|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Canada11369 Posts
On July 31 2018 05:04 farvacola wrote:
The corrupting influence of powerful items in LotR doesn't only regard their users/owners, it also implicates non-owners and those who become aware of some great power owned by someone else. Further, it's not only about corruption per se, rather that accessions to power, regardless of form, attract negative consequences without regard to the intentions of those who end up wielding them. As a general rule, you can't really go wrong with "the cooler the item, the more likely the owner does bad stuff/bad stuff happens to the owner" when it comes to LotR. If anything, the uncontrollable aspect takes precedence over the corrupting influence as a general theme, but the two go hand in hand.
I agree with this. It's a very consistent theme that the bigger they come, the harder they fall. Melkor being the greatest, also fell the farthest. Same with Feanor.
But I disagree that there is anything necessarily malignant about naming a tech device palantir, no more than naming something silmaril. If he's calling things the One Ring or the Ring of Power, sure.
The reason why I think it's pretty benign (and not missing the point) to name something the palantir: Yes, "Even Gandalf feared that encounter."
But to that, Aragorn says, "Nay, my friends, I am the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it, or so I judged. The right cannot be doubted. The strength was enough- barely."
I don't see anything that contradicts Aragorn's claims/ judgement, except that Aragorn only narrowly arrived in time. It doesn't seem that the palantirs should never be used or that they should be unmade or that they should never have been made. It moves more into the rightful authority of the King (hands of healing and all). Maybe authority vs power? But it's not so clear cut as being a nefarious name for a tech company.
|
On July 31 2018 05:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 04:56 Falling wrote:On July 31 2018 04:14 farvacola wrote:
The subtext of powerful objects/power itself being an inherently corrupting and uncontrollable force. Sure. But I don't think naming your company after the palantirs is missing the point or something secretly devious. If you think to when the seeing-stones were first set up- gifts from the elves- and where the high king can communicate with his entire realm, it's a rather cool concept, and I suspect that's what he's going for. They are more like the silmarils where great evil came about over the silmarils, but they aren't really inherently corrupting. The palantir's aren't in and of themselves a corrupting force. The only reason they corrupted Denethor and Saruman because Sauron gained access to one of them and in this particular case he is the corrupting force. Your subtext exists, but I don't know that the palantirs are the best candidate for them. Though there are other themes connected with the seeing-stones. Sauron is a freaking fallen angle who teaches the races of middle earth to magic magical items that end up ruining them. He offers them power and then destroys them with it. He is a faceless, corrupting force that manifest by preying on the weaknesses of those he touches. Even the powerful wizards of Middle Earth(also angles of sorts) avoid being corrupted by avoiding using the items of power. The elves deal with Sauron’s gifts by almost never using them. Palantirs are another example of a powerful item built with the best of intent, but that is quickly turned to a weapon of evil because no one asked what would happen if the enemy obtained one. An item so easily corrupted that it only takes one of them falling into the wrong hands to make them to risky to use. It says a TON about a tech company if they name themselves after them. That it’s founder is either arrogant or ignorant.
Perhaps the founder is sending a message to himself to beware the corruption of power and sent that message as a constant reminder while also being an inside joke through the name. He knows the power of huge corporations, data, and money and is trying to warn himself not to fall prey to that power.
On July 31 2018 05:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 05:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 05:03 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2018 04:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 04:44 Evotroid wrote:On July 31 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 04:06 ticklishmusic wrote:On July 31 2018 03:41 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2018 03:21 IgnE wrote:Peter Thiel was interviewed by a German publication and was asked about a bunch of stuff, including his support for Trump: www.weltwoche.chAt some point, you described that the last presidential election felt like an apocalyptic battle. What exactly did you feel was at stake?
