2.27.2009
Herding cats
In a sense, this is what I do, too.
[I'm a little disappointed that this is an ad, but props.]
2.25.2009
Penis distraction
I was totally going to post this article from the BBC News on the origin of sex as found in some fish fossils...
but then I got distracted by the "fossil penis".
Dude. I was really hoping for something a little more explicit.
but then I got distracted by the "fossil penis".
Dude. I was really hoping for something a little more explicit.
Loosely quoted
I'd just like to say that I am not the grammatically challenged "graduate student Phoebe Elefante" that I am misrepresentated to be in the Indiana Daily Student article on health care.
I did make roughly those points, just not so inarticulately.
That is a case of ill transcribed note taking.
I did make roughly those points, just not so inarticulately.
That is a case of ill transcribed note taking.
2.24.2009
Hyperironic
No, we won't pay for linked content or "Journalism".
We're better at this than you are.
Here's why:
Ohmynews
Current TV
Independent Media Center
LiveLeak
We're better at this than you are.
Here's why:
Ohmynews
Current TV
Independent Media Center
LiveLeak
2.23.2009
Killing in the name of
Generation Kill is my new obsession.
Not just because it's good tv - well-written dialogue, engaging characters, complex relationships and conflicting motivations, and lots of explosions - but because it presents the experience of war in its appropriately amoralistic light.
There is no right and wrong, on the ground, when someone is trying to kill you and you are trying to kill them. It's much clearer than that. Living through it is the only option.
Not just because it's good tv - well-written dialogue, engaging characters, complex relationships and conflicting motivations, and lots of explosions - but because it presents the experience of war in its appropriately amoralistic light.
There is no right and wrong, on the ground, when someone is trying to kill you and you are trying to kill them. It's much clearer than that. Living through it is the only option.
2.20.2009
2.19.2009
Dr. Sigman, I presume
Dr. Aric Sigman thinks that social networks are responsible for increasing our risks of heart disease and all other sorts of pernicious ailments by decreasing the amount of time we spend interacting with other humans face to face.
As someone who spends a lot of time thinking about and participating in electronically mediated communications - social and otherwise - I can unequivocally say that this is not true. The electronic communications actually facilitate more face to face interaction with a wider range of people, many of whom I would not interact with if not for the virtual community we have created.
There's another side to this argument that provides, perhaps, some mediating data. According to my beloved Edward T. Hall's theory of proxemics, humans and other biological creatures have an automatic shut-off mechanism - in the form of hormones - which results in total sociopathic behavior when population density reaches a certain point. So, it may be that the massive numbers of human interactions we are forced to have - many involuntary - has forced us online into self-selected tribes.
Though email and chat are no replacement for eye contact, the ubiquity (in the west, where these "problems" are occurring) of screen based devices is making eye contact over the distances necessitated by a globalized society possible, even convenient.
Finally, concluding that it is our media that is at fault is irrelevant, and ultimately pointless. WE are the creators of the society and the technology that drives these usage patterns. The last thing we need is someone telling us that what we're doing is bad for us: guilt and a sense of failure contribute more to the stress that causes circulatory conditions than anything else.
As someone who spends a lot of time thinking about and participating in electronically mediated communications - social and otherwise - I can unequivocally say that this is not true. The electronic communications actually facilitate more face to face interaction with a wider range of people, many of whom I would not interact with if not for the virtual community we have created.
There's another side to this argument that provides, perhaps, some mediating data. According to my beloved Edward T. Hall's theory of proxemics, humans and other biological creatures have an automatic shut-off mechanism - in the form of hormones - which results in total sociopathic behavior when population density reaches a certain point. So, it may be that the massive numbers of human interactions we are forced to have - many involuntary - has forced us online into self-selected tribes.
Though email and chat are no replacement for eye contact, the ubiquity (in the west, where these "problems" are occurring) of screen based devices is making eye contact over the distances necessitated by a globalized society possible, even convenient.
Finally, concluding that it is our media that is at fault is irrelevant, and ultimately pointless. WE are the creators of the society and the technology that drives these usage patterns. The last thing we need is someone telling us that what we're doing is bad for us: guilt and a sense of failure contribute more to the stress that causes circulatory conditions than anything else.
Who is John Galt?
The recent disappearances and faked deaths of die-hard capitalists who have watched their neglect/incompetence/unethical business practices result in the loss of billions of other people's money is too reminiscent of Atlas Shrugged to be merely coincidental.
I suggest you start looking for gold dollar signs...they're probably in the hills of Colorado building secret vaults.
Except, most of these motherfuckers don't even qualify in Ayn Rand's eyes as true tycoons. They don't make anything. They just move YOUR money from one place to another.
Gee, might THAT be the source of the complete lack of productivity that underlies this economic catastrophe?
Dagny Taggart is an admirable business executive in comparison.
I suggest you start looking for gold dollar signs...they're probably in the hills of Colorado building secret vaults.
Except, most of these motherfuckers don't even qualify in Ayn Rand's eyes as true tycoons. They don't make anything. They just move YOUR money from one place to another.
Gee, might THAT be the source of the complete lack of productivity that underlies this economic catastrophe?
Dagny Taggart is an admirable business executive in comparison.
2.18.2009
Frances Densmore
One of the country's earliest and most astute ethnographers.
A few of her thoughts, retold for Minnesota Public Radio.
She IS an archive.
A few of her thoughts, retold for Minnesota Public Radio.
She IS an archive.
Schooling n00bs
Quest to learn
Too bad I'm basically rendered mute with excitement. Hard to craft a cover letter that way.
All I can really say right now is thank you! THANK YOU! THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!
2.17.2009
2.16.2009
I love war
I'm so conflicted.
