>You mean the one with the sources of "anonymous" "anonymous" "anonymous" "anonymous source" and so on? Oh yeah. Very solid sources there,
No, Trump Jr., his lawyer, the Russian lawyer he met with, and Trump's tweets. Odd that as a Canadian you're a fanatical Trump supporter. Perhaps you're butthurt that Harper lost and Canada failed to pursue more American-style politics?
Personally I'm not aligned with any of the parties or their platforms, American or Canadian, and consider the Liberals to have been a case of 'least evil'.
How nice of you to, as AC, to imply I'm bullshitting.
Of course, you already know these details are coming from the people actually involved. Trump Jr. Trump's lawyer. The Russian lawyer. Various tweets from the POTUS.
And Trump financial ties to Russia are a matter of public record - or, in the case of Trump Jr., public bragging.
I would be willing to admit Mars would be a good future-Australia.
Sure, the flora and fauna isn't out to kill you, but only because there isn't any. Instead, the planet itself it doing its best to end you. Low grav health issues, radiation, toxic surface chemistry, ridiculously thin and O2-free atmosphere... it makes Australia look like the Garden of Eden in comparison.
Also, it's a big, arid rock far from civilization.
>Or you can take a look at the "Trump-Russia-Collusion" story. Which has evolved from "Russia colluded with Trump" to "his son talked with a lawyer who's visa expired that the Obama administration specifically let back in at the behest of Susan Rice" along with "Putin talked with Trump during dinner." But the entire thing has fallen apart to the point where pundits outside of the main of the party are saying "shut-up, this is hurting us more then helping." If the media has one narrative, it's very easy to see from the outside. But it sure is self-reinforcing if you're in that rabbit hole.
Really? That's the example you're going with? The one where the whole last week has been detail after detail coming to light showing collusion is incredibly likely to any reasonable person?
Trump isn't a republican. He's a Trump. Republicans are just willing to stand behind him despite the fact that he's unprofessional, erratic, self-defeating, and, well, an international buffoon, because it got them power and they don't want to let go. American politics - things like the actual country don't matter so long as your team is winning.
If that weren't true you wouldn't feel that compulsion to astroturf for Trump in your post. I mean, the guy's rich off Russian money, has uncountable Russian contacts, fired a guy for not dropping an investigation into his Russian ties, had three high level members of his campaign meet with Russians on the promise of Russian government-backed dirt on his opponent, and then - when all this 'fake news' was dogging him, decided to have an extended private meeting with Putin without anyone there you could trust to corroborate the content of their discussions. And all that (believe it or not) just pales compared to the horrorshow that was his first week in office constantly bitching at the most inappropriate times that his inauguration crowd was bigger than his predecessors despite photographic proof to the contrary.
>Doesn't matter if you're fucking Gandhi somebody's going to get so pissed at you they'll want to shoot you dead.
This is probably going to shock you, but Gandhi could be a bit of a creep and an asshole.
Very few people in history have been 'ideal'. I suspect Fred Rogers is about as close as you're going to find, and I'd bet at some point in his life even he had a screaming match with somebody.
"Hey, isn't it awesome how thin my phone is? Why yes, I DID put it in an Otter Box that makes it bigger than most other phones, but I don't want it to break if I drop it!"
Really? The recommendation I've always received (Ontario, Canada) is to take non-narcotics back to the pharmacy and narcotics to the hospital.
Like I'd ever give back extra narcotic painkillers. They've come in handy a couple of times already. I almost (but not really) hope to have a need to visit an ER so I can restock.
Interestingly enough... not true! Statistically, there's disproportionate number of non-whites convicted of crimes on a per capita basis, which means your AI training is very likely going to be done with an image pool biased towards identifying non-white faces as criminals.
When a human does this, we call it racism and the accused racist usually says something like, "no, in this area it's just true".
The results will be similar with the proposed system - it'll identify more non-whites as suspects than whites, the underlying cause (more convictions for a group resulting in a perception bias against individuals of that group).
Nobody will want to address why that group is over represented in any meaningful, actionable way so in order to do something, the facial recognition will be weighted to select proportional numbers of white people and so be effectively neutered.
Do not underestimate greed and the evil of advertisers.
Do you see dancing cigarette packs before every show? No, because advertising evolved. Well, get ready for *everything* you see in a show to be a product placement.
