Slashdot Mirror

The best satire today is simply to publish official communications verbatim. Some good examples are:

McSweeneys "My very good black history month tribute to some of the most tremendous black people"

or Tina Fey as Sarah Palin

The politicians are writing the material. The satirists just need to point out how rediculous it is by republishing it.

This is the same as the Trolley Problem, a famous philosophical dilemma, first proposed in 1967: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Basically, a runaway trolley is going to kill five people. You can either do nothing and let the trolley kill them, or pull a lever to switch it to another track on which it will kill only one person. There are many variations, including one in which you push a fat man onto the tracks to stop the trolley. Philosophers have written a LOT about it. Here are some humorous variations:
http://existentialcomics.com/c...
https://xkcd.com/1455/
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/arti...

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/im-comic-sans-asshole

Doctor or Mr. Doris Haggis-On-Whey, is that you?

Contrary to popular belief, the NSA is not asking for fecal samples.

And, sadly, once he saw it, and reasonably knew what the second one was likely to be used for .. he was screwed. Because either he said nothing and became complicit, or he turned in some shady people who might not be understanding of that.

A couple of months ago, Bruce Shneier linked to an interview with a professional safe cracker. Relevant piece:

Q: Do you ever look inside?
A: I NEVER look. It’s none of my business. Involving yourself in people’s private affairs can lead to being subpoenaed in a lawsuit or criminal trial. Besides, I’d prefer not knowing about a client’s drug stash, personal porn, or belly button lint collection.

When I’m done I gather my tools and walk to the truck to write my invoice. Sometimes I’m out of the room before they open it. I don’t want to be nearby if there is a booby trap.

I think if Anaya was following the same rule, he'd be a free man today. Once the mechanisms failed to trip, he should have handed the gentlemen tools (drill, saws, etc..) told them where to drill and walked away.

Holy crap! Comic Sans - I didn't believe this until I saw it. No, really, Comic Sans is absolutely not what one should compose anything in, once you have reached puberty. http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/im-comic-sans-asshole

...a computer programmer...

Your job became taking young programmers who love what they do and extracting their souls, motivating them to follow the same path you did.

And of course, none of that answers the question: Just because I am "rich", why does that automatically mean I should be soaked to provide government benefit/program X? Why is it that if the government takes from "me" and gives to others, under threat of force, that is okay. However, if you the individual did the same thing, or as some group that isn't the government, that is theft? Why?

Somehow this seems topical.

Not exactly. Reading what I said carefully you'll note I specifically called out "under threat of force". I have no problem with sharing or giving to charity. These are both great and noble things. However, when anyone comes to my door, be they in a group or individually, and demands I give them something or else they'll take away my freedom and if I resist I'll be shot, how is that not wrong?

The central question is: Can the group, however they are defined, do something that the individual would be prosecuted for as a crime? If so, how far does that go?

Living in a society we all recognize that there are limits to our freedoms and costs to maintain various services. Is there no limit to the costs that some of the people should bear on behalf of others? Is it fair to take, again this is by force, 40% of what some people earn? 50? 60? Where should it end? Is there a limit?

We can presume the moral question raised above does not apply so long as the people paying the taxes and such do not object, but what if they do? I don't mean just one or two people, but large numbers of people say "No More". Does the majority, who by definition don't have as much as them, have the right to simply vote to take away what the minority earned and give it to themselves? If so, where does that end?

Sorry if I rambled a bit there. It isn't a simple set of questions to me.

And of course, none of that answers the question: Just because I am "rich", why does that automatically mean I should be soaked to provide government benefit/program X? Why is it that if the government takes from "me" and gives to others, under threat of force, that is okay. However, if you the individual did the same thing, or as some group that isn't the government, that is theft? Why?

Somehow this seems topical.

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2001/09/19perkal.html
http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/witnesses.html

There is no cordite on airliners.

Label at least one computer "ham sandwich" to confuse future language researchers.

You might be interested in this approximation of what it would cause: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2010/6/10packman.html

Tangentially related: I'm Comic Sans, Asshole.

Comic sans is tougher than you think. I wouldn't piss him off if I were you:
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/monologues/15comicsans.html

This, in my opinion, is the best tone to use while writing about the design issues of the Star Wars universe:

O N T H E I M P L A U S I B I L I T Y O F
T H E D E A T H S T A R ' S
T R A S H C O M P A C T O R .
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2002/01/10deathstar.html

"Oh, no, I got out of that suckers' game. I now run my own hedge-fund firm, Rearden Capital Management."

