I did not make this headline up
panthera leo fututio
- Member for
- 6 years 28 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 weeks 3 days ago||So in otherwords: you like||
So in otherwords: you like the aspect of the uniform that looks very much like a million other uniforms Michigan basketball has worn, but you're not a huge fan of the glaring dick-cumberbun that's been vomited onto the shorts? To me, that would mean that I don't like the uniform.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Head injury vs. joint injury||
I never played past high school, but I did manage to accumulate a fair amount of joint injury: a torn ACL/meniscus and four subsequent knee surgeries and continued wear left me unable to do anything ballistic with my legs at a young age, and I already have a fair amount of arthritis in that knee and same-side hip, both of which I assume will have to get replaced at some point going forward.
I know that this pails in comparison to the joint injury/pain that a lot of guys go through, but I say it to establish the fact that I can appreciate the costs of joint damage. That said, I'm grateful that, aside from getting my bell rung a few times, I never accumulated much head trauma. I just see a qualitative difference between brain injury and bodily injury; bodily injury can alter your life, making it inconvenient and painful (in ways that I acknowledge can be pretty awful), but brain injury can fundamentally change who you are. And this is what I, and I assume others, find so frightening about the risk from concussions. I could see myself with full information trading a few years of playing a sport that I love for a future of moderate physical disability. I could never see myself making that trade for a future of middle-aged advanced dementia.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||It's interesting to see this||
It's interesting to see this outcome after reading a really fascinating Grantland piece recently on advanced defensive metrics: http://grantland.com/features/department-of-defense/. Among other things, the article makes the case for Chris Paul as the best perimeter defender in the association.
|4 weeks 18 hours ago||Honest, straight-faced answer: I would give zero||
Honest, straight-faced answer: I would give zero fucks if I was largely clueless about where guys would end up before they committed somewhere. I would care more about losing scouting content, but that content doesn't seem to me to be dependent on the element of the business model in question.
|4 weeks 19 hours ago||Me directly answering your question does not||
Me directly answering your question does not qualify as going off on a wild tangent.
|4 weeks 19 hours ago||With respect go the question of whether anyone||
With respect go the question of whether anyone would pay him a cent: possibly, though at the margin, certainly fewer. my broader, more tangential point: the world would not be a poorer place if some of these hypothetical guys were to empty their contact lists of 16-year-olds and go back to selling insurance or whatever.
|4 weeks 19 hours ago||The 'certain definition of value' I referenced is||
The 'certain definition of value' I referenced is the one that you presuppose: the one that centers entirely on the guy running the site. A piece of recruiting info also carries value for (at least some) of the people who absorb it, whether or not they pay. It also carries some (possibly negative) value for the players/coaches/families from which it was extracted.
|4 weeks 19 hours ago||Under a certain definition of 'value', yes.Also,||
Under a certain definition of 'value', yes.
Also, I'm not entirely convinced by my own argument, but I'm much less convinced by your fact/opinion distinction, either with respect to its logical structure or its application to statements about what recruits will do.
|4 weeks 20 hours ago||I dunno, man. I have a really hard time swallowing||
I dunno, man. I have a really hard time swallowing the notion of statements of fact about the world as property. Whatever the legal framework, items of prose seem to me to be qualitatively different from kernels of knowledge, and it seems to me that the latter can't properly 'belong' to anybody.
Granted, there's a collective action problem here; if everybody gets info for free, then nobody gets paid to collect it, and everybody gets less recruiting bits. But I feel confident in saying that the socially optimal level of recruit pestering is way lower than what goes on now.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||I could be mistaken, but my||
I could be mistaken, but my impression of the twitterverse is that you could find a cure for cancer, and you'd still get a dozen people telling you that you're a vagina that rhymes with "punt".
Which is not to say that York hasn't earned some vitriol.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Whatever. Facebook is rightly||
Whatever. Facebook is rightly horrified at Swift's suggestion:
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Before or after the game?||
Before or after the game?
|6 weeks 6 days ago||The success of autodidacts||
The success of autodidacts doesn't mean that schools are useless. And I think we may have to agree to disagree on the interpretation of my experience; in my view, there is vanishingly little danger here, and the use of (very modest) university resources to encourage students to be less shitty than I was at times in undergrad seems reasonable.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||So if I'm Roma, and I'm kind||
So if I'm Roma, and I'm kind of bummed out that my ethnic identity is used as a shorthand for fucking people over (an association that has been used as a pretext for my ancestors' systematic extermination at various points in history), I should realize that I'm part of the problem. Got it.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||The thing with a simple "be||
The thing with a simple "be considerate" message is that many people (and I would place my 20-year-old self firmly in this camp) have no idea that some of the things they're saying actually are deeply incosiderate.
