Another victim of our insane War On Squash.

I'd hate to have my grapes squashed by a train.

My wife was feeling creative and created this:

http://i.imgur.com/t5Zmt.jpg

The white half moons are daikon and the arrows in the centre are summer squash.

it's not that all corporate stuff is good or bad. it's a big shade of grey.

i think a better question is whether we'd be better off with a different legal framework for large entities other than the corporate charter, which often operates at the expense of the public good.
An executive in a corporation only has a fiduciary duty to maximize the earnings of the shareholders. There is no duty to public trust.

right now corporations generally:

a. are mainly owned by the upper class
b. mainly employ the lower class
c. mass produce second rate goods
d. Dominate smaller and emerging markets/
undercutting emerging technologies and competitors in order to monopolize markets. Once competition is squashed, they can price control, insuring profit.
e. Carefully protect their trade secrets in order to maximize profits. In other words, they don't share.
f. due to a history of conservative US judicial decisions, are treated "legally" as people for purposes of "free speech" and unlimited political access (money), but are not treated like people when it comes to liability for their actions.
g. Wield enormous financial political power that incredibly undermines the democratic idea of one person, one vote.
h. Mega-corporations are almost always multi-national - operating in different countries and "forum" shopping for the cheapest labor, best tax benefits, cheapest resources, easiest military dictator to support, and crappiest environmental standards. And as multinationals - they often operate outside of ANY laws, since jurisdiction becomes such a complicated issue.

to really fix the problems with corporations, the legal framework on an international level needs to be addressed, and soon.

and before any of you right wing dipshits start jabbering about liberal bias, know this:
I'm an ex-lawyer and a critical, independent thinker, so think twice and read carefully before emailing me your bullshit.

Oh Im not saying this wouldn't happen either. But if you wanted a true and good engineer/scientist in that kind of position, they should be able to say "I haven't had time to form an informed opinion on that." Which whether or not they had a funded and excellent campaign, is not what the public responds to. They want absolutes, their guy has to have an opinion on everything and pretty much line up with theirs. It would be very unlikely that any scientist/engineer you got elected was actually a good scientist/engineer, more than likely they may be educated in sciences but have an agenda they are willing to say whatever it takes to push forward.

So to simplify the point again: Politicians are all liars, and science is based in untwisted fact. To be a good scientist you have to take the facts as they are instead of twisting them to serve your purpose.

>> ^ghark:

>> ^Porksandwich:
Engineers and Scientists in Congress.


I don't think a good engineer or scientist could even get elected, because their approach to giving out information and answering questions isn't based around what provides the best platform/message.
If they could have a solid opinion on any subject when asked......they simply wouldn't be a good engineer or scientist. And people want to believe that the person they are voting for agrees with them, whether the voter is ignorant or well informed......a good engineer/scientist couldn't possibly know enough about all topics to give a definite answer that would give voters the warm fuzzies.
Or even more simply put: Engineers/Scientists aren't bred for deception and double speak.

while partially true, there are plenty of well spoken scientists, it's just a matter of them not being able to get elected because the money is behind those that fall in line with corporate ideals. They would get squashed on every side by negative media campaigns, lack of funding, lack of a platform for widespread dissemination of their message etc.

>> ^Porksandwich:

Engineers and Scientists in Congress.
I don't think a good engineer or scientist could even get elected, because their approach to giving out information and answering questions isn't based around what provides the best platform/message.
If they could have a solid opinion on any subject when asked......they simply wouldn't be a good engineer or scientist. And people want to believe that the person they are voting for agrees with them, whether the voter is ignorant or well informed......a good engineer/scientist couldn't possibly know enough about all topics to give a definite answer that would give voters the warm fuzzies.
Or even more simply put: Engineers/Scientists aren't bred for deception and double speak.


while partially true, there are plenty of well spoken scientists, it's just a matter of them not being able to get elected because the money is behind those that fall in line with corporate ideals. They would get squashed on every side by negative media campaigns, lack of funding, lack of a platform for widespread dissemination of their message etc.

