georgeorwell

6 ms·

1.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
"As deep as anyone else in the field" implies formal writing, which I've never seen by Ebert. If it exists, does it compare with what gets published in a film studies journal, or has it been published in one? Do you have a link or article
2.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Yeah, I basically agree. His mainstream work is what he's known for, and it's probably why self-avowed intellectuals (academics in film studies or film theory) don't consider him an intellectual. For me it's that even with his online work
3.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
gnosis didn't say anything about film or new media. I'd be really pretty surprised if gnosis believed there weren't "intellectual" (read: thoughtful) things to say about film. That said, he didn't explain why it's sad that Ebert was consi
4.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
There's nothing wrong with film criticism. Ebert's 4-star ratings are even a good heuristic for picking something to watch. All of his "great movies" are generally recognized as such. And he certainly knew a lot more details about film t
5.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Cognition is layer upon layer of pattern processing, all the way down to sensory inputs. His particular pattern matching mechanism might need adjustment, but pattern matching itself is the only mechanism by which we decide anything. If yo
6.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
I'll give you a practical example. What specific emotions do you feel when you take a moment to consider the following two lists of five words extracted from your comment? 1) mystical, Christian, exotic, prayer, pitched 2) productive, eval
7.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
For reference, I deleted a comment which said, "Personally I believe nobody benefits from abuse, because it is not a zero-sum game." or something very close to that. For me sexism implies discrimination, and discrimination implies abuse.
8.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Hey man, thanks for your reply. From above: > Context. You are supposed to comment on HN. You are not supposed to play in the street. If you played in a park, I'd expect you not to get hit by a car. If someone does get hit by a car whi
9.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Well, mr-hank said it had something to do with "a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male", and Adria corroborates that less specifically with it being a joke about a "big" dongle. https://news.ycombinator.
10.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Ok, I actually just didn't realize you were talking about probabilistic logic, because I'm used to propositional logic. If there is no way to determine S in the absence of A, then yes, A matters. However, we have a reasonable accounting o
11.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Guilty pleasure?
12.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Okay, thanks for explaining, I better understand your position. For myself, I don't believe A -> S or !A -> !S. I also don't believe O -> S or !O -> !S. People will get offended over the silliest things, and conversely vi
13.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Please be civil and don't make threats. I flagged your comment.
14.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Please be civil. I asked you nicely when you were complaining about death threats and you ignored it. I've flagged that comment and the three comments since then. This isn't the place for sarcasm, all-caps, insults, or flame wars.
15.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
So with other people claiming sexism O, hypocritical Adria H, and sexist remarks S, you're saying !O -> (H -> !S), but O -> S. I guess I don't believe that the truth of statements depends on the number of people making them (th
16.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
If you evaluate whether or not those guys deserved the treatment they got on the basis of anyone's emotions, then it's all up for grabs. It's incorrect in the first place to support a claim of sexism on the basis of an individual's emotion
17.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Let's assume an identical situation, except that this time one of the two guys said something to her like, "Hey baby, I'd like to fork your repo, so do you wanna see my dongle?" Would her hypocrisy have any bearing on her claims of sexism?
18.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
Okay. You came up with the park analogy, saying that if someone got hit by a car in it, that you wouldn't not play in it on that basis. This is a fallacy because that was not the original position. The fallacy is called a straw man, beca
19.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
For what it's worth, I didn't tell her to shut up. (I'm assuming it's a woman.) I just said I don't think it's such a good idea to write such inflammatory messages if you're concerned about the death threats you're receiving. This includ
20.
by georgeorwell 13y ago
I'll give you another example. I don't find the dongle jokes offensive, but obviously Adria did. My advice to guys at conferences would probably be, don't make dick jokes in public, because it seems somebody might overreact and you might g
21.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
I'm not sure why it's cowardly to suggest that. Could you elaborate? I thought it was good advice. If inflammatory comments are even possibly leading to death threats (and it seemed to me like they might be), it's probably a good idea to
22.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
Hi rmrfrmrf. I went through your recent comments. By and large, they're highly inflammatory. Ease off on the vitriol and your life might get a bit easier. To be precise, these are the comments that I find inflammatory: > Because anti
23.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
> I'm honestly surprised that anyone is [...] defending Ms Richards Even though I think she messed up in a big way, that there wasn't sexism, that she is a hypocrite, and that she really kept asking for it, much of the aggressive abuse
24.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
She was playing it in the hallway, at the conference, by the washrooms, posting about it on her public Facebook page, and tagging it #PyCon. Nobody dragged Adria anywhere and forced her to listen to the penis jokes. She just overheard them
25.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
Thanks for catching that. It's hard to reason about these things because tu quoque is already false. I mean, if you assume false is true, then you can prove anything. I guess it depends on whether there's an if or an if-and-only-if relat
26.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
I'm not clear that you understand what a straw man is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man People are saying that what the two guys did was not sexist and that Adria's response was inappropriate. So, debate that, rather than introduc
27.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
Here's my source about tu quoque being a kind of ad hominem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque Ad hominem does not require the accusations to be baseless; it's usually more effective if they aren't. It's true that she appears to ha
28.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
Yeah, that one. There are more pictures of it on her Facebook page along with plenty of nasty comments. Basically the game is based on politically incorrect 'humor' and they were playing it in public spaces at PyCon. Although I probably
29.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
I agree that it looks like she was exaggerating her offense. Hypocritical people often lie to manipulate situations to their advantage, or rather they choose truths to suit them according to the situation. So I guess what I am saying is t
30.
by georgeorwell 14y ago
Yeah, it's a kind of ad hominem, because it says, "This person's arguments are not worth listening to because this person's behavior is not in line with what they are arguing for." But if arguments are rational things with inherent truth t

More ›