Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Of the many things humans are consistently terrible at doing, seeing the future is somewhere near the top of the list. This flaw became a preoccupation among Megadeath Intellectuals such as Herman Kahn and his fellow economists, mathematicians, and former military officers at the Rand Corporation in the 1960s.

Kahn and his colleagues helped invent modern futurism, which was born of the existential dread that the bomb ushered in, and hardened by the understanding that most innovation is horizontal in nature—a copy of what already exists, rather than wholly new. Real invention is extraordinarily rare, and far more disruptive.

The logician and philosopher Olaf Helmer-Hirschberg, who overlapped with Kahn at Rand and would later co-found the Institute for the Future, arrived in California after having fled the Nazis, an experience that gave his desire to peer into the future a particular kind of urgency. He argued that the acceleration of technological change had established the need for a new epistemological approach to fields such as engineering, medicine, the social sciences, and so on. “No longer does it take generations for a new pattern of living conditions to evolve,” he wrote, “but we are going through several major adjustments in our lives, and our children will have to adopt continual adaptation as a way of life.” In 1965, he wrote a book called Social Technology that aimed to create a scientific methodology for predicting the future.


In those same years, Kahn was dreaming up his own hypothetical machine to provide a philosophical framework for the new threats humanity faced. He called it the Doomsday Machine, and also the Doomsday-in-a-Hurry Machine, and also the Homicide Pact Machine. Stanley Kubrick famously borrowed the concept for the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, the cinematic apotheosis of the fatalism that came with living on hair-trigger alert for nuclear annihilation.

Today’s fatalism about the brokenness of the internet feels similar. We’re still in the infancy of this century’s triple digital revolution of the internet, smartphones, and the social web, and we find ourselves in a dangerous and unstable informational environment, powerless to resist forces of manipulation and exploitation that we know are exerted on us but remain mostly invisible. The Doomsday Machine offers a lesson: We should not accept this current arrangement. No single machine should be able to control so many people.

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:26 am

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

The compliance by the unwashed masses with mask wearing even after multiple studies prove their ineffectiveness prove this point.

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:17 am

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

That statement applies equally well to the idiots on the left and the right. Both sides have their pied pipers that they will blindly follow to slaughter.

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:37 am

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:26 am

The compliance by the unwashed masses with mask wearing even after multiple studies prove their ineffectiveness prove this point.

Studies only address inhaling virus, which is not why mask are recommended as part of the protocol.

Show me one study that shows 100% of the virus escapes thru a mask, during an exhale, sneeze, cough, or just talking, when wearing a proper mask correctly, and I will quit talking about masks. Here is your chance. This is an open challenge to anyone.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:17 am

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

That statement applies equally well to the idiots on the left and the right. Both sides have their pied pipers that they will blindly follow to slaughter.

kalm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:40 am

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:17 am
That statement applies equally well to the idiots on the left and the right. Both sides have their pied pipers that they will blindly follow to slaughter.

Z is right except “he” is a she.

And what does left and right have to do with this?

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:17 am

kalm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:40 am

Z is right except “he” is a she.

And what does left and right have to do with this?

Z is right.

I made the leap based on past posts that Z thinks that many of "idiots" are on the left. Maybe I was wrong to make that assumption about Z but my point stands - there are plenty of idiots running around wrapping their cars, trucks, boats, houses, etc. in American Flags and Trump signs and calling themselves "Murican patriots. The "right way" to lead these idiots to slaughter is with inflammatory tweets.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:17 am

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:36 pm He left out one verifiable fact in his conclusion:

People are, in essence, idiots. They will willingly be led to slaughter and be happy doing so if told in the right way.

That statement applies equally well to the idiots on the left and the right. Both sides have their pied pipers that they will blindly follow to slaughter.

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:37 am

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:26 am

The compliance by the unwashed masses with mask wearing even after multiple studies prove their ineffectiveness prove this point.

Studies only address inhaling virus, which is not why mask are recommended as part of the protocol.

Show me one study that shows 100% of the virus escapes thru a mask, during an exhale, sneeze, cough, or just talking, when wearing a proper mask correctly, and I will quit talking about masks. Here is your chance. This is an open challenge to anyone.

A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:54 pm

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:37 am

Studies only address inhaling virus, which is not why mask are recommended as part of the protocol.

Show me one study that shows 100% of the virus escapes thru a mask, during an exhale, sneeze, cough, or just talking, when wearing a proper mask correctly, and I will quit talking about masks. Here is your chance. This is an open challenge to anyone.

A Danish study which the summary indicates surgical masks were used.

A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

So based on this study, there is not much of a difference between wearing a mask (non-N95 or better) and not wearing a mask. And we all know most people aren't wearing an N95 mask. So unless the draconian mask rules dictate the use of a N95 mask, they are pretty much useless.

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 2:40 pm

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:54 pm

A Danish study which the summary indicates surgical masks were used.




https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

So based on this study, there is not much of a difference between wearing a mask (non-N95 or better) and not wearing a mask. And we all know most people aren't wearing an N95 mask. So unless the draconian mask rules dictate the use of a N95 mask, they are pretty much useless.

Study does not cover exhaled virus thru a mask, which is the reason mask are worn.

UNI88 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:17 am

kalm wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:40 am

Z is right except “he” is a she.