I pissed @lucky760 off quite a bit when I made this comment. I was under the impression, as many others probably are, that quoting was still broken because nobody gave a shit to fix it.

After I apologized; and credit to lucky for accepting it and switching back to friendly mode so quickly; we began discussing the problem(s) a bit. He made it clear that while he had heard lots of whining (my words, not his), he hadn't seen anything in the way of examples. I was able to provide him with some (one of them actually popped up right there in our discussion when I quoted him) and I think 4 or 5 quoting bugs have been fixed since I made that original comment.

I reported another one just a day or two ago that seems way more convoluted than the others. It might not actually be worth fixing because I bet it doesn't even come up more than 2-3x a year.

So now I stand here like Donald Trump telling my story about being a huge asshole and getting something done because of it.

But kudos to lucky for his recent bug-squashing kung fu.

BOOM. http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=235777113120873&id=248600051

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=253158471379337&id=248600051

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=234508586589493&id=248600051

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=139106669507214&id=248600051

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=242466762444775&id=248600051

I really like the squashed ewok one. Unless it's @moodonia ;-)



Edit: No longer true due to change of rules: (Google+ is a bit unfair, I can't get on it because it says it's full.)

brain squashed

Lyrics:


deifniteively, spittin venom vigorously-
comin in ya speaker system, leavin victims, in the streets-
Im just here the feed the wisdom, feast the rhythm, from the beats-
shouts to my fellow colleagues, like alyssa miss marie-
how you doin, yeah I see you, you killin the game-
we got femcees galore, restorin images meng-
because the image to these critics, is a little deranged-
so let us paint the picture, fix it with the vividest flame-
in which we spit, cause this shit isnt delivered in vain-
its just means of our survival, rivals get in ya lanes-
cause the competition stomped, and I squash em again-
my inkin thinkin scientific like the quantum of pens-
you want it again? fine let me drop another mixtape-
rappers always mean muggin, buggin with that pissed face-
spit straight fire though, no dungen dragon,
Just a J to my face and a blunt for draggin-

brilliant! I still won't think twice before squashing one underneath my size 5 stilettos, though.

Sorry for misinterpreting the shorthand -- I don't know the lingo and am acquiring it bit by bit.

And no, sorry, it is still effectively the squashing mentality present on the Sift. It still is "you shouldn't have spoken up."

I will grant you that the squashing mentality isn't restricted to women and women-friendly folks. It happens all the time here on the Sift/intertubes. Fervent proseltyzing Christians can relate, I'm sure.

"Shut up" even has its own acronym STFU, right?

What I don't think is understood is how different it is when there is a culture wide, centuries long STFU about certain topics.

There are whole college degrees based on the suppression of women in the world. Shelves of books, pop psychology, academic tomes, dedicated to the subject. A lot of these books explicitly discuss the reclaiming of women's voices -- "I will not stay silent" is almost a revolutionary war cry.

And I understand that you don't understand. I'm cool with it.

Thanks for taking the time to read the whole long, convoluted, confusing Sift Talk post, Retro. I hope you took time to watch the vid link that @blankfist posted. It really is great.



>> ^Retroboy:

Thx, Jonny, that was the reason for the tl;dr reference. If it were the only comment in my post, it would have referred to the rest of the thread.
I'm assuming that this also removes my post from being an example of comments that are "squashing" the opinion of the thread's creator? Because that was far from the intent.

Thx, Jonny, that was the reason for the tl;dr reference. If it were the only comment in my post, it would have referred to the rest of the thread.

I'm assuming that this also removes my post from being an example of comments that are "squashing" the opinion of the thread's creator? Because that was far from the intent.

No offense, Retroboy, but it is pretty dang funny to me that you have an opinion about what is happening here without having read the comment stream. Although I understand that it is too long to read (rotten taught me what those initials mean.) I completely understand why you wouldn't wade in!

This ending bit eerily matches many of the comments made though. Isn't that interesting!