"What?"

He stood and adjusted his suit jacket so that his body didn't betray his shameful weakness. He walked toward her and sat informally on the edge of her desk. "Why make a product when you can make dollars? Right this second, I'm earning millions in interest off money I don't even have."

He gestured to his floor-to-ceiling windows, a symbol of his productive ability and goodness.

"There's a whole world out there of byzantine financial products just waiting to be invented, Dagny. Let the leeches run my factories into the ground! I hope they do! I've taken out more insurance on a single Rearden Steel bond than the entire company is even worth! When my old company finally tanks, I'll make a cool $877 million."
-- ATLAS SHRUGGED: UPDATED FOR THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS.

Don't you just read comments in any contentious article? Or maybe view those lower-rated posts and see what the less lively discussions are. And then the rest of the people who dislike all the Idle posts can have less filler on Slashdot. Anyhow, I'd imagine this is pretty generic "disagree mail" for any major news collection + comment site. The world is full of nutty people who send in wacky letters to all sorts of places.

If you're looking for interesting letters, try overqualified, the wacky antics of Open letters to people or entities who are unlikely to respond, or get a copy of idiot letters (book). If that fails, just google around for "dumb letters."

Here's a writeup of somebody who took part in a prior NASA study:

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/bed/

A pretty interesting read.

All those links and the summary doesn't mention Dave Eggers, the author, and founder of 826 Valencia, as well as McSweeneys.

Also, that group once did a Pirate supply store.

They were subsequently sued by the RIAA.

Apparently you're not the only one who felt strongly about this!

Seriously, what history books have you been reading? You've got parts right. Gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration if you attempt to treat an accelerating body as an inertial reference frame. Yes, an imaginary force does appear if you do the coordinate substitution in this case (see any number of textbook, or, if you enjoy comedy this).

But to assert that the gravitational portions of relativity have never been shown experimentally is ignoring history. I point you towards the precession of Mercury's orbit and the first observation of gravitational lensing in 1919 (See the Story of Eddington and the Eclipse, laid out in many places and quite humorously here. And that's just the simple ones. It's called General Relativity.

Now, let's look at some of your errors here:
1)"Two neutron stars or black holes in close proximity, could have way more influence on each other and the radiation emitted, by way of the electric interactions between them, than by gravity."
Ok, true, given certain things. Even true about the radiation. Except for we're not talking about EM radiation in this context, we're talking about gravitational radiation, which shows no response to EM forces.

2)"Newtonian mechanics mandate that gravity ITSELF not be in any way be impacted by time. Only the ACCELERATION produced by gravity has a time value. Since the planets and galaxies don't move relative to each other at anywhere close to the speed of light, relativity doesn't enter into the picture here."
I'm not even sure where to begin here. Newton is wrong. Sorry to say it. I teach his laws every day in class, and he's wrong. He got damn close but his basic assumptions about the nature of reality are off. Space and time are not static. The force of gravity is only varies with time as the location and the mass creating the space-time curving effect that we see as gravity varies. So, if the object moves (like, oh, I don't know, a binary black hole system) the force we notice will vary. It takes time for the information that the force has changed to reach us. We don't notice instantly. That would mean information has traveled faster than light. Which is not possible.
Oh, and by the way, relativity does enter into this as General Relativity is a description of gravity.

Seriously, go read the first couple of sections ofThe Elegant Universe. And then go read a text book.

We get that too...then the sender sends out a Recall Message, which never really seems to work as it should.

But it could be worse:

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2008/1/4sacks.html

Uh, no.

Dear Servicemember:

We realize that you were due to retire in 2008. However, as we're now fighting EVERYONE, your enlistment has been extended...

...to 2108. Thanks for serving, and have a friendly-fire-free day!

Love, Uncle Sam

Seriously, folks... While I'm as proud as any military brat concerning the amount of rear the US armed forces has the capability to kick, we are NOT at the point where we can take on the world.

Rephrased: How many 12-year-olds could you take on?

This is actually smaller than the iPod Zepto: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2005/11/28fitch.html

This article seems quite preposterous. As Richard Dawkins points out, belief in Santa is unscientific.

I'm Starting to Suspect That a Dungeons and Dragons Player Named "Elgdorf the Mage" Is Abusing His Wikipedia Editorial Privileges.

