missobtuse

[missobtuse]

[missobtuse]

Whenever I think about students using AI, I think about an essay I did in high school. Now see, we were reading The Grapes of Wrath, and I just couldn't do it. I got 25 pages in and my brain refused to read any more. I hated it. And its not like I hate the classics, I loved English class and I loved reading. I had even enjoyed Of Mice and Men, which I had read for fun. For some reason though, I absolutely could NOT read The Grapes of Wrath.

And it turned out I also couldn't watch the movie. I fell asleep in class both days we were watching it.

This, of course, meant I had to cheat on my essay.

And I got an A.

The essay was to compare the book and the movie and discuss the changes and how that affected the story.

Well it turned out Sparknotes had an entire section devoted to comparing and contrasting the book and the movie. Using that, and flipping to pages mentioned in Sparknotes to read sections of the book, I was able to bullshit an A paper.

But see the thing is, that this kind of 'cheating' still takes skills, you still learn things.

I had to know how to find the information I needed, I needed to be able to comprehend what sparknotes was saying and the analysis they did, I needed to know how to USE the information I read there to write an essay, I needed to know how to make sure none of it was marked as plagerized. I had to form an opinion on the sparknotes analysis so I could express my own opinions in the essay.

Was it cheating? Yeah, I didn't read the book or watch the movie. I used Sparknotes. It was a lot less work than if I had read the book and watched the movie and done it all myself.

The thing is though, I still had to use my fucking brain. Being able to bullshit an essay like that is a skill in and of itself that is useful. I exercised important skills, and even if it wasnt the intended way I still learned.

ChatGTP and other AI do not give that experience to people, people have to do nothing and gain nothing from it.

Using AI is absolutely different from other ways students have cheated in the past, and I stand by my opinion that its making students dumber, more helpless, and less capable.

However you feel about higher education, I think its undeniable that students using chatgtp is to their detriment. And by extension a detriment to anyone they work with or anyone who has to rely on them for something.

[missobtuse]

“In Jewish thought, a sin is not an offense against God, an act of disobedience. A sin is a missed opportunity to act humanly. The verb to sin in Hebrew is also used in the sense of ‘missing the target.’ When God created us free to choose between good and bad, He also gave us the capacity to know when we had chosen wrongly”

— Harold Kushner, To Life!: A Celebration of Jewish Being and Thinking

[missobtuse]

I've seen an increasing number of posts talking about carrying documentation with you at all times, which I think is an understandable instinct, in light of everything. That said, there's something that's often being left out of these conversations, and it's vitally important that people know about it, so this is a PSA:

DO NOT carry your Social Security card literally anywhere, except to specific appointments where you actually need it.

I mean it. Carry a driver's license or state ID. Carry an expired passport (which is sufficient to prove citizenship in most cases). Carry an active passport. You can even carry a birth certificate on your person if you have a certified copy and feel like you absolutely need it – but your Social Security card belongs in a safety deposit box. I am being so serious right now. I am grabbing you by the shoulders and looking intently into your soul and begging you to store your Social Security card somewhere safe.

This is not even about the risk of identity theft, to be clear. This is because the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 2004 limits the number of replacement Social Security cards to three per year and ten in a lifetime, beginning with cards issued on or after December 17, 2005.

Yes, ten (10!!!) cards is an extremely small number of replacement cards for a person's entire life – especially considering that there is no minimum age for a child to get a Social Security card, and so if you have forgetful or irresponsible parents, it's possible that you've already gone through some of those ten because they lost it and requested a replacement cards before you were a legal adult. Yes, that is a hard limit – it isn't one of those "the first x are cheaper and then they get way more expensive and annoying to replace" situations. Your application for a replacement Social Security card will actually be outright rejected if you have replaced it ten times before. And yes, it's stupid as hell. This is one of the many, many horrible laws that were passed after 9/11 when no one was paying attention, because for a hot minute there people would vote for the Kick Puppies For No Reason Act, just so long as it had "Terrorism Prevention" in its name.

Your life will be very, very fucked if you ever need an 11th Social Security card. Technically, there is a hardship exception, but it requires a letter from a third party, such as a state public assistance agency or an employer, and it takes time to process, and it's not at all guaranteed. In many situations where you might need or want a social security card, you will simply be shit out of luck. Just last year, one of my relatives witnessed a woman reduced to tears in the local Social Security office, because she had exceeded the limit and could not get another one and was going to lose a job opportunity because of it – and the administrator she was talking to had to sadly tell her that there was simply nothing that he could legally do to help. You do not want to be in that situation, believe me.

Do not carry your Social Security card around with you.

I'll say it again:

Do not carry your Social Security card around with you.

I am literally begging you, please keep this particular document safe somewhere that it is impossible for you to lose it.

