site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 15, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

9
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The competency crisis rages on. Boeing's planes fall out of the sky. The Secret Service forgets to check the nearby roof. Anti-virus software bricks your computer. These sorts of incidents have always happened, but it's hard to deny that they have gotten more frequent.

Boeing's planes fall out of the sky.

I could be wrong, but the number of fatal Boeing crashes or lesser incidents is not an outlier compared to past incidents and other manufactures before all the media scrutiny. Anyone remember the 737 rudder jams during the 90s? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues#:~:text=During%20the%201990s%2C%20a%20series,board%2C%20157%20people%20in%20total.

It was a different model and hardly got similar media attention despite two major accidents with lots of fatalities close together

The Boeing issue was somwhat unique in that it was arguably the result of a vulnerability that had been purposefully introduced.

A conscious choice was made to change the emergancy autopilot disconnect from a physical switch to a software one and also to exempt certain autopilot functions from said disconnect switch thus invalidating the existing pilot checklist procedure for bad air data.

but it's hard to deny that they have gotten more frequent.

I'm always skeptical but never dismissive of such common sense. It could be recency bias and the availability heuristic at work.

I am starting to think there's the opposite of that kind of bias at play. 'Instinct distrust bias'?

I don't know what to call it, but it certainly feels like a lot of people turn very 'skeptical' when an aspect of their supported or preferred worldview is poked at in some way. The most obvious example of this would be mass immigration and the rise of housing prices. Implying a causal connection simply isn't a part of the program. Yet instinct would tell us it's the most obvious and important part of the entire problem in most if not all western countries.

Ditto depressed wages, rise of "the gig economy", etc...

Pick me! I’ll deny it!

I have zero reason to believe capability has gotten worse by any reasonable metric. Maybe—just maybe—that’s propped up by technology even as competency has tanked? But if so, I think there should be better evidence than black swans.

Compare complaints about the land boats of old. Why can’t we buy sweet Caddys anymore? I dunno, because they were death traps in an accident.

I’m still trying to find that Onion skit about accidentally invading the wrong Middle Eastern country.

I agree that our competence probably hasn’t declined that much. But our systems are much more integrated with a lot more single points of failure. I doubt that bad updates were ever that unusual. But it wasn’t quite the same as it would have been in 1990 when there were dozens of different OS and virus software combinations and so on. One company doing one update would have only affected the few companies that had the wrong combination of systems that got a bad update. Now the combination of cloudflare and Windows is common enough that one bad update takes out thousands of computers in thousands of companies.

Why can’t we buy sweet Caddys anymore? I dunno, because they were death traps in an accident.

Well, I think it has more to do with fuel efficiency standards. They were also death traps, or not as perfectly safe as possible, but rounding off all the edges for aerodynamic efficiency gives all calls a sameness that's striking when compared to older designs.

You can build a land boat that's as safe as you like, but it's not going to meet fuel efficiency standards unless it's classified as a truck somehow. This also relates to the rise of SUVs: they're not-sedans, and so they don't have the same standards.

I remember a video about the old standard of round headlights. Super convenient for everything except aerodynamics. There was an awkward transition where companies tried to put the aero shell around their legally-mandated headlights, but that was unnecessary after the regulation got removed. Wish I could find it again.

Boeing used to be better. I believe the Secret Service was as well. But anti-virus software, and the companies which make it, have always sucked.

Ehh I'm going to press X to doubt on the Secret service.

John F. Kennedy got Killed (I'll admit Trump would have been killed by Lee Harvey Oswald too)

Gerald Ford had 2 assasination attempts on him both of which he got lucky and survived but both were even crazier than Trumps

and just looking through wikipedia the list is just so long and full of examples that it beggars the question if Trump was even remotely unusual.

Boeing I'll grant you though, I think a part of it is that every corporation has its ups and downs and we have 1 down for Boeing right now, but remember the ford pinto? Boeing's issues are nowhere near as bad.