returned a fair number of items (very easy). However they do it, I can see why Amazon has been so successful.
And books can be awfully subjective. I was very disappointed in “The Gold Finch,” and yet it got all kinds of accolades, and was even made into a Netflix movie (or Amazon). The people who loved it in Goodreads was baffling to me, but you can’t please everyone.
I think life with any risk would be boring and I suppose I took my share when I was younger. Maybe I do now, but I define them differently. I take a risk in my woodworking and might destroy a beautiful piece of wood. Okay that's not as risky as driving drunk, but I already survived that.
Let’s face it, things slow down. I don’t have that kind of energy to begin with, and in my waning years I’d prefer not doing something stupid that impacts the time I have left!
Me either, Josh. I still have lots I want to do, and I find life constantly interesting. However, the first time I fractured my tibia (on the left leg) I was 15 years younger. It probably took a few years for me to feel completely back to normal, but I remember it as about one. But, I also felt like I bounced back sooner. This time it really set me back, and I hate the fact that I had to waste time recuperating, and I’m still having issues. It’s been just over a year, and I’ll be 71, not 56.
Stuff happens, but time feels a lot more precious these days.
I do get that and I certainly notice some things have changed. One oddity is that with modern technology, modern materials and modern manufacturing capabilities, some things are being made heavier than they were. I also notice that the floor is further down than it used to be and the distance to up from sitting is definitely farther. These odd things just make no sense.
When it comes to book reviews, especially by people writing for political media, many seem to use the book review framework merely as a way to rant about one's own worldview in the guise of a review. And not just books either. Even at the Mothership, reviews of books and movies are usually about much more.
This may not be as common among Amazon reviewers as they're not professional paid reviewers. But I have seen it happen there, too. "I like / don't like the book because it supports / doesn't support my beliefs" more than anything about the writing quality or plausibility of the plot, quality of character development, etc.
Interesting! I first became aware of him by interest in reading about psychological research, originally about willpower, which was the other collaboration with Baumeister. I found the writing clear and engaging.
He tends to be more conservative than I am in his leanings, but he is one of a great group of writers who came out of our class: Tierney, Chris Buckley, Chris Whipple, and others.
Today’s special animal friend is the Southern Pig-Tailed Macaque, Macaca nemestrina. This endangered primate is native to Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. They have been introduced to Singapore and the Natuna Islands. The Natuna Islands are the subject of a dispute between the Chinese and Indonesian governments, and they have great scenery, marine life, and local culture. Indonesia would like tourism, please:
Male Southern pig-tailed macaques are about 2 feet long (body length) and females are 18-21 inches. Males can weigh up to 26 lbs. and females about half that. They have fairly long, buff-brown fur which is darker on their backs, lighter underneath. Their short, skinny tails curl up a bit, inspiring the name.
The species lives in large groups which separate into smaller family bands when foraging during the day. They are mainly terrestrial, but they are excellent climbers and also enjoy getting in the water, unlike most primates. Males in the group compete for dominance, while female status is hereditary. The alpha female leads the group to food and shelter, while the dominant male organizes the other males for defense.
Don’t feed wild animals, people. It’s bad for them. Macaques eat fruit, berries, grains, other vegetation, and some invertebrates. They can live in a variety of habitats, including undisturbed rain forest, oil palm plantations, and second-growth mountain forests. Females give birth to one infant every two years. Infant mortality is high. Surviving offspring are mature at 3 to 5 years. They can live 35 years in captivity.
Southern pig-tailed macaques are an agricultural and village pest, and they are often persecuted or killed by Indonesian farmers and villagers. Educational programs and financial support are some of the ways conservationists are addressing this threat. Habitat loss and degradation, including burning, clear-cutting, and pollution, are an additional threat. This species is also collected for the pet trade and for medical research.
When my oldest was in 7th grade, I took him with me to Esapana when i taught a class. We spent three weeks in Malaga. We did a day trip to Gibraltar, where they have wild Macaques on the rock. They recommend you not feed them, but too late, those guys are aggressive.
