Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

I wonder if the guy who glued his feet to the floor worried about using a petroleum product to unglue his feet.

I wonder if he understood how much of the clothing he was wearing was comprised of petroleum products.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

I wonder if the guy who glued his feet to the floor worried about using a petroleum product to unglue his feet.

I'm always fascinated by "vegan leather" which is mostly petroleum based.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Destroying art

Have they destroyed any art? Hasn't it all been behind glass or otherwise protected?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's a stupid and authoritarian bill. If people want to employ DEI, do so. If they don't, don't.

I don't understand how that's constitutional. But then, I also don't understand how DeSantis' preclusion of certain content in FL is either. My guess is its constitutional until someone sues and it is found otherwise.

I'm pretty sure that since the Court added Barrett most conservative legislatures and governors have figured out that whatever their position is will be deemed constitutional no matter what previous courts have decided.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Adder

Have they destroyed any art? Hasn't it all been behind glass or otherwise protected?

Here's the running tally from 2022. It looks like all of it has been behind glass.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I'm always fascinated by "vegan leather" which is mostly petroleum based.

The good stuff is cork. However a million year old dead animal I guess is better than a freshly killed one.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Actually people who voted third party elected him. Hopefully they learned their lesson.

If you look at the numbers, you will see that Trump got more votes than the people who voted third party.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You only fight the obvious evidence of his mental problems because you seem to think they raise an insanity defense, or render him worthy of leniency. That's in your own head. I don't see that at all.

No, I think Trump has strong, strong preferences to keep those documents, and did not evaluate the risk of doing so very well. I personally think his preferences are a little weird, but "crazy" to me is a medical term, and I'm reluctant to pathologize odd behavior. YMMV.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Except it is. It's a cult that's caused corporate America to engage in performative rituals. Performative rituals are not conducive to productivity. Companies exist to make money, period.

HR is enough of a cash suck/cost center already. Larding it with DEI strictures is throwing sand in gears. At one point in my life, and very annoying one, I had to work with an HR head managing 1100 people. This kind of stuff drove everyone nuts. "This is sexist, that's discriminatory, we should have a workshop." Pissed away a small fortune getting opinions from outside counsel on employment matters. Godawful, tedious.

If the social change you attribute to DEI is that corporations now perform expensive performative rituals, I would say (1) speaking as a manager in corporate America, you are overestimating the expense, and, more importantly, (2) the kind of social change that DEI advocates have been looking for is to foster a culture of social equality, and even expensive performative corporate rituals weren't the point.

If the Trump kids had such a laptop, it'd have been on the front page of every newspaper in the country. Don Jr's dick picks would still be a meme today.

The great thing about this kind of argument by hypothetical is that it is completely speculative, and so completely irrefutable.

I personally don't want to see dick pics from anyone, including both Hunter Biden and Don Jr. I am 100% OK with editorial judgment by the media that permits me not to see them.

It's telling that it's not that you want to see Hunter Biden dick pics, it's that you see a double standard. We started with the idea that you were defending the freedom of expression from authoritarians, but now you are complaining that about a double standard involving the publication of hypothetical dick pics. Life comes at you fast.

And it's defended, laughably, as efforts to stanch misinformation.

Actually, no. I just told you that Twitter's policy was not to publish stuff that had been hacked. The misinformation is in your version of the facts, and there is no stanching it. God Bless America! You continue to be free to receive and disseminate all sorts of nutty things.

But the Biden laptop is just one of the most recent examples of it. Recall how the media got in line and parroted Bush's bullshit to get us into Iraq? How about the stamping out of lab leak theories as disinformation, and worse yet, racism? How about the endless bullshit about the efficacy of masks? Even Fauci has admitted lying about that. But it's okay, and we shouldn't talk about his lies, because they were noble lies - those who know what's best for everyone else needed to get people in line.

Is your point that when the government says something, lots of people believe it? Yes, that is too bad.

Your refusal to see authoritarian creep all around you is kind of surprising. You're not a blindered sort. But I think you're so tied to the idea that it can only come from the right that to show you how it insidiously comes from the left incenses you. It's like pissing on some article of faith.