And what does left and right have to do with this?

Z is right.

I made the leap based on past posts that Z thinks that many of "idiots" are on the left. Maybe I was wrong to make that assumption about Z but my point stands - there are plenty of idiots running around wrapping their cars, trucks, boats, houses, etc. in American Flags and Trump signs and calling themselves "Murican patriots. The "right way" to lead these idiots to slaughter is with inflammatory tweets.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:54 pm

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 5:37 am

Studies only address inhaling virus, which is not why mask are recommended as part of the protocol.

Show me one study that shows 100% of the virus escapes thru a mask, during an exhale, sneeze, cough, or just talking, when wearing a proper mask correctly, and I will quit talking about masks. Here is your chance. This is an open challenge to anyone.

A Danish study which the summary indicates surgical masks were used.

A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant, the 95% CIs are compatible with a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection.

The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

So based on this study, there is not much of a difference between wearing a mask (non-N95 or better) and not wearing a mask. And we all know most people aren't wearing an N95 mask. So unless the draconian mask rules dictate the use of a N95 mask, they are pretty much useless.

houndawg wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:27 am

SDHornet wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:54 pm

A Danish study which the summary indicates surgical masks were used.




https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

So based on this study, there is not much of a difference between wearing a mask (non-N95 or better) and not wearing a mask. And we all know most people aren't wearing an N95 mask. So unless the draconian mask rules dictate the use of a N95 mask, they are pretty much useless.

Here's a guy that never lost sight of the fact that this whole thing is a sham perpetrated by the Democrats. You're an inspiration to us all.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:04 am

houndawg wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 4:27 am

Here's a guy that never lost sight of the fact that this whole thing is a sham perpetrated by the Democrats. You're an inspiration to us all.

The virus is real, but a lot closer to "just the flu" than "bubonic plague". It's the outrage and fear porn that is fake. Not hard to figure this out.

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:08 am

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:04 am

The virus is real, but a lot closer to "just the flu" than "bubonic plague". It's the outrage and fear porn that is fake. Not hard to figure this out.

You and AZ are good guys, but there's the fear porn from the right that tells us covid is going to take down America, mask are a threat to our freedom ex.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:17 am

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:08 am

You and AZ are good guys, but there's the fear porn from the right that tells us covid is going to take down America, mask are a threat to our freedom ex.

The over reaction to the China Virus will take down America. Plenty of small businesses are already gone for good because of these draconian measures.

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:17 am

Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:08 am

You and AZ are good guys, but there's the fear porn from the right that tells us covid is going to take down America, mask are a threat to our freedom ex.

The over reaction to the China Virus will take down America. Plenty of small businesses are already gone for good because of these draconian measures.

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:13 pm

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:17 am

The over reaction to the China Virus will take down America. Plenty of small businesses are already gone for good because of these draconian measures.

Less private small business, less freedom, more government dependence, more government overreach....yeah. It’s a great formula for success. Proven world wide.

houndawg wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:16 pm

SDHornet wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:17 am
The over reaction to the China Virus will take down America. Plenty of small businesses are already gone for good because of these draconian measures.

300,000 dead and the nation running out of ICU beds with another 100,000 dead by the end of January.

kalm wrote: ↑Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:27 pm Interesting read and historical call backs.

Overblown hysterics or legitimate threat?

Of the many things humans are consistently terrible at doing, seeing the future is somewhere near the top of the list. This flaw became a preoccupation among Megadeath Intellectuals such as Herman Kahn and his fellow economists, mathematicians, and former military officers at the Rand Corporation in the 1960s.

Kahn and his colleagues helped invent modern futurism, which was born of the existential dread that the bomb ushered in, and hardened by the understanding that most innovation is horizontal in nature—a copy of what already exists, rather than wholly new. Real invention is extraordinarily rare, and far more disruptive.

The logician and philosopher Olaf Helmer-Hirschberg, who overlapped with Kahn at Rand and would later co-found the Institute for the Future, arrived in California after having fled the Nazis, an experience that gave his desire to peer into the future a particular kind of urgency. He argued that the acceleration of technological change had established the need for a new epistemological approach to fields such as engineering, medicine, the social sciences, and so on. “No longer does it take generations for a new pattern of living conditions to evolve,” he wrote, “but we are going through several major adjustments in our lives, and our children will have to adopt continual adaptation as a way of life.” In 1965, he wrote a book called Social Technology that aimed to create a scientific methodology for predicting the future.


In those same years, Kahn was dreaming up his own hypothetical machine to provide a philosophical framework for the new threats humanity faced. He called it the Doomsday Machine, and also the Doomsday-in-a-Hurry Machine, and also the Homicide Pact Machine. Stanley Kubrick famously borrowed the concept for the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, the cinematic apotheosis of the fatalism that came with living on hair-trigger alert for nuclear annihilation.

Today’s fatalism about the brokenness of the internet feels similar. We’re still in the infancy of this century’s triple digital revolution of the internet, smartphones, and the social web, and we find ourselves in a dangerous and unstable informational environment, powerless to resist forces of manipulation and exploitation that we know are exerted on us but remain mostly invisible. The Doomsday Machine offers a lesson: We should not accept this current arrangement. No single machine should be able to control so many people.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ne/617384/