Author Topic: Episode #596  (Read 4202 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline fuzzyMarmot

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 206
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #30 on: December 12, 2016, 03:36:05 AM »
Also, I wasn't entirely sure why this particular person was being interviewed on this particular show, apart from hurr hurr porn.

I agree. Was this supposed to be science? I didn't hear much science. And, after looking at this guy's website, he seems like a self-promoting quack.

This is an issue that is highly susceptible to motivated reasoning on all sides. And the issue is so complicated it is extremely difficult to extract data to reach any type of scientific conclusions (much less consensus). Seems like a poor choice of topic for scientific skepticism to wade into.

Again, cheers for Cara's questions. I would have been too angry to be that articulate.

Offline AtheistApotheosis

  • Doesn't Panic
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #31 on: December 12, 2016, 08:16:22 AM »
Thanks to Bob and Jay for bringing their usual awesome energy despite feeling under the weather!

Gotta say I was not a fan of the interview. Did we run out of scientists to interview? Looked up this guy, and I got a self-help woo vibe from his site.

Props to Cara for pushing back with some great questions in the interview  :cara:!

I am really curious about a more thorough explanation for the increased prevalence of humiliation porn.  Whether or not Cara's take was more accurate than Dr. Klein's, it certainly jives with my experience.  I get a bit uncomfortable that what used to be something a handful of adult film stars would engage in (presumably for slightly higher pay?) is now appearing to be the norm*.  While I realize it's possible to engage in these fantasies without automatically treating women like shit in real life, I have a hard time believing that even a fraction of this stuff is being consumed in a "healthy" manner by the average male consumer.  I'm not even sure that better sex education is going to cause it to decline at this point. 

*Without being too explicit, I'm referring to situations a bit more graphic than the one Cara referenced, but not stuff that's specifically targeted to BDSM fans.

What really puts me off is the guy grabbing the girls head or hair, and the choking noises. Cara was right on the money with this one. I suspect like most products these days it's a case of giving the customer what you think they want and excluding every thing else so there is no other choice. I'd once like to see the girl grab a big hand full and smear it all over the guys face just to see how he likes it.

Bob and Jay, I know how your feeling. I've just started to recover from the flue and my voice has gone from sounding like Darth Vader down to Valentine Dyall, "AND THE ANSWER IS... 42" and now I sound like a slightly wheezy Paul Hogan. Of course it also coincided with a week long heat wave and severe thunder storm so I was a little hot, cold, sweaty, deaf and blinded for a wile, partly due to my flat being hit by lightning a couple of times. There is a high-rise a few blocks from my place that was hit about eight times while I was watching.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/incredible-storms-bring-one-million-lightning-strikes/news-story/2bb8a31bbac10005ddf379197a981823

Best, most terrifying fireworks show ever.



It just wouldn't stop. The cat hasn't been right since. The heatwave devastated the bats, I've see a few dead ones on my way to work. They fall out of the sky from heat exhaustion.

Online daniel1948

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4327
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #32 on: December 12, 2016, 09:36:37 AM »
I've known two kinds of people opposed to porn: Where I used to live, a number of my friends felt that porn (all porn, they made no distinctions among types) objectifies women and this should not be allowed.

Have you asked any sex positive women who enjoy porn whether they get uncomfortable at some types of it? Because even though it would be good if you had the chance to, you don't have to - Cara was there representing that group of people, and was shouted down among all the giggling about how great it is that there is limitless access to any and all types of film and photos.

Dan Savage, on his Savage Love podcast has guests from time to time, often sex-positive women, and sometimes porn actors. They never call for banning porn. They ask consumers of porn to seek out ethically-produced porn that does not degrade the actors or portray force or degradation. Porn is not going away. Attempts to ban it are utterly doomed. What we should want is to educate people to seek out "good" porn: Porn that does not exploit the actors, and that depicts people having sex in ways that are enjoyable for all concerned.

I will say for myself, that I have no interest in humiliation porn, so I don't watch it.



I haven't listened yet, but I don't think the problem with women being humiliated in porn is a problem concerning the welfare of the actress necessarily.
Rather, it's an issue of teaching kids birds and bees in a fun house mirror. There seems to be something destructive about making the culture of brutality present in a large section of porn into the sexual expectations of a huge number of youngsters.

This is one more reason why we need good sex education. We need to teach kids (whether their parents want them to learn or not!!!) what healthy sex involves, and that the porn they are all watching (whether their parents know it or not) is not real sex and that some of it portrays things they should never want to do to a sex partner. Humiliation porn is not going away. We cannot eliminate it. All we can hope to do is to educate kids that such acts are cruel and unloving and not something that they should be doing to each other. We need to educate them to seek out healthy porn rather than unhealthy porn and we need to teach them the difference. This won't happen by attempts to ban porn, or to bad certain kinds of porn, and it certainly won't happen while parents stick their heads in the sand, pretend their kids know nothing about sex, and try to keep it that way.

Porn is here to stay whether we like it or not. What we need to do, as the interviewee said, is teach kids that porn is not real and is not how they should be having sex. What I took away from the interview is that Cara is right: a lot of porn is degrading and humiliating, and that the solution is education, not futile attempts at banning.

Best, most terrifying fireworks show ever.

I saw some pretty spectacular lightning shows when I lived in North Dakota.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline lonely moa

  • A rather tough old bird.
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4112
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #33 on: December 12, 2016, 11:51:03 AM »
... she finds it hard to find porn that doesn't contain women being humiliated.



She's not looking all that hard.
"The home of the brave and the land of the free; the less you know, the better off you'll be"

Warren Zevon

Offline PatrickG

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 64
Supercapacitor hype: lets keep it real
« Reply #34 on: December 12, 2016, 12:27:58 PM »
Skeptical toolkit for new battery technology:

1: Haste is a pain: shoving energy quickly into a battery requires high charging currents. This is an unavoidable physical fact, and independent whether its