#Science and Policy

[capricorn-0mnikorn]

How much of our scientific thinking has an unconscious religious bias?

This is in response to this post, from @headspace-hotel, about campaigns to eradicate Hybrid Cattails as an "Invasive Species," even though both individual species hybridizing themselves are native plants (But I didn't want to muddy a discussion about science with a rant about religion. So: a separate post it is)

I sometimes wonder if our dominant views of "natural vs. unnatural/invasive" were shaped, are shaped, by the particular theologies of Protestant Christianity...

You Know, the theology that teaches / believes:

Our world was created by a single, all-knowing god

Humanity Fell by disobeying that god, and thus tainted the world with Sin (so Humans are now apart from Nature [aka the Garden of Eden])

The Protestant Christians fetishized the North American Continent as an example of what Eden was like "Before the Fall," and the people who were already living here were Noble Savages.*

So now, anything that evolves in response to human influence (such as brackish cattails hybridizing with freshwater cattails), is considered "unnatural," as if it's been tainted by our sin.

I sometimes wonder what our environmental understanding would be like in an alternate universe where the sciences had evolved in a polytheistic culture.** Would we be more generally accepting of the idea of coexisting forces constantly intertwining, and changing, rather than there being a single, fixed, "pure" world, that must be protected from contamination?

[BTW. I've become an atheist in this last third of my life, so I don't think any one religion is "more true" than any other: they're all metaphors that help us frame and understand the actual world we live in; they are very powerful metaphors, and for some, can be helpful and emotionally healthy ... for others, not so much.]

*(even though the abundant environment the colonizers found here was actually deliberately managed and curated by humans -- it's just that it wasn't managed in the form of fenced off square plots, and straight rows of crops).

**If you don't believe scientific thinking can evolve within a polytheistic paradigm, check out (what survives of) the writings of Democritus and Epicurus. Their philosophies weren't following what we now consider the Scientific Method, but they were already drifting in that direction.

[vyeoh]

One of my new co workers wants to come to the science muesums with me and I will be so normal and neurotypical about it

[fantodsdhrit]

an embrace is glaring at you dark purple tulip flying over fast glaciers and glades 

a bollywood chocolate boy doraemon blue

onlyfans persona in skin lace

with peaked beauty only a mirage

musk lip fillers granite breast augmentation testosterone replacement therapy

happily happy typhoon air insecure

secure bodies fuse it's not that you find me revolting it's that i am

of few that are opaque ash today

in a hundred years a nothingness

a fascile nothingness beneath your nail

you understand me digest me when i refund your long umbrella

your sanguine lingerie youth

wasted on religious southern fascism

the tragic movie is good only in parts poets are treacherous unforgiving

unforgettably contradictorily free

it's almost sad that you're seeing me age

near lake ullswater we see me age

clasped in each other's arms i know you don't believe me a decayed poet

[carlos-in-glasses]

Carlos Reyes Mounting TK Strand: A Study

[afutureworththinkingabout]

My New Article at WIRED

Tweet

So, you may have heard about the whole zoom “AI” Terms of Service  clause public relations debacle, going on this past week, in which Zoom decided that it wasn’t going to let users opt out of them feeding our faces and conversations into their LLMs. In 10.1, Zoom defines “Customer Content” as whatever data users provide or generate (“Customer Input”) and whatever else Zoom generates from our uses of Zoom. Then 10.4 says what they’ll use “Customer Content” for, including “…machine learning, artificial intelligence.”

And then on cue they dropped an “oh god oh fuck oh shit we fucked up” blog where they pinky promised not to do the thing they left actually-legally-binding ToS language saying they could do.

Like, Section 10.4 of the ToS now contains the line “Notwithstanding the above, Zoom will not use audio, video or chat Customer Content to train our artificial intelligence models without your consent,” but it again it still seems a) that the “customer” in question is the Enterprise not the User, and 2) that “consent” means “clicking yes and using Zoom.” So it’s Still Not Good.