I would regularly call things retarded, and I would regularly admonish my friends to not be such fags when they wouldn't want to go out in the cold and such. I don't do this anymore, not because I'm such a better person now, but because I realize now that I was being demeaning and shitty.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Self-control vs. understanding of context||
In requesting that people not say certain things because other people find them hurtful and demeaning, the university isn't providing a nudge to exercise self-control so much as it's letting people know that some of those things actually are hurtful and demeaning to others.
I used to say a lot of things in friendly conversation that I now consider socially unacceptable and, with the exception of the occcasional slip up, rarely use. It's not because I'm so much more in possession of myself, but because I now realize in ways that I didn't before that I was kind of being an asshole.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Free thought||
There is an enormous gap between 1) censoring ideas, and 2) requesting that people be civil to each other.
The notion that my ability to formulate and openly argue for ideas is somehow compromised because Big Brother has asked that I not call anyone a fag is...not particularly compelling.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||An onerous task: don't be an asshole||
"98% of what people angrily claim is “Political Correctness” is just manners. Politeness. If something I were saying at a dinner party offended another guest and my host explained why, I would stop saying that thing, in all likelihood. I myself used to call things “retarded” all the time when I was a kid, and I carried it into adulthood, and then people on the internet made it clear that they found this hurtful and demeaning, so I stopped. I explained to my children, I have a left-over bad habit in that I will occasionally call something retarded and it’s not an appropriate thing to say; will you please correct me when I do it? Thinking about what I wanted my children to say helped me here. Likewise, although I don’t know that I said anything particularly unpleasant about it ever, I was comparatively ignorant about issues facing trans people until some years back. Does this make me angry because the word “cisgender” exists now? No, because I’m not an asshole."
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I'd actually disagree about||
I'd actually disagree about Westwood village being awesome. It's kind of like a scaled-up South U, except with more douchebags in Maseratis and 50-year-olds with plastic faces.
Other things of note: CTools is a lot better than UCLA's course computing website, and people get ticketed for jaywalking on campus all the time, which totally sucks. Let the negative recruiting commence!
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Another thing to not click on||
Burt and Ernie did MOP's Ante Up:
|7 weeks 6 days ago||As a current UCLA grad||
As a current UCLA grad student, that is absolutely true. I went to the Oregon game this year, and most of the stadium seemed to not completely realize that a football game was happening. The campus in general seems pretty detached from football.
That said, the university is not without amenities...
|7 weeks 6 days ago||Statistics||
Article is paywalled, but you can get the gist from the abstract:
Auto insurance 'redlining' is an empirically verifiable thing. To your initial point: this isn't to say that insurance companies are extracting excess profits from people in affected neighborhoods. But it does demonstrate that a lot of (potential) drivers take a huge hit on premiums through no fault of their own.
|8 weeks 6 days ago||(No subject)||
|8 weeks 6 days ago||This raises an interesting||
This raises an interesting point over what counts as "political". I'm assuming that you're objecting to the comments on race and racism because they cross the no-politics line. But I'd argue that discussing the stability of Grosse Pointe's elite status without acknowledging that the form of segregation from which it draws its status represents one of the biggest moral failings of 20th Century America is, at the very least, a tad political.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Let's not drag Harbaugh into||
Let's not drag Harbaugh into this.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||The point is that "grown men", as used in the||
The point is that "grown men", as used in the initial comment, refers to the stage of life development at which dudes are likely to be not so into being led around on a string. Yes, 22yos are often asked to bear tremendous military burdens, and we should all solemnly introduce this point in as many threads as possible. But the relevant sense of "grown men" has a lot more to do with not getting care packages from mom, making solo trips to Bed, Bath and Beyond, etc.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Maybe it's the case that the||
Maybe it's the case that the attributes that make a person well-suited for infantry do not overlap precisely with the attributes that make them resent being dragged to cocktail parties?
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Option for posting unsavory links||
I came across this site the other day: http://www.donotlink.com/
It allows you to link to a page you'd rather not support without that link affecting the page's standing in search engines (I think). The page still gets whatever marginal benefit from the extra views, but presumably that benefit is fairly small.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I remember seeing McGuffie at||
I remember seeing McGuffie at the CCRB right before he transferred and being struck by the fact that he had a tremendously unironic mustache, a really hot girlfriend, and could benchpress way more than me. Everything seemed right.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Politics != ideology != moral||
Politics != ideology != moral reasoning. Criticizing a movie because of what you perceive as its moral or ideological failings is entirely reasonable. As this is not at all the place for the discussion, I won't offer my own opinion on the merit of specific critiques. But, regardless of your own commitments, it would be a mistake to write off a critique simply because it addresses what it takes to be the underlying ideological commitments of the movie.