Soon enough they'll be using "green screen" props with corner markers for real-time replacement with the imagery of the product of whoever pays the most - for an 'impression' sold based on all the data your streaming service has collected on you. That's right, you're going to get customized product placement. The show you watch today might very well look different when you watch it again next week. Or even if you back it up a bit to watch a scene again.
Ultimately I expect it's going to be 100% script-based real-time CGI anyway. Wait until you see what advertising will do to that... I mean, maybe Shrek needs to be yellow this time to promote Chiquita bananas (on special at your local grocer right now!) because you bought a bunch of bananas last week.
I've seen the potential of the future, and it's awesome. I've also imagined what we're likely to do with that potential, and it's shitty.
>So what happens when the camera reports a false positive?
They stop and question you. They check your ID. Depending on who it thinks you are, possibly after putting cuffs on you.
And - after the first innocent person is harassed to the edge of sanity and sues - they eventually stop using the cameras as anything but a small portion of their decision-making process.
> Making a female doctor is the only way, to break that barrier.
No, a female Doctor is the only way to inject your personal sexual politics into this particular show. To 'break that barrier' you could just come up with something original instead of altering something pre-existing.
We've got 50 years of a cranky man and we're attached to him, and you and yours have gone and shit all over that because of some weird social philosophy that requires you to take anything other people like and mold it to fit your need for propaganda.
It's done, you won, stop bullshitting. And if the show should fail, don't continue bullshitting and claim it's bigotry. You shit on the show's history (and the fact that it was done in stages over the last few years doesn't change that), those who preferred it the old way may choose to stop watching.
I personally hope Doctor Who does miserably next year so it gets cancelled and has a chance at a later revival with a retcon undoing most of Moffat's work... preferably before I have grand kids to share it with.
Did you see that episode with the 'light vampires' or whatever and the Romans?
Yeah, Romans weren't that cool with homosexuality. They were OK with gay sex... if you were the top. Lesbians were considered mannish freaks, as best we know.
So no, despite the fact that for the most part Bill was just Bill, they *were* using her sexual orientation to preach political correctness garbage.
Windows. OK, it probably existed, but I didn't notice at the time.
Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. Well... network functionality. That's something useful!
Windows 95. Hey, it actually makes some sense and has a usable interface! (But it crashes a lot)
Windows NT workstation. Not as friendly, but rock solid in comparison to the 9x product.
Windows 98, now with fewer crashes.
Windows 2000. Windows NT, but with the 98 interface. Nice upgrade.
Windows ME. Because Bill Gates tried mixing LSD and crack.
Windows XP. Tell me again why I need the prettier interface that sucks up all my CPU?
Windows Vista. Because XP unexpectedly kept running and MS wanted a new round of licensing sales.
Windows 7/8/10 - Because you're going to take unnecessary interface changes right up the ass. What are you going to do, switch to Linux? SURE it's the year of the Linux desktop.
Everything after XP has been change for the sake of milking more money out of you. Same with the Office line. And since that didn't really work out so well, now they're going to shift as much as possible online so you have to rent cycles from their servers and they get constant, uninterrupted access to your bank account.
>I just hope Dr. Who treats her as an actual Doctor, not just use her to virtue-signal for SJW cred.
Don't hold your breath. Moffat is on record saying the Doctor is a secondary character to the companion... a walking deus ex machina to enable the companion's adventures. Which is odd considering how much screen time gets spent on the Doctor's angst.
> In an incredible WTF moment, the writers decide to do a gender bender
This was not an isolated decision, it was a workup to sex-swapping the title character. Along with introducing the Corsair. And having the Doctor flirt with Harkness.
In the future, everybody's pansexual and gender fluid because they're better than us.
Weird how the oppressed sexual minority fought so long to you know, NOT be oppressed for their nature only to turn around and start telling everyone it's actually a choice and the straight majority is wrong for not being just like them. Its like people are stupid and never learn.
>Legacy also says that Daleks can't climb stairs too.
You know how I know you didn't watch the old series? You're technically correct - they didn't climb, but they did float right up them in later episodes of the original run.
And Romana was (briefly) 7ft tall and blue after and prior to taking Astra's face if I recall correctly.
None of which makes it a good idea to change the Doctor's sex.
>With Capaldi, my interest in Doctor Who somehow plummeted. I can't even say why.
Electric guitar and sonic sunglasses?
Capaldi's performances were great (the manic energy, the unironic arrogance especially when confronting arrogance, the lecturing and the running, even a slight bit of 'alienness'). I bought him as the Doctor... it was the material that sucked.
Take a look at 'Kill the Moon' - the Moon is a space dragon egg, containing a space dragon that somehow breathes and flies in vacuum, is born pregnant, and can immediately lay an egg bigger than itself... oh, and the Doctor's willing to let the whole Earth burn or the unborn dragon die on the decision of an uninformed companion.
> the solution for having your hero not being what you want isn't to change them but to create new ones.
Generally, I agree... but you're looking at the wrong problem. This is about forcing a worldview on everyone else, and from that perspective the changes make perfect sense; it's not about wanting a new hero, it's about changing your old one. It's about propaganda, dressed up as 'fairness' or 'representation'. And if the show fails, it won't be because they ruined the lead character, it'll be because we're all bigots. Self-awareness is not high up on the list of traits for people enthusiastically fighting for a cause they believe in.
Essentially, you don't get to have traditions if it offends a group with influence, and having the Doctor always be a white heterosexual male was offensive to many people in the entertainment industry and a small but loud chunk of the fandom.
What's interesting is they actually tried to work up to this change like nobody would notice - the Doctor flirting with men, the Corsair being mentioned as a sex-swapper, the Master becoming Missy. The shippers squeed and the rest of us shrugged because it didn't *really* matter.
But this does. Sex does change things, men and women should be considered equals philosophically and legally... but we're not identical. The Doctor isn't going to be the Doctor. Then again, Moffat already fixed that since the current 'Doctor' is an nth generation clone of the guy we used to watch as of the episode 'Heaven Sent'. And depending on your interpretation, he might not have been the same guy since Amelia magically willed him back into existence in 'The Big Bang'.
Moffat's always wanted to do this sex swap and finally got his way. Though honestly this is more of a 'last straw' deal for me. The stories have generally been getting dumber and dumber as any and all attempts at logic and consistency were thrown out the window. Moffat's awesome single episodes made him look like a breath of fresh air as RTD got stale (and I won't pretend RTD didn't preside over some cringy Doctor Who) and failed to build on his awesome start - but once Moffat had the reins it became obvious he had a limited repertoire and (long time fan of the show or not) didn't really understand the core of the show. Why he's a BBC darling I just don't understand.
But give me a couple of weeks to get over it and you won't even have to see me post about it in Internet forums. I watched the new series because I grew up with the old so I'm not 100% attached to it. My kids never caught the Who-flu so I won't watch just because they are watching. I'll stop watching, then stop thinking about it, and the BBC won't give a damn unless a large chunk of the viewership does the same... at which point it'll be too late anyway.
Doctor Who was 'silly sci-fi' until Moffat decided it was fantasy with mere sci-fi trappings. That the sonic screwdriver was a magic wand instead of an actual sonic screwdriver as in the original series. That's what first made me regret I ever hoped he'd take over from Davies (who did a great job of capturing the feel of the original show as I recalled it through a thick haze of nostalgia).
Then he showed he didn't understand the Tardis by making it an actual living, intelligent, free-willed being. Which makes no sense at all. He totally misunderstood the mariner tradition of referring to a ship as 'she'. Then the Doctor became an expert pilot who always left the brakes on. Moffat will shit on anything for a quick gag.
Then there was the issue of pushing his "good people are pansexual" like there's no hardwiring there. Idiot. Good people don't care if OTHERS are pansexual, but that doesn't make them switch sexual orientation. That was him pushing his sexual political agenda.
University is about learning and exposure to ideas. Not all of them need be immediately practical.
However, when people start taking those faculties and their impassioned young fools of a student body too seriously, you have a problem.
For instance, allowing political groups of any sort to disrupt university activities, or actually giving them power to control what happens and even what is said on campus? That should be the instant death of the institution's credibility. Suppression of alternate viewpoints is anaethema to the whole concept of such places.
Slashdot Mirror
>You mean the one with the sources of "anonymous" "anonymous" "anonymous" "anonymous source" and so on? Oh yeah. Very solid sources there,
No, Trump Jr., his lawyer, the Russian lawyer he met with, and Trump's tweets. Odd that as a Canadian you're a fanatical Trump supporter. Perhaps you're butthurt that Harper lost and Canada failed to pursue more American-style politics?