There are these essays by a person called Michael Anton. They are all written pseudonymously because he felt it was too dangerous to write names. One of them was titled “The Flight 93 Election”. Flight 93 was one of the four flights that was hijacked after 9/11 but it was the one where the passengers took over, they charged the cockpit – plane still crashed. And it was like that it felt that the country had been taken over and it was on a catastrophic trajectory, that people were going to try to charge the cockpit. It didn’t mean that they would be able to ride the plane or the ship or whatever the metaphor is, but “we’re gonna try”. So I do think that “The Flight 93 Election” is a powerful metaphor and, emotionally, that certainly resonated with me. He felt that the Flight 93 Election was a powerful metaphor for the last election, but it's not clear exactly why he felt that way. I thought that Anton was more a liberaltarian (classical Machiavellian liberalism) than the Thiel kind of libertarian with a tinge of cyber anarchism. Thiel's comment here: And the answer is?
My judgement certainly is that there is a lot more truth on the Trump side than on the, let’s call it Google Propaganda, the alternative where everything is just automatically getting better. Certainly, one of the experiences throughout the western world is that the younger generation, for the most part, does not expect to have lives as good as those of their parents. We can say they are wrong, they don’t understand anything about their lives. But, again, the common-sense, anti “political correctness” intuition is that you trust people’s common sense, you trust their judgements and that judgement is an incredible indictment of our elites. just seems to be way too general in contrast to Anton's very specific description of where he thinks the country is going and why we have to charge the cockpit. Then Thiel says that he supports Trump out of a libertarian foreign policy perspective: But I still think of myself as philosophically quite libertarian: I do believe in a smaller government, free markets, socially moderate positions, less interventionist foreign policy… I would actually strongly defend president Trump on libertarian grounds. I know lots of libertarians would not agree with this. The dimension that is always very important is the foreign-policy one from a libertarian point of view. Yet more fuel to my feelings that Peter Thiel is a mediocre human that happens to have billions of dollars and wants the government to get out of his way. And he named his data analytics firm Palantir. That has always made me wonder if I have it wrong and he is a genius that is fooling everyone or just another tech bro that failed to graps the very not subtle subtext of the LotR. I think he's a pretty big LotR fan because he named a couple of his PE/VC finds Valar Ventures and Mithril Capital. But I agree he probably missed, ignored or has a very twisted interpretation of the entire subtext about Palantirs. Is it possible that something like LoTR can also inspire people who think the wrong people won out? Or more to the point farv clarified, that his read was they were flawed in ways he isn't? Maybe getting a bit offtopic, but: I mean, isn't that the real subtext? Making you think that of course people before you were the wrong people, but you, you really could do so much good, if you only used my power... I always understood the main point to be about not falling for the "you are better than those before" spiel. I could also see him as just being self aware, and not oblivious in the naming. I would presume so, but I'm only a superficial fan, if that. I've seen the movies more times than I'd admit anywhere but here and read The Hobbit but presume pretty much anyone with an opinion on LoTR here knows better than I do. The story of the Hobbit was written before LotR and the world had not been fully fleshed out in Tolkien’s mind at that point. Later editions of the Hobbit had parts added to reference the ring more clearly. Tolkien served in WW1 and his son served in WW2. Both of those wars impacted his world view on war and heroism, though he never really talked about it publicly. But the mechanical, all consuming nature of Mordor and Uraki more closely resemble the industrialized warfare of his era, which the heroes fight against. LotR also has overtones of Christianity(Tolkien was super Christian), with the villain being a fallen, corrupting angle that promises the power to rule justly and fairly, only to use those gifts to corrupt the land. And the power of the meek(hobbits) influence the world by carrying the burden as far as they can bear. A lot of these subtexts are lost on tech nerds like Pet, who only see magic items from D&D that someone else could have used if it wasn’t for the bad guy. They watch Blade Runner and see the bright lights of the cyber city and flying car, while missing the oil fields on fire in the background and that the future is built on the back of growing slaves in a vat. I'm not so sure they "miss it" as they think their way will be better and more righteous or just the harsh reality we must face. Granting I can't really speak to what's "there" in terms of the LoTR story. That it’s founder is either arrogant or ignorant I'm leaning toward arrogant. I used to think that, but the more nerdy people I talk to about series like LotR the more I believe that people like that series never read into the subtext of what it is all about. They just think the magic items were cool.