Four Ways in which My Life is Just Like Pac-Man's:

1. Ever-present wail of sirens
2. Relentlessly pursued by ghosts
3. Four special pills daily keep ghosts at bay
4. Occasionally eat some fruit

(by John Crownover, http://mcsweeneys.net/links/lists/16JohnCrownover. html)

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2006/8/14sullivansulliva n.html

see this for more commentary on the lyrics..

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2005/12/9moe.html

I remebering hearing about this idea on NPR a while back, but making it political: Red-State Edition DVD commentaries. Here's a transcript of one for Aliens.

Here's a great section:

COULTER: Again, here: Burke in a very natty red tie. And he really fills out a pair of chinos.
D'SOUZA: We're watching how he tries to help Ripley help herself, by convincing her to get back on the bike and revisit an alien-infested planet. Just in case anybody thought that conservatism and compassion couldn't go hand in hand ...
COULTER: Burke?
D'SOUZA: Yeah, look at him. He's clearly got Ripley's best interest in mind.
COULTER: I think so.

Even if this experiment doesn't pan out, there are other viable challengers to The Amazing Randi. Behold, the Power of the Vagina !

You stand on the second hand of a clock and ravage the next thousand years. The entire world crumbles in front of your big prick, the dawn breaking on a broken world of your creation, and you send up a prayer demanding more light.

In the window across from you, a woman stands knock-kneed with her cunt pushed forward, holding the edge of her dress with greasy fists. Marvelous if she were to suddenly fall through the glass! Dream of the men bleeding from their feet on the sidewalk below, their frock coats dragging through the splinters!

You have found God in His burning bush and have risen from the ashes beneath its branches. You are in a sore struggle with the French girl, but it isn't possible for you to last with her crying and her mumbling: oh, c'est bon!

You think about how the stars have exploded, and the birds that came from the death of the heavens are not as free as you.

DO YOU?

a) Swallow the confusion which nourishes the artist and makes him madly inhuman, and come.
b) Come, and stare at your crumpled pants.

A Selection from the Recently Discovered Jack Kerouac Choose-Your-Own-Adventure, Bop Affirmation, c. 1955

You're trudging in the riverbottom sand when zoooom, there goes a flatbed truck and you're suddenly on the back of the truck with two Nebraska farm boys and you're weeping, "Y-e-e-e-e-e-e-s," yes to the blue swing swing of the Bird, yes to Charlie Parker, that shimmering saxophone, yes to the original mind, yes to this uncompromising romp through the heartland, you who labored on the railroad with crimson sun on your back, you who know the palabra, you who look right into the blowin' breeze and cry and moan and shout

AND...

a. Discover a rainbow.
b. Go off to pick oranges with the Mexican girl.
c. Sing in a rising crescendo, "Y-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-s."

I think he means iPod Zepto.

John Hodgman, in addition to being a professional writer, has long been known as a former professional literary agent, whose twelve part series of f-p-l-agent "advice" can be found at mcsweeney's internet thing. But Hodgman is even better doing his schtick as host/purveyor of the Little Gray Book Lecture Series, live in NYC or via "podcasts," which as far as I can tell are just mp3s. The Lecture Series installment on D&D was especially good ("we cast a spell of illumination. we proceed with caution"); a partial "podcast" available here. He seems to be an all around nice guy, and talented enough to inspire envy.

If it's the same John Hodgman, the guy's a contributor to McSweeney's . Sounds like this material is very much in keeping with his work for them, and maybe some of it might have first appeared there.

If it's the same John Hodgman, the guy's a contributor to McSweeney's . Sounds like this material is very much in keeping with his work for them, and maybe some of it might have first appeared there.

> irregardless of...<snip>

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!

You need to read a little bit of this chap's rantings.

Serenity, though? Ass kickery. So many flavors of goodness: "T'weren't been nothin between my nethers but was run on batteries..."

And, as we all know, the true mark of a good fighter is that he always attacks head on, regardless of circumstances.

Quite correct. If you can attack head-on and win, you have proven yourself to be a very good fighter.

it is indeed clever to attack a well organized and superiorly equipped force that has readily accessible artillery and air support head on,

Wrong. They never faced a "superiorly equipped force". The enemy was blatantly disorganized, with no ability to concentrate their scattered units on the single point of threat. Master Chief, individually, was superior to the entire alien army, in both firepower and survivability. The fact that clever tactics were absolutely unneeded just further underscores what better fighters those heros were.