Personally I'm not aligned with any of the parties or their platforms, American or Canadian, and consider the Liberals to have been a case of 'least evil'.
How nice of you to, as AC, to imply I'm bullshitting.
Of course, you already know these details are coming from the people actually involved. Trump Jr. Trump's lawyer. The Russian lawyer. Various tweets from the POTUS.
And Trump financial ties to Russia are a matter of public record - or, in the case of Trump Jr., public bragging.
I would be willing to admit Mars would be a good future-Australia.
Sure, the flora and fauna isn't out to kill you, but only because there isn't any. Instead, the planet itself it doing its best to end you. Low grav health issues, radiation, toxic surface chemistry, ridiculously thin and O2-free atmosphere... it makes Australia look like the Garden of Eden in comparison.
Also, it's a big, arid rock far from civilization.
>Or you can take a look at the "Trump-Russia-Collusion" story. Which has evolved from "Russia colluded with Trump" to "his son talked with a lawyer who's visa expired that the Obama administration specifically let back in at the behest of Susan Rice" along with "Putin talked with Trump during dinner." But the entire thing has fallen apart to the point where pundits outside of the main of the party are saying "shut-up, this is hurting us more then helping." If the media has one narrative, it's very easy to see from the outside. But it sure is self-reinforcing if you're in that rabbit hole.
Really? That's the example you're going with? The one where the whole last week has been detail after detail coming to light showing collusion is incredibly likely to any reasonable person?
Trump isn't a republican. He's a Trump. Republicans are just willing to stand behind him despite the fact that he's unprofessional, erratic, self-defeating, and, well, an international buffoon, because it got them power and they don't want to let go. American politics - things like the actual country don't matter so long as your team is winning.
If that weren't true you wouldn't feel that compulsion to astroturf for Trump in your post. I mean, the guy's rich off Russian money, has uncountable Russian contacts, fired a guy for not dropping an investigation into his Russian ties, had three high level members of his campaign meet with Russians on the promise of Russian government-backed dirt on his opponent, and then - when all this 'fake news' was dogging him, decided to have an extended private meeting with Putin without anyone there you could trust to corroborate the content of their discussions. And all that (believe it or not) just pales compared to the horrorshow that was his first week in office constantly bitching at the most inappropriate times that his inauguration crowd was bigger than his predecessors despite photographic proof to the contrary.
>Doesn't matter if you're fucking Gandhi somebody's going to get so pissed at you they'll want to shoot you dead.
This is probably going to shock you, but Gandhi could be a bit of a creep and an asshole.
Very few people in history have been 'ideal'. I suspect Fred Rogers is about as close as you're going to find, and I'd bet at some point in his life even he had a screaming match with somebody.
"Hey, isn't it awesome how thin my phone is? Why yes, I DID put it in an Otter Box that makes it bigger than most other phones, but I don't want it to break if I drop it!"
I wouldn't call it crap - I would say it's grossly overpriced for the functionality it provides, and I'd also say I'm not keen on their walled garden.
And of course I find the idea of paying a premium for branding to be offensively stupid because I'm not a child any more.
I mean, why not just come out and say you're appealing to conspicuous consumption so the more you charge, the more loyal your customers get?
Really? The recommendation I've always received (Ontario, Canada) is to take non-narcotics back to the pharmacy and narcotics to the hospital.
Like I'd ever give back extra narcotic painkillers. They've come in handy a couple of times already. I almost (but not really) hope to have a need to visit an ER so I can restock.
>The computer isn't racist or classist
Interestingly enough... not true! Statistically, there's disproportionate number of non-whites convicted of crimes on a per capita basis, which means your AI training is very likely going to be done with an image pool biased towards identifying non-white faces as criminals.
When a human does this, we call it racism and the accused racist usually says something like, "no, in this area it's just true".
The results will be similar with the proposed system - it'll identify more non-whites as suspects than whites, the underlying cause (more convictions for a group resulting in a perception bias against individuals of that group).
Nobody will want to address why that group is over represented in any meaningful, actionable way so in order to do something, the facial recognition will be weighted to select proportional numbers of white people and so be effectively neutered.
Do not underestimate greed and the evil of advertisers.
Do you see dancing cigarette packs before every show? No, because advertising evolved. Well, get ready for *everything* you see in a show to be a product placement.
