Interesting Links for 20-09-2016

[andrewducker]

The Kremlin Really Believes That Hillary Wants to Start a War With Russia (tags: russia usa politics war ) Inside Google’s AI-Powered War on Trolls (tags: abuse internet google ai ) Edinburgh's Christmas expands across city (tags: edinburgh christmas ) RuneScape Adding Auctions For Banned Players’ Stuff (tags: games money ) Cornell wants to

Comments

How Poe's Law killed edgy comedians

[cartesiandaemon]

I'm not convinced yet. All the examples cited seem to be ones where the the comedian says something BLATANTLY racist (or misogynistic, etc), and it's "edgy" for people who want to say that at least a little bit, but aren't sure if they can get away with it. But to anyone who actually cares, it's not "edgy", it's just "racist". There are examples of characters where you're clearly supposed to be laughing AT them for being racist, not with them, but I think of them much more on TV. I'm sure there are comedians who have personas like that but it didn't sound like ones in the article.

RE: How Poe's Law killed edgy comedians

[octopoid_horror]

I'd agree, although I think there's a difference between sitcoms and stand-up that's quite interesting.

Shows like Another Period, South Park and It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia are extremely "edgy" (to use the article's term). You could also replace that with "puerile", "finding humour in stereotypes", "incredibly lowbrow", "frankly offensive" depending on your tastes. I absolutely love Another Period, but I can easily see how people might be offended by some of the jokes. Abortion, anti-semitism and paedophilia are things that some people really don't like jokes about, and I can understand that. However, I guess it's maybe more problematic in stand-up, because the comedian is directly identified with the joke that they're telling.

Also, I think "society getting too PC" is really just a way of saying "society is getting less bigoted and more understanding of others", which is a good thing. Although it can be taken too far, witness the whole SJW thing.

[gonzo21]

That would be lovely if Google to produce a sort of adblock style filter tool that would automatically remove all the assholes from the internet so I didn't have to see them abusive shitty little comments everywhere.

Interesting article about how the Kremlin views Clinton though. The Russians are clever people and their analysts are some of the best in the world. If they're concerned, maybe we should all be a little concerned.

[andrewducker]

Maybe. But there's a massive slant in there of "If we all act self-interestedly then it's much better than if we actually try to make the world a better place" and also, I wouldn't trust a lot of it to not be propaganda itself.

[gonzo21]

No, can't trust anything anywhere in this post-truth era.

Though it does amuse me, both Republican and Democrat parties are demonstrably hostile to the best wishes of the majority of the people. So all that ink spilt on which is the good guy and which is the bad guy, and really they're all bad guys. It's only a question of who will screw us all over the worst, Trump or Clinton.

[ironyoxide]

>The lone American in a Russian foreign policy academy/think-tank.

Yeah, he's being played.

[seraphicwing]

LOL forever at the Kremlin. :(

[kalimac]

1) Fear of Clinton's bellicosity has some justification, but Russia's real agenda here became clear after its desire to manage international relations on "mutually-understood self-interest" turned out to manifest itself in expectation that Trump will pursue policies on Syria and NATO that would actually suit Russia's self-interest, not the US's

[andrewducker]

Totally agreed on Russia.

And largely on the comedy - I think there was a place for comedians in shattering some of the restrictive social mores of the past, but a lot of it does seem remarkably pointless nowadays. (Less so in places where such social restrictions are still in place).

The key takeaway from the car article, I thought, was that cul-de-sacs are worse because there are no shops or jobs in them, and so you have to travel further afield, along highways, to get to places that people typically need to get to:
“The reality is yes, you’re safer - if you never leave your cul-de-sac. But if you actually move around town like a normal person, your town as a whole is much more dangerous

[skington]

It's not just topography, it's the fact that density is lower / there's no public transport. So you have to drive.

[kalimac]

They're not able to walk, bike, ride transit: they have to. I lived in Berkeley. I walked to the grocery, though it wasn't any closer than the suburban one where I live now. Why? Because I didn't have a car, and one reason I didn't is because they were built before expectation of universal car ownership, and consequently there were few places to park one: no driveways, no garages, and street parking under severe pressure and consequently severe legal restrictions. If people don't drive in grid cities, it's because they can't move (congestion: a case of the ironic "nobody goes there, it's too crowded") and they can't park. You can easily walk or ride bikes in the suburbs, and many do, and the bike paths are easier and safer

[bart_calendar]

I have never once ran out of Pokeballs. If you live in a city running out of them isn't really an option. If anything I get "your bag is filled with too many pokeballs" about half the time.