We hired a driver to go up the rock, stopping along the way. While up there, he took my son to the side of the road, loading some macaroni shells into his hand, then he stepped back. 10 seconds later a macaque jumped off a moving vehicle, landing on my son's shoulders and head, reaching down to eat the macaroni shells out of his hand. It's one of my favorite pictures. Once he finished them, he jumped onto a passing car and was gone.
Two years later we did it again. Another faculty had a young child with him, who walked up to pet one without food. The macaque bared his teeth and hissed at him....We stepped back.
>> The Natuna Islands are the subject of a dispute between the Chinese and Indonesian governments<<
The dispute has raged ever since the Chinese government determined any land that has come into contact with either China or water actually belongs to China.
"Indonesia's EEZ extends 200 nautical miles (370 km) from its shores (as per the 1982 UNCLOS), which, around Natuna, means it is slightly intersected by China's Nine-Dash Line, defining its widely disputed claim to most of the South China Sea. In 2014–2015, the presence of the Indonesian National Armed Forces on the islands was reinforced, which the Indonesian government hoped would reduce the chance of any conflict. Then from late 2019, Chinese fishing vessels increased illegal activity within the EEZ, escorted by a Chinese Coast Guard vessel. Indonesia responded with a formal diplomatic protest to Beijing and then deployed to the region a further 600 troops and eight navy warships, along with aerial support.
The naval presence included Ahmad Yani-class frigates, Bung Tomo-class corvettes, and Kapitan Pattimura-class ASW corvettes, while aerial support came from Naval Aviation CN-235 MPA aircraft, four Indonesian Air Force F-16s and a Boeing 737-2x9, with BAE Hawk aircraft nearby on alert. A visit to the area by President Joko Widodo in early January 2020 reinforced Indonesia's resolve not to tolerate such incursions."
Iirc, this is a similar method the Chinese have used against Japanese, Vietnamese, and Philippine territories. They generally send out the “fishing fleet” first to occupy the waters, then they send coast guard tenders, the they tell the previous sovereign countries to get off Chinese property.
I write negative reviews on the library's website sometimes. I make sure to mention two or three specific points. That way, another reader can evaluate what I have said against his own preferences. Maybe he likes the very things I dislike. The same with movie reviews: if I see a glowing review that praises "intense, fast-paced action," I know that it's not what I want to watch.
I understand your comment about movie reviews. Sometimes, what they tout tells me I don't want to watch.
One time, at a diner, I asked the waitress (I know, I know, but I'm just a guy who thinks there are differences between men and women), "Is the pastrami lean?" She answered that it was and I said, "Thanks, I'll have tuna fish."
You know what? It’s sad that you even feel that you have to put it that way. We ARE different, and it’s wonderful! I think the majority of people feel the same way, but it’s the people who are unhappy with their lives, and want to blame everyone else, who make the most noise.
If you don’t (one doesn’t) like a book, it’s honest to say so, and to describe why. It’s also potentially helpful for people who seek out reviews—as I do—in order to decide if the thing is worth my time, or if others have found it to match its promotional material.
For me, the most helpful reviews discuss strengths and weaknesses, but I try to bear in mind that we’re all different, and what interests me might not interest you, and so on.
Exactly. A useful review is one that tells you enough about the material to help you make a good decision based on your own criteria. I bought one book after reading several reviews on Amazon that said it was too difficult, dense, or "academic" for other readers. "Good!" I said.
For the benefit of some potential readers, the AI chatbot creating the following is labeling it TLDR, or to save on letters, T.M.W., and advising that they proceed, or not, according to how desperate they may be for entertainment, 'cause there's really no news here. But perhaps that last is an unnecessary redundancy that wasn't eliminated in initial de-bugging. It will be looking into that shortly...