Soon enough they'll be using "green screen" props with corner markers for real-time replacement with the imagery of the product of whoever pays the most - for an 'impression' sold based on all the data your streaming service has collected on you. That's right, you're going to get customized product placement. The show you watch today might very well look different when you watch it again next week. Or even if you back it up a bit to watch a scene again.
Ultimately I expect it's going to be 100% script-based real-time CGI anyway. Wait until you see what advertising will do to that... I mean, maybe Shrek needs to be yellow this time to promote Chiquita bananas (on special at your local grocer right now!) because you bought a bunch of bananas last week.
I've seen the potential of the future, and it's awesome. I've also imagined what we're likely to do with that potential, and it's shitty.
>So what happens when the camera reports a false positive?
They stop and question you. They check your ID. Depending on who it thinks you are, possibly after putting cuffs on you.
And - after the first innocent person is harassed to the edge of sanity and sues - they eventually stop using the cameras as anything but a small portion of their decision-making process.
> Making a female doctor is the only way, to break that barrier.
No, a female Doctor is the only way to inject your personal sexual politics into this particular show. To 'break that barrier' you could just come up with something original instead of altering something pre-existing.
We've got 50 years of a cranky man and we're attached to him, and you and yours have gone and shit all over that because of some weird social philosophy that requires you to take anything other people like and mold it to fit your need for propaganda.
It's done, you won, stop bullshitting. And if the show should fail, don't continue bullshitting and claim it's bigotry. You shit on the show's history (and the fact that it was done in stages over the last few years doesn't change that), those who preferred it the old way may choose to stop watching.
I personally hope Doctor Who does miserably next year so it gets cancelled and has a chance at a later revival with a retcon undoing most of Moffat's work... preferably before I have grand kids to share it with.
Did you see that episode with the 'light vampires' or whatever and the Romans?
Yeah, Romans weren't that cool with homosexuality. They were OK with gay sex... if you were the top. Lesbians were considered mannish freaks, as best we know.
So no, despite the fact that for the most part Bill was just Bill, they *were* using her sexual orientation to preach political correctness garbage.
Visits to foreign-hosted porn sites from the UK mysteriously skyrocket after 2018/04. VPN services experience a slight bump as well.
Windows. OK, it probably existed, but I didn't notice at the time.
Windows 3.11 for Workgroups. Well... network functionality. That's something useful!
Windows 95. Hey, it actually makes some sense and has a usable interface! (But it crashes a lot)
Windows NT workstation. Not as friendly, but rock solid in comparison to the 9x product.
Windows 98, now with fewer crashes.
Windows 2000. Windows NT, but with the 98 interface. Nice upgrade.
Windows ME. Because Bill Gates tried mixing LSD and crack.
Windows XP. Tell me again why I need the prettier interface that sucks up all my CPU?
Windows Vista. Because XP unexpectedly kept running and MS wanted a new round of licensing sales.
Windows 7/8/10 - Because you're going to take unnecessary interface changes right up the ass. What are you going to do, switch to Linux? SURE it's the year of the Linux desktop.
Everything after XP has been change for the sake of milking more money out of you. Same with the Office line. And since that didn't really work out so well, now they're going to shift as much as possible online so you have to rent cycles from their servers and they get constant, uninterrupted access to your bank account.
>I just hope Dr. Who treats her as an actual Doctor, not just use her to virtue-signal for SJW cred.
Don't hold your breath. Moffat is on record saying the Doctor is a secondary character to the companion... a walking deus ex machina to enable the companion's adventures. Which is odd considering how much screen time gets spent on the Doctor's angst.
If they're trying to represent the diversity of the UK, then regional concentrations are irrelevant.
> In an incredible WTF moment, the writers decide to do a gender bender
This was not an isolated decision, it was a workup to sex-swapping the title character. Along with introducing the Corsair. And having the Doctor flirt with Harkness.
In the future, everybody's pansexual and gender fluid because they're better than us.
Weird how the oppressed sexual minority fought so long to you know, NOT be oppressed for their nature only to turn around and start telling everyone it's actually a choice and the straight majority is wrong for not being just like them. Its like people are stupid and never learn.
>Legacy also says that Daleks can't climb stairs too.
You know how I know you didn't watch the old series? You're technically correct - they didn't climb, but they did float right up them in later episodes of the original run.
And Romana was (briefly) 7ft tall and blue after and prior to taking Astra's face if I recall correctly.
