Jump to content

Turbo

Contributors
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Turbo

  1. Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity

    Note: This article was published in Social Text #46/47, pp. 217-252 (spring/summer 1996).
    My approach will be as follows: First I will review very briefly some of the philosophical and ideological issues raised by quantum mechanics and by classical general relativity. Next I will sketch the outlines of the emerging theory of quantum gravity, and discuss some of the conceptual issues it raises. Finally, I will comment on the cultural and political implications of these scientific developments.

    Over the past two decades there has been extensive discussion among critical theorists with regard to the characteristics of modernist versus postmodernist culture; and in recent years these dialogues have begun to devote detailed attention to the specific problems posed by the natural sciences.75 In particular, Madsen and Madsen have recently given a very clear summary of the characteristics of modernist versus postmodernist science. They posit two criteria for a postmodern science:

    A simple criterion for science to qualify as postmodern is that it be free from any dependence on the concept of objective truth. By this criterion, for example, the complementarity interpretation of quantum physics due to Niels Bohr and the Copenhagen school is seen as postmodernist.76

    The alternative is a profound reconception of science as well as politics:

    [T]he dialogical move towards redefining systems, of seeing the world not only as an ecological whole but as a set of competing systems -- a world held together by the tensions among various natural and human interests -- offers the possibility of redefining what science is and what it does, of restructuring deterministic schemes of scientific education in favor of ongoing dialogues about how we intervene in our environment.92

    It goes without saying that postmodernist science unequivocally favors the latter, deeper approach. In addition to redefining the content of science, it is imperative to restructure and redefine the institutional loci in which scientific labor takes place -- universities, government labs, and corporations -- and reframe the reward system that pushes scientists to become, often against their own better instincts, the hired guns of capitalists and the military.

    Finally, postmodern science provides a powerful refutation of the authoritarianism and elitism inherent in traditional science, as well as an empirical basis for a democratic approach to scientific work. For, as Bohr noted, ``a complete elucidation of one and the same object may require diverse points of view which defy a unique description'' -- this is quite simply a fact about the world, much as the self-proclaimed empiricists of modernist science might prefer to deny it. In such a situation, how can a self-perpetuating secular priesthood of credentialed ``scientists'' purport to maintain a monopoly on the production of scientific knowledge? (Let me emphasize that I am in no way opposed to specialized scientific training; I object only when an elite caste seeks to impose its canon of ``high science'', with the aim of excluding a priori alternative forms of scientific production by non-members.
    Postmodernism: So useful that its entrance into the mainstream took half a century and manifest through blogs and gaming news!
  2. Regardless of what GG is *now*, the Zoe "controversy" IS actually what prompted gamergate. The person who actually created the #gamergate hashtag, Adam Baldwin, coined it while linking to the InternetAristocrat videos. Let's not revise history here.

    Oh, you're right, I misspoke there. That's the technical accurate origin, but it didn't have a boom of activity right away.

    Again: Nobody is arguing against ethics in game journalism. But the GG movement comes across as petty, obsessive, and, dare I say a bit misogynist, when it obsesses over people like Anita (not a game journalist), Leigh (who writes opinion pieces), Brianna (not a game journalist), or Zoe (not a game journalist) while seemingly ignoring the far larger ethical issues at hand.
    Constant prodding over twitter and shady fundraisers (ethics concern) have nothing to do with it?
    I posit that the movement is NOT actually about harassment or misogyny, but it's not about really about game journalism either. Posting on KotakuInAction under an alt account I've had conversations with quite a few pro-GG folks. The main sentiment is one of camaraderie, and a feeling that their identity as gamers is under attack - that the games they love will not exist, that "diversity" and other "SJW causes" are being forced upon developers, that the media is ignoring them. Sure, some people DO care about ethics in game journalism. But that really doesn't appear to be the focus.
    If we're splitting hairs here,

    camaraderie - you weren't listing this as an actual promotional subject of the group right?

    state of gaming being influenced/ agenda pressed on developers - Holding ratings hostage, representing the ability to smear dev teams as bigoted so they're incentivized to cater to sensibilities not necessarily shared by themselves as artists or consumers they'd like to cater, in order to stay afloat or gain entry to the field regardless of crafstmanship? That would be corrupt behavior wouldn't it? This has been occurring to some degree, has it not?

    that the media is ignoring them - whitewashing to protect their media "trade secrets" and one sided narrative is not corrupt/irresponsible journalism?

