@josephzander.bsky.social
Another MilSF it reminds me of is The Mote in God's Eye, a book (among other things) about the undesirability of sequestering political and technical questions, even if it were (in)humanly possible to do so.
November 30, 2025 at 3:54 PM
Another MilSF it reminds me of is The Mote in God's Eye, a book (among other things) about the undesirability of sequestering political and technical questions, even if it were (in)humanly possible to do so.
I haven't read much Honor Harrington, but I get the idea that at any moment anyone could say "I think we should go back to the gold standard," be met with general agreement, and be compeltely in character.
Yes, anyone. Even the cat.
Yes, anyone. Even the cat.
November 30, 2025 at 3:51 PM
I haven't read much Honor Harrington, but I get the idea that at any moment anyone could say "I think we should go back to the gold standard," be met with general agreement, and be compeltely in character.
Yes, anyone. Even the cat.
Yes, anyone. Even the cat.
On a lighter note, when you mentioned MilSF, I wondered what was popping into your head. Mine was Hammer's Slammers.
Funnily enough Starship Troopers is an antidote to this.
Funnily enough Starship Troopers is an antidote to this.
November 30, 2025 at 3:41 PM
On a lighter note, when you mentioned MilSF, I wondered what was popping into your head. Mine was Hammer's Slammers.
Funnily enough Starship Troopers is an antidote to this.
Funnily enough Starship Troopers is an antidote to this.
I can't follow Schake's paradigm. She laudes Grant for preferring Congressional orders to Presidential ones, but condemns Sen. Kelly et. al. for telling the military not to follow illegal orders. These seem irreconcilable.
November 30, 2025 at 3:39 PM
I can't follow Schake's paradigm. She laudes Grant for preferring Congressional orders to Presidential ones, but condemns Sen. Kelly et. al. for telling the military not to follow illegal orders. These seem irreconcilable.
Cities have been built with less scrutiny than a single modern building zoning change.
November 29, 2025 at 3:11 PM
Cities have been built with less scrutiny than a single modern building zoning change.
In the very little political detail we get, Starfleet generally seems to be the anti-expansionist force. They opposed settling near Cardassia, and compared to civilian Lwaxanna Troi they are fanatical about the Prime Directive.
November 29, 2025 at 11:50 AM
In the very little political detail we get, Starfleet generally seems to be the anti-expansionist force. They opposed settling near Cardassia, and compared to civilian Lwaxanna Troi they are fanatical about the Prime Directive.
No laws would be applied retroactively. They would merely be ruling on the interpretation of laws already passed.
November 28, 2025 at 11:14 PM
No laws would be applied retroactively. They would merely be ruling on the interpretation of laws already passed.
For the sake of argument, let's say in 2029 Congress passes a law removing SCOTUS' jurisdiction over these cases, and appoints judges who agree with the above legal theories.
If Dems are serious about this, they can get courts who will support it.
If Dems are serious about this, they can get courts who will support it.
November 28, 2025 at 10:04 PM
For the sake of argument, let's say in 2029 Congress passes a law removing SCOTUS' jurisdiction over these cases, and appoints judges who agree with the above legal theories.
If Dems are serious about this, they can get courts who will support it.
If Dems are serious about this, they can get courts who will support it.
What does that suggest about the legal system? If I have a dispute with my neighbour over the boundaries of my garden, does it get heard in a Starfleet court if either of us is in the fleet? If so, that's nuts! That's worse than medieval Catholic canon law courts.
November 28, 2025 at 9:05 PM
What does that suggest about the legal system? If I have a dispute with my neighbour over the boundaries of my garden, does it get heard in a Starfleet court if either of us is in the fleet? If so, that's nuts! That's worse than medieval Catholic canon law courts.
We just don't know; Federation civilian public opinion is hardly ever mentioned. One assumes that the Federation is democratic enough that its citizens believe in Starfleet's core mission.
It being Starfleet property made it worse; they're an interested party.
It being Starfleet property made it worse; they're an interested party.
November 28, 2025 at 9:03 PM
We just don't know; Federation civilian public opinion is hardly ever mentioned. One assumes that the Federation is democratic enough that its citizens believe in Starfleet's core mission.
It being Starfleet property made it worse; they're an interested party.
It being Starfleet property made it worse; they're an interested party.
In Voyager a Starfleet admiral is the judge of an internal copyright dispute!
Yeah, Picard is nuts. I dunno about "not a lot to show for it" — they survived the Dominion and the Borg. But the presence of a civilian journalist highlights how irrelevant civilian leadership is.
Yeah, Picard is nuts. I dunno about "not a lot to show for it" — they survived the Dominion and the Borg. But the presence of a civilian journalist highlights how irrelevant civilian leadership is.
November 28, 2025 at 8:36 PM
In Voyager a Starfleet admiral is the judge of an internal copyright dispute!
Yeah, Picard is nuts. I dunno about "not a lot to show for it" — they survived the Dominion and the Borg. But the presence of a civilian journalist highlights how irrelevant civilian leadership is.
Yeah, Picard is nuts. I dunno about "not a lot to show for it" — they survived the Dominion and the Borg. But the presence of a civilian journalist highlights how irrelevant civilian leadership is.
As a child reading, I took very seriously the idea that Aslan; as often stated by the beavers; is a wild Lion, and therefore cannot be relied on. I was shocked to hear that a devout Christian would use Aslan as an analogy for Jesus.
November 28, 2025 at 8:33 PM
As a child reading, I took very seriously the idea that Aslan; as often stated by the beavers; is a wild Lion, and therefore cannot be relied on. I was shocked to hear that a devout Christian would use Aslan as an analogy for Jesus.
TLotR isn't Catholic in ornaments, but it's very Catholic in outlook. The moral ideas of the book, of what right and wrong means, of how one's place is set in the world and one's relationship with Providence, are very distinctively Catholic.
November 28, 2025 at 8:32 PM
TLotR isn't Catholic in ornaments, but it's very Catholic in outlook. The moral ideas of the book, of what right and wrong means, of how one's place is set in the world and one's relationship with Providence, are very distinctively Catholic.
In the TOS era they seem to be Great Society liberals. In the TNG era Roddenberry brought them back as communists. Despite the failure of the coup in DS9, by the time of Voyager the civillian government seemed to have given up pretending that the Federation isn't run by neurotic Starfleet admirals.
November 28, 2025 at 8:27 PM
In the TOS era they seem to be Great Society liberals. In the TNG era Roddenberry brought them back as communists. Despite the failure of the coup in DS9, by the time of Voyager the civillian government seemed to have given up pretending that the Federation isn't run by neurotic Starfleet admirals.
Reposted
(the alt text is great too)
November 28, 2025 at 5:23 PM
(the alt text is great too)
Of course, nowadays we understand that butter is made with love but other oils are ultra-processed foods. It's nice to have real science.
November 28, 2025 at 5:23 PM
Of course, nowadays we understand that butter is made with love but other oils are ultra-processed foods. It's nice to have real science.
The LLM doesn't have a human-type translation dictionary, therefore the system isn't conscious. If it had, then it would be. (If you've read Searle's paper, I'm making the systems reply.)
November 28, 2025 at 5:18 PM
The LLM doesn't have a human-type translation dictionary, therefore the system isn't conscious. If it had, then it would be. (If you've read Searle's paper, I'm making the systems reply.)
Julian the apostate is on TikTok?
November 28, 2025 at 3:37 PM
Julian the apostate is on TikTok?
It's not a simple binary. The Biden administration was wilfully blind, but it did threaten Israel for humanitarian concessions and got them, eg the 13-Oct-24 letter. Trump was very clear that he would not have supported Palestinians in that way.
November 28, 2025 at 1:52 PM
It's not a simple binary. The Biden administration was wilfully blind, but it did threaten Israel for humanitarian concessions and got them, eg the 13-Oct-24 letter. Trump was very clear that he would not have supported Palestinians in that way.
Did the Biden administration fight as hard as they should have? Was their strategy good? I could ask those questions about a dozen issues, including this one, with no; and still say I'm sure that Trump would do worse.
November 28, 2025 at 1:42 PM
Did the Biden administration fight as hard as they should have? Was their strategy good? I could ask those questions about a dozen issues, including this one, with no; and still say I'm sure that Trump would do worse.
You've dropped the comparison: Trump also denied Israel was committing genocide, and promised to help them more.
I saw the Biden administration fighting the Israelis to get more aid into Gaza, and the Trump campaign promising they wouldn't do that.
I saw the Biden administration fighting the Israelis to get more aid into Gaza, and the Trump campaign promising they wouldn't do that.
November 28, 2025 at 1:40 PM
You've dropped the comparison: Trump also denied Israel was committing genocide, and promised to help them more.
I saw the Biden administration fighting the Israelis to get more aid into Gaza, and the Trump campaign promising they wouldn't do that.
I saw the Biden administration fighting the Israelis to get more aid into Gaza, and the Trump campaign promising they wouldn't do that.
And you should also apologise for accusing me of engaging with you in bad faith, because I have been very straight to the point and haven't said anything against you as a person.
November 28, 2025 at 1:22 PM
And you should also apologise for accusing me of engaging with you in bad faith, because I have been very straight to the point and haven't said anything against you as a person.
Trump was very openly boasting about how he would encourage Israel to be harsher. There was a strange standard of evidence applied to him where it was considered a "big assumption" that he would attempt to do what he kept saying he would do; you should stop perpetuating that.
November 28, 2025 at 1:21 PM
Trump was very openly boasting about how he would encourage Israel to be harsher. There was a strange standard of evidence applied to him where it was considered a "big assumption" that he would attempt to do what he kept saying he would do; you should stop perpetuating that.
"And it relies on a big assumption that I'm not sure of."
The point of the comment it to ask you what the big assumption that you weren't/aren't sure of is, because just saying something isn't 100% certain isn't meaningful.
The point of the comment it to ask you what the big assumption that you weren't/aren't sure of is, because just saying something isn't 100% certain isn't meaningful.
November 28, 2025 at 1:12 PM
"And it relies on a big assumption that I'm not sure of."
The point of the comment it to ask you what the big assumption that you weren't/aren't sure of is, because just saying something isn't 100% certain isn't meaningful.
The point of the comment it to ask you what the big assumption that you weren't/aren't sure of is, because just saying something isn't 100% certain isn't meaningful.