Breaking News: Researcher assumes those he disagrees with and doesn't like are ignoramuses. Is shocked when he finds out they aren't.
People who think about politics and issues enough to join up with a nonmainstream group are often brighter and better informed than average. (Regardless of the wisdom of the positions they adopt.) The average types tend to stay in the parties they grew up with.
This would probably also hold with members of the IWW, for example.
With the internet to remind me of everything else I should be violently outraged about (global warming, abortion, Kony, Miley Cyrus twerking), it's hard to fit time in to be outraged about this.
I think maybe I can pencil it in for Thursday at 3am. Does that work for you?
Anyone can take anyone else's words out of context. If you try to run everything through some syntactic analysis so there's absolutely no way for it to be misinterpreted, you end up not being able to say anything.
Some of the Hispanics who came recently are illegal immigrants. Most of them are here quite legally. Again, large deal.
"You don't understand! These people carry guns." was a direct quote from a store manager who himself was one of the "new" Hispanics. I hardly think he was making a racial statement.
And, the difference between saying bad neighborhood and high crime neighborhood is nil.
Are you seriously saying it would change interpretations? Even yours? Forgive me while I snicker.
Anyone who wants to misinterpret it isn't going to be put off by that little change. A bigot will assume either bad or high crime refers to those he doesn't like. (I must note that you made a similar assumption about what I meant by "bad" that I suspect you also would have made about "high crime". You would have just thought it a different code word. You wanted to see stereotyping of a group, and by gum you weren't going to be disappointed, even if it wasn't really there.)
Oh, the trollish AC's are coming out of the woodwork. They just love using "nigger" when hiding behind anonymity.
Here's a clue. The store manager was Hispanic, and the neighborhood was Hispanic. Not that it makes that much difference in Albuquerque. Large parts of the city, both good parts and bad are Hispanic.
If that wasn't enough, I can take you to all white rural areas (The Ridge in Clay County Illinois, for example) that the main industry is cooking meth, and the census takers only go into with police escort.
Worse than just the viewpoint changes, is the extent to which the articles are dumbed down.
In the 70s, the articles tended to start off pretty general, but would go deeper into the subject as you read. It was some high quality writing and information.
Now, it's gee whiz, multiverse, and other buzzwords. And that's the deepest you get.
Albuquerque has only a small percentage black population and much of it is associated with the air base.
Yes, it was a mostly Hispanic neighborhood, but Hispanic neighborhoods in Albuquerque range from the poorest barrios to some of the richest in town.
Your stereotypes don't quite fit there. The divide is more between Hispanics who came recently (mostly Mexican) and those who have been there for 300 years. All us Anglos are late comers compared to both them and the Native Americans.
That's the system they went to in New Mexico when I was working for a card processor there. When the system first started, there was no default approval.
That was bad. Try telling someone "Sorry. Your kids are going to go hungry tonight."
So, they allowed store level approvals up to a certain amount when the system was down. It got abused some, but was a much better option than a blanket denial.
This was in the late 1990s, and would have varied from state to state, obviously. I would expect most states would have a similar system.
In the late 1990s, the company I worked for was one of many processing EBT card transactions for grocery stores in New Mexico when they first switched to it from paper food stamps. The bank that was the approving authority for them (the next higher link up the chain from us) had a system problem and had been down for about 45 minutes.
I got a call from a very stressed sounding manager at a store in a bad neighborhood of Albuquerque and explained that the outage was statewide, and I'd already called the next highest level.
His response: "You don't understand! These people carry guns."
I really didn't have a good answer for that one, but certainly sympathized.
They later changed the rules so that when the statewide system was down, they could approve it at the store and then take out any overuse from later payments. That got abused, but it made some store managers a lot less nervous.
The BBC News website has a story on it seemingly confirming that some number of episodes have been bound and will be revealed at a press conference later this week.
It's always possible this is one part of the Beeb not being in sync with the other, but it looks like it's more than just idle rumors.
"The exceptions to this rule are the people who are truly dead inside."
Londo Molari in Babylon 5:
"Something my father said. He was old, very old at the time. I went into his room, and he was sitting alone in the dark, crying. So I asked him what was wrong, and he said, "My shoes are too tight, but it doesn't matter, because I have forgotten how to dance." I never understood what that meant until now. My shoes are too tight, and I have forgotten how to dance."
There are a lot of shows that when you go back to them years/decades later are pretty campy. Look at some of the original Star Trek episodes. (I'm from the US, so can't comment on the BBC stuff as much.)
