Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
GeekNights 061019 - Burden of Proof
Tonight on GeekNights, we discuss the "burden of proof," and why you should care about it. In the news, Twilight Princess may be released online only, and for the first time ever, non-traditional households overtake traditional households in the US.
Comments
Is Scott an idiot in real life or only on the Podcast?
I can't help but think that Rym chose Scott as a roommate on the same basis people like to hang around with fat people. i.e. Next to Scott, Rym sounds like a genius!
There are so many times I just want to reach out and smack Scott around for saying things that are just stupid or ignorant. This has to be an act... right?
He did get into RIT... Or was he one of those "diversity" students?
I was going to chastise Rym for being so hard on Scott these past few podcasts. It's really not interesting to me, because Rym is known to mix few parts legitimate argument with many parts fluff and fluster less eloquent people. Trust me on this one.
I thought the thing of the day would be cool, but I couldn't see it because YouTube took it down. If it was on some other show, there's no way I'd ever have heard about it if Scott hadn't mentioned it. That's what makes it a thing of the day. I don't have time to troll the internet looking for cool shit; that's one the reasons I listen to this podcast.
Stop using Scott as a punching bag. It's not in his nature to lash back at anyone. I know how he argues; I've argued with him long before this podcast existed. But it was always the fault of everyone involved, not just Scott.
I was going to come here and comment on how I think Scott was absolutely right on communities. While it is in my nature to act like Rym does, surrounding myself only with those I'm most comfortable with, that is only because of the random circumstances of my upbringing. I recognize the value of a more communal way of life, and often wish I was more comfortable around strangers so as to find social satisfaction in such exchanges.
The Sims (video game) put it best; social interaction is a need, like hunger, fun, or anything else. In any form, social interaction satisfies a human being in an irreplaceable way. Now, you can meet that need in many ways; you can go to bars and watch sports with your buddies every night, you can go to church groups and spend lots of time with your family, or you can play WoW and troll message boards. To each his own, after all.
I am not saying, nor should anyone, that one way is better than another. Communities are cool, so are online communities. I can say this, though; keeping to a small, closed circle of friends causes your personality to ferment. Politics affects all groups of humans larger than 2, and it can bring out the worst in people. To truly grow in life, you must interact with people (outside of work) you didn't plan on interacting with.
Social interaction of the old-fashioned kind (non-internet) is a double-edged sword. You find yourself naturally adapting to suit those around you, commensurate with the degree to which you are comfortable with them and/or the degree to which you are forced to associate with them. Look what happens to people in the army, school, families, etc.
It is not a bad thing that humans will try to alter themselves to please others. The disapproval of other humans, especially those in a position of authority, naturally causes a strong negative emotional reaction, which can be channeled into positive, creative power. Conversely, the approval of others causes deep satisfaction. This is not good or bad; it's the way our brains have evolved.
Communities were the greatest development evolution gave us. Not fire, not the wheel; it was community that allowed us to become sentient. Millions of years ago, as our brains grew larger, we began to walk erect, females had a very difficult time delivering their young. Infants had to be born premature (relative to other mammals) because their heads outpaced their bodies, and too large a head could not be delivered. So what did our ancestors do? They banded together to guard the females and the young. Not just one male guarding his mate; everyone took care of everyone. A male who only wanted to hang out with a select few of his community was shunned for not playing his role.
This behavior has obvious echoes throughout history. Long before modern nationalism, loyalty to one's social group (family, tribe, city, kingdom) has always been a strong virtue, a lapse in which was punishable by anything from mere resentment to death. Throughout human history, we have remembered that it was the community that was the key to survival and advancement.
Now. (copyright Rym 2006). In the Information Age, we can participate in communities on a global scale. You can be a digg poster, constantly trying to come up with the coolest, newest stories for geek cred. You can join a World of Warcraft guild, and try to help your guild accomplish raids it can only accomplish with many people's diligent work, and get rewards in return you could not have gotten on your own. You can work on an open source project, and find yourself, to varying degree, being counted on by many people to do whatever it is that you do.
