What are you watching on Youtube now? η'

[shadowplay]

 

[Glassfan]

The attack on the Death Star.

 

[amadeus]

Advanced railroad signaling and station building techniques.

 

[EgonSpengler]

"What if a group of Raiders from Fallout 4 decided to form a band?"

Great makeup, costuming, set design. Song's decent, if you're into goth metal - not breaking any new ground, but solid - but I am here for this video.

Their Evil Dead tribute is kind of fun too.

I guess I should call this one "NSFW." Kinda gory.

I think I read somewhere that they toured with GWAR in their early days.

 

[Kyriakos]

 

[EgonSpengler]

YouTube started throwing some of these talent-show series at me: ________'s Got Talent; The Voice. Not normally my bag, but okay, I'll try anything once. This woman from the Polish edition of The Voice really knocked me out of my chair.

And I have a little bit of a man-crush on this dude. You can see the moment(s) the judges realize what he's playing.

 

[Kyriakos]

@red_elk

 

[Hygro]

YOU ARE VERY WELCOME

 

[Ferocitus]

Heh, historians predicting the dark future and preparing to try to survive it.

Almost as crazy as the 4th turning people back in 2005 warning the years ahead would be crazy due to generational stuff.

I don't see it as that precise, but more in the manner of realising that there will be more devastating plagues as severe as the famous historical ones, and to be prepared for them.
Asimov wasn't setting up "psycho-history" as an absolutely accurate predictor of the future because he allowed for many alternatives. Those Fourth Turning schnooks seem committed to the inevitability of their predictions.

 

[Ferocitus]

I showed this Chomsky vs Foucault debate (one of many now available with subtitles) to my son and nieces as an example of how two people can disagree at many fundamental levels without resorting to vicious rancour and abuse. Something of a lost art in many places.

I like Pinker's optimism and agree with many of his views in The Better Angels of Our Nature.

 

[Ferocitus]

I love watching two troupes of baboons slugging it out in public.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I showed this Chomsky vs Foucault debate (one of many now available with subtitles) to my son and nieces as an example of how two people can disagree at many

I thought the reason why they aren't "fighting" is because their frameworks are so different they are literally talking past each other constantly. especially with Chomsky I think not only did he not understand most of what F said, he also never really directly responded to any of it, just used it to go off on his own tangents. still cool that we have this video relic though.

I also have a massive hateboner for pinker so I'll make sure to watch that other video you posted. To me he is simply someone who (ab)uses evolutionary psychology to justify his political beliefs, a trend that is absolutely catastrophically popular right now. I am not an expert in this field at all, but from what I know, Pinker is not in any capacity respected/taken seriously in evolutionary biology/psychology and the computational theory of mind is more or less a reductionist joke, both in philosophy of mind and in psychology.

if you want some really cool evolutionary biology/psychology with political implications I can only wholeheardetly recommend Michael Tomasello. His account of evolution and morality is brilliant, even if I do not agree with all of it.

 

[Ferocitus]

I thought the reason why they aren't "fighting" is because their frameworks are so different they are literally talking past each other constantly. especially with Chomsky I think not only did he not understand most of what F said, he also never really directly responded to any of it, just used it to go off on his own tangents. still cool that we have this video relic though.

I also have a massive hateboner for pinker so I'll make sure to watch that other video you posted. To me he is simply someone who (ab)uses evolutionary psychology to justify his political beliefs, a trend that is absolutely catastrophically popular right now. I am not an expert in this field at all, but from what I know, Pinker is not in any capacity respected/taken seriously in evolutionary biology/psychology and the computational theory of mind is more or less a reductionist joke, both in philosophy of mind and in psychology.

if you want some really cool evolutionary biology/psychology with political implications I can only wholeheardetly recommend Michael Tomasello. His account of evolution and morality is brilliant, even if I do not agree with all of it.

As I wrote, I like his optimism in The Better Angels... Like you, I don't care for his other stuff (the little I've read, anyway.) I have a huge suspicion of a lot of psychology but mine stems more from a concern about the reproducibility of an enormous number of studies that were once deemed "foundational".

I thought the series of lectures from Stanford by Robert Sapolsky among the best that I have ever seen (in any field!)

I will definitely look at Tomasello's videos because I really like the very varied work that comes out of the Max Planck Institute(s). Thanks!

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I have a huge suspicion of a lot of psychology but mine stems more from a concern about the reproducibility of an enormous number of studies that were once deemed "foundational".

Interestingly I have read the exact same thing recently. It seems that there were many fundamental assumptions made from studies, which informed psychology for decades, and only recently have people attempted to reproduce these studies and actually found out they weren't reproducible, which means all the implications and assumptions are crashing down right now.

the problem here is not exclusively with psychology of course, it is also that science (and media/capitalism) inherently rewards novelty and flashy, easily understandable results. takes me back to the discussion I had with @uppi . some of the most important scientific work is what Kuhn called "cleanup" work, it is sciences inherent tool of hygiene - reproducing studies, cross-examination, all of that "boring" work is fundamental for any discipline and is probably the most important part of "normal" science.

also, we were both watching the same lecture on YT! I am also currently watching Sapolsky.

 

[Ferocitus]

Interestingly I have read the exact same thing recently. It seems that there were many fundamental assumptions made from studies, which informed psychology for decades, and only recently have people attempted to reproduce these studies and actually found out they weren't reproducible, which means all the implications and assumptions are crashing down right now.

the problem here is not exclusively with psychology of course, it is also that science (and media/capitalism) inherently rewards novelty and flashy, easily understandable results. takes me back to the discussion I had with @uppi . some of the most important scientific work is what Kuhn called "cleanup" work, it is sciences inherent tool of hygiene - reproducing studies, cross-examination, all of that "boring" work is fundamental for any discipline and is probably the most important part of "normal" science.

also, we were both watching the same lecture on YT! I am also currently watching Sapolsky.

My partner and I watched Sapolsky's lectures a couple of years ago. (She watched it again earlier this year.) I mentioned it because the series seems to fit your style.

On your recommendation I watched this Tomasello talk:

Great talk. Focussed, quite precise with simple reproducible experiments. Each idea was illustrated with excellent short videos. I love seeing an academic who doesn't have to refer to notes - they just go full pace for the whole time!
Before becoming a lawyer my partner did post-grad work in Anthropology and Linguistics. Tomasello's ideas were a perfect fit with hers, so many thanks from both of us.
I did take issue with his comment about a chimp being interested in a book and its pictures. It's clear that the chimp was interested in the book itself, but none at all that the pictures on the pages were of interest to it. A minor glitch in an otherwise splendid talk.

 

[Kyriakos]

A penchant for cautiousness, far exceeding a simple predilection due to being based on a conscious decision, can still fail to protect you against an enemy such as the manticore.

 

[Narz]

 

[Zkribbler]

Hong Kong, in the near future. Government spying results in the creation of "runners" to transport confidential information across the city. In Mirror's Edge, you are one of those runners.

Note: Steam's Summer Sale is ongoing now.

 

[Cutlass]

 

[EgonSpengler]

This is a riot. It must be a product of going mad during the quarantine.

It looks like she's done a bunch of them.