But, people still enjoy them. That's the whole point. Yes, maybe it's making a big deal of something unimportant. It won't cure cancer or stop war, but most things won't in this world. But if it's true, people will get excited about it. Old friends will get together for an evening watching the newly-found old episodes.
I'm not much of a Whovian. Watched a few episodes on the local public station years back. Chances are nearly nil I'd see these.
An example from my cultural background (or lack thereof;): I detest the song My Baby Does the Hanky Panky by Tommy James and the Shondells. But, it keeps getting lots of airplay on the oldies stations here in the US. That means a lot of people like it (though they may wisely not admit it too openly).
They get a kick out of hearing it, and I can turn it down. Oh, I'll rant about it from time to time, but it's obvious it's in fun. What misery I get from hearing it, can be made up for by getting to grump about it. And in the end, the people who like the song get enjoyment from it. And the world is better for it (Though I shudder at the thought.)
"Who really cares? Some old grainy black and white kinescopes? BFD. The artistic merit compared to the childish cult-like following is nil. Dr. Who is for adolescents who never grew up. It is like cabbage patch dolls or beanie babies."
Dear heavens, isn't it horrible that someone might get enjoyment out of something you don't particularly like.
Do you also blow out candles on adult's birthday cakes and then sternly lecture them about how "That's just for kids"?
Slashdot Mirror
Breaking News: Researcher assumes those he disagrees with and doesn't like are ignoramuses. Is shocked when he finds out they aren't.
People who think about politics and issues enough to join up with a nonmainstream group are often brighter and better informed than average. (Regardless of the wisdom of the positions they adopt.) The average types tend to stay in the parties they grew up with.
This would probably also hold with members of the IWW, for example.
I'm guessing it's almost all a selection effect.
Hey, this Cyrus thing is serious business. She was just the beginning of it. What if this spreads throughout entertainment?
Imagine the psychological devastation from John Goodman twerking.
With the internet to remind me of everything else I should be violently outraged about (global warming, abortion, Kony, Miley Cyrus twerking), it's hard to fit time in to be outraged about this.
I think maybe I can pencil it in for Thursday at 3am. Does that work for you?
Anyone can take anyone else's words out of context. If you try to run everything through some syntactic analysis so there's absolutely no way for it to be misinterpreted, you end up not being able to say anything.
Some of the Hispanics who came recently are illegal immigrants. Most of them are here quite legally. Again, large deal.
"You don't understand! These people carry guns." was a direct quote from a store manager who himself was one of the "new" Hispanics. I hardly think he was making a racial statement.
And, the difference between saying bad neighborhood and high crime neighborhood is nil.
Are you seriously saying it would change interpretations? Even yours? Forgive me while I snicker.
Anyone who wants to misinterpret it isn't going to be put off by that little change. A bigot will assume either bad or high crime refers to those he doesn't like. (I must note that you made a similar assumption about what I meant by "bad" that I suspect you also would have made about "high crime". You would have just thought it a different code word. You wanted to see stereotyping of a group, and by gum you weren't going to be disappointed, even if it wasn't really there.)
Oh, the trollish AC's are coming out of the woodwork. They just love using "nigger" when hiding behind anonymity.
Here's a clue. The store manager was Hispanic, and the neighborhood was Hispanic. Not that it makes that much difference in Albuquerque. Large parts of the city, both good parts and bad are Hispanic.
If that wasn't enough, I can take you to all white rural areas (The Ridge in Clay County Illinois, for example) that the main industry is cooking meth, and the census takers only go into with police escort.
Worse than just the viewpoint changes, is the extent to which the articles are dumbed down.
In the 70s, the articles tended to start off pretty general, but would go deeper into the subject as you read. It was some high quality writing and information.
Now, it's gee whiz, multiverse, and other buzzwords. And that's the deepest you get.
I muut work for the wrong university. I sure didn't get Columbus Day off.
"Have you heard a Whoooosssshhhhh! lately?"
Yes, and it sure applied to you missing the point big time because you "assumed".
Well, you assumed wrong.
Albuquerque has only a small percentage black population and much of it is associated with the air base.
Yes, it was a mostly Hispanic neighborhood, but Hispanic neighborhoods in Albuquerque range from the poorest barrios to some of the richest in town.
Your stereotypes don't quite fit there. The divide is more between Hispanics who came recently (mostly Mexican) and those who have been there for 300 years. All us Anglos are late comers compared to both them and the Native Americans.
"Well, obviously it was a bunch of niggers. Calling them "people" is a bit deceptive."