[missobtuse]

United Healthcare getting sued by its investors, because it didn't warn them that the CEO getting murdered (by the tendrils of their unmitigated greed) was going to lead to them approving more claims (for covered services that they had no right to deny) is a cartoonish example of exactly why their CEO got murdered.

Their argument is essentially "You promised us a specific profit margin that is not possible to achieve under this increased public scrutiny of your unethical practices. We only agreed to invest because of those unethical practices. So we demand compensation because you didn't warn us that you'd be behaving more ethically"

And idk. Satire isn't just dead. We've pissed on its corpse and now it's dissolving in lye.

[missobtuse]

THE ARISTOCATS 1970, dir. Wolfgang Reitherman

[missobtuse]

[missobtuse]

these are KILLING me

[missobtuse]

[missobtuse]

📢📢📢

[missobtuse]

Looking at religion from an uber rational perspective is so freeing in a way I just can't articulate. It's like that feeling when you have a dream about missing an assignment in school and then wake up and realize it's been 7 years since you were even in school and everything's fine lol.

This is Britt Hartley btw and she's an ex-mormon with a degree in theology who talks about building meaningful lives post-religion. Love her.

[missobtuse]

[missobtuse]

Oh my god

[missobtuse]

Tennis Dress

1885-1888

United States

It gradually became more acceptable for women to participate in sporting activities throughout the second half of the 19th century. Clothing requirements for most sporting remained strict towards retaining foundation garments such as corsets and bustle, which were thought to stabilize women's frail and weak forms. This example would have been worn for tennis, yachting or general seaside walking. Striped textiles were fashionable for such activities, probably due to the nautical theme and their jaunty air which inspires vigor. Although the silhouette remained the same, with the exception of the shorter, more maneuverable length, the trimmings were reduced. This is a striking example of this type of dress, which is fairly rare in museum collections. The bustle silhouette, although primarily associated with the second half of the 19th century, originated in earlier fashions as a simple bump at the back of the dress, such as with late 17th-early 18th century mantuas and late 18th- early 19th century Empire dresses. The full-blown bustle silhouette had its first Victorian appearance in the late 1860s, which started as fullness in skirts moving to the back of the dress. This fullness was drawn up in ties for walking that created a fashionable puff. This trendsetting puff expanded and was then built up with supports from a variety of different things such as horsehair, metal hoops and down. Styles of this period were often taken from historical inspiration and covered in various types of trim and lace. Accessories were petite and allowed for the focus on the large elaborate gowns. Around 1874, the style altered and the skirts began to hug the thighs in the front while the bustle at the back was reduced to a natural flow from the waist to the train. This period was marked by darker colors, asymmetrical drapery, oversize accessories and elongated forms created by full-length coats. Near the beginning of the 1880s the trends altered once again to include the bustle, this time it would reach its maximum potential with some skirts having the appearance of a full shelf at the back. The dense textiles preferred were covered in trimming, beadwork, puffs and bows to visually elevate them further. The feminine silhouette continued like this through 1889 before the skirts began to reduce and make way for the S-curve silhouette.

The MET (Object Number: 2009.300.2477a, b)

[missobtuse]

Lilo & Stitch (2002) dir. Tony Leondis

[missobtuse]

my rage increases with everything i hear about the live action lilo and stitch

what do you mean nani gives up custody of lilo.

what do you mean no jumba redemption— and he’s the twist villain???

what do you mean no pleakley in drag.

what do you mean no nani and david romance subplot.

what do you mean no gantu.

what do you mean no ugly duckling scene.

what do you mean no anti-tourism theme.

what do you mean jumba just sounds like some random american guy.

what do you mean cobra bubbles isn’t the social worker

not to mention nani’s actress being in brownface.

and more than anything— showing an indigeneous family being separated by the government, and having it be shown as a “happy ending.” the original ending was perfect. nani kept custody and gained a support system.

disney’s rise in conservatism is showing bigtime

[missobtuse]

One of the things that makes the family conflict in Lilo & Stitch work narratively is that Cobra is correct in that Lilo and Nani's current situation is non-sustainable. And yes, Nani is not prepared to handle everything by herself. But losing the custody is not the solution either, and to a degree Cobra seems to believe the same (he legit does not want that to happen), but if Nani can't solve the problem, then from his perspective it's the least harmful solution.

And the conflict is solved because what Lilo and Nani need (what they REALLY needed) is a support net. Someone, anyone to be there to take at least SOME of the burden from Nani and give her breathing room.

Which is why Jumba and Peakley joining the family alongside Stitch, and become a constant pressence who share the burden of the household, makes all the difference.

And this does not solve all the problems, because the movie is not about magically resolving those problems, it's about putting the characters in a situation in which they can move forward as a family. And for their desire to be a family and be together as a family, to be respected.

Anyway, someone told me what the remake did for the ending