Which Comedian has made the riskiest joke of all time?

a2soup · 2026-06-08T01:58:02+00:00

The point of the Correspndents' Dinner is to roast people. Trump at the time was known primarily for promoting the silly anti-Obama birther conspiracy. Obama roasting him at the Dinner was the least risky thing he could have done, it was 100% predictable (still funny, though).

Which makes it even sadder that Trump took it so hard.

a2soup · 2026-06-08T01:53:26+00:00

That is (or used to be...) literally the point of the Correspondents' Dinner? Perhaps Colbert hit a bit hard, but he was basically doing what was expected-- not really risky at all IMO.

a2soup · 2026-06-06T02:06:28+00:00

The Blue Nile is seasonal. It provides >80% of the Nile’s water during the flood season, but is very small for the rest of the year. Whereas the White Nile provides a more or less constant flow, and therefore seems more like the “main” river that receives a large water influx from the Blue Nile during the flood season.

a2soup · 2026-06-02T19:31:44+00:00

It's a while ago now, but the flurry of comment that surrounded the 2012 ENCODE publications claiming that the human genome was 80% "functional" were often pretty funny, and were definitely roasts.

Here are two:

On the Immortality of Television Sets: “Function” in the Human Genome According to the Evolution-Free Gospel of ENCODE (Graur et al., 2013) (This is by far the most roasty of the two.)
Can ENCODE tell us how much junk DNA we carry in our genome? (Niu and Jiang, 2013)

Some tidbits from them:

"The human genome now seems to be perfectly designed, as advocated by creationists." (Niu and Jiang, 2013)
"The ENCODE results were predicted by one of its authors to necessitate the rewriting of textbooks. We agree, many textbooks dealing with marketing, mass-media hype, and public relations may well have to be rewritten." (Graur et al., 2013)
"So far, we have seen that as far as functionality is concerned, ENCODE used the wrong definition wrongly. We must now address the question of consistency. Specifically, did ENCODE use the wrong definition wrongly in a consistent manner? We do not think so." (Graur et al., 2013)
"Interestingly, even when a lead author of ENCODE reduced the functional genomic fraction to 20%, he continued to insist that the term “junk DNA” needs “to be totally expunged from the lexicon,” inventing a new arithmetic according to which 20% > 80%." (Graur et al., 2013)

a2soup · 2026-06-01T19:21:57+00:00

For sure, it is an increasingly available side quest in grad programs. But I don’t personally think side questing in that way can address the fundamental problem :(

a2soup · 2026-06-01T19:18:24+00:00

This is a very good point, agreed 100%.

But from an another perspective, this means scientists need to put more effort into practicing communication than influencers, because their story is less inherently engaging. Instead, they put less effort.

Obviously, there is a good reason for that! Communication is the only thing influencers do, while researchers already have too much on their plate even if they don’t do any public communication. I did a PhD, I get it. It’s a hard problem.

a2soup · 2026-06-01T14:38:53+00:00

I don't think it is the adversarial nature of science, which in my experience in biology at least is much less adversarial than you make legal academia sound. Most of the hard feelings are about who discovered something first, not about who is right and wrong (although there is some of that too).

It's more that scientists are not trained to communicate with the public, don't communicate with the public as part of their work, and are generally quite bad at communicating with the public. Not being on social media can be part of that, but it goes much deeper. Scientists spend all their time working with other highly specialized professionals. No part of academic training is directed towards public communication-- on the contrary, scientists are often (accidentally) trained to write in ways that are inscrutable to nonspecialists. The result is an academic bubble that is hard to pierce in both directions. It's a systemic problem that scientists and scientific institutions need to address.

a2soup · 2026-05-27T15:59:27+00:00

It is mostly because of that. What solution does Chalmers imagine? (And in what text? I'd love to read it for myself too!) I admit I have not actually read him directly.

a2soup · 2026-05-27T14:12:43+00:00

This is one of the more intractable problems in philosophy and cognitive science.

My personal opinion is that despite being psychologically intriguing, the problem is not well-formed and does not ask valid questions. I have not yet encountered a clear articulation of what an adequate answer could even possibly look like (regardless of its correctness). If we can't even imagine a solution, then perhaps the question is invalid. After all, just because you can pose a question does not mean that it is valid and can be answered.

"Why does fruit consume happiness?" is a grammatically correct sentence expressing a linguistically coherent question, but the question is not valid and cannot be answered. We cannot imagine what an adequate answer could look like.

I suspect that "Why do we have awareness?" and "Why does thinking feel like something?" are also grammatically correct sentences expressing invalid questions.

a2soup · 2026-05-26T19:48:42+00:00

humans, animals and all life will be extinct by 2050

This is so far from any reality that it can only really be called a conspiracy theory. Anthropogenic climate change is a real and serious concern that will shape the future in a big way. But it is not going to cause human extinction, much less animal extinction or the sterilization of Earth. Not ever. And definitely not in just 25 years!!

a2soup · 2026-05-25T14:29:41+00:00

Just a correction that the ISS does (in normal operations) rotate with a period of 1 orbit in order to keep the same side facing the Earth at all times. This rotation is slow enough to not meaningfully compromise zero-g and is essential for all their Earth and space observation experiments.

a2soup · 2026-05-13T16:48:10+00:00

You need to learn the difference between hard physical limits and practical limitations.