Sure wasn't obvious to me, troll. Albuquerque has a very low percentage of blacks.
Yes, the neighborhood was mostly Hispanic. Big deal. So are a lot of the good neighborhoods in Albuquerque, too.
Obvious trolling is obvious.
Regardless of who it is, try telling someone "Sorry, but your kids are going to go hungry tonight." The response won't always be a fun one.
That's the system they went to in New Mexico when I was working for a card processor there. When the system first started, there was no default approval.
That was bad. Try telling someone "Sorry. Your kids are going to go hungry tonight."
So, they allowed store level approvals up to a certain amount when the system was down. It got abused some, but was a much better option than a blanket denial.
This was in the late 1990s, and would have varied from state to state, obviously. I would expect most states would have a similar system.
In the late 1990s, the company I worked for was one of many processing EBT card transactions for grocery stores in New Mexico when they first switched to it from paper food stamps. The bank that was the approving authority for them (the next higher link up the chain from us) had a system problem and had been down for about 45 minutes.
I got a call from a very stressed sounding manager at a store in a bad neighborhood of Albuquerque and explained that the outage was statewide, and I'd already called the next highest level.
His response: "You don't understand! These people carry guns."
I really didn't have a good answer for that one, but certainly sympathized.
They later changed the rules so that when the statewide system was down, they could approve it at the store and then take out any overuse from later payments. That got abused, but it made some store managers a lot less nervous.
That statement is no longer operative.
"[A politician] underscored that the entry of the US into WW2 was not related to the attack on Pearl Harbor."
Bluto: "Did the Syrians give up when the Germans bombed the Bar Lev line? Hell no!"
"Forget it. He's rolling."
The BBC News website has a story on it seemingly confirming that some number of episodes have been bound and will be revealed at a press conference later this week.
It's always possible this is one part of the Beeb not being in sync with the other, but it looks like it's more than just idle rumors.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24448063
"The exceptions to this rule are the people who are truly dead inside."
Londo Molari in Babylon 5:
"Something my father said. He was old, very old at the time. I went into his room, and he was sitting alone in the dark, crying. So I asked him what was wrong, and he said, "My shoes are too tight, but it doesn't matter, because I have forgotten how to dance." I never understood what that meant until now. My shoes are too tight, and I have forgotten how to dance."
There are a lot of shows that when you go back to them years/decades later are pretty campy. Look at some of the original Star Trek episodes. (I'm from the US, so can't comment on the BBC stuff as much.)
But, people still enjoy them. That's the whole point. Yes, maybe it's making a big deal of something unimportant. It won't cure cancer or stop war, but most things won't in this world. But if it's true, people will get excited about it. Old friends will get together for an evening watching the newly-found old episodes.
I'm not much of a Whovian. Watched a few episodes on the local public station years back. Chances are nearly nil I'd see these.
An example from my cultural background (or lack thereof ;): I detest the song My Baby Does the Hanky Panky by Tommy James and the Shondells. But, it keeps getting lots of airplay on the oldies stations here in the US. That means a lot of people like it (though they may wisely not admit it too openly).
They get a kick out of hearing it, and I can turn it down. Oh, I'll rant about it from time to time, but it's obvious it's in fun. What misery I get from hearing it, can be made up for by getting to grump about it. And in the end, the people who like the song get enjoyment from it. And the world is better for it (Though I shudder at the thought.)
"Who really cares? Some old grainy black and white kinescopes? BFD. The artistic merit compared to the childish cult-like following is nil. Dr. Who is for adolescents who never grew up. It is like cabbage patch dolls or beanie babies."
Dear heavens, isn't it horrible that someone might get enjoyment out of something you don't particularly like.
Do you also blow out candles on adult's birthday cakes and then sternly lecture them about how "That's just for kids"?
"Hugo Boss"
That would be even more horrifying. *shudder*
Yeah, I misread your post. Sorry.
Must have more coffee! :)
"Instead you just pull the trigger on anybody who dares to snicker"
Yeah, they stop laughing quick. Then they call in the SWAT team that's more heavily armed than you are.
I had a horrifying vision of hundreds of preschool age clones of Giorgio Armani complete with graying hair and Speedos.
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/wkXX8i-_YY7/Giorgio+Armani+Beach+Spain/o9t_26CJhk8/Giorgio+Armani
Shouldn't that have been the paradigm from the beginning if you really wanted security?
Just because you think a person or organization can mostly be trusted today, doesn't mean it will always be the case.