site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   2639 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for October 6, 2023

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is pretty un-fun (well for me) but too insubstantial for the main thread: Coffeezilla apparently reviewed Michael Lewis' book, and basically it seems like he had his mind made up/got hit with SBF's Rasputin-in-flip-flops aura and decided it was too hard to rewrite the book when FTX collapsed like a house of cards. The guy with the most access is also the most compromised.

Coffeezilla should know what he's talking about on this topic, but I did a sanity check with the grown-ups and NYT, FT and Fortune basically all come to the same conclusion. Even after his collapse in full view of everyone, SBF somehow has a residual reality distortion field. Also:

Bankman-Fried was supposed to be another hero in this vein — or at least that’s what Lewis suggests in the opening pages of “Going Infinite,” recalling how a friend who was about to close a deal with Bankman-Fried had asked Lewis to look into him. After his first meeting with Bankman-Fried at the end of 2021, Lewis says, he “was totally sold.” He called up his friend: “Go for it! Swap shares with Sam Bankman-Fried! Do whatever he wants to do! What could possibly go wrong?”

Ah-mazing. (Imagine how his friend feels lol)

My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined. I think I'm going to go find a book on cults instead now.

I keep seeing this take but I came away from the book thinking SBF is 100% guilty and probably going to jail. The book is an empathetic portrait of Sam yet there are multiple scenes that show outright and deliberate fraud.The book is more of a character study of Sam and less a laundry list of crimes, but I think the book is more interesting that way.

It's really unfortunate for Michael Lewis that this unforced error of a book was published at the same time as his prior work, The Blind Side, looks really messed up in retrospect because of the conservatorship lawsuit between the black athlete in question and non-adoptive millionaire booster quasi-familial adults covered in that story.

I'm actually inclined to believe him on the whole Oher thing (I think a certain sort of person already hated The Blind Side so leaped on the story of the white family exploiting the guy).

But yeah, the optics aren't good.

Reminds me of the guy who sued the director of Thin Blue Line, the movie that got him freed from prison. Not that I am all that confident in my assessment of that historical anecdote either.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats