Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)
I literally just sat down with coffee to check if the new stubsack needs to be made
brava
I almost made it but couldn’t be arsed to replicate the explanation text
there’s a Trade Secret I could tell you! (the cross-post or view source buttons, with appropriate mini trimming)
Minor personal annoyance is the lack of link back to the previous thread. But still thanks for the hard / quick work yall.
EVE Online creator CCP announces a new game with BLOCKCHAIN and it’s not going well:
Apparently they got investment from A16Z:
I admit, in my haste, I read that link as Marc Andreessen openly announcing they’re investing in the Chinese Communist Party, which is slightly funnier than the reality of yet another crypto game.
it’s even funnier than that (albeit also super depressing, in some ways)
primer: hilmar (the head honcho at ccp) has been “crypto = bae” for going on 5~6y now (that I’m aware of, maybe longer), to the point that there are pictures of the guy at chain confs from around then, and mentions of people talking with him in The Private Backrooms at said chain confs. it’s been his darling and he has wanted very, very hard to put it into tq (the main game server). see this for example (and fwiw, warning: eve reddit)
in-fill: there also appears to be quite a bit of cart before the horse element in how the company operates - they will frequently first work on something, then when it starts getting near release they’ll send out some surveys that almost without fail have some extremely loaded questions in them. an example would be that instead of asking players what they generally think of xyz feature/intended mechanic/etc, the survey will instead garden path answers along, attempting to manufacture consent/compliance.
and, last little detail: keep in mind this is a game where people will min-max the everloving shit out of something, and where a fair number of people out there are willing to trade actual time to making in-game money with which to fund their gametime (“plexing”). people who would be willing to engage with some really ridiculous abstract/effortful shit for whatever gains they could, just because they could.
so with that said, during 2021/2022 (in the middle of the NFT tsunami of shit) the first big round of “we want to add NFTs to tq” came about. and there were a fair amount of indications that ccp had already sunk quite a bunch of devtime on it, and were getting ready to roll it out. the pitch was, uh, “not well received” would be putting it extremely lightly. it was panned so fucking extremely, they had to put out this newsblog which included the remarkably tortured phrase “Not For Tranquility”
which is the early strand of what leads us to this particular little “gem”. it’s hard to get specific details because they’re fairly tight-lipped about internal processes and shit, so the following is definitely heavily conjecture. hilmar didn’t want to break up with his bae, and kept pushing trying to keep this alive, somehow. whether the drive for this is also tied up with the Pearl Abyss acquisition some years prior is unclear (but Black Desert Online players all cried wolf when PA bought CCP, and said to expect increasing financial fuckery). what does appear to be the case is that a number of developers (possibly the pro-NFT among them) got sequestered off to the Special Project that became this thing, along with the a16z money a while back. the general feeling in the eve:o community is still largely “get fucked”, and this project is likely to be double-stillborn (on account of dead kriptoes and an unwanted game/product)
I look forward in earnest to see just how dead it is on arrival
[0] - it took less than 2mo from the “would you like to play a fps in the eve universe? what would you want in it? what do you normally do in eve? what would you do in an eve-universe fps? why would you want your eve …” survey going out to the announcement “hey surprise! we have an fps!”[1]
[1] - again. they’ve failed a few times, with multiples out. ccp product leadership real bad.
Man this company has had some really interesting ideas and then the execution always falters.
I was still subscribed when the first eve-fps crossover they attempted. it seemed great and then for whatever reason a console exclusive with a subscription fee ontop. They didnt get the numbers they were planning for and the whole thing just died on the vine.
They’ve had some neat tech here and there and the whole experience is great for building out your psychopathy but i lost interest after the Greed Is Good phase of CCCP games started.
In 3 years they will release their NFT game.
so mozilla decided to take the piss while begging for $10 donations:
We know $10 USD may not seem like enough to reclaim the internet and take on irresponsible tech companies. But the truth is that as you read this email, hundreds of Mozilla supporters worldwide are making donations. And when each one of us contributes what we can, all those donations add up fast.
