The Wires
powered by Surfing Waves
Help!

To keep the Conversation going, please help me by linking news articles, opinion pieces and other political content in today's Comments section.

Link Code:   <a href="URL">text</a>

OR here's a link generator. The one I had posted died, then Akhilleus found one, but it too bit the dust. He found yet another, which I've linked here, and as of September 23, 2024, it's working.

OR you can always just block, copy and paste to your comment the URL (Web address) of the page you want to link.

Note for Readers. It is not possible for commenters to "throw" their highlighted links to another window. But you can do that yourself. Right-click on the link and a drop-down box will give you choices as to where you want to open the link: in a new tab, new window or new private window.

Thank you to everyone who has been contributing links to articles & other content in the Comments section of each day's "Conversation." If you're missing the comments, you're missing some vital links.

INAUGURATION 2029

Marie: I don't know why this video came up on my YouTube recommendations, but it did. I watched it on a large-ish teevee, and I found it fascinating. ~~~

 

Hubris. One would think that a married man smart enough to start up and operate his own tech company was also smart enough to know that you don't take your girlfriend to a public concert where the equipment includes a jumbotron -- unless you want to get caught on the big camera with your arms around said girlfriend. Ah, but for Andy Bryon, CEO of A company called Astronomer, and also maybe his wife, Wednesday was a night that will live in infamy. New York Times link. ~~~