These communities exist, they are good, and that is all well. But they are neither superior nor inferior to a location-based residential community, as Scott described.
Here, however, is the true argument. The difference between a neutral statement of balance in the world, and a statement of some sort of problem.
Housing developments have changed radically in the United States and all other nations (developing and industrialized) in recent centuries, and most of that change is in the last 50 years. The suburb supplanted the village. The older civic planning model involved small villages, with their own mayor and/or council, being built around wherever they were founded, with only light commerce and industry, and everything within walking distance of everything else. Then, as villages grew into towns, and into cities, they would envelop smaller villages, which would necessarily adapt, but never quite lose their identity. Look at Detroit, which has dozens of "villages" within its city limits, each with their own identity, but almost indistinguishable from one another visually by an outside observer. That's because most of its development was prior to 1950.
Now take the suburbs of Detroit. Planned decades in advance of any major emigration, the suburbs were planned in 6x6 mile townships, coordinated by means of the square mile gride of roads some 30+ miles in radius around Detroit's city center, themselves built long before they were needed. The stage was set for massive suburban developments. Huge roads with huge medians and massive scalability went underused for a time, as all land was cheap.
Now, the suburbs of Detroit as I knew them as a kid are mostly filled, some near or over capacity. Massive square-mile-spanning suburbs of large houses adjoin huge thoroughfares with more traffic capacity than an interstate highway, upon which there are hundreds of millions of dollars worth of colossal, upscale retail outlets (mostly chains).
Nothing is within walking distance, so everyone drives. Hell, they all have 3 SUV's each anyway. Since everyone drives, nobody passes anybody else. They meet in their upscale retail outlets, but not many conversations occur there. You don't know if the person you're talking to is your neighbor or is from Canada.
People might meet at schools or churches, but that's about all--merely a fraction of the social engagement you'd get in an old-fashioned community.
So it is not much of a choice; you cannot simply choose to live in such a community nowadays, because it has been made near impossible by city planners. Of course, I said nearly; like I said, the villages of Detroit still exist, and, of course, half this country is still rural, and the community model is still favored in rural towns. But even then, we can't neglect television and the internet, which pull people away from public hangouts and into their own living rooms.
The community model is neither inferior nor superior to any other model of social interaction. But it has its merits, and Scott stated them all. I myself might choose such a lifestyle if I could find a suitable community that still allowed access to a job and modern amenities; not an easy find. But you'll certainly have competition, as that's exactly what the well-to-do families of America (now a minority) are looking for too.
In conclusion, be nicer to Scott. Or, go find a community to live in. Or not.
Now I don't have to read that long essay ^_^
The simple truth is that most geek activities, used as intended, are anti-social. Kids these days have 100 television channels, video games, cartoons, etc. When my father was a kid, they had baseball gloves and bats. On any given afternoon there were 20 plus kids at the ball field. When was the last time you saw kids hanging out at a ball field playing a pick-up game? It just doesn't happen anymore in middle class communities. Quite sad.
He is by no means stupid. He is sometimes Opinionated and Cranky. But I think that in general his alignment is Good.
Like how Scott sometimes tries to hide nice acts with a grouchy comment.
Our teaches you something while berating you for not knowing it already.
He is smart, but sometimes hides it behind bold, at times ridiculous proclamations.
We like Scott and he is not dumb. Take our word for it.
To put it in gaming terms:
Does Scott have a high Intelligence but a low Wisdom or is he just acting dumb?
As for myself, if I say something in the show that Rym tries to pounce on, I try to avoid biting. Not always, but usually I just move right along in the interest of continuing the show. Outside the show is a different story.
If you want to think I'm stupid, you're welcome to think that. I don't really care what people think. I'll just let you know that I never studied a day in my life. I went to RIT and graduated with a B.S. in Computer Science, a program most people drop out of in their first year. I immediately proceeded to procure a high paying tech job in New York City. I can read at relatively high speed, I can write with correct grammar and spelling, but I can't lift ten Pokemons. Make of that what you will.
Much as the Colbert Report is hosted by "Stephen Colbert" who is played by the actor Stephen Colbert?
Wait a minute... that didn't come out right...