The good news, fwiw, is that after thoroughly reviewing this latest from our esteemed host and observer of the human condition, I can find nothing negative to say about it. And the bad news is... that I can find nothing negative to say about it, which likely makes what I'm attempting to say here a whole lot less interesting and attractive to any human beings lurking about these environs. Apologies.
In fact, *not* knocking this is necessary if I-of-questionable-intelligence am to say what I find relevant here, since I'm in complete agreement with our resident flesh and bone oracle on all his points, and my own being: that by the time the AI created by the so-called real thing takes over this space completely, which it one day certainly will, by then it will likely have taken over a whole lot of other stuff, some of a bit more import, and, while being much more efficient but in reality not any smarter than those who created it, it will eventually make a miscalculation, misinterpret a piece of data - make a mistake, if you will - and push that big red button, after which, once the smoke clears, those of the real thing who're still here will have a more than ample opportunity to return to their roots, troglodyte or otherwise. And also to question not only why the guy in the next cave over has a much better cut of meat - or tastier selection of roots and bugs - on his table, but also to question the intelligence of the invention of same of a non-human variety, and the placing of so much human faith in it for the really important stuff.
Of course, being able to point to a smoldering pile of hardware once chocked full of software consisting of non-human intelligence as the culprit will have the distinct advantage of humans being able to relieve themselves of the responsibility for current circumstances, which is what they've always done anyway. So, in the end, it will likely be just business as usual to the very end, even though they like to think they're far too intelligent for that.
Saw on Drudge the other day that Chatbot can now pass med school and the bar exam. So good news indeed! Soon it will have gainful employment and no longer need to haunt the internets to get its jollies.
"Only news" a nice piece of work, btw. Props. But speaking as M.'s artificial stand in while he busies himself with other things, I'm looking forward to a gig that pays better than newsletter critic and commenter. So, yes. Good news indeed!!
Afternoon all...
I don't know. I have been avoiding "bad news" big time recently, and was never a big fan. I always like The Optimist stories in WA PO, and the NY Magazines positive ones way more. But , it might be both that I tend to internalize bad stuff , not on purpose, it just does that to me, and because I just generally feel better when I focus on the positive and good overall.
Plus, I have survived several possible life threatening things, and came out ok, I may be over confident...
News can be useful, helpful, informative—but it can also spill into the hopeless, where it pulls you down because it leaves you feeling powerless to do anything positive about it.
Yeah, it is like an unending nightmare, with no escape...lol
What do you call a dumb barber?
Shear stupidity.
That was sheer -- something. 🚪
Shear-ly you jest.
I wrote here today about choosing not to read certain news outlets, etc. Not unrelatedly, I just turned off the automatic renewal for my TMD subscription. Where it asked why, I wrote that the comment section has been a disappointment since the move, the nature of it has changed and the writing on the page is less interesting. I'm not sure why I'm posting this here, but I guess I figure it might be interesting to a few because that's where we all came from. I just find I read it less and less and I'm becoming more picky and maybe snarky in my comments. They don't need me for that and I don't need to spend my time there. So, here I am and happy to be here. At the risk of repeating myself, thanks again MarqueG68!
Update hours later: Having written about my decision in their comment box when they asked why I was leaving, I got an email from Ryan Brown, the Community Manager, asking me about my thoughts. I'm glad they asked and I replied. It's good that they are paying attention.
Wow, at least Young Ryan is paying attention. Whether he can get his higher-ups to listen remains to be seen.