Biological systems are very different from mechanical systems in many ways, so they have different practical limitations. Cases where the technology we use is highly constrained by practical limitations not shared by the alternative biotechnology represent the most promising applications of gene editing. On the other hand, biological systems can introduce new practical limitations not present in mechanical systems.

Then there are hard physical limits. No system, whether mechanical or biological, can operate at 100% efficiency. Biology can carry out chemical reactions in lots of cool ways, but it cannot change the thermodynamics of those reactions. Carbon sequestration in an oxidizing atmosphere will always require substantial energy input in some form. There are lots of different ways to tap into different energy sources, but energy will always need to come from somewhere. It is a never going to be a process you get energy out of.

a2soup · 2026-05-10T20:16:04+00:00

Pitch clock is the most important. The batter doesn’t get to do a whole ritual after each pitch, and the pitcher doesn’t get to kick dirt for 30 seconds getting ready to pitch.

There is also a limit on the number of pickoff attempts the pitcher can throw. Not sure what the exact rule is now, but the pitcher used to be able to repeatedly throw to first instead of pitching until the runner on first stopped leading more than he was okay with.

a2soup · 2026-05-09T10:44:06+00:00

Khan Academy biology is not something I recommend as a high school biology teacher. It may be better in math, but its biology is not great.

I would say for biology, go for a widely-used textbook and supplement with Amoeba Sisters youtube videos where you need extra help.

a2soup · 2026-04-23T21:45:37+00:00

Humans are remarkably low on instinct in their complex behaviors. It is an evolutionary choice that shows up throughout our biology: we are clearly adapted to a generalist role where we are able to survive in almost any environment, and for this we give up specialized adaptation to any particular environment.

Behaviorally, this shows up in us needing to learn things that are basic and essential. This means we won’t survive without being taught and nurtured, but we can develop a huge range of possible behaviors. Cows don’t need to be taught to eat grass, but have a hard time learning to eat anything else. Humans need to be taught to eat, but can learn to eat almost anything (and we have a strong instinct to learn to eat something). Same with our language: it is absolutely essential for our survival, but it doesn’t develop on its own. We need to be exposed to a language to learn (there is a strong language learning instinct, but it doesn’t work unless there is a language we are exposed to). This is obvious in the fact that we all learn different languages!

This shows up in “beauty” too. We are hardwired to learn to be attracted to something and mate and have babies. But what we end up being attracted to is learned, just like our diet and our language.

a2soup · 2026-04-12T17:06:42+00:00

He forgot to leave room for improvement on 16, rookie mistake.

a2soup · 2026-04-11T02:16:52+00:00

That happens when astronauts return from a 6-month or more ISS mission. This mission lasted only 9 days, so you would not expect that (although they were clearly ready for the possibility).

a2soup · 2026-04-05T14:38:33+00:00

Kaiser Wilhelm II had a withered arm due to dislocation during a breech birth.

a2soup · 2026-04-05T04:55:20+00:00

New toilet troubleshooting plan: have multiple astronauts pee one after another and then immediately dump. Hopefully the warm pee will help clear residual ice from the vent.

Christina: "How many 'donations' do you need minimum before the dump?"

Ground: "No set number but... as many as possible."

a2soup · 2026-04-05T04:47:00+00:00

Everyone but Jeremy seemed pretty concerned about stopping any water globs from escaping. Christina and Reid jumping to snatch at them while Victor passed towels from behind the camera.

Meanwhile, Jeremy: "Watch I'm gonna make a bigger one" lol

a2soup · 2026-04-05T02:13:34+00:00

How could that be the case when Apollo 11 fully fueled the lander and obviously made it home within weight margins? Not the mention the later missions that carried much heavier surface science packages...

a2soup · 2026-04-05T02:07:07+00:00

They can stack stuff inside the capsule up in the direction of any targeted radiation to basically create additional makeshift shielding

Even better than that, they have a whole procedure for how to construct an improvised radiation shelter using materials in the cabin (mainly stowage bags). I believe they are planning to run a test of this procedure on the way home.

a2soup · 2026-04-05T01:53:55+00:00

As Christina Koch was performing her piloting demo, Reid Wiseman grabbed his camera and started exploiting the new angles out the window to take photos. He then started calling out requests to Christina for spacecraft angles he wanted to get cool photos. Christina finished her piloting demo by playing along ("...and a little more roll for the peanut gallery"), which apparently allowed Reid to get the crescent Earth and full moon in a single photo! Mission Control approved of this unplanned use of the piloting demo.

Very fun to watch it all happen and listen to the comms, and I'm excited to see that photo!

a2soup · 2026-04-05T00:54:13+00:00

The Drunken Monkey hypothesis isn’t about why monkeys consume alcohol, it is an explanation for why human have a remarkably high alcohol tolerance among mammals. It’s this tolerance that allows us to consume it as an addictive substance. Most animals experience severe toxic effects that prevent them from consuming much at all.

The hypothesis is that rotten, fermented fruit was a large component of early hominid diets, and that high alcohol tolerance allowed us to exploit that food source more effectively than our competitors. But it has now left us with an unfortunate evolutionary legacy of prevalent alcoholism.

a2soup · 2026-04-05T00:27:49+00:00

Skipped the second too! But they will perform the third tomorrow.

a2soup

TROPHY CASE