None of which makes it a good idea to change the Doctor's sex.
>With Capaldi, my interest in Doctor Who somehow plummeted. I can't even say why.
Electric guitar and sonic sunglasses?
Capaldi's performances were great (the manic energy, the unironic arrogance especially when confronting arrogance, the lecturing and the running, even a slight bit of 'alienness'). I bought him as the Doctor... it was the material that sucked.
Take a look at 'Kill the Moon' - the Moon is a space dragon egg, containing a space dragon that somehow breathes and flies in vacuum, is born pregnant, and can immediately lay an egg bigger than itself... oh, and the Doctor's willing to let the whole Earth burn or the unborn dragon die on the decision of an uninformed companion.
Seriously, who writes this shit?
> the solution for having your hero not being what you want isn't to change them but to create new ones.
Generally, I agree... but you're looking at the wrong problem. This is about forcing a worldview on everyone else, and from that perspective the changes make perfect sense; it's not about wanting a new hero, it's about changing your old one. It's about propaganda, dressed up as 'fairness' or 'representation'. And if the show fails, it won't be because they ruined the lead character, it'll be because we're all bigots. Self-awareness is not high up on the list of traits for people enthusiastically fighting for a cause they believe in.
Essentially, you don't get to have traditions if it offends a group with influence, and having the Doctor always be a white heterosexual male was offensive to many people in the entertainment industry and a small but loud chunk of the fandom.
What's interesting is they actually tried to work up to this change like nobody would notice - the Doctor flirting with men, the Corsair being mentioned as a sex-swapper, the Master becoming Missy. The shippers squeed and the rest of us shrugged because it didn't *really* matter.
But this does. Sex does change things, men and women should be considered equals philosophically and legally... but we're not identical. The Doctor isn't going to be the Doctor. Then again, Moffat already fixed that since the current 'Doctor' is an nth generation clone of the guy we used to watch as of the episode 'Heaven Sent'. And depending on your interpretation, he might not have been the same guy since Amelia magically willed him back into existence in 'The Big Bang'.
Moffat's always wanted to do this sex swap and finally got his way. Though honestly this is more of a 'last straw' deal for me. The stories have generally been getting dumber and dumber as any and all attempts at logic and consistency were thrown out the window. Moffat's awesome single episodes made him look like a breath of fresh air as RTD got stale (and I won't pretend RTD didn't preside over some cringy Doctor Who) and failed to build on his awesome start - but once Moffat had the reins it became obvious he had a limited repertoire and (long time fan of the show or not) didn't really understand the core of the show. Why he's a BBC darling I just don't understand.
But give me a couple of weeks to get over it and you won't even have to see me post about it in Internet forums. I watched the new series because I grew up with the old so I'm not 100% attached to it. My kids never caught the Who-flu so I won't watch just because they are watching. I'll stop watching, then stop thinking about it, and the BBC won't give a damn unless a large chunk of the viewership does the same... at which point it'll be too late anyway.
>in the classic series the TARDIS was portrayed as having a will of her own,
You've made the same ignorant mistake Moffat did, congratulations.
Doctor Who was 'silly sci-fi' until Moffat decided it was fantasy with mere sci-fi trappings. That the sonic screwdriver was a magic wand instead of an actual sonic screwdriver as in the original series. That's what first made me regret I ever hoped he'd take over from Davies (who did a great job of capturing the feel of the original show as I recalled it through a thick haze of nostalgia).
Then he showed he didn't understand the Tardis by making it an actual living, intelligent, free-willed being. Which makes no sense at all. He totally misunderstood the mariner tradition of referring to a ship as 'she'. Then the Doctor became an expert pilot who always left the brakes on. Moffat will shit on anything for a quick gag.
Then there was the issue of pushing his "good people are pansexual" like there's no hardwiring there. Idiot. Good people don't care if OTHERS are pansexual, but that doesn't make them switch sexual orientation. That was him pushing his sexual political agenda.
50 years in, I'm out. Thanks, Moffat.
University is about learning and exposure to ideas. Not all of them need be immediately practical.
However, when people start taking those faculties and their impassioned young fools of a student body too seriously, you have a problem.
For instance, allowing political groups of any sort to disrupt university activities, or actually giving them power to control what happens and even what is said on campus? That should be the instant death of the institution's credibility. Suppression of alternate viewpoints is anaethema to the whole concept of such places.