Shrugs Bunny on the Internet
I created @AcademicTitles and also run the silly photoshop blog "You Made It Beard".
Need more? Check out mattmorain DOT com to see the rest.
Jaron Lanier: The Internet destroyed the middle class - Salon.com
I like Jaron Lanier a lot, but this illustration as some sort of evidence of the internet hollowing out the middle class is, forgive me for saying so, idiotic. A child could figure out where those jobs went.
1) Instagram SHOWS the photos. We have to include all of the people who work on the cloud that supports that.
2) Kodak made cameras and film. Cameras are still being made - even moreso. At the very least, we should include the current #1 camera maker’s employees. At this point, that’s apple. Fifty thousand employees. Pro rate it to only the apple devices that have cameras, ignoring their mac business. 30,000 employees.
3) The film business still exists. It was just lost to Fujichrome, who still makes film and has over 30,000 employees. This has nothing to do with the web, but rather something called “Globalization.”
The internet didn’t kill a single job in photography. There are more cameras now than ever. There are still tens of thousands of people making film.
Take the market cap of JUST these three companies - facebook, apple, fujifilm, and we’re looking at $500 billion market cap, and nearly 90,000 employees.
Think that’s unfair? Canon has nearly 200,000 employees. Nikon has 24,000. 10,000 more than Kodak. Shit, ZEISS has 24,000 employees.
Never mind every single camera in an android phone.
Those jobs went overseas, and they went to computer companies, Mr. Lanier. They still exist. The internet didn’t kill a single one of them.
(via rickwebb)
Rafer sez:
Huzzah, plus Kodak’s consumer film executives went out of their way to line their pockets on the way down, at the explicit and afaik knowing expense of the nascent digital businesses. They killed Kodak, probably knew they were doing so, and showed no signs of caring at all.
I was the first internet PM for Kodak Hollywood. My product line was one of their victims.
(via rafer)
Well played, Mr. Webb.
I’m less bullish on Jaron Lanier. After his book “You Are Not A Gadget” everything he says sounds to me like some variation of “YOU KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!”
(via kenyatta)
re: “You Are Not a Gadget,” see also: “cephalopods4lyf”
(via kenyatta)
And they said it was impossible.
(via automatic-bazooti)
The Why Would You Eat That? by Ron Babcock and Michael Truly is one of the funnest and funniest web series as of late. Look no further for proof than this latest episode where a Chicago rite of passage, supposedly, in the spirit known as ‘Malort’ is drank after grabbing fake cash from a wind machine/fan in a challenge between very funny comedians Kyle Kinane and Brendan McGowan from Chicago.
This was fucking gross.
“Like something that emerges from the ground after 100 years and the villagers set it on fire.”
(via fuckyounofuckme)
Pretty sure Dr. Krieger started working here and got a new vehicle. #Archer #fx
I believe that there are a small group of women who hate men just for being men. I believe that the textbook definition of the word misandry fits that description. I believe there are bad things that happen to men. I believe those issues should be addressed. I do not believe that a fringe group of women who hate men can be blamed for those issues.
Misandry was a dead word until recently. A group of men who feared the progress of feminism revived the word and used it to undercut the movement. They like having the power being a man provides and they don’t want to lose that. So they created a movement, found a bunch of legitimate issues that affect men, and tried to blame women for those issues. They called this misandry. It’s like conservatives using buzzwords like “death panels” to make people fear health care. They let people assume it meant Obama wanted to kill your grandma. They let their cute little phrase infect the minds of good people and convince them of falsehoods.
People are telling me that men cannot report rape without getting laughed at. They say this is misandry. It is the fault of women who hate men. But that just doesn’t make any sense to me. When I seek a logical explanation, it seems more likely that this is because men are supposed to be strong and women are supposed to be weak. And rape has been viewed as something that happens mostly to women. So if it does happen to a man, they must be weak. How did this idea of men=strong and women=weak start? I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because of misandry. It is an ancient patriarchy collapsing in on itself.
Feminism is about fighting inequality. It’s about erasing the strong/weak perception ingrained into our society. Misandry, as the term is often used today, is about trying to blame women for anything bad that happens to men.
If you want to fight to fix issues that affect men, go for it. But I would really consider distancing yourself from this term. It is used to evangelize folks into a movement that is very problematic. A group that can’t handle scrutiny of their comic books and video games, so they send death and rape threats. A group that calls women sluts and think they ask for rape if they show too much cleavage. Those are the people who coined this term, and you should want nothing to do with them or their language.