Similarly, when I need to clobber a few twelve-year olds, I don't bother with anything but a frontal assault either!

Look for Eccleston to star alongside David Caruso in a film this summer. They play a pair of delusional self-important actors that bumble around Hollywood in search of fame while people ask them "who are you"?

At least Eccleston can reply "Who? Exactly!"

Cheers.

Hmm, been reading a lot of Chomsky lately?

I'd vote for the guy who got three purple hearts, a silver star, and a bronze star, anytime, over the guy who took the rich boy coward's way out and won't admit there was anything even remotely improper about it.

Really? I'd vote for the guy who didn't freaking give tax breaks to the richest 1% of Americans under the cover of helping the middle class, double freaking pull back environmental protections it took decades to establish, quadruple freaking send us to war in Iraq under false pretenses, and super-duper-dippity-dang-dog-freaking exhibit a childlike love for junk science that furthers his beliefs.

Yes, this means I'm voting for the same person as you. I just take the view that while it's nice that the guy you're voting for is honorable on the field of battle and all, under the present circumstances, that are dozens of other, more important, reasons to vote against Bush.

This DVD is supposed to include Noam Chomsky's analysis of LOTR's semiotic significance. Well worth reading;)

I know that it's probably your sig, but *that* is what I think is the saddest part about this election.

Actually it's not, I apologize if it seems sig-like.

*sigh* I'll tell you that I am voting for Bush, but to be honest, it's mainly because if Kerry wins we might be stuck with him for 8 years, whereas only 4 more with Bush. Add to that the gut feeling I have about Kerry, and I feel it's easier for me to keep Bush in check (stupidity is easier to manage than someone who changes their line constantly), and I pretty much have to.

The way I see it, Bush is a known quantity, and a hideous one. The fact that he's stupid and easy to manage is not a point in his favor -- he's being managed by big business and his cabinet. Bush himself hasn't done *that* much, but his administration has been extremely revisionist towards the role of the President, deadly for the environment, friendly towards big business above all other sectors of the economy, engaging in stupid, pointless wars over evidence that, had it existed, would have been silly and aggressive even then, poisoning our relations with other nations, repressive towards many sectors of our population, everything just short of censorous of the press, demanding that press conference questions be pre-approved or the organization (not just the reporter) loses access to them, giving us secret laws and delaying the release of presidential documents for iffish reasons, censoring a wide array of material including Supreme Court decisions (!) for spurious reasons... and I can very well go on, that's how many reasons there are to not vote for Bush. But don't take my word for it, check out McSweeney's Daily Reason to Dispatch Bush.

Kerry could be an *awful* president, but he'd still be better than Bush is. In the long run, if Bush is seen by history as anything more than awful, I'm convinced that it'll mean that a trained monkey could do the job and be remembered fondly for it.

McSweeneys perhaps one of the last bastions of American wit.
Anarcho sometimes goes off on tangents but he should be more accesible to you than McSweeneys.

Read up on current American Foreign Policy, and try to stop following herd mentality. Just becuase someone that likes somone acts a certain way does not entail that everyone that likes that person acts that way.

An interesting look at the deeper (political) meanings in the Fellowship Of The Ring, purported to be from chomsky and zinn...

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2003/04/22fellowship.htm l

Zinn: And observe the map device here -- how the map is itself completely Gondor-centric. Rohan and Gondor are treated as though they are the literal center of Middle Earth. Obviously this is because they have men living there. What of places such as Anfalas and Forlindon or Near Harad? One never really hears anything about places like that. And this so-called map casually reveals other places -- the Lost Realm, the Northern Waste (lost to whom? wasted how? I ask) -- but tells us nothing about them. It is as though the people who live in these places are despicable, and unworthy of mention. Who is producing this tale? What is their agenda? What are their interests and how are those interests being served by this portrayal? Questions we need to ask repeatedly.

Zinn: And notice how Strider characterizes the Black Riders. "Neither living nor dead." Why, that's a really useful enemy to have.

Chomsky: Yes. In this way you can never verify their existence, and yet they're horribly terrifying. We should not overlook the fact that Middle Earth is in a cold war at this moment, locked in perpetual conflict. Strider's rhetoric serves to keep fear alive.