I don't see authoritarian creep on the left because I think the fringe lefties you're talking about are not in any danger of taking any real power anywhere in this country, and when I and the rest of the world talk about authoritarianism, we are talking about government control over things, not a couple of guys on Twitter. YMMV. MAGA types currently occupy all sorts of government offices all over the country, and there is a real danger that Trump will win the next presidential election. (You never actually name the leftist bogeymen who get you all hot and bothered.)

If you say the left and the right are equivalent, and I say, no they're not, it doesn't mean that I think the left is perfect. I'm saying that differences between right and left are real and important, and should be acknowledged and discussed.

.... I don't see any right way to poke fun at these things. And things like DEI, or ESG, are not like finance at all. People hold these things to be so virtuous as to be beyond reproach. I can make fun of finance all day long, anywhere. Nobody takes offense or thinks one "dim" for doing so. Finance doesn't care; it's making money. Poke fun at a DEI consultant or exec and see how that flies. Better yet, try it with a Dean or Professor. These things are sanctified. And what's sanctified is... religion.

It just depends on how you do it. The issue here is that when you talk about poking fun at DEI, what you really mean is trying to make a so-called "joke" that tells everyone you think DEI is a waste of time and money. In the sort of large company that we are talking about, there is an understanding that once business decisions get made, there is a time to shelve your personal views and pitch in to make the plan work. If you're at the table when someone is deciding whether to invest in DEI, you can absolutely say it's not a good use of money. Once the decision is made, it's time to support that decision. People who can't do that are disruptive, and they get weeded out.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I got bounced very fast once for saying I didn't believe in home owners associations in a case where the HOA was suing some resident for non-payment of dues. In Texas, HOAs have massive power and in some circumstances can take your house.

I don't like HOAs either, but I never thought of trying to stop believing in them. If you do that, do they disappear?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

If the social change you attribute to DEI is that corporations now perform expensive performative rituals, I would say (1) speaking as a manager in corporate America, you are overestimating the expense, and, more importantly, (2) the kind of social change that DEI advocates have been looking for is to foster a culture of social equality, and even expensive performative corporate rituals weren't the point.

A DEI manager is a six figure position. It's not huge dollars, but not pocket change either.

And you miss the fact that a ton of managers don't want to adopt it at all. But because it has become a sort of industry standard thing, it becomes (I hate this word, but it's necessary here) best practices. Once something is adopted widely, it becomes compulsory. An HR manager says, "Look, when in Rome... And it's a hedge against claims... and creates a nice feel good story."

The great thing about this kind of argument by hypothetical is that it is completely speculative, and so completely irrefutable.

It's not speculative at all. Anything related to Trump is front page immediately. We heard about hookers and golden showers in Moscow for months, and no one in the media stepped back and asked if that was reckless. Then it was proven to be bullshit, and nobody in the media apologized for any of it. All is fair with the Orange Man.

He deserves this, no doubt, and courts it, but still - it is a double standard.

I personally don't want to see dick pics from anyone, including both Hunter Biden and Don Jr. I am 100% OK with editorial judgment by the media that permits me not to see them.

The Post wasn't showing dick pics. The Post was merely writing about a laptop that had all sorts of material damaging to Joe and Hunter on it.

It's telling that it's not that you want to see Hunter Biden dick pics, it's that you see a double standard. We started with the idea that you were defending the freedom of expression from authoritarians, but now you are complaining that about a double standard involving the publication of hypothetical dick pics. Life comes at you fast.

I share your lack of interest in dick pics. The Post was exercising free expression - providing a story of public interest. A late campaign surprise, like Hillary's strategic drop of the "grab them by the pussy" tape. The Post story was every bit as newsworthy as the Access Hollywood interview of Trump. One was carried in every media outlet on earth. The other was ignored in legacy media and silenced in social media.

(I'll reply in advance to your facile attempt to distinguish the stories by stating one involves the son of a candidate rather than the candidate by noting the laptop contained info regarding Joe, not just Hunter.)

Actually, no. I just told you that Twitter's policy was not to publish stuff that had been hacked. The misinformation is in your version of the facts, and there is no stanching it. God Bless America! You continue to be free to receive and disseminate all sorts of nutty things.

