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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Can I piggyback and have a non culture war sub thread?
I'm interested in learning and pragmatics. I've looked at predictive flood maps before, but it's hard to have any sense of 'how good' they are. I'd also like to know if they are pretty off in some ways, are there any heuristics shy of literally replicating all of the work of coding up a topographic model, a precipitation model, etc., and just turning the dial up, that I could use to more easily get a sense of where is still pretty safe and where might be deceptively dangerous.
One thing that would be helpful is that if anyone knows where I can find recent observational data to compare to the old predictive maps, so preferably maps of the current major flooding with geographic detail that is somewhat close to federal predictive flood maps. Any other reasonable heuristics would be appreciated, though I am open to the answer being that there just aren't any good heuristics that can be generalized beyond detailed knowledge/modeling of a particular geographic area.
You should summon Beej67 for real answers. Just some thoughts from a nobody: common sense, knowing your risk tolerance, and a satellite image can get you pretty far. Don’t be within 20 vertical feet of anywhere a meandering river has ever been. Avoid being at the end of a draw, and in a non-meandering river valley, look for areas where the river has been before, then double or triple the vertical distance. Flow data usually goes back quite a while, but visually, you should be able to ask yourself, "How did that rock end up like that?" You should have to work to get to water, if it's easy to get to you're at flood risk. There's also an element of you don't have to outrun the bear just another person. If there's a path for water to go flood some massive other area get hire then that.
Maybe I get to cheat in my area because I live in an area in the path of ARkStorm so worst case is pretty observable.
I’ve found maps useful for identifying hidden flood dangers, like streams that have been fully encased for a significant distance. The flood maps will show the risk. The heuristic I use is: "If this disaster did occur, would its consequences be so severe that I’d be affected indirectly no matter what?" Maximizing mitigation of the Yellowstone caldera erupting probably isn’t worth much of your time, since the economic effects would be catastrophic, and you'd likely need to become a prepper if you truly want to mitigate that.
More options
Context Copy link
Look where past floods / natural disasters (blizzards, forrest fires, earthquakes) were?
There are services like this:
https://www.augurisk.com/risk/state/north-carolina/buncombe-county/37021
Good bet would be that insurances have the best models and risk assessments.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link