Please enter your username below and press the send button.A password reset link will be sent to you.
If you are unable to access the email address originally associated with your Delicious account, we recommend creating a new account.
This link recently saved by arianeb on April 12, 2017
This link recently saved by arianeb on November 14, 2016
The paradoxical result is that the backlash against neoliberalism’s crushing of political choice has elevated just the kind of man that Hayek worshipped. Trump, who has no coherent politics, is not a classic neoliberal. But he is the perfect representation of Hayek’s “independent”; the beneficiary of inherited wealth, unconstrained by common morality, whose gross predilections strike a new path that others may follow. The neoliberal thinktankers are now swarming round this hollow man, this empty vessel waiting to be filled by those who know what they want. The likely result is the demolition of our remaining decencies, beginning with the agreement to limit global warming.
This link recently saved by arianeb on September 04, 2016
There is a common theme here: Toxic masculinity.
Every time feminists talk about toxic masculinity, there is a chorus of whiny dudes who will immediately assume — or pretend to assume — that feminists are condemning all masculinity, even though the modifier “toxic” inherently suggests that there are forms of masculinity that are not toxic.
So, to be excruciatingly clear, toxic masculinity is a specific model of manhood, geared towards dominance and control. It’s a manhood that views women and LGBT people as inferior, sees sex as an act not of affection but domination, and which valorizes violence as the way to prove one’s self to the world.
This link recently saved by arianeb on July 20, 2016
This link recently saved by arianeb on June 17, 2016
But, still. Look. When you encourage rage you cannot then feign surprise when people become enraged. You cannot turn around and say, ‘Mate, you weren’t supposed to take it so seriously. It’s just a game, just a ploy, a strategy for winning votes.’
When you shout BREAKING POINT over and over again, you don’t get to be surprised when someone breaks. When you present politics as a matter of life and death, as a question of national survival, don’t be surprised if someone takes you at your word. You didn’t make them do it, no, but you didn’t do much to stop it either.
This link recently saved by arianeb on June 13, 2016
But there’s another view — one that’s been around for almost a century — in which particles really do have precise positions at all times. This alternative view, known as pilot-wave theory or Bohmian mechanics, never became as popular as the Copenhagen view, in part because Bohmian mechanics implies that the world must be strange in other ways. In particular, a 1992 study claimed to crystalize certain bizarre consequences of Bohmian mechanics and in doing so deal it a fatal conceptual blow. The authors of that paper concluded that a particle following the laws of Bohmian mechanics would end up taking a trajectory that was so unphysical — even by the warped standards of quantum theory — that they described it as “surreal.”
This link recently saved by arianeb on June 07, 2016
I’m watching a musician, with whom I’ve been intimate, play an intimate musical game on his smartphone. As he lightly circles his finger and the music swells, the screen reddens and so do I. This is perhaps the first time I’ve been turned on by a video game – and I’m not even playing it.
This link recently saved by arianeb on May 19, 2016
Guess the politician. He’s a dangerous “authoritarian.” A “race-baiter” and a “racist” who divides Americans for political gain. An “arrogant” celebrity of a politician who has no place in the Oval Office. An “unqualified,” “incompetent” fraud who “simply does not understand what it means to be president.” Hell, he can barely give a speech.
This link recently saved by arianeb on May 09, 2016
If the peer reviewing back this up (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence) this is a MAJOR paradigm shift in cosmology and astrophysics.
On the one hand, the big bang theory exists because there is a lot of evidence for it: red shifting galaxies, background noise, etc.
On the other hand, if this theory does away with "theoretical" (as in it has never been discovered yet) Dark Matter and Dark energy, and convincingly explains why we haven't discovered the two most common elements of the universe (according to current models), it passes the "Occam's Razor" test (the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one).
Note: This article is over a year old, and we are still taught "big Bang" and "Dark Matter" in Astronomy classes. Is the peer reviewing still being done?