Right, just like Twitter's refusal to allow links to the Times' publishing of Trump's stolen tax return showing a $900mil loss.

I don't see authoritarian creep on the left because I think the fringe lefties you're talking about are not in any danger of taking any real power anywhere in this country, and when I and the rest of the world talk about authoritarianism, we are talking about government control over things, not a couple of guys on Twitter. YMMV.

Actually, it's a couple guys in the C Suite of Twitter who were working with NSA and FBI folks to massage narratives. I mean, you could read Bari Weiss on this. And you probably did read her when she was at the Times. But then she started criticizing the narratives you prefer, so you'll of course assert that all of the info she published about Twitter after Musk bought it establishing govt-concerted efforts to control what was said on the platform are just... quackery.

MAGA types currently occupy all sorts of government offices all over the country, and there is a real danger that Trump will win the next presidential election. (You never actually name the leftist bogeymen who get you all hot and bothered.)

You're not seriously buying that hysterical conspiracy theory that Trump has an army of bureaucrats placed in positions to grant him the election in 2024. That's Alex Jones level silliness, and I'm not dignifying anything that frivolous with a response.

If you say the left and the right are equivalent, and I say, no they're not, it doesn't mean that I think the left is perfect. I'm saying that differences between right and left are real and important, and should be acknowledged and discussed.

Totally agree. The right is far more aggressive and seeking direct control. Hence, I referred to it as Orwellian. Boot on the neck. Couldn't agree with you more. The left, however, is for more effective, as it is capturing the culture - the legacy media, a large chunk of social media, academia, corporate management. And as Huxley described in Brave New World, it is suggesting, both carrot and stick in hand, that the masses had better take their Soma and do as the People Who Know Best (maleducated knuckleheads of our strata who fancy ourselves wise wonks) tell them to do. It is subtle, but it's also obvious. You have to be willfully obtuse to miss it.

It just depends on how you do it. The issue here is that when you talk about poking fun at DEI, what you really mean is trying to make a so-called "joke" that tells everyone you think DEI is a waste of time and money. In the sort of large company that we are talking about, there is an understanding that once business decisions get made, there is a time to shelve your personal views and pitch in to make the plan work. If you're at the table when someone is deciding whether to invest in DEI, you can absolutely say it's not a good use of money. Once the decision is made, it's time to support that decision. People who can't do that are disruptive, and they get weeded out.

See my earlier comment about "best practices." It's pretty much compulsory, and you'd be an utter fool to argue against its adoption at any stage. The smarter play is to adopt, let it fail as it often does, or succeed, and wait out the current moral panic over "equity" and "inequality" until the thing burns out from its own heat, as moral panics and fashionable manias will.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

A DEI manager is a six figure position. It's not huge dollars, but not pocket change either.

And you miss the fact that a ton of managers don't want to adopt it at all. But because it has become a sort of industry standard thing, it becomes (I hate this word, but it's necessary here) best practices. Once something is adopted widely, it becomes compulsory. An HR manager says, "Look, when in Rome... And it's a hedge against claims... and creates a nice feel good story."

You are completely missing my point, which is that the people behind DEI efforts are *not* trying to create six-figure jobs for DEI managers. They are trying to change society, but they aren't changing much. But they are providing a fig-leaf for large corporations.

It's not speculative at all. Anything related to Trump is front page immediately. We heard about hookers and golden showers in Moscow for months, and no one in the media stepped back and asked if that was reckless. Then it was proven to be bullshit, and nobody in the media apologized for any of it. All is fair with the Orange Man.

He deserves this, no doubt, and courts it, but still - it is a double standard.

Are there double standards? Sure. (For example, if Joe Biden said crazy things that Trump says all the time, the media would completely flip out, and rightly so. Trump says them and it's not news.) Does that mean the left is authoritarian? No.

The Post wasn't showing dick pics. The Post was merely writing about a laptop that had all sorts of material damaging to Joe and Hunter on it.

I share your lack of interest in dick pics. The Post was exercising free expression - providing a story of public interest. A late campaign surprise, like Hillary's strategic drop of the "grab them by the pussy" tape. The Post story was every bit as newsworthy as the Access Hollywood interview of Trump. One was carried in every media outlet on earth. The other was ignored in legacy media and silenced in social media.