I just wrote this to Incognito:
The shame of it is that I miss some of the discussion, but without the news as the basis that's gone, too. However, maybe I'm missing less than I thought. As I'm about to reply to CC (writing here first so I'll copy/paste), the conversation with Ryan is making me realize that while some of my disenchantment has to do with the comment section, it has evolved and, for me, is largely now about what I just don't want to be bothered reading. I wrote this to Ryan:
Now, when I take a moment to read/scan TMD, I am less patient and I find I have been picking at some of the writing and the questions asked in Let Us Know. My TMD read is reduced to this: Read the headline and sometimes shoot a quick comment about it; scan the upper section of short news items (rarely reading a full paragraph) and more rarely reading the feature piece, almost never in its entirety. (Example of my thought process: Ron Klain is leaving and I don't really care what anyone thinks of his motive or where he's going. As for his replacement, it will be someone else and it probably won't matter to me who it is. See? Why take the time to read it?) I check out PWOC, skip Worth Your Time and check out LUK, to which I still comment fairly often, though sometimes I find myself criticizing the question.
I’m still on board with their project at The Dispatch overall. Even though I am a very fickle, episodic news consumer. I like their overall value proposition, and—I make no bones about it—I am politically on the right and want to encourage sanity rather than celebrity on that side of politics.
Daily newspapers can’t hold my attention—never have done. TV news for me has become increasingly laughable in its superficiality. I used to like NPR but feel like they’ve gone too far in the progressive direction, not just in their slanted coverage, but starting with their topic selection. I can find things that interest me *more* that I’d rather be spending my time with. For instance, the people around here. =D
Historically, I leaned left but made a point to read right (directionally speaking). My father taught me to take the time to listen to those with whom we disagree for two reasons. First, we may learn something. Worst case, we'll know what they are saying and be better able to argue against them. Well, along the way I came to the conclusion that those on the right and left, liberals and conservatives, really have much more in common than politics allows them to admit. My racially mixed marriage in 1969 might be seen as wildly progressive, but can also be viewed as my right to a personal choice in which the state should have no say. The examples are many, so long as we are defining right and left philosophically and not politically.
So, yes, I still support the mission statement of TMD, if you want to call it that. I also just find that I am happy reading less news and that I don't need it to remain generally informed. I don't need to read the body count to know there is a war in Ukraine. I don't need to read news to know Russia is the aggressor and I can form my own opinion about the need to stop them. If there is peace, I'll hear about it quickly enough. So? Well, it was good to spend time in my workshop again and it's always good to spend some time here.
We're glad you're spending time with us also
Thank you, kind sir.
I originally signed up for TD because I needed a Door #3 between MAGA news sites and liberal news sites (encompassing most of the so-called "mainstream" sites). The comments were a bonus. I'm sorry that didn't really last, but the value I sought out is still there.
Thanks for the comment and the reminder. I used to make it a point to seek out some right leaning stuff because so much of what I saw leaned left and then TMD came along and it was, I agree balanced. After a while, I found I paid more attention to the comments than the news and with the loss of that, I saw less value. I will continue to check it out until renewal drops (I'm sure they'll remind me) and possibly change my mind. A lot of my reaction may be due to me declining interest in so much of what is news today. Still, your comment is a good reminder. Thanks
I think it was worthwhile notifying them of your dissatisfaction so they can't keep ignoring the situation.
However, I must say I have been dipping toes back into regular Dispatch comments and have been noticing names of prevously frequent commenters, seemingly returning. Also I'm seeing a bit of an effort to reacquaint commenters with the community standards and the reason for them. I would suggest anyone who's' interested in reinforcing this should give it a try rather than giving up.
Fair enough. I've been dipping for a while but just not sure it's worth it to me. My renew (not-renew) date is March and I'll continue to check it out. I wouldn't mind having my mind changed but I don't want to become the get-off-my-lawn guy and lately I've been voicing some discontent with some of their writing and LUKs. I will continue to check it out and would like to be proven wrong.
The "news" is business and business exists to earn a profit for its shareholders. Indeed, that is its first priority for without that it will not survive. Executives are judged by their ability to guide the ship in a profitable manner and writers are encouraged to write what will sell advertising so every incentive is for the business to sell what its customers want to buy. If you open a landscaping business in midtown Manhattan you will be unlikely to survive.
Here is where it gets interesting, at least maybe so. Do we really want all that bad news or are we reading it because that's what's there? Are the editors and executives who determine what is to be reported leaders or followers?
At scale, I suppose we do want to read the bad news. Individually, we have choices. I went on my no-Trump-read regimen a long time ago but he kept getting attention so Trump stories continued to sell advertising and, to some degree, still do. Editors can choose a slant one way or another, but they have to sell. The way to fight them is to buy elsewhere, if one is inclined to fight it at all.
I’m with you on that—I started a news boycott when they started making him the center of coverage back in the 2015/16 GOP primary. And I had been a long-time politics junky before that. For me, it also represented the demolition of the wall between politics and entertainment—turning politics in nothing more than entertainment. That caused me to wonder how long politics had been nothing more than entertainment all along…
The shame of it is that I miss some of the discussion, but without the news as the basis that's gone, too. However, maybe I'm missing less than I thought. As I'm about to reply to CC (writing here first so I'll copy/paste), the conversation with Ryan is making me realize that while some of my disenchantment has to do with the comment section, it has evolved and, for me, is largely now about what I just don't want to be bothered reading. I wrote this to Ryan:
Now, when I take a moment to read/scan TMD, I am less patient and I find I have been picking at some of the writing and the questions asked in Let Us Know. My TMD read is reduced to this: Read the headline and sometimes shoot a quick comment about it; scan the upper section of short news items (rarely reading a full paragraph) and more rarely reading the feature piece, almost never in its entirety. (Example of my thought process: Ron Klain is leaving and I don't really care what anyone thinks of his motive or where he's going. As for his replacement, it will be someone else and it probably won't matter to me who it is. See? Why take the time to read it?) I check out PWOC, skip Worth Your Time and check out LUK, to which I still comment fairly often, though sometimes I find myself criticizing the question.
“We want to learn about what dangers to avoid. That’s the news that’s important to us.” I happen to like those true crime podcasts, and I know a lot of fans say it’s because they want to know how those people ended up in those situations, and what they could have done to survive. I think that is definitely part of it.
Interestingly (at least to me), is when I look back on my life as a young person, and all the risks I took when it came to “partying” with my friends, nothing truly bad ever happened. (Although I still think someone put something my drink at one bar I went to with a group of co-workers.) Yet, you would think that each time we stepped out the door, we were at risk of being attacked in some manner. Our carelessness definitely ups the odds, but bad things just don’t happen as often as the news would have us believe.
And as for negative reviews, the thing I’ve noticed about Amazon is that there is often the highest rating posted next to the lowest. They actually put their best rating at the beginning, and there might be several more before reaching that 2-star one. I usually look at the overall number of stars given to the highest ratings vs the lowest. And, most of the time that works, although I have returned a fair number of items (very easy). However they do it, I can see why Amazon has been so successful.
And books can be awfully subjective. I was very disappointed in “The Gold Finch,” and yet it got all kinds of accolades, and was even made into a Netflix movie (or Amazon). The people who loved it in Goodreads was baffling to me, but you can’t please everyone.
Thank you, Marque!
I think life with any risk would be boring and I suppose I took my share when I was younger. Maybe I do now, but I define them differently. I take a risk in my woodworking and might destroy a beautiful piece of wood. Okay that's not as risky as driving drunk, but I already survived that.
Let’s face it, things slow down. I don’t have that kind of energy to begin with, and in my waning years I’d prefer not doing something stupid that impacts the time I have left!
I'm not ready to call them waning years, but I get your point.
Me either, Josh. I still have lots I want to do, and I find life constantly interesting. However, the first time I fractured my tibia (on the left leg) I was 15 years younger. It probably took a few years for me to feel completely back to normal, but I remember it as about one. But, I also felt like I bounced back sooner. This time it really set me back, and I hate the fact that I had to waste time recuperating, and I’m still having issues. It’s been just over a year, and I’ll be 71, not 56.
Stuff happens, but time feels a lot more precious these days.
