Cat

woodyweaver Free

Comics I Follow

All of your followed comic titles will appear here.

For help on how to follow a comic title, click here

Recent Comments

  1. about 9 hours ago on Pooch Cafe

    I think they put something in the water.

  2. about 9 hours ago on Doonesbury

    Of programmer, coder, software engineer, developer — I think of “coder” like the line from Jurassic Park about “Grant’s like me. He’s a digger.” (Or the old sense of hacker.) Its a title that a kindred spirit can give to another, and it talks a bit about a way of life, like someone who would invoke a runtime CLI to do arithmetic rather than pull out a calculator.

    I’m on a gig (where I don’t do coding) that has Software Engineers. Or Senior Developers. Many of them are just kids, writing fairly poor code, actually (it lacks elegance, often has debug stubs still left in the production code, and doesn’t think about how to do things right, just how they can write paragraphs with lots of global variables to hit the mark. Bleah.) Some of the developers are pretty good, and I think are drawn down by the low bar set by the others.

    But that’s modern big-corp commercial development.

    On the other hand, there seem to be a decent percentage of non-male programmers, both female or those that don’t neatly fit into either category. They are mostly young, of course, but that’s because of the cost of older programmers. There is a fair number of non-North American, and while there are a high number of Asian, of course, there are quite a few Africans or Oceanian. Partly the high American counts are because I work in a US Federal gig, and they often have citizenship requirements. That wasn’t true twenty years ago, but it seems to have loosened up.

  3. about 10 hours ago on Shoe

    Miss, er, Mr. Hoover?

  4. about 10 hours ago on Pearls Before Swine

    I think there is something obvious here. To relate the quick, relevant, accurate facts about a current event takes very little time. (Much more time to research and prepare, but that’s a different issue.) On the other hand, we’ve grown to channels that provide media on a 7/24 basis. This means that they can’t provide just relevant, accurate facts, they will provide something else. It may be that they will provide things that aren’t relevant — like how the families of those murdered feel. Or perhaps they will leave accuracy behind, and drift into hyperbole or sarcasm. But unless they drift into deep pieces — which generally they don’t attempt, because the audience doesn’t appreciate it — its going to be simple entertainment. Not “left” or “right”, but a matter of math and the kind of audience we are.

    That’s a pity, really.

  5. 4 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

    Its possible they used those words. Its not in the pleading, or at least in the court records. If you think about it, its kind of an odd thing to say — what is in the pleading is more reasonable: it is basically saying that people who watch Carlson are smart to understand this is all entertainment, while those words are basically calling his audience idiots. Lawyers are usually a little more careful, but not always…

  6. 5 days ago on Non Sequitur

    Want to comment on one point: “3. Biden is pouring resources into Ukraine to successfully help blunt, and probably defeat Putin’s human rights violation of an unprovoked war.” I think its not that simple. Aside from the issue that “defeat” isn’t something that has a single valued answer (and I don’t think even like ‘prevent military occupation’ is more likely than not at this point) there are lots of other reasons that Biden is pouring resources into Ukraine that are purely selfish.

    The simplest one is like that of the Cold War, to use economic forces to minimize a foreign power: by supporting Ukraine, Russia is forced to spend more on logistics than it had expected, preventing acquisition of sufficient assets to enforce it’s will elsewhere.

    A more subtle one is the increase the importance of NATO, and encourage broader participation, which both suppresses foreign powers and aids in the defense of US.

    This relates to your point 4, of course. Foreign policy is rarely single threaded, i think.

    I do believe that for Biden, at least, the front-of-mind reason is the moral outrage one; Biden is pretty transparent at times. I’d love to play poker with him. (Disclaimer: I think I’d love to just have him over to dinner and pick his brain: he’s led an interesting life. I’d be particularly interested in how he dealt with the addictions of Hunter and the death of Beau. Those are Big Deals, and how he faced them would be insightful, I think.)

  7. 5 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

    Dueling sources? But I think if instead of using business insider (who summarizes and paraphrases) its better to use the language in the pleading itself. That’s why I said close. The exact language on page 12 of the published judgement is Fox persuasively argues, see Def Br. at 13-15, that given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer “arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism” about the statements he makes. which is a much nicer way of saying that Tucker Carlson is an ape gibbering for the masses, which we both think is the truth. :-) [Alas, it is all too easy to fall into hyperbole.]

  8. 6 days ago on Non Sequitur

    Naah, its just a metaphor.

  9. 6 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

    One can always be more ignorant.

    For example, accredited entertainment meme (not a ‘fake news story’) was three years ago, not eight.

    It was a part of what lead to McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC, No. 1:2019cv11161 – Document 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2020). Again, people used hyperbole reading it: what the defendants asserted is “Fox persuasively argues, […] that given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer “arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism” about the statements he makes. […] Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson’s statements as “exaggeration,” “non-literal commentary,” or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same—the statements are not actionable” and what the court concluded was “the Court concludes that the statements are rhetorical hyperbole and opinion commentary intended to frame a political debate”. So sorry, @kmcjoel, its not “no one should take Tucker Carlson seriously” although the language is close.

    A common definition of “news program” is “a program devoted to current events, often using interviews and commentary” — just entertainment. What used to be true is perhaps carried in a statement the Dean of the ASU school of journalism noted, "The values that Mr. Cronkite embodies – excellence, integrity, accuracy, fairness, objectivity – we try to instill in our students each and every day. " Alas, entertainment has trumped integrity and accuracy, apparently because that’s what we as the consuming public want.

  10. 6 days ago on Non Sequitur

    Maybe I’m missing something, but how is the US and NATO responsible for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine? I think there are arguments around provocation (such as the mere existence of NATO in Europe) but is anyone really asserting that anyone but Putin is responsible for the invasion?