There was and is widespread skepticism about what was actually on the laptop, because of questions about the chain of custody and because of the poor credibility of key people (e.g., Giuliani) involved in the story. (The fact that some contents of the laptop are legit does not, of course, mean that everything on it is legit.)

This country has many, many, many media outlets. Some ran the story, and some did not, each according to its own editorial standards. The government prevented none of them publishing.

In other words, there is no First Amendment issue here, period, full stop. There is no authoritarianism going on in this story. Indeed, the federal government was, at the time, run by Trump, so I suppose it's a testament to our media's editorial independence that many outlets felt free not to run the story.

(I'll reply in advance to your facile attempt to distinguish the stories by stating one involves the son of a candidate rather than the candidate by noting the laptop contained info regarding Joe, not just Hunter.)

We both know that the allegations about Joe and the Ukrainian prosecutor are empty, and that the GOP wanted the Hunter Biden dick pics in the news before the election. That was the point.

Right, just like Twitter's refusal to allow links to the Times' publishing of Trump's stolen tax return showing a $900mil loss.

God help anyone who tries to defend the application of Twitter's policies. A good friend was a top lawyer there. It's an impossible job.

Actually, it's a couple guys in the C Suite of Twitter who were working with NSA and FBI folks to massage narratives. I mean, you could read Bari Weiss on this. And you probably did read her when she was at the Times. But then she started criticizing the narratives you prefer, so you'll of course assert that all of the info she published about Twitter after Musk bought it establishing govt-concerted efforts to control what was said on the platform are just... quackery.

I have looked at what she and Taibbi came up with from what Musk gave them, and it was the weakest of weak sauce, twisted and amplified in the retelling by the kind of morons on Twitter whom you would try to escape at a party.

Who, specifically, "in the C Suite of Twitter" do you think was "working with the NSA and folks to massage narratives." Facts, or it didn't happen.

You're not seriously buying that hysterical conspiracy theory that Trump has an army of bureaucrats placed in positions to grant him the election in 2024.

No, I'm pointing out that MAGA Republicans are currently holding seats in the Senate and Congress, statewide office in many states, and many state legislative seats. This is not a secret or a conspiracy theory.

Totally agree. The right is far more aggressive and seeking direct control. Hence, I referred to it as Orwellian. Boot on the neck. Couldn't agree with you more. The left, however, is for more effective, as it is capturing the culture - the legacy media, a large chunk of social media, academia, corporate management. And as Huxley described in Brave New World, it is suggesting, both carrot and stick in hand, that the masses had better take their Soma and do as the People Who Know Best (maleducated knuckleheads of our strata who fancy ourselves wise wonks) tell them to do. It is subtle, but it's also obvious. You have to be willfully obtuse to miss it.

I'm glad you perceive reality, but your grasp of cause and effect is weak. The "left" is not "capturing the culture." There's no carrot and no stick. It's the other way around. The culture has changed. What most people want is where most media, business and schools are. It's not like mainstream institutions were all taken over by Maoists who brainwashed everyone.

The mainstream is most of the country. It changes, because that's what it does, and yes, the country has been mostly growing more liberal and less conservative for decades. The "left" of your imagination is a tiny fraction of people who have almost never had power and almost never will have power. Conservatives are a much larger fraction primarily motivated by resistance to and grievance about social change. (Hence "Make American Great Again.")

See my earlier comment about "best practices." It's pretty much compulsory, and you'd be an utter fool to argue against its adoption at any stage. The smarter play is to adopt, let it fail as it often does, or succeed, and wait out the current moral panic over "equity" and "inequality" until the thing burns out from its own heat, as moral panics and fashionable manias will.

Thanks for the advice, but I am familiar with the way these issues play out within actual companies, large and small.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Greedy, you might find this review of Marty Peretz's memoir interesting:

https://thebaffler.com/latest/everyb...es-marty-klion

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Here's the running tally from 2022. It looks like all of it has been behind glass.

I had thought they were trying to be provocative and annoying, but not destructive.

The spokesperson for Just Stop Oil was on Pod Save the UK and did not seem like a crazy person.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Ty:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...en-laptop.html

From those rabid right wingers at the Daily Mail.