I think it'd be pretty hard to miss the "power corrupts" message of LotR. The whole idea is that a hobbit who wants nothing more than to eat food and live a happy modest life in the Shire is the one to carry the ring because he's the least likely to be corrupted, yet he still suffers from the corruption. Add in guys like Boromir and Gandalf even gives a speech about how he would mean to do good with the ring when offered it, but knows that it would corrupt him and tells the hobbit not to ever offer it to him again.
People might not focus on the message and prefer the fantasy, but the message is kinda hard to miss.
|
On July 31 2018 06:15 Plansix wrote:
How do Pro-Russia Ukrainians just have 60 million to dump into a single political operative lobbying in a foreign country?
Ukraine has a problem with wealth redistribution, the country may be poor but its oligarchs are so rich it's actually possible that with some Russian support they could spend that much money on lobbying in the US.
Here's what wikipedia has on Ukrainian president
According to the annual ranking of the richest people in Ukraine[31] published by the Ukrainian journal Novoye Vremya and conducted jointly with Dragon Capital, a leading investment company in Ukraine, published in October 2015, president Poroshenko was found to be the only one from the top ten list whose asset value grew since the previous year's ranking. The estimate of his assets was set at $979 million USD, a 20% growth, and his ranking increased from 9th to 6th wealthiest person in Ukraine. The article noted that Poroshenko remained one of the only two European leaders who owned a business empire of such scale, with Silvio Berlusconi of Italy being the other.
|
On July 31 2018 06:31 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 05:04 farvacola wrote:
The corrupting influence of powerful items in LotR doesn't only regard their users/owners, it also implicates non-owners and those who become aware of some great power owned by someone else. Further, it's not only about corruption per se, rather that accessions to power, regardless of form, attract negative consequences without regard to the intentions of those who end up wielding them. As a general rule, you can't really go wrong with "the cooler the item, the more likely the owner does bad stuff/bad stuff happens to the owner" when it comes to LotR. If anything, the uncontrollable aspect takes precedence over the corrupting influence as a general theme, but the two go hand in hand. I agree with this. It's a very consistent theme that the bigger they come, the harder they fall. Melkor being the greatest, also fell the farthest. Same with Feanor. But I disagree that there is anything necessarily malignant about naming a tech device palantir, no more than naming something silmaril. If he's calling things the One Ring or the Ring of Power, sure. The reason why I think it's pretty benign (and not missing the point) to name something the palantir: Yes, "Even Gandalf feared that encounter." But to that, Aragorn says, "Nay, my friends, I am the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it, or so I judged. The right cannot be doubted. The strength was enough- barely." I don't see anything that contradicts Aragorn's claims/ judgement, except that Aragorn only narrowly arrived in time. It doesn't seem that the palantirs should never be used or that they should be unmade or that they should never have been made. It moves more into the rightful authority of the King (hands of healing and all). Maybe authority vs power? But it's not so clear cut as being a nefarious name for a tech company.
Aragorn is also the last and best of a bloodline repenting a mythical paragon and exemplar of human nobility. He is an ideal we will never obtain. And he succeeded just barely as mastering the tools of old Gondor. The palantirs were flawed tools, and naming a tech company after them is kinda dumb.
|
People in NY and Illi politics are so fuckin stupid man, are there any states with any sanity left..? Giuliani, Trump, De Blasio, Obama, please shoot me before i ever give any of these brain dead men my support
|
On July 31 2018 07:27 funnybananaman wrote:
People in NY and Illi politics are so fuckin stupid man, are there any states with any sanity left..? Giuliani, Trump, De Blasio, Obama, please shoot me before i ever give any of these brain dead men my support
obama wasn't THAT bad. how do you justify putting obama in that group?
also, most people everywhere are stupid. and politicians everywhere are iffy.
|
Man, Guiliani is making me think there is some serrrrrrrrrrious shit about to drop. The dude is trying to suggest Trump can't be guilty unless he's the one doing the hacking. Holy smokes. That must mean the Trump team now knows evidence of Trump's direct involvement is going to be on full display.
|
On July 31 2018 07:44 Mohdoo wrote:
Man, Guiliani is making me think there is some serrrrrrrrrrious shit about to drop. The dude is trying to suggest Trump can't be guilty unless he's the one doing the hacking. Holy smokes. That must mean the Trump team now knows evidence of Trump's direct involvement is going to be on full display.