    Sure, some people DO care about ethics in game journalism - Wait what, I already read past the list of stuff not about journalistic ethics? What is your narrow definition of it?

    This explains why there is such concerted effort to attack and punish Gawker. Surely otherwise intelligent people realize that doing this isn't really going to effect positive change; Gawker has responded to their tactics with hostility. But GG doesn't care about that - they care about "winning the war" and punishing an organization they don't like. If they DID really care about ethics in journalism, the focus would be very different... say, for example, by creating and/or promoting sites that have stronger policies, or by appealing to journalists reasonably, as opposed to attacking Kotaku by carpetbombing its advertisers.

    Objections to that analysis?

    Christcenteredgaming or something gets praised for their review method that allows for their subjectivity without applying pressure on game developers, and I believe new sites have indeed sprung up. It's just that "punishing Gawker" is not mutually exclusive, and that depiction of is slightly loaded.

    I once did music for commission for a site, and when it came up for talking about handling a bigger solely musical project, the site owner described their desired share for pseudo-promotional hosting of the work to be providing their fanbase as a resource. It was disturbing to me. Sure, I need money, but I didn't get into music to deal in the logistics of literal human capital. I tried to cut ties. Not-so-coincidentally, they turned out to be a big proponent of bullying people into submission for crossing them, and I suspect the smear campaign spewing forth across the internet was due to a character assassination squad they hired.

    That's how I see what's happening here, except the resource that was supposed to be being sold is aware for this. That these gaming websites were catering to a not-necessarily-gamer demographic was straight up told to them by identity attack of "gamers are dead." It's not that advertising support is a bad thing, but it was meant to supplement legitimate things. And it might be also something that advertisers would like, to not be lied to about what audience they're expecting to reach with advertisements. Gawker has shown time and again that it's deliberately designed to be clickbaity, exploiting the addictive stranglehold of tumblr delusi-feminoppression-lympics, out to make a profit at the cost of social sanity. Instead of making genuine expressions that a viewership can find useful or appealing in relation to games where games are not just a supplemental tool of inciting and encouraging a histrionic outrage.

  3. Who studies how to fabricate?

    Oh, I know this one! Propagandists.

    More like "the type that develops particularly [with regards to] gender/justice [situations] that" ask for the critical evaluation of what is clearly biased and what looks incredibly suspicious before the making of claims regarding their qualifications.
    Is cherry picking, as in, omitting a lot of stuff to present a narrative-strengthening view of a situation, readily apparent to a reader when it occurs without requiring the reader to be familiar with the subject themselves?

    Like, all you have to do to discount that possibility in this case is just see the misogyny full blown in one of the hives, like here, in one of several threads on the GG subreddit currently supporting Christina Hoff Sommers, the feminist who observed the SJW trend in the making twenty years ago and published a book about it. Such a cancerous mass of woman-hating scum. Yuck.

  4. No, but it is quite relevant to the gathering of good evidence. That was the idea.

    Considering that pro-GGers do not convene in some kind of secret lair, what kind of common sense says you should rely on second/third hand info about them from opinionated blogs?

    Is it something like the common sense that infers how to pronounce words like "timbre" "solder" and "vitae," or is it the type that develops particularly after taking gender/justice studies that encourage subjective methodology with a warped sense of peer review?

  5. Sorry Mirby is a moderator/admin and you are not allowed to ignore him or her.
    Okay, this is what I needed to see, assuming you've had the ability to delete posts to create an echo chamber but didn't.