Commencement ceremonies are joyous occasions, and Steve Carell made sure that was true this past weekend (mid-June) at Northwestern's commencement:

~~~ Carell's entire commencement speech was hilarious. The audio and video here isn't great, but I laughed till I cried.

CNN did a live telecast Saturday night (June 7) of the Broadway play "Good Night, and Good Luck," written by George Clooney and Grant Heslov, about legendary newsman Edward R. Murrow's effort to hold to account Sen. Joe McCarthy, "the junior senator from Wisconsin." Clooney plays Murrow. Here's Murrow himself with his famous take on McCarthy & McCarthyism, brief remarks that especially resonate today: ~~~

     ~~~ This article lists ways you still can watch the play. 

New York Times: “The New York Times Company has agreed to license its editorial content to Amazon for use in the tech giant’s artificial intelligence platforms, the company said on Thursday. The multiyear agreement 'will bring Times editorial content to a variety of Amazon customer experiences,' the news organization said in a statement. Besides news articles, the agreement encompasses material from NYT Cooking, The Times’s food and recipe site, and The Athletic, which focuses on sports. This is The Times’s first licensing arrangement with a focus on generative A.I. technology. In 2023, The Times sued OpenAI and its partner, Microsoft, for copyright infringement, accusing the tech companies of using millions of articles published by The Times to train automated chatbots without any kind of compensation. OpenAI and Microsoft have rejected those accusations.” ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: I have no idea what this means for "the Amazon customer experience." Does it mean that if I don't have a NYT subscription but do have Amazon Prime I can read NYT content? And where, exactly, would I find that content? I don't know. I don't know.

Washington Post reporters asked three AI image generators what a beautiful woman looks like. "The Post found that they steer users toward a startlingly narrow vision of attractiveness. Prompted to show a 'beautiful woman,' all three tools generated thin women, without exception.... Her body looks like Barbie — slim hips, impossible waist, round breasts.... Just 2 percent of the images showed visible signs of aging. More than a third of the images had medium skin tones. But only nine percent had dark skin tones. Asked to show 'normal women,' the tools produced images that remained overwhelmingly thin.... However bias originates, The Post’s analysis found that popular image tools struggle to render realistic images of women outside the Western ideal." ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: The reporters seem to think they are calling out the AI programs for being unrealistic. But there's a lot about the "beautiful women" images they miss. I find these omissions remarkably sexist. For one thing, the reporters seem to think AI is a magical "thing" that self-generates. It isn't. It's programmed. It's programmed by boys, many of them incels who have little or no experience or insights beyond comic books and Internet porn of how to gauge female "beauty." As a result, the AI-generated women look like cartoons; that is, a lot like an air-brushed photo of Kristi Noem: globs of every kind of dark eye makeup, Scandinavian nose, Botox lips, slathered-on skin concealer/toner/etc. makeup, long dark hair and the aforementioned impossible Barbie body shape, including huge, round plastic breasts. 

New York Times: “George Clooney’s Broadway debut, 'Good Night, and Good Luck,' has been one of the sensations of the 2024-25 theater season, breaking box office records and drawing packed houses of audiences eager to see the popular movie star in a timely drama about the importance of an independent press. Now the play will become much more widely available: CNN is planning a live broadcast of the penultimate performance, on June 7 at 7 p.m. Eastern. The performance will be preceded and followed by coverage of, and discussion about, the show and the state of journalism.”

 

Contact Marie

Email Marie at constantweader@gmail.com

Friday
Sep102010

Constitution v. Common Sense

Charles Blow of the New York Times is concerned that "Too much of the debate [over Islam in America] seems to be centered around the sensitivities of terrorists a world away.... But...," he writes, "we are a country in which the construction of a building and the destruction of a book are rights extended to all, even if opposed by most."

Over & above the false equivalency Blow tries to establish between building a cultural center & destroying a holy text, the Constant Weader thinks he misses the underlying point of the discussion:

So what you're saying, I guess, is that the "debate" over the Rev. Cap'n. Crunch and his Koran-torching plans is all about the Constitution.

No, it isn't. Nobody is saying the Koran burning is unconstitutional. It is a common-sense issue. Over in Afghanistan, we're busy bombing innocent Muslims & pretending it's all just an accident & besides, we're doing it for their own goods. Burning their holy book is not just blowing them to bits; it's blowing their fundamental(ist) principles to bits. It's worse than saying, "Kaboom! Whoops, sorry, you're just collateral damage." It means, "Everything about you is abhorrent." The latter is, of course, what many Americans, including the Rev. Cap'n. Crunch, believe.

We all thought it was laughable when George W. Bush, after shooting & bombing his way across two countries, said, "They hate us for our freedom." But, as with many stupid remarks, there is a grain of truth in that one. (a) They hate us because while we exercise our own freedoms, we impinge upon their's. Big-time. (b) They don't "get" our freedoms. The majority of Muslims live in countries where there's no such thing as a bill of rights or freedom of expression. If you want to do something stupid, the government says you can't. If you think of doing something stupid & know the government will lock you up or kill you for it, you don't do it. So the idea that the U.S. government can stand by & allow an American to do something stupid means to most Muslims that the government is cool with the stupid thing. Otherwise, they'd stop it.

Add to that -- few fundamentalists are smart. Some, like the Osama bin Laden gang, are shrewd. But, like the Ever-so-Rev. Jones, they are not good at nuance & they don't get irony. If you think you can explain the concepts underlying the bill of rights to the Taliban, just try it out on a few American high-school dropouts first. See how far you get.

Now, it's true that most American Christians would not put a target on your head if you burned a Bible in front of their church. But some would. They would especially do so if you were a Muslim or a Jew.

Similarly, most Muslims would not put a target on your head if you burned a copy of the Koran. They might despise you, they might feel sorry for you because you were so stupid, but they would let it go. The Muslims who stand up & take notice of stunts like those of Terry Jones are (a) folks who aren't very smart, & (b) folks who are whipped into frenzies by men with political agendas. Consider them the Muslim world's version of the tea party, if you will. It is completely unfair to paint Muslims with a broad brushstroke. Saying, "Muslims believe..." is as unfair as saying, "Americans torched the Koran." No, a couple of nuts did (or planned to do) that.

As for our own vaunted tolerance of bookburning, it was not so long ago that Poppy Bush came out in favor of a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the burning of the American flag. Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who is no dope, has said he thought the Constitution already allowed a law against flag-burning. George Stephanopoulos questioned Barack Obama's patriotism because Obama didn't include a flag pin in his campaign uniform. (Why is it all right, I wonder, to burn a cross but not the flag?) We are not a tolerant nation. We take inanimate symbols way too seriously & read way too much into them. So if uneducated Muslims do the same, this Biblical rejoinder should suffice: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."