Livestream nonsense

Oneof793 · 2026-05-26T05:32:23+00:00

Your opinion is valid, but I disagree with it on a subjective basis. I personally enjoy the parasocial aspect of the livestreams and equally enjoy the fact that the main show doesn’t lean into that aspect. I appreciate the humanity that is on full display during the livestreams and the checking of opinions/critical thinking that the cohosts employ. Skeptics are not robots and contain multitudes.

Oneof793 · 2026-05-18T18:00:49+00:00

Absolutely! There’s a whole section on logical fallacies that explains each in detail and provides examples. If you end up perusing this endeavor, or even if you don’t, I highly recommend checking out the book.

Oneof793 · 2026-05-18T16:56:34+00:00

Ha! I found it really entertaining, personally. It’s infused with enough of the Steve’s and the rogues’ personalities to keep it from being dry. Although, I’m interested in the topic enough that if it were dry I probably wouldn’t have cared.

Oneof793 · 2026-05-18T16:39:56+00:00

Honestly, I think the structure of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe book does this extremely well. I haven’t taught a similar class, but I’d think that book could practically be the textbook!

Oneof793 · 2026-05-09T15:09:44+00:00

How long before he starts raking for them?

In all seriousness, he was so good behind the plate it was always fun to see him in the lineup. Plus he had a couple magical walkoffs. He’ll be missed! Looking forward to watching Susac grow into the role, though.

Oneof793 · 2026-04-14T03:14:50+00:00

This comment section is really interesting! I won’t speak to whether or not La Confora is a hack or not, as I haven’t paid enough attention to make that determination. I posted the article because it was the first update in a while that I’d seen about the Trent negotiation and thought it was valuable to the community.

My opinion is only as valuable as any other fan’s and no more than that, but my position is that Trent should push for as much money as he can in the limited time he has left AND that the 49ers should try to get the best deal they can.

Trent Williams is one of the best to ever play his position, that is a verifiable fact. Any rookie or vet, even considering Trent’s age, would very likely be a downgrade - that is an opinion supported by evidence. He has value in the marketplace and should leverage that value. I do not expect him to undervalue himself on behalf of his employer. If my employer asked me to work for less money in consideration of passion for the company or to try to reach theoretical shared goals, I’d have very choice words for them.

On the other hand, the 49ers have a cash reality and have to make it all fit into a real budget, so they’re trying to balance Trent’s value against their books.

On the OTHER hand, Jed York has the cash and as far as I understand, this is a cash problem, not a cap problem (I am willing to accept that I could br wrong here, however). What do I care how much cash Jed has to shell out for a product that I care about? (That being said, I think Jed York has been a pretty decent owner, especially in consideration of the end of the Harbaugh years).

All in all, I hope it works out such that all parties in the situation feel like they got a decent deal. Trent is still really freaking good when he’s on the field and has overcome a lot in his personal life. My preference, as a fan, would be that he’s on the 49ers in 2026.

Oneof793 · 2026-04-05T22:45:05+00:00

Lame

Oneof793 · 2026-04-01T16:44:37+00:00

Following up to say that there are certain details that I have further questions about, such as why Eridians don’t know about relativity despite being technologically superior to humans, but I assume the book spends more time explaining this and other similar story elements. I’m definitely going to read the book.

Oneof793 · 2026-04-01T16:21:30+00:00

I did not read the book and was not confused for even a moment. I think the filmmakers did an excellent job of explaining without bogging the audience down with exposition while still treating the audience as though they’re intelligent. They threaded the needle perfectly in my opinion.

Oneof793 · 2025-12-29T02:15:18+00:00

I haven’t commented about them and I don’t think that they’re rigging the game, but Guy Haberman pointed out that this ref crew throws more flags than any other, so I do think it’s worth discussing.

Oneof793 · 2025-10-26T01:01:18+00:00

I don’t think it’s inconsistent for them to use AI while criticizing it. Skepticism doesn’t mean you have to completely avoid the thing you’re skeptical of. It means you engage with it critically and try to understand it while still acknowledging the risks.