    You're twisting words on a facepalm level still, however.

    you attacked my location
    No more than saying Christianity is the dominant religion in Texas.
    and stereotyped me based purely on that
    I just elaborated that I gauged you before saying that it figures, but you may have been typing this before seeing.
    You constantly ignore the logic in what others are saying to substitute your own, even when proof is brought against you.
    I apologize profusely that I don't consider opinions like "they're at the level of fabricating evidence" as proof of anything. Also, did you not notice that I admitted I did not have the details correct on Depression Quest? Or did you simply choose not to acknowledge it while describing to "me" (a.k.a. trying to mischaracterize the discussion to skimming forum readers) what my actions are in the perspective of Super Bias Land?
    all I'm saying is that perhaps a little more research into things before you make your claims (or maybe a little more common sense)
    Common sense is not a substitute for evidence.
  6. This is a long way of saying you're stereotyping San Franciscans as overly aggressive feminists.

    Or that a San Franciscan using the pseudologic of proponents of a prominent ideology in San Francisco is just not surprising.

    "You can't define something with itself, after all" has the intent that the Mirby's "team" should be the grand arbiters of semantics, apparent by Mirby also linking an article that contains the mocking statement to subtitle an image I think in reference to some kind of "booth babe" quip within it: "But GamerGate isn’t about misogyny." Is this not an arbitrary definition of misogyny? Why?

  7. Here's another relevant link to this discussion

    Also I didn't say all of them were fake, so yeah. The point of mentioning the fabrication was just that they're at the level of fabricating evidence to support the claim that anti-GGers are attacking pro-GGers. And yes, some of what's on that site is legit, I won't deny it. Just was pointing that out.

    You said you believe in the truth.

    I asked how you arrived to the truth about the specific statement "most of those are fake."

    The answer: "they're at the level of fabricating evidence"

    :-?

    You're not really coming off as a person who should be on the internet unsupervised.

    You also took the opportunity pick out another lovely article for some reason. I'm guessing this one is supposed to be "neutral" as well.

    FTA:

    I'll start believing that people are really against threats and doxxing when they act like it.
    Like this? Or is this fake too? I mean those are relative time stamps that could have been taken at different times, and theres photoshop, and...- oh: 25th, 26th

    That must mean that GG hacked twitter to make certain tweets display the wrong time, and/or those people were cooperating with the threat poster to manufacture a scenario they respond to. Because it's just not possible for there to be unaffiliated trolls on the internet that are capable of typing out a tag according to your mysterious access of truth.

  8. The only thing I believe is the truth.

    Oh, excuse me then.

    You do realize that a lot of the "quotes" on that site are faked, right? Not really the best site to support your claim.

    I scrolled back up, and looked at this previous post real hard. I'm afraid I appear to be incompetent at internetting since I cannot see any links or attachments providing definitive proof that your statement is true. It looks like a bare assertion to me, but you insist you care about the truth, so I don't know where the problem lies. Can you please excuse my incompetence and explain to me where the proof is?

    Now I'm not claiming that every single instance is legitimately attributable to anti-GG, I was making a statement that GG receives bullying comments, threat implying objects in the mail, and doxxes just as well, except anti-GGer's get to claim that's not from them while the same claim with the roles reversed is totally dismissed.

    But, I see now, you've been trying to show me there's a reason for that. You know the truth. That is incredible! But for some reason I can't appear to find it. Can you help me find the damning verification that you have surely provided to supplement your statements of truth?

  9. a blog that continuously judges an entire group

    I beg your pardon? Can you go through the process of inference you used to gather that out of "Showing the often overlooked other side of this argument" written out on the top? Can you point out any of the commentary accompanying the posts that is outright generalizing instead of speaking on a case by case basis?

    faked
    Bias and double standards. Bias and double standards everywhere.

    Listen and believe!

  10. It took DJP and Larry more than a week to bring the level of this discussion on par with sophistication, and you guys only a couple days to bring it right back down to middle school.