@Lann @UsesProzac -- here's an example of something that I interpret as a "shut up." "No reason to complain" can be translated to "you shouldn't have said anything to start with."

The "tense" is weird -- it is more "you should never have spoken" rather than "shut up now." The squash is still present in retro's sentiment, just as it always is here on the Sift.

And I understand that rule -- five years with nary a peep from me.

I lasted longer than @NicoleBeewhoever wrote the burlesque sift talk -- but she was brave enough to try a little feminist education in her Sift Talk. (All I'm doing is saying is it is uncomfortable to be a woman on this site and I'm not the first one to feel that way, and I don't like trolling.) I was meekly lurking while nicolewhoever was engaging. And yes, can you believe it??? I was meek! I lurked and scurried and was afraid of speaking up, knowing the unwritten rule -- don't interfere with the boys and their idea of fun.

Until now. My one little rebellion, triggered by a specific series of events. And oddly enough, this sift talk only happened because I have been educated well by the Freedom Fighters here on the Sift. "Don't censor me. I have a right to say anything I want. Freedom of speech. Move on if you don't like it." Sound familiar?

I have learned the lessons of the Sift well.

>> ^Retroboy:

TL;DR: If things have really changed since earlier days here, that's a problem. If they're the same and it was always obvious, no reason to complain.

Thanks for reading that long long loooooong post. It certainly came from my heart!

I didn't see the comment stream as "backlash." I fully expected it. This is what humans do, it seems -- lash out, misinterpret, cherry pick one sentence and analyze it to death out of context, extrapolate, and build themselves up into fake and real outrage. Happens all the time on comment streams of longer length.

I include myself in that description, but I am trying to wean myself from doing that. It isn't productive. I know I am not 100% successful, but I do it less than I used to. I'm still learning to recognize the behavior in myself. I have learned a lot from being on the Sift.

And I think you are right -- this place is mostly guys and I don't care how old they are, the kid is still inside there and he wants to play. Women have been called a "civilizing" influence -- I prefer that idea to the negativity of the idea of Political Correctness -- and the guys are absolutely right. It sucks the spontaneous fun of reacting in the moment.

I think the best example of that is that horrible C Punch vid that Lasurus posted. http://videosift.com/video/CUNt-PUNCH

The first comment. Now that is honesty -- he knows there is something distasteful about this vid and he finds it funny. I say good on him for just telling truth.

I always bring up Louis CK as a perfect example of the lie that is Political Correctness. Here's a guy who has said some of the most objectively offensive things I have ever heard, but I am never offended. Why? Because he tells the truth. Always. If he finds something that is objectively speaking distasteful, he says -- man, this is gross and I like it anyway. It is the bone deep honesty of it that steps him back from the edge.

AND. It is tiring to keep that up when all you want to do is watch videos and react, though. I get it.

I was very interested in how you reacted to the C punch vid (with the title that offended me.) I have a couple of fantastic male friends who are not the "normal" kind of guy. Heterosexual but gentle. To hear their tales of being bullied and abused, of their struggles to find their way to be themselves in our culture that is so abusive towards its men, that only allows one image for what it means to be masculine.... it's enough to break your heart. I heard echos of that in your post. I know you say that you felt protective towards women -- well, I may be projecting my friends' experience, I may be off base, but I heard echos of my male friends' struggles in your outrage.

I know that this place is mostly male. I come here because of the science (there used to be more, but there is still some), and the smarts, and the generally progressive attitudes, and dft and blankfist having the same argument over and over again.

I believe it is inappropriate for me to "squash" the boyish fun -- if this were a predominantly female site, the men would be expected to respect the culture of that site.

But they also aren't here alone. And that first poster on lasurus' linked vid KNEW it wasn't appropriate, that a line had been crossed.

Blah blah blah.

I am going to the new Pirates movie now. (Saw Thor last night -- man, was that stupid. But then, I don't know the comics, so maybe it was actually very good. I had no reference. I did recognize Stan Lee though....)



In reply to this comment by spoco2:
Very nice post