Well anyway, I wrote about all of this for WIRED, including what zoom might need to do to gain back customer and user trust, and what other tech creators and corporations need to understand about where people are, right now.

And frankly the fact that I have a byline in WIRED is kind of blowing my mind, in and of itself, but anyway…

Also, today, Zoom backtracked Hard. And while i appreciate that, it really feels like decided to Zoom take their ball and go home rather than offer meaningful consent and user control options. That’s… not exactly better, and doesn’t tell me what if anything they’ve learned from the experience. If you want to see what I think they should’ve done, then, well… Check the article.

Until Next Time.

Tweet

Read the rest of My New Article at WIRED at A Future Worth Thinking About

[thespookylibrarian]

I have a really sweet coworker who just immigrated here from another country about a year ago. She came into work all excited the other day, saying “I heard some news on the radio that I think is good for you!” 

She proceeded to tell me about the Florida law (HB 1467) requiring a certified media specialist to review books before they can enter school libraries and classrooms.

“More jobs for future librarians like you!” she said.

Sad to think this is how a lot of people probably see this law, and that many won’t bother to investigate further into how vague and harmful it really is for students (not to mention the teachers who could face a third-degree felony for violating the law). 

I don’t know if this is an area of librarianship I really want to go into, but literacy has always been at the forefront of my academic/professional interests. That includes cultural literacy, which tends to fall under HB 1467′s broad language (re: theories that could lead to "student indoctrination”). 

I’ve found myself thinking about the ways I could shape my librarian studies/career into something that involves combatting these and similar laws affecting our education system, but I’m still not 100% sure what that would look like--hoping to take Intro to Info Policy in the fall for some insight. 

In the meantime, if anyone has any knowledge or experience regarding this topic, I would love to discuss it! I have a few friends in the K-12 teaching space but none on the librarian side, and they are dealing with enough already, unfortunately. 

[sinister-yet-satisfying]

If we lived in a decent society we’d behead people like this

Absolute ghouls. People who see the looming water shortage as a profitable opportunity aren’t worth the air they breathe.

[isfjmel-phleg]

😶

[healingheartdogs]

I have seen a couple of posts across social medias in the last couple of weeks about rat dogs not being a good recommendation for pest control in place of "barn cats" because dogs are significantly more work than cats are to manage and train and ngl it really annoys me that the neglect of cats is so normalized that people think they need zero management or training compared to dogs, especially when lack of management and training is literally part of the reason they are an invasive ecosystem destroying pest and commonly die horrible and fully preventable deaths outdoors. The real reason rat dogs aren't a good suggestion to people who have "barn cats" is because the vast majority of those people aren't actually using their cats for pest control at all, they are just keeping cats around and neglecting them and calling them "barn cats" as the excuse for why they keep them outdoors unmanaged and untrained (and often without proper vet care).

Cats deserve just as much medical care as dogs, cats deserve just as much management as dogs, cats deserve just as much play and enrichment provided by their owners as dogs, cats deserve to have their exercise needs met in a way that is safe for both them and other animals in their environments just like dogs, cats deserve training to make them easier to live with and contain and safer to interact with for other people and animals just like dogs, cats deserve protection from predators and diseases and parasites they can encounter outside just like dogs. Cats are not low to no effort alternatives to dogs. Throwing a cat outdoors is not a better or easier solution to a pest problem than getting a ratting dog (if that pest problem even actually exists and is being treated with the use of a cat, which I highly doubt in almost all cases), and is still harmful to the environment and dangerous for the cat even if the cat is occasionally killing mice for you (not rats, don't even get me started on cats for rat control, that is actual cruelty). If taking care of one animal is too much work neglecting another animal is not the solution. Use another pest management method that doesn't require you to take care of an animal at all if providing adequate animal care is a problem for you.

