PerkinWarwick

That's a good point.

Perhaps the temptation is to choose philosophies that have the appearance of power. Sticking pins in a voodoo doll of your boss, Mr. Scrooge for example.

Some acquaintances of mine did that at their job once and it worked a charm. The boss was permanently off on sick leave within a month. Maybe there's something to it.

This man is a genius. We've hit Peak Modern Art.

Honestly, you can't buy this kind of PR. Do a dozen more, number and sign them on the back, profit.

>Reddit now will become the place that inspires mass shooters instead of 8chan

I can guarantee that there are plenty of evil doings on Reddit and Facebook.

One argument, and a more honest one, that people can make is that (a) social media is toxic and (b) it should be made illegal generally. Bingo bango, no mass shootings I guess.

>Do you find yourself being just as concerned when the reading list is 7 male authors and 2 female authors? Or only in this direction?

Not at all, it just stuck out at me while I was browsing through their program. Women represent barely a blip in the world of the 19th C. novel, you might as well teach military history as a series of female leaders. Novels of that era represent a core teaching (or should) in English departments, not an opportunity to boost underserved demographics. Save that for a specialty class.

I don't give a damn about fairness so much as teaching the truth, and the truth includes relative values of things.

> if you just want to dismiss the observation.

I'm not and I'm willing to give it a chance. I'm just not seeing a strong correlation.

What I do see people doing when they lack control is to attempt to gain control. Put together a group, grab some of that sweet power through mass. The more ambitious ones fight their way up the power structure. Special bonus points if you can take over an existing seat of power.

Zero moderation beyond criminal content is/was basically Usenet alt groups. Somehow the world survived all those years.

Listen, I understand the need to cordon off the wrongthink people so that they can't communicate with each other, I just don't agree with it.

That's an interesting theory, although I doubt that 19th century US farmers, among the most self-sufficient people in history, were lacking in religion, superstition, or conspiracies.

>"Hateful" Reddit or FB communities also don't allow "free speech". The moderators will ban people who go against the grain.

Which is fine I think, but why have Reddit or FB do the censoring (aside from things that are outright illegal). I don't much care if a bunch of Nazis or tankies are busy planning world domination on Reddit while sharing recipes. Why do you care?

Heck, I view it all as 'misinformation', and I certainly don't need some cubicle drone at youtube to decide for me.

Certainly the average person is smart enough to understand the statistics of the thing, after all that's something of the point of epidemiology.

There should be enough data points by now to tell me a few things.

. What is the real value of a cloth mask worn inside in a crowd with strangers? What is the value of a properly fitted N95 mask? Give it to me as an odds calculation.

. Just what percentage of covid is picked up in bars? grocery stores? schools? at home? Our local health department is notably mum about that preferring only to hand out the county-wide ages and that's it.

.Actual strong data on value of vaccine in terms of infection and symptoms. 1st, 2nd, 3rd dose. How long are these valuable? How long will they remain so due to mutations? Odds.

.Actual data on nasty side effects of vaccine including odds.

.Fairly presented value of home remedies, anti-virals, etc.

.etc.

You can twizzle out some of this, but rarely. Cut down to the essentials, it wouldn't take up a single sheet of paper. Post that sheet of paper whenever anyone feels the need to opine.

Instead I'm treated to shaming and scolding and peoples' fear about their precious bodily fluids and I'm sick of everyone. Somehow this has become a proxy for the 2016/2020 elections complete with all the religious overtones. Please stop.

While I see that funding will tend to constrict the research around the desires of the funders, it's worth considering that 'science' has also expanded into areas that don't deserve the title.

The softer disciplines are particularly susceptible to the style of the day but lust after the cloak of correctness (and status) that hard sciences wear.

>I think you'll find if you spend time on universities today, they are essentially apolitical.

An interesting experiment would be to compare English Department reading lists in the 1970's vs. now.

My bet is that you'd see quite a difference.

It's not that the College Marxist Club had it's meetings in the basement at any particular time, but that politicization and social movements of the day have been normalized into daily life.

I will stick to my guns in saying that there were 0 (zero) demonstrations of a political nature during my stay. For all I know, it was a low point in such activities (which likely gives me a short temper on the modern world). Frank Zappa played there every year though.

...hah, now that's an interesting angle I hadn't thought of. I went hunting for reading lists for the graduate students. A course on the '19th century English novel' has, wait for it, 7 female authors and 2 male. And one of the two men wrote 'Portrait of a Lady'. That's a pretty interesting way to shift the conversation.

A total user base of 50 or so would be fine. The trick is to find a group where everyone (mostly) wants to interact. An extended family could probably work.