    Way to go. :S

    Are there literally middle schoolers here? That might explain why "stereotype" is a difficult word to grasp for some, with them interpreting "someone mimicing the deceptive style associated with the prominent widespread image of SJWs continuously perpetuated by many self-identified SJWs" to somehow mean "judgement of SJWs based off one person" :roll:

  11. There are so many other worse violations that HAVE happened, and that ARE happening.
    Do you know of Katamari Damacy? The idea of having to start small is really pronounced in that game. Recall the first link I presented in the topic, about when people tried directly going after big dog Fox News? How did that turn out?

    Or, are you suggesting that people shouldn't even bother trying while we paradoxically (or sadistically?) continue to teach generations that vox populi runs democratic society, opposed to being puppets of social engineering?

    DQ didn't win an indiecade award. It was simply a game featured there. It wasn't a nominee...

    Or a digital select...

    Nor did it win any awards.

    Well damn, the text on those icons are unnoticeably small, I thought it was a decoration.

    Yeah, there does appear to be misinformation floating about on the matter. It's said she was awarded for the Night Games of the festival, which doesn't actually have awards it seems.

    I'm not clear, however, on how DQ is at all fitting for an event described as

    With live musical performances from Austin Wintory and Chipzel and a rotation of almost 30 new games, IndieCade’s Night Games is a carnival of avant-garde game play compressed into a celebratory diamond of flashing lights, loud music, and gameplay.

    Anyhow, this controversy was not what prompted the appearance of gamergate, the concerted censorship of discussion and speculation about these minor infractions followed by outright flaunting of journalists having ties with each other to coordinate manipulation of public opinion with deceptive articles that attack their own audience is what did it. It's not like GGers sit around obsessing over this red herring that I shouldn't have acknowledged in the first place. I don't know who the person DusK ran into is, but it doesn't look at all like anything I've seen from 8c or KiA. It's described as if it was spoken by a stereotypical radical SJW, really.

  12. What point are you trying to make by posting this?

    You know how religions and political ideologies tend to have "geographical borders?" Like when the "Bible belt" is referred to. It's not perfect homogeneity but indicates a concentration of something. San Francisco is basically home base for third wave "feminism," so someone with SF as location presenting a link to a ridiculously cherry-picked smearing opinion piece as some kind of neutral party is just embarrassingly stereotypical.

  13. In a few lines, I actually said "try looking at this definition to see where DusK could have gotten his

    I was addressing the sarcastic overtone that definition was in context of, that appears to be invisible to you, despite how well you can see sarcasm that comes from me, bafflingly. To spell it out, it was a variation of the whitewashing parroting catch phrase of "They're about harassment- if they say otherwise, it's BS."

    It's kind of weird you would dedicate this wordy post to ensure clarification on this non-issue but can't be bothered to fill in the two words of another post to be clear about what - I assume - your intended meaning was :

    viewed viciously by the impetuous, insensitive [subset of] gamers.

    I'm pretty sure I'm not the only gamer that spotted the allegory in that ending scenario and didn't consider it to be poor execution.

  14. A Statistical Analysis of #GamerGate Utilizing Newsweek Data

    Newsweek asked BrandWatch, a social media analytics company, to dig through 25 percent of the more than 2 million tweets about GamerGate since September 1 to discover how often Twitter users tweeted at or about the major players in the debate, and whether those tweets were positive, negative or neutral.The first issue present here is that they asked the company to look at 25% of tweets. The standardization of aggregation is not identified. Which tweets were selected? Whose tweets were selected? In what frequency?

    None of these questions are answered. This presents the first methodological problem. There is no way for anyone to replicate these findings. The reader is thus to trust that Newsweek and BrandWatch did a quality job in their analytics. So let’s address trust.