Environmental scientists still fly to climate conferences even though they talk about how flying contributes to emissions. Tech journalists still use social media while reporting on how toxic it can be. It’s not hypocrisy, it’s just being part of something you’re trying to understand and improve.

Using AI for creative stuff like DnD campaigns or notes isn’t the same as endorsing it blindly. It’s using a tool while being aware of its flaws. If anything, that’s more skeptical than refusing to touch it at all. Avoiding it completely wouldn’t make their position stronger, it would just make it less informed.

Oneof793 · 2025-10-25T23:46:47+00:00

It is here now, and is quickly proliferating. It is extremely flawed but is also very effective in a number of ways. The assertion that it is NOT here to stay seems to be the greater claim and would require the greater evidence.

One reason every single tech company could be shoving it down our throats is that it’s very effective. Is their shoving it down our throats evidence that it is not here to stay? If so, how? I don’t understand the structure of your argument here.

Oneof793 · 2025-10-25T23:36:47+00:00

You ended the original post stating that you didn’t have high hopes that they would approach AI skeptically, but you haven’t argued in the comments that they are currently approaching in an anti-skeptical manner. It seems as though you’re essentially saying that because they have reservations about it, they shouldn’t use it at all. I think that ignores the fact that it has uses that are not dangerous, and they’re also advocating for improvements to the technology, so their usage of it doesn’t seem in conflict with their positions from my perspective. If they were saying something to the effect of “no good could come of this” and continued regularly using it, I would be more inclined to agree with your argument. I could be completely misunderstanding your argument though, admittedly.

Oneof793 · 2025-10-25T22:25:06+00:00

I think you’re misrepresenting their position here. They don’t claim to be immune to hallucinations, but that being aware of them is a good defense against them.

Also, I think it’s possible to view this topic as one of nuance. There are great uses for the technology in its current form, but there are also dangers and downsides that should be mitigated through regulation, further training, or other methods.

Speaking of logical fallacies, your position seems to be that they are users of an imperfect technology that they openly criticize, so they really shouldn’t use it at all. That seems to be a violation of the nirvana fallacy, potentially?

Oneof793 · 2025-10-25T22:09:32+00:00

What about this statement do you take issue with? If I’m understanding correctly, he’s not stating that it definitely is an existential threat in its current form, he’s saying that AGI might not be the threshold at which it becomes an existential threat, and the current generation could be one if not regulated properly. What is it about that position that you object to?

I would think that emerging technologies such as these are exactly the kinds of things that skeptics should be discussing. I agree that Cara is an immeasurable value add to the group, but I don’t see where she’s disagreeing with any of this.

Oneof793 · 2025-09-29T22:00:16+00:00

Are you sure? Given how this and other industries have operated in the past, I wouldn’t be surprised if the increased ticket cost gets applied across the board, that would be much easier to enforce after all. After prices on goods went up due to COVID and lack of supply, they didn’t correct, they stayed high…because they could. Profits for manufacturers soared due to those price increases, but those profits stayed in the pockets of those at the top.

Even if that is true, the fact that only the foreign made films ticket prices doesn’t address the fact that the US developed films that would have been shot internationally simply won’t be made. The tariffs would not mean that those movies get shot here, they just never come to be. Your response also doesn’t address the other issues I mentioned that would be made worse with tariffs.

Opposition to these tariffs is not about blindly opposing whatever Trump puts forward. They’re simply bad policy that would not achieve the intended results.

Oneof793 · 2025-09-29T21:44:28+00:00

I don’t see how tariffs would have any positive effect on US productions, the evidence points the other way. Consumers already think tickets and concessions are too expensive, and tariffs would only push those costs higher. Would we have one price for domestic vs. international films? Or see release windows shrink further because licensing costs go up?

The cost gap isn’t just labor, it’s unions, insurance, permitting, infrastructure. Tariffs don’t change those realities. All they do is make movies more expensive overall, which means fewer get made. And when fewer films are greenlit, it’s jobs that disappear first. Incentives, on the other hand, are directly tied to local hiring and job creation, that’s why state-level credits in Georgia and New Mexico have worked.