Maybe this has something to do with it:
As we showed, early man started to cooperate with each other to be able to hunt bigger game, and division of labour with regards to gender roles led to the nuclear family, as men provided meat and women agriculture, and close bonds became necessary to take care of human children who, because of their big brains, have extraordinarily long child-rearing times. However:
"All this interconnectedness and getting along came with a downside. With the concept of “us” comes “them.” To define who is part of our group worth fighting and dying for, we need to determine who is not.
"Very few species demonstrate this much specialization. In this respect, humans have more in common with ants than primates. Ants have a queen, workers, farmers and soldiers. That capacity for war is only found in these highly social animals because only a society that interdependent is capable of having a devoted class willing to die for the greater good."
According to Matt Ridley in The Origins of Virtue, groups put aside selfishness of individuals to form group cohesion. Once the external threat is eradicated, individuals return to their selfish ways. This would explain the unity after 9/11. In WW II:
"German bombs achieved a monolithic loyalty among the British (and vice versa). When the war was over, society fragmented once more and the triumphant greater-goodism of the war years disintigrated into the bickering selfishness of peace, gradually spoiling the promise of socialism."
These strong bonds made us devoted to each other, and look out for one another, but it also made us ferocious towards "others" for the betterment of our "own":
"As we expanded our definition of family outward to include cousins, neighbors and state, we also bred nepotism, tribalism and nationalism. From love came hate, our camaraderie bred prejudice, the capacity to choose good requires an option for evil."
[Taken verbatim from here.]
Maybe this has something to do with it:
As we showed, early man started to cooperate with each other to be able to hunt bigger game, and division of labour with regards to gender roles led to the nuclear family, as men provided meat and women agriculture, and close bonds became necessary to take care of human children who, because of their big brains, have extraordinarily long child-rearing times. However:
"All this interconnectedness and getting along came with a downside. With the concept of “us” comes “them.” To define who is part of our group worth fighting and dying for, we need to determine who is not.
"Very few species demonstrate this much specialization. In this respect, humans have more in common with ants than primates. Ants have a queen, workers, farmers and soldiers. That capacity for war is only found in these highly social animals because only a society that interdependent is capable of having a devoted class willing to die for the greater good."
According to Matt Ridley in The Origins of Virtue, groups put aside selfishness of individuals to form group cohesion. Once the external threat is eradicated, individuals return to their selfish ways. This would explain the unity after 9/11. In WW II:
"German bombs achieved a monolithic loyalty among the British (and vice versa). When the war was over, society fragmented once more and the triumphant greater-goodism of the war years disintigrated into the bickering selfishness of peace, gradually spoiling the promise of socialism."
These strong bonds made us devoted to each other, and look out for one another, but it also made us ferocious towards "others" for the betterment of our "own":
"As we expanded our definition of family outward to include cousins, neighbors and state, we also bred nepotism, tribalism and nationalism. From love came hate, our camaraderie bred prejudice, the capacity to choose good requires an option for evil."
[Taken verbatim from here.]
Smart moves
From alert reader Catherine Satterlee:
What the hell does DRM mean anyway?
You mean, you can't believe everything wikipedia says?
Some day, when we have to pay back all that bad debt, we'll need kids who can think...and stuff.
What the hell does DRM mean anyway?
You mean, you can't believe everything wikipedia says?
Some day, when we have to pay back all that bad debt, we'll need kids who can think...and stuff.
2.15.2009
Before rap battles
According to Johan Huizinga, the Greek word "iambos," originally meaning derision, became the source of iambic poetry.
This form, perhaps best illustrated by Archilochus, became popular in Greek culture as a ritual of public ridicule - often and especially aimed at the vilification of political actors or personal opponents.
This form, perhaps best illustrated by Archilochus, became popular in Greek culture as a ritual of public ridicule - often and especially aimed at the vilification of political actors or personal opponents.
2.13.2009
2.12.2009
2.09.2009
My first hack
I think I mentioned that I would be occasionally posting to Culture Hacker, which is part of a semi-educational and hopefully informative trans/pan/multimedia-for-traditional-media-nerds website called WorkBookProject.
Well, much to the belated enjoyment of my editor, I've finally published my first post.
Well, much to the belated enjoyment of my editor, I've finally published my first post.
2.08.2009
Spectacle of the De Bord
You had me with:
"1 The whole of life of those societies in which modern conditions of production prevail presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. All that once was directly lived has become representation."
You lost me at:
"24 ...If the spectacle -- understood in the limited sense of those "mass media" that are its most stultifying superficial manifestation -- seems at times to be invading society in the shape of a mere apparatus, it should be remembered that this apparatus has nothing neutral about it, and that it answers precisely to the needs of the spectacle's internal dynamics. If the social requirements of the age which develops such techniques can be met only through their mediation, if the administration of society and all contact between people now depends on the intervention of such "instant" communication, it is because this "communication" is essentially one-way; the concentration of the media thus amounts to the monopolization by the administrators of the existing system of the means to pursue their particular form of administration."
from The Society of the Spectacle, Guy De Bord
"1 The whole of life of those societies in which modern conditions of production prevail presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. All that once was directly lived has become representation."
You lost me at:
"24 ...If the spectacle -- understood in the limited sense of those "mass media" that are its most stultifying superficial manifestation -- seems at times to be invading society in the shape of a mere apparatus, it should be remembered that this apparatus has nothing neutral about it, and that it answers precisely to the needs of the spectacle's internal dynamics. If the social requirements of the age which develops such techniques can be met only through their mediation, if the administration of society and all contact between people now depends on the intervention of such "instant" communication, it is because this "communication" is essentially one-way; the concentration of the media thus amounts to the monopolization by the administrators of the existing system of the means to pursue their particular form of administration."
from The Society of the Spectacle, Guy De Bord
2.05.2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)