Mason Goad on DEI in STEM; Peter Saint-Andre on more Dunbar numbers; Lorenzo Warby dislikes activism; Abigail Shrier on the consequences of trans activism;
When you unpack that Shrier article, it's based on:
-- uncritical trust in a single source (Ugarte) who tells lots of lurid anecdotes but provides no data to back up her claims
-- similarly uncritical trust that police enforcing sex offender laws are protective rather than abusive, in both their intent and their effect.
These are classic signs of a moral panic driven by what you would generally, and rightly, call Fear of Others' Liberty. Shrier may have some reasonable points about the downsides of
the kinds of liberalization Wiener has advocated, but she hasn't done much to justify believing her. It is especially noteworthy that she has made no attempt to talk to any pro- liberalization source other than Wiener about what the data show. I am sure that, for example, Elizabeth Nolan Brown at Reason would be more than happy to provide countervailing statistics and arguments.
Commenting here because I'm not (yet!) a subscriber and can't post to your article about ChatGPT and KM. Are subscribers able to access recordings of your Zoom conversations?
With regard to the pieces by Goad and Warby, look at the bright side. Development of advanced weaponry depends on STEM and 'scientific literacy.' Russia and China excel in STEM, and they are already well ahead of the US in certain types of weaponry, such as hypersonic missiles. In the medium to long term, the degradation of STEM may constrain the US from engaging in stupid wars that we end up losing anyway. Maybe that's why the right side of the foreign policy 'Blob' is so gung ho on the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, and a war over Taiwan with China -- if we wait too long, the window of opportunity may close. Already the war in Ukraine is straining the MIC. Sorry, Zelensky, we are running out of heavy artillery shells and missiles, and we can't keep pace with the Russians in the production of these items, but here are some tanks for you. Of course, one might wonder why the US is undermining its own ability to maintain its position as the 'global hegemon.' The obsession with renewable energy raises the same contradiction. Production of large quantities of weaponry depends on cheap and reliable sources of energy, but the notion that intermittent, low-density energy sources like wind and solar can substitute for fossil fuels violates the laws of STEM. What accounts for the pursuit of these seemingly contradictory policy goals? I am mystified by it.
I recommend to Ms. Shrier legal prostitution, the kind we have in Nevada which solves most of the problems she discusses.
Gosh I just missed including this in the "notices" I put at the top of each of Lorenzo's essays - our posts crossed!
I will include it in next week's.
When you unpack that Shrier article, it's based on:
-- uncritical trust in a single source (Ugarte) who tells lots of lurid anecdotes but provides no data to back up her claims
-- similarly uncritical trust that police enforcing sex offender laws are protective rather than abusive, in both their intent and their effect.
These are classic signs of a moral panic driven by what you would generally, and rightly, call Fear of Others' Liberty. Shrier may have some reasonable points about the downsides of
the kinds of liberalization Wiener has advocated, but she hasn't done much to justify believing her. It is especially noteworthy that she has made no attempt to talk to any pro- liberalization source other than Wiener about what the data show. I am sure that, for example, Elizabeth Nolan Brown at Reason would be more than happy to provide countervailing statistics and arguments.
Commenting here because I'm not (yet!) a subscriber and can't post to your article about ChatGPT and KM. Are subscribers able to access recordings of your Zoom conversations?
With regard to the pieces by Goad and Warby, look at the bright side. Development of advanced weaponry depends on STEM and 'scientific literacy.' Russia and China excel in STEM, and they are already well ahead of the US in certain types of weaponry, such as hypersonic missiles. In the medium to long term, the degradation of STEM may constrain the US from engaging in stupid wars that we end up losing anyway. Maybe that's why the right side of the foreign policy 'Blob' is so gung ho on the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, and a war over Taiwan with China -- if we wait too long, the window of opportunity may close. Already the war in Ukraine is straining the MIC. Sorry, Zelensky, we are running out of heavy artillery shells and missiles, and we can't keep pace with the Russians in the production of these items, but here are some tanks for you. Of course, one might wonder why the US is undermining its own ability to maintain its position as the 'global hegemon.' The obsession with renewable energy raises the same contradiction. Production of large quantities of weaponry depends on cheap and reliable sources of energy, but the notion that intermittent, low-density energy sources like wind and solar can substitute for fossil fuels violates the laws of STEM. What accounts for the pursuit of these seemingly contradictory policy goals? I am mystified by it.