Idk, it could just be Guilani is REALLY bad at being a spokes person (that is pretty much all he is, there is no way this guy is doing real legal shit right?)
Giving up that there were 2 meetings is a huge unforced error though
|
Honestly I think Rudy might be the latest in the long line of really-doesn't-want-to-deal-with-this-crap anymore when it comes to Trump's PR stooges. Especially since the longer he sticks with it the more people remember him talking about his covert pipeline into the FBI that leaked him information in 2016. and the deeper he gets dragged into the muck.
|
Rudy has a long history was stating with absolute certainty things that turn out to be totally not true.
Edit: the trial tomorrow is going to shed some light on what Rudy is freaking out about.
Edit: also, why is Obama lumped in with the NY nonsense post above?
|
On July 31 2018 08:03 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Honestly I think Rudy might be the latest in the long line of really-doesn't-want-to-deal-with-this-crap anymore when it comes to Trump's PR stooges. Especially since the longer he sticks with it the more people remember him talking about his covert pipeline into the FBI that leaked him information in 2016. and the deeper he gets dragged into the muck.
Rudy got into this well after Trumps character was revealed. He knew 100% what he was getting into.
|
Judging by his prepared remarks reported here it certainly sounds like this is a "Christianity liberty task force" more so than "religious". He doesn't seem to mention any of the multitude of attacks against non-christian religious people, instead citing self-identified Christians.
Sessions said the cultural climate in this country — and in the West more generally — has become less hospitable to people of faith in recent years, and as a result many Americans have felt their freedom to practice their faith has been under attack.
“We’ve seen nuns ordered to buy contraceptives. We’ve seen U.S. senators ask judicial and executive branch nominees about dogma—even though the Constitution explicitly forbids a religious test for public office. We’ve all seen the ordeal faced so bravely by Jack Phillips,” he said, referring to the Colorado baker who took his case to the Supreme Court after he was found to have violated the state’s anti-discrimination laws for refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
Sessions said the guidance he issued in October lays out 20 fundamental principles for the executive branch to follow, including the principles that free exercise means a right to act — or to abstain from action — and that government shouldn’t impugn people’s motives or beliefs.
“In short, we have not only the freedom to worship—but the right to exercise our faith. The Constitution’s protections don’t end at the parish parking lot nor can our freedoms be confined to our basements,” he said, according to his prepared remarks.
|
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol...
|
Why the fuck is ICE detaining people based on Interpol flags placed by Russia? Why are is ICE considering extraditing these people? On top of all the other terrible shit, they are trying to be the bag men for Putin too. And we denied the dude asylum based on a trumped up conviction from the Russian government. This country is a joke.
And that “religious freedom” task force is exactly what it sounds like, Christian doctrine being imposed through the power of the state
|
On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol...
Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think.
This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was.
|
On July 31 2018 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol... Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think. This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was.
I feel like this is the logical conclusion of "religious liberty", US-style. It is, and never was, about actual religious liberty. It was always about the right to be an asshole because you claim that the bible tells you to.
US "religious liberty" is about giving christians additional rights. They are not even subtle in the way that they only see christianity as a religion that deserves that liberty. And it is never about the liberty to be a christian and not be discriminated against based on that, because that is not something that is actually happening. It is always about the liberty to be a christian and discriminate against other people due to that.