I do get that and I certainly notice some things have changed. One oddity is that with modern technology, modern materials and modern manufacturing capabilities, some things are being made heavier than they were. I also notice that the floor is further down than it used to be and the distance to up from sitting is definitely farther. These odd things just make no sense.
When it comes to book reviews, especially by people writing for political media, many seem to use the book review framework merely as a way to rant about one's own worldview in the guise of a review. And not just books either. Even at the Mothership, reviews of books and movies are usually about much more.
This may not be as common among Amazon reviewers as they're not professional paid reviewers. But I have seen it happen there, too. "I like / don't like the book because it supports / doesn't support my beliefs" more than anything about the writing quality or plausibility of the plot, quality of character development, etc.
I write short book reviews for the American Library Association. Our guidelines ask us to
a: find a related book that people might know.
b: Lay out the book's theme
c: illustrate something insightful from the book.
Oh, and limit it to 190 words.
The goal is not to like/dislike the book, but to share enough people know if it is a good fit to them.
Very nice guidelines. Helpful and constructive.
I don't always agree with Tierney, but I like his writing. Also, he was a college classmate.
his good fortune
Oooh. Nice landing!
🙏
Interesting! I first became aware of him by interest in reading about psychological research, originally about willpower, which was the other collaboration with Baumeister. I found the writing clear and engaging.
He tends to be more conservative than I am in his leanings, but he is one of a great group of writers who came out of our class: Tierney, Chris Buckley, Chris Whipple, and others.
Today’s special animal friend is the Southern Pig-Tailed Macaque, Macaca nemestrina. This endangered primate is native to Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. They have been introduced to Singapore and the Natuna Islands. The Natuna Islands are the subject of a dispute between the Chinese and Indonesian governments, and they have great scenery, marine life, and local culture. Indonesia would like tourism, please:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8_OuaiRso
Male Southern pig-tailed macaques are about 2 feet long (body length) and females are 18-21 inches. Males can weigh up to 26 lbs. and females about half that. They have fairly long, buff-brown fur which is darker on their backs, lighter underneath. Their short, skinny tails curl up a bit, inspiring the name.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5udjOijqJcE
The species lives in large groups which separate into smaller family bands when foraging during the day. They are mainly terrestrial, but they are excellent climbers and also enjoy getting in the water, unlike most primates. Males in the group compete for dominance, while female status is hereditary. The alpha female leads the group to food and shelter, while the dominant male organizes the other males for defense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxOG3y2RTHw
Don’t feed wild animals, people. It’s bad for them. Macaques eat fruit, berries, grains, other vegetation, and some invertebrates. They can live in a variety of habitats, including undisturbed rain forest, oil palm plantations, and second-growth mountain forests. Females give birth to one infant every two years. Infant mortality is high. Surviving offspring are mature at 3 to 5 years. They can live 35 years in captivity.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/whHT_2E9xf8
Southern pig-tailed macaques are an agricultural and village pest, and they are often persecuted or killed by Indonesian farmers and villagers. Educational programs and financial support are some of the ways conservationists are addressing this threat. Habitat loss and degradation, including burning, clear-cutting, and pollution, are an additional threat. This species is also collected for the pet trade and for medical research.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mloYW1GEFO4
Thank you to reader Wilhelm for suggesting Borneo as a topic.
When my oldest was in 7th grade, I took him with me to Esapana when i taught a class. We spent three weeks in Malaga. We did a day trip to Gibraltar, where they have wild Macaques on the rock. They recommend you not feed them, but too late, those guys are aggressive.
We hired a driver to go up the rock, stopping along the way. While up there, he took my son to the side of the road, loading some macaroni shells into his hand, then he stepped back. 10 seconds later a macaque jumped off a moving vehicle, landing on my son's shoulders and head, reaching down to eat the macaroni shells out of his hand. It's one of my favorite pictures. Once he finished them, he jumped onto a passing car and was gone.
