There’s an interesting conversation in the New York Times: a neuroscientist, Kenneth D. Miller, argues that brain uploading ain’t gonna happen. I agree with him, only in part because of the argument from complexity he gives.
I must have a case of terminal cynicism, because I read this article with the thesis that there are signs of hope in the fight against academic sexism, and my heart just opened one eye and sighed flatulently.
Maybe you’ll be more receptive.
I’ve heard a lot about Dubai, but honestly, it’s one of the few places on the planet I never want to visit. Zero interest. Actively repelled. And I’d like to visit Antarctica someday!
Building giant skyscrapers and “entertainment complexes” has no appeal — it doesn’t make for an interestingly human place. Here’s a wonderfully brutal rant about Dubai.
Dubai, on the other hand, markets itself as fun in the sun, a kind of Las Vegas on the Persian Gulf. Yet it has far more in common with Saudi Arabia than you’d imagine. Before you say, “But Alex, Dubai is the forward looking part of the Middle East that wants to engage with the world,” I invite you to consider the case of Marte Deborah Dalelv.
Dalelv is a Norwegian fashion designer who was on a business trip in Dubai in 2013. During an evening out, she was raped. She later reported her attack to the police. The authorities’ reaction? Ms Dalelv was charged with perjury, having extramarital sex and drinking alcohol. She received a 16-month jail sentence.
It’s full of entertaining bon mots, too.
Bigger, better, higher, glitzier, nastier: it’s like an entire city designed by Donald Trump.
Aaaah! Run away, run away!
From that last post, I wanted to single out one of the criticisms Answers in Genesis has of other people’s renderings of the book of Genesis.
10. Ark looks like a bathtub with happy animals sticking out of it
That’s an odd complaint. So children’s books are all bad because they have cartoonish simplifications of the old myth? This collection of medieval and more recent art showing the Ark is all wrong?
Bodie Hodge of Answers in Genesis wants you to know that you’ve been talking about the book of Genesis all wrong. Heretics, every one of you.
The globe looks like it does today: This would specifically be before the Flood in Genesis 6–8.
Leaving open evolutionary ideas
Not including extinct creatures like dinosaurs on Day Six
Putting modern variations of animals in the creation scene
Drawing Adam and Eve with very light skin and blond hair and blue eyes
Making an apple the fruit
Having a serpent without some form of upright posture or appendages during the deception: Genesis 3:1 calls it a serpent
Neglecting that God sacrificed animals to cover Adam and Eve
When illustrating Cain and Abel, we often get the impression they were the only two kids Adam and Eve had at the time
Ark looks like a bathtub with happy animals sticking out of it
Not including dinosaurs and pterodactyls (e.g., dragons) on the Ark
Putting too many individuals of a kind on the Ark
Tower of Babel being rounded
Tower of Babel reaches so high into the atmosphere that its top is covered with high cirrus clouds
The Tower being only partially built (i.e., a foundation)
Not using biblical dates
Calling the accounts “stories”
Don’t paraphrase the Bible—use a respectable translation
Placing the Garden of Eden based on post-Flood geography
Christopher Walken, reading The Raven.
More of ancient philosophy dudebro Colin McGinn’s emails have emerged as his harassment victim brings suit against him. The former student’s responses are consistent: he makes advances, she says no.
On May 18, he texted
I feel like kissing you.She responded, “You can’t do that.”
But at the same time, you can tell she’s conflicted: this guy is part of her pathway to a career in philosophy, and she can’t afford to just tell him to fuck off. So she gets more and more email like this one:
Need to avoid the scenario I sketched: you meet someone else, I broken hearted, our relationship over (except formally). This follows pretty obviously from current policy. To avoid my heart break I need to prepare myself mentally, which means withdrawing from you emotionally–not good for either of us. Also no good to just have full-blown relationship–too risky and difficult in the circumstances. So need compromise. Many are possible. Here’s one (I’m not necessarily advocating it): we have sex 3 times over the summer when no one is around, but stop before next semester begins. This has many advantages, which I won’t spell out, but also disadvantages, ditto. I am NOT asking you to do this–it is merely one possible compromise solution to a difficult problem, which might suggest others. It has the FORM of a possible solution. Try to take this in the spirit in which it is intended. yours, Colin
Jebus. She finally had enough, and resigned. And then, finally, the university administration leapt into action…and did their very best to keep everything on the down low. Of course.
She resigned her position as his research assistant on Sept. 11, 2012. Two days later, McGinn emailed her, stating “you are much better off with my support than without it. So please think carefully about your actions.” On Sept. 14, Morrison made what she believed to be a formal sexual harassment complaint and provided some of McGinn’s messages to university administrators, hoping to be protected from retaliation. However, UM routed her complaint through an “informal process” pressing the professor to resign, according to reports, because it was quicker. (McGinn denies on his blog that he was forced out.)
UM lawyers have said they chose to pursue this informal route to achieve an immediate resolution. Isicoff echoed the comments in conversations with HuffPost. Morrison said she had a right to choose between a formal or informal complaint process.
Keeping it informal, quiet, and private allows the university to hush up the misbehavior, but notice — it does not provide the victim the support and protection she needed and wanted.
Just once in my lifetime I’d like to see university bureaucrats come down on harassers like a swarm of vengeful angels in nice conservative suits and dresses. I know, it’s strange to see a call for more wrath on university professors from a university professor, but these people are not my kind. They are exploiters who damage the reputation of my profession, and if only these administrators would see it, the reputation of the universities they nest in.
I’m feeling left out. I’m not even placeable on this diagram.
Oh, wait. I think I’m the plain empty unlabeled background. Yay!
We need more of these, and here’s another: Great Adaptations: A Fantastical Collection of Science Poems. It contains short rhyming summaries of scientists’ work on adaptations, all nicely illustrated.
Here’s one from Sarah Hrdy’s work on empathy and cooperation.
Doesn’t that make you want to run out and buy it right now? How much would you pay? $5? $10? $25?
Well, you can’t. Instead, you have to go to this website and download it for free.
Writing the book was a labor of love, so I hope you love it too! Lastly, because our objective is to get as many people reading and learning about evolution, we’re offering the E-book for free.
Those wacky scientists. They know nothing of capitalism. Isn’t it great?
The Marcy situation has repercussions all across the university, and at universities all across the country. Here’s Ellen Simms take.
The greatest fury regarding the Geoff Marcy case has been directed against the university for protecting the predator at the expense of student safety and well-being. Despite a finding of sexual harassment, the university completely suppressed the outcome of the investigation. No effort was made to warn the students and postdocs in the astronomy department. They were left to be the canaries in the coal mine. Only if one of them complained would Marcy have experienced any repercussions for his decade or more of abuse. And, why would those women complain? Some had already complained and, seemingly, nothing had come of it. The only reason that this path was not followed is that someone leaked the report to BuzzFeed. It was from there that I, other Berkeley faculty and even the students involved in the investigation, learned of its outcome.
On Monday evening, most graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and faculty members of UC Berkeley’s astronomy department publicly condemned Marcy’s behavior and the administration’s handling of the case. Yet it seems clear that some faculty members had knowingly tolerated Marcy’s behavior for years. This episode clarifies that such cases cannot be investigated internally. The conflicts of interest are too great.
That’s a major problem: the institution wants problems like Marcy’s harassment of women kept silent, because they have an interest in preventing the stories from affecting their reputation and revenue stream. So potential victims are kept unaware, and all of the burden of reporting and standing up to the barrage of negativity that follows falls entirely on the shoulders of whistleblowers…who are often also victims of the predator.