With the rise of AI and continued threats to online privacy, the stakes of our movement have never been higher. And supporters like you are the reason why Mozilla is in a strong position to take on these challenges and transform the future of the internet.
the rise of AI you say! wow that sounds awful, it’s so good Mozilla isn’t very recently notorious for pushing that exact thing on their users without their consent alongside other privacy-violating changes. what a responsible tech company!
upside of this: they’ll get told why they’re not getting many of those $10 donations
downside of that (rejection): that could be exactly what one of the ghouls-in-chief there need to push some or other bullshit
the ability of Mozilla’s executives and PMs to ignore public outcry is incredible, but not exactly unexpected from a thoroughly corrupt non-profit
I mentioned Severed Heads here as a good band several months ago and was wanting to recommend their album Living Museum, the tapes for their final US tour in 2019, as a good entry point. Anyway, it’s up on YouTube. A pleasant hour’s boppy industrial pop.
I still need to listen to this (I got way too into making backups of various systems, as one does) but severed heads has been such a big part of my FLAC rotation ever since you first mentioned them
(my bad)
it’s like a software fidget toy. also I found out how to make the mistake that makes a backup take 5 hours instead of 1.5 minutes (fortunately locally, not on our deployment)
Borked link. Possibly unthrottled invidious version
I prefer less pop and bop in my industrial, but I am glad to see anybody else still enjoying this with the word industrial in it.
Timnit Gebru on Twitter:
We received feedback from a grant application that included “While your impact metrics & thoughtful approach to addressing systemic issues in AI are impressive, some reviewers noted the inherent risks of navigating this space without alignment with larger corporate players,”
navigating this space without alignment with larger corporate players
stares into middle distance, hollow laugh
Paul Krugman and Francis Fukuyama and Daniel Dennett and Steve Pinker were in a “human biodiversity discussion group” with Steve Sailer and Ron Unz in 1999, because of course they were
I’m mildly surprised at Krugman, since I never got a particularly racist vibe from him. (This is 100% an invitation to be corrected.) Annoyed that 1) I recognise so many names and 2) so many of the people involved are still influential.
Interested in why Johnathan Marks is there though. He’s been pretty anti-scientific racism if memory serves. I think he’s even complained about how white supremacists stole the term human biodiversity. Now, I’m curious about the deep history of this group. Marks published his book in 1995 and this is a list from 1999, so was the transformation of the term into a racist euphemism already complete by then? Or is this discussion group more towards the beginning.
Similarly, curious how out some of these people were at the time. E.g. I know that Harpending was seen as a pretty respectable anthropologist up until recently, despite his virulent racism. But I’ve never been able to figure out how much his earlier racism was covert vs. how much 1970s anthropology accepted racism vs. how much this reflects his personal connections with key people in the early field of hunter-gatherer studies.
Oh also, super amused that Pinker and MacDonald are in the group at the same time, since I’m pretty sure Pinker denounced MacDonald for anti-Semitism in quite harsh language (which I haven’t seen mirrored when it comes to anti-black racism). MacDonald’s another weird one. He defended Irving when Irving was trying to silence Lipstadt, but in Evan’s account, while he disagrees with MacDonald, he doesn’t emphasise that MacDonald is a raging anti-Semite and white supremacist. So, once again, interested in how covert vs. overt MacDonald was at the time.
Yeah, Krugman appearing on the roster surprised me too. While I haven’t pored over everything he’s blogged and microblogged, he hasn’t sent up red flags that I recall. E.g., here he is in 2009:
Oh, Kay. Greg Mankiw looks at a graph showing that children of high-income families do better on tests, and suggests that it’s largely about inherited talent: smart people make lots of money, and also have smart kids.
But, you know, there’s lots of evidence that there’s more to it than that. For example: students with low test scores from high-income families are slightly more likely to finish college than students with high test scores from low-income families.
It’s comforting to think that we live in a meritocracy. But we don’t.
There are many negative things you can say about Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee and the G.O.P.’s de facto intellectual leader. But you have to admit that he’s a very articulate guy, an expert at sounding as if he knows what he’s talking about.
So it’s comical, in a way, to see [Paul] Ryan trying to explain away some recent remarks in which he attributed persistent poverty to a “culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working.” He was, he says, simply being “inarticulate.” How could anyone suggest that it was a racial dog-whistle? Why, he even cited the work of serious scholars — people like Charles Murray, most famous for arguing that blacks are genetically inferior to whites. Oh, wait.
I suppose it’s possible that he was invited to an e-mail list in the late '90s and never bothered to unsubscribe, or something like that.