But of course pushing a fundamentalist christian agenda works a lot better if you call it "religious liberty" and not "christian fascism"
|
On July 31 2018 08:37 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol... Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think. This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was. I feel like this is the logical conclusion of "religious liberty", US-style. It is, and never was, about actual religious liberty. It was always about the right to be an asshole because you claim that the bible tells you to. US "religious liberty" is about giving christians additional rights. They are not even subtle in the way that they only see christianity as a religion that deserves that liberty. And it is never about the liberty to be a christian and not be discriminated against based on that, because that is not something that is actually happening. It is always about the liberty to be a christian and discriminate against other people due to that. But of course pushing a fundamentalist christian agenda works a lot better if you call it "religious liberty" and not "christian fascism"
In the words of the immortal Simon Phoenix: “You can’t take away people’s right to be assholes.”
|
On July 31 2018 09:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 08:37 Simberto wrote:On July 31 2018 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol... Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think. This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was. I feel like this is the logical conclusion of "religious liberty", US-style. It is, and never was, about actual religious liberty. It was always about the right to be an asshole because you claim that the bible tells you to. US "religious liberty" is about giving christians additional rights. They are not even subtle in the way that they only see christianity as a religion that deserves that liberty. And it is never about the liberty to be a christian and not be discriminated against based on that, because that is not something that is actually happening. It is always about the liberty to be a christian and discriminate against other people due to that. But of course pushing a fundamentalist christian agenda works a lot better if you call it "religious liberty" and not "christian fascism" In the words of the immortal Simon Phoenix: “You can’t take away people’s right to be assholes.”
Actually yes you can, but your ilk are fighting very hard to remain bigoted assholes for literally no sane reason.
|
On July 31 2018 09:45 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 09:40 xDaunt wrote:On July 31 2018 08:37 Simberto wrote:On July 31 2018 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol... Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think. This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was. I feel like this is the logical conclusion of "religious liberty", US-style. It is, and never was, about actual religious liberty. It was always about the right to be an asshole because you claim that the bible tells you to. US "religious liberty" is about giving christians additional rights. They are not even subtle in the way that they only see christianity as a religion that deserves that liberty. And it is never about the liberty to be a christian and not be discriminated against based on that, because that is not something that is actually happening. It is always about the liberty to be a christian and discriminate against other people due to that. But of course pushing a fundamentalist christian agenda works a lot better if you call it "religious liberty" and not "christian fascism" In the words of the immortal Simon Phoenix: “You can’t take away people’s right to be assholes.” Actually yes you can, but your ilk are fighting very hard to remain bigoted assholes for literally no sane reason.
First Amendment rights and equal protection under the law — which is not a one-way street — certainly qualify as sane reasons.
|
On July 31 2018 09:48 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2018 09:45 hunts wrote:On July 31 2018 09:40 xDaunt wrote:On July 31 2018 08:37 Simberto wrote:On July 31 2018 08:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2018 08:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Do they not understand the separation of church and government? Lol... Just betting that enough citizens don't, or will agree enough, I think. This was like Trump leaking the Cohen thing and nobody realizing they were failing to meet a basic journalistic standard on anonymity or how ridiculous their speculation on who they talked to was. I feel like this is the logical conclusion of "religious liberty", US-style. It is, and never was, about actual religious liberty. It was always about the right to be an asshole because you claim that the bible tells you to. US "religious liberty" is about giving christians additional rights. They are not even subtle in the way that they only see christianity as a religion that deserves that liberty. And it is never about the liberty to be a christian and not be discriminated against based on that, because that is not something that is actually happening. It is always about the liberty to be a christian and discriminate against other people due to that. But of course pushing a fundamentalist christian agenda works a lot better if you call it "religious liberty" and not "christian fascism" In the words of the immortal Simon Phoenix: “You can’t take away people’s right to be assholes.” Actually yes you can, but your ilk are fighting very hard to remain bigoted assholes for literally no sane reason. First Amendment rights and equal protection under the law — which is not a one-way street — certainly qualify as sane reasons.
They don't once you take about 5 seconds to realize that hate speech is not protect and that you cannot deny service to someone based on their gender race sexual orientation or religion. Furthermore If this is really what you want you will find yourself quite sad when all of the non christian, gay, and immigrant doctors lawyers bankers and I nvestors decide to say fuck you to the bigoted christian assholes and deny you service for what you are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