If you have mice inside your house or another building or whatever and an INDOOR cat that you use to help control small pests that are coming INDOORS and the cat also stays contained INDOORS where it can't decimate local small wildlife populations and you take care of it and make sure to get it frequent vet care for potential parasites and diseases it may pick up from those pests then this post is not about you. Scroll on instead of "okay but"-ing me, please. This is about outdoor/indoor-outdoor "barn" cats and cats being neglected under the false guise of them being kept around for "pest control". There is no justifiable reason for someone to have an outdoor cat. Calling it a "barn cat" or a "working cat" doesn't make them not invasive predators, doesn't make them not at risk for death by predation, doesn't make them resistant to parasites or diseases, doesn't make them resistant to poisons other people may set out that they get into or the small animals they kill get into and transfer to them, doesn't make them immune to being hit by cars, and doesn't make them immune to potential animal abuse by strangers. If you have ferals that aren't sociable that you're just taking care of at least keep them contained in an actual barn or sheltered catio or something -- not free to roam --and you still need to provide them vet care including neutering them otherwise you're just making more of a problem and still neglecting animals.

[racefortheironthrone]

I can get why it was created, but why does Department of Homeland Security still exist?

A combination of bureaucratic inertia and lack of political will. For the former, a lot of civil servants’ careers and influence depends on the existence of DHS as a Cabinet department. Even if the major functions of DHS would continue just as they have always done (the dirty secret of DHS is that the coordination and information-sharing that was the rationale for creating the department in the wake of 9/11 never actually happened and that most DHS agencies do their own thing like they did before the reorganization), a lot of high-up and middle managers would be at risk of losing their jobs or their power measured in terms of budget and manpower - so those folks are going to fight any attempt to de-establish the department with everything in their power.

Likewise, over on the political side, there’s a strong incentive to do nothing. Not only would a vote to reorganize DHS be controversial just in terms of generating lots of winners and losers, but it’s also a vote that could be easily characterized as “soft on national security,” and a lot of politicians would have to answer difficult questions about why they had voted to reauthorize or approve DHS funding in the past. Politicians don’t like having to admit to mistakes, and it’s easy to characterize a change of mind as “flip-flopping.” Finally, politicians also stand to lose power in this scenario - no DHS means no Homeland Security committee positions, means no DHS contracts and lobbyists to raise money off of. And so it goes.

[conscorridor]

For almost 25 years, Bhutan has been working to enhance the wildlife corridors which connect the country's protected areas. These provisions protect tigers, snow leopards, elephants, and drinking water. See how Bhutan is setting an example in our latest digest.

[quasi-normalcy]

The corporate university also compromises the concept of academic leadership. Deans who reached their leadership positions by virtue of distinguished contributions to their disciplines have in places been replaced with fundraisers and academic managers, who are forced to demonstrate their profitability or show how they can attract corporate sponsors. In medicine, those who succeed in academia are likely to be key opinion leaders (KOLs in marketing parlance), whose careers can be advanced through the opportunities provided by industry. Potential KOLs are selected based on a complex array of profiling activities carried out by companies, for example, physicians are selected based on their influence on prescribing habits of other physicians.7 KOLs are sought out by industry for this influence and for the prestige that their university affiliation brings to the branding of the company’s products. As well paid members of pharmaceutical advisory boards and speakers’ bureaus, KOLs present results of industry trials at medical conferences and in continuing medical education. Instead of acting as independent, disinterested scientists and critically evaluating a drug’s performance, they become what marketing executives refer to as “product champions.

“The Illusion of Evidence-based Medicine”, Jon Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry

[discoursets]

“Kasuri also gives us a rare insight into the minds of the Pakistan Army, the contribution of the Foreign Office and his warm but complex relationship with President Musharraf. Blending analysis with choice anecdote, Neither a Hawk nor a Dove gives us a comprehensive and revealing account of Pakistan’s politics and the political compulsions of those at the helm.” 🌱

[unicornbeck]

Apparently the pope just came out staunchly against surrogacy.

Jesus was a surrogate baby.

???