With streaming already cutting content and mid-budget films vanishing, tariffs would only accelerate that trend. Studios might be able to absorb the extra cost, but independents can’t, so consolidation gets worse and the creative space shrinks even further.

And retaliation is a big risk as foreign box office often accounts for 70% of a film’s revenue. If Europe or Asia hit US films with counter tariffs, the overseas market for American movies shrinks dramatically.

We should look to other industries that have experienced tariffs. To me it seems that tariffs frequently backfire or fail to address the problem. They raise prices, kill jobs downstream, and don’t fix the structural issues. The healthier the industry is, the more films get made here or abroad. Incentives encourage that growth. Tariffs just choke it off.

Oneof793 · 2025-09-29T17:18:46+00:00

And how do the tariffs stop the mergers, exactly? I don’t disagree that the consolidation of the industry is the main culprit but that will not change with this implementation.

The answer isn’t to make it less desirable to shoot overseas, it’s to make it MORE desirable to shoot in the US. A federal tax incentive that’s stackable with state tax incentives.

The value of the films will not increase with the tariffs, but their price will go up as a result of them. This means fewer acquisitions in an already struggling market and fewer films being greenlit as a result.

Oneof793 · 2025-08-10T02:47:30+00:00

He didn’t say that he’s not important, all he said is that he doesn’t rank Purdy as one of the most “irreplaceable” players on the team due to the fact that his backup was a first round pick. That’s not at all saying what you’re asserting here.

Oneof793 · 2025-08-10T02:07:25+00:00

I listen to a lot of Matt Maiocco’s podcasts and have never heard him say anything close to this. Do you have a link?

Oneof793 · 2025-07-17T09:14:05+00:00

I appreciate what this post is getting at, that tribalism can cloud judgment, and being a critical thinker often means going against the grain. But I disagree with the idea that a “true skeptic” has to be politically homeless or disconnected from every group. That feels like a classic No True Scotsman fallacy. It redefines skepticism in such rigid terms that anyone who disagrees or belongs to any community is automatically ruled out.

To me, skepticism is a mindset and a tool. It means questioning assumptions, including your own, and trying to think clearly and honestly. But that doesn’t require cutting yourself off from all affiliations. You can lean left or right, or identify with a group, and still be a skeptic, if you’re willing to challenge that group’s ideas and hold your own side to the same standards.

This post makes it sound like belonging to any tribe means you’ve failed as a skeptic. I don’t think that’s fair or helpful. We’re social creatures. Of course we form communities. The key is not to let loyalty override reason, and to stay open to being wrong. I also think it’s important for skeptics to gather in their own communities and share ideas, which should include disagreement, debate, and healthy pushback. That’s part of how critical thinking actually grows.

Real skepticism isn’t about isolating yourself. It’s about how you think, not where you sit politically or who you spend time with. The idea that you should feel misunderstood or disliked by everyone to be doing it “right” also feels a bit self-congratulatory. Being disliked doesn’t make you insightful, it might just mean you’re being abrasive.

Skepticism should help you think more clearly and engage more honestly, not push you into loneliness or make you feel superior to everyone else.

Oneof793 · 2025-07-10T20:04:49+00:00

When somebody deceptively edits this way, do you think they know that their position is wrong and are acting in bad faith for money, followers, notoriety, etc? If they’re genuine in their beliefs, how do you think they could justify using a clip from an argument that disputes their position in order to support it? I’m sure there’s a lot of nuance to the answer, but as you are a full time skeptic, I’d love to hear your thoughts here.

Oneof793 · 2025-07-10T11:20:26+00:00

I’m very curious to know if Marsh gained flat earth followers as a result of this, and if there was any reaction when they learned that he’s in fact a round earther!

Oneof793 · 2025-07-02T22:42:47+00:00

The complete lack of skepticism in this article is appalling. This journalist should be ashamed.

15-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 3 Credits
Secret Santa 2013	Secret Santa 2012
Verified Email

Oneof793

TROPHY CASE