    It would appear that Newsweek asked BrandWatch to only examine tweets at particular people utilizing the GamerGate tag at the same time. This can be seen in their bar graph image where only select people were examined (tweets in parentheses as detailed in the source): Anita Sarkeesian (35,188), Zoe Quinn (10,700), Brianna Wu (38,952), Kotaku (23,500), Leigh Alexander (13,296), Nathan Grayson (732), Stephen Totilo (1,708).

    [...]

    Readers are to believe that approximately 10% of negative tweets are more important than 90% of positive or neutral tweets. The data, however, show that all sources receive more positive or neutral tweets than negative. The most numerous of positive tweets are also to a woman — Brianna Wu. All of the women receive more absolute positive statements than any of the men.If that’s the case, how can one conclude that GamerGate is about harassment more than praise and exchange of ideas?

    It is also worth noting that these measurements are all sentiment measurements. Sentiment is “opinion of.” It never measures intent or motivation. Statement that the group of people hate or dislike others through negative sentiment is completely unfounded as sentiment does not measure belief or attitude. It categorizes opinions about something based on the assumed linguistic motivation of terms.

    [...]

    Yes, Newsweek used a brand-maximization service to analyze the brand of Sarkessian, Wu, Kotaku, Alexander, Grayson, Totilo, and Quinn.

    They did not use a system which can analyze the intention of the tweets. They did not use a system which can examine the motivation for the reason of tweets. They did not use a system which can examine the fundamental mindset of those who are engaging in the tweets.

    They used a system which can examine how favorable or unfavorable a brand is. Not a person. A brand.

    They then looked at the information presented and concluded that GamerGate is about harassment. BrandWatch does not measure harassment. It does not state it does. This measure should have never been used to conclude harassment.

    Especially when the conclusion is made without inferential analysis.

  15. For a picture claiming to prove something, it does a pretty bad job of proving anything. Should I let everyone I've tagged on Facebook know that I'm banging all of them?

    Also, Grayson reviewed her game? When? Let's see it.

    Actually, let's just get right to the point: Post a single review of Depression Quest written by someone she allegedly slept with.

    So yeah, the allegations are still not true at all.

    I'll give you that the wording was flimsy with that scandal (even the gg wiki describes them as allegations,) however the point is that the relationships was not disclosed, despite that it wasn't a dedicated review, this article pretty much put Depression Quest in the spotlight, given the image spot, with glowing alt-text and first mention, when given 49 alternative choices: https://archive.today/iS4Ru

    Then there's this that's come to light:

    http://theralphretort.com/zoe-quinn-couldnt-have-made-depression-quest-without-grayson/

    http://www.depressionquest.com/ itself shows an indiecade award, referring to Night Games 2013, where it was pit against Papers, Please and lesser known indie titles, some of which that make interesting innovations. Do you believe Depression Quest is that groundbreaking of a game, where a curator and judge of the event is one of those in the scandal?

  16. But I'm sure I just made that stuff up, right?

    No, I was more implying if that was the extent of what is backing your reason for vocalizing peer-pressuring discredit of gamergate, you should have at least saved a screenshot or web archive or something.

    I'm sorry someone decided to sink down to tumblr level on you. I say that genuinely as someone who has been the recipient of harassment and malicious, libelous character assassination that sites where it propagated to such as tumblr and wikia refused to deal with because they "value free speech" and won't budge without a court order that's out of my budget.

    But that part you're saying that's debunked? No.

  17. Seems just insulting to tell someone how to properly do something wrong. :whatevaa:

    http://wiki.gamergate.me/index.php/GamerGate

    multiple gaming journalism outlets posted nine different articles, all on the same day, which decried "gamers" and declared that Gamers are Dead. Soon after the articles were published, actor Adam Baldwin tweeted his support for gamers and created the hashtag "#GamerGate", which quickly evolved into a consumer revolt against unethical practices in gaming journalism, such as corruption, collusion, and censorship.

    That's not characterization.

    Like, if you say you're a musician, it does not say a lot about your personality.

    Or, to be more "insulting" about it, equivocation is too easy to point out, you're supposed to try to excuse the generalization by pointing out the "no true scotsman" fallacy as if I had committed it since I've not yet explicitly said that I'm aware that any broad group of people is going to have jerks.

    Sophistry is actually viewed by quite a lot of people as a debate strategy. You can look up books like "How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic" if you don't believe me. Sophistry successfully influences people regularly. There's something lacking in general education or something that left has conveniently left this social engineering vulnerability within democratic society, somehow. Yet, the thought that journalists can lie and exploit, seems to be considered tin foil hat territory.

  18. Ran into my first pro-GG'er today. He's been busy trolling all over my recent YouTube video just because I retweeted some anti-GG tweets.

    Ya know, because the whole movement is about ethics in journalism.

    I just clicked on the youtube link in your sig, looked at every video uploaded within the last 3 months and didn't find anything even remotely related to GG that's all over the comments in any of them?

    Did you leave out anything like you deleted the comments, or you run several different youtube channels?

    I mean, if you're going to characterize "the WHOLE movement" based on the actions of a troll, you should know that a hasty generalization fallacy is supposed to involve a bad sample size, not a non-existent one.

  19. O <- where you were aiming

    where the joke went -> O

    Well you can attribute that horrible aim to the lack of FPS floating around. One can derive from the mainstream media and their trusting viewer's thoroughly investigated account that gamers are a put-the-woman-down misogynistic clique, that this genre faded into obscurity having lost support for being forever tainted by cooties after Perfect Dark. Just take a look at Wreck-It Ralph: While there was a boycott of Disney by pixel-kin for the insensitive representation of pixlexia, the movie's box office failures was more influenced by how it reminded gamers of that monumental disaster in gaming and prompted a revival of the Keep Cooties Out of Gaming movement that seeks to regulate artistic expression by colluding with popular review magazines and sites to impose biased rhetoric and unfavorable scores on the criteria that they don't fit into the political agenda of the critics opposed to craftsmanship of the work.

    I'm not even being facetious. Social justice education says I can break free from the chains of institutionalized methods of establishing knowledge and data, thus this is valid history, just as statistics for perception of quantitative occurrences of harassment by gender can be used as statistics of actual occurrences of harassment by gender. The distinction of subjectivity and objectivity is only a tool of subjugation by the Patriarchy.

  20. Explain how the comic of a guy getting robbed relates to an abandoning of the scientific method and thus a poisoning of the youth mind in regards to news consumption.

    It doesn't. Hence interpreting it as "the current discussion through metaphor" is absurd, and I followed up with a second paragraph. Sure I could have taken "current discussion" too literally by referring to my own morbid fears of what the actions of SJWs are going to wreak. It's not really a topic for GG, but they

    .

    Anyhow, have a thought experiment:

    fqJQVQL.jpg

  21. I think it fits quite well really. It presents an idea fitting to the current discussion through metaphor, kind of like sticking unlit cigarettes in your mouth.

    Yes, now that you mention it, it is quite a fantastic allegory for the situation of thousands of impressionable teens that--due to being subjected to oblivious parents and an undermined education system, not being raised with a shred of skeptical and critical inquiry--just take headlines of tabloid trash at face value expecting such "news" to be just as factual as scientific journals, getting sucked into a cult mindset and overcome with urges to share their strong opinions on the matter gathered from the mainstream narrative from shady journalists with motive to be dishonest to reinforce the mainstream narrative. It is quite a stunning satire of the "research justice" that attempts to validate a vocal minority of extremists' continued poisoning of everything they come into contact with by discarding the scientific method.

    Or it's just the same old propaganda but in comic strip form so that the little glue eaters can understand that while both sides are being trolled, doxxed and harassed, with rumors of wants-to-watch-the-world-burn interference from a sadistic third party being responsible for the bulk of it, they can accuse their opposition of being covertly responsible because specific hashtags are magical words that only a chosen few have the misogynistic privilege to utter.

×
×
  • Create New...