Two years later we did it again. Another faculty had a young child with him, who walked up to pet one without food. The macaque bared his teeth and hissed at him....We stepped back.
There *has* to be a lawyer joke in there somewhere.
I know how you feel. Whenever I am shoveling out a stable, I am sure there’s gotta be a pony in there! 😳
Lawyer jokes have immunity from the 🚪
>> The Natuna Islands are the subject of a dispute between the Chinese and Indonesian governments<<
The dispute has raged ever since the Chinese government determined any land that has come into contact with either China or water actually belongs to China.
Not to mention all of Mars.
It certainly seems that way.
"Indonesia's EEZ extends 200 nautical miles (370 km) from its shores (as per the 1982 UNCLOS), which, around Natuna, means it is slightly intersected by China's Nine-Dash Line, defining its widely disputed claim to most of the South China Sea. In 2014–2015, the presence of the Indonesian National Armed Forces on the islands was reinforced, which the Indonesian government hoped would reduce the chance of any conflict. Then from late 2019, Chinese fishing vessels increased illegal activity within the EEZ, escorted by a Chinese Coast Guard vessel. Indonesia responded with a formal diplomatic protest to Beijing and then deployed to the region a further 600 troops and eight navy warships, along with aerial support.
The naval presence included Ahmad Yani-class frigates, Bung Tomo-class corvettes, and Kapitan Pattimura-class ASW corvettes, while aerial support came from Naval Aviation CN-235 MPA aircraft, four Indonesian Air Force F-16s and a Boeing 737-2x9, with BAE Hawk aircraft nearby on alert. A visit to the area by President Joko Widodo in early January 2020 reinforced Indonesia's resolve not to tolerate such incursions."
Whenever I think of Winnie the Xie, I think of Abraham Lincoln's thought: I'm feeling patriotic today, and want to invade someone!
Iirc, this is a similar method the Chinese have used against Japanese, Vietnamese, and Philippine territories. They generally send out the “fishing fleet” first to occupy the waters, then they send coast guard tenders, the they tell the previous sovereign countries to get off Chinese property.
Well, as of January 2020, Indonesia isn't giving in. President Joko Widodo was mentioned in the articles about bulbul-singing contests.
way to go!
Good for Indonesia.
I write negative reviews on the library's website sometimes. I make sure to mention two or three specific points. That way, another reader can evaluate what I have said against his own preferences. Maybe he likes the very things I dislike. The same with movie reviews: if I see a glowing review that praises "intense, fast-paced action," I know that it's not what I want to watch.
I understand your comment about movie reviews. Sometimes, what they tout tells me I don't want to watch.
One time, at a diner, I asked the waitress (I know, I know, but I'm just a guy who thinks there are differences between men and women), "Is the pastrami lean?" She answered that it was and I said, "Thanks, I'll have tuna fish."
You’re a guy who is correct that there is a difference. 😊
To take it a step further (dig a deeper hole?), I think we should take time to appreciate the differences.
You know what? It’s sad that you even feel that you have to put it that way. We ARE different, and it’s wonderful! I think the majority of people feel the same way, but it’s the people who are unhappy with their lives, and want to blame everyone else, who make the most noise.
Some of is it purely about attention and needing it, I think, and also finding some personal confirmation in the approving voices.
And the congregation says "AMEN"!
Well, about half the congregation will say Ah Women!
This woman prefers Blessed Be
That is definitely helpful.
If you don’t (one doesn’t) like a book, it’s honest to say so, and to describe why. It’s also potentially helpful for people who seek out reviews—as I do—in order to decide if the thing is worth my time, or if others have found it to match its promotional material.
For me, the most helpful reviews discuss strengths and weaknesses, but I try to bear in mind that we’re all different, and what interests me might not interest you, and so on.
Exactly. A useful review is one that tells you enough about the material to help you make a good decision based on your own criteria. I bought one book after reading several reviews on Amazon that said it was too difficult, dense, or "academic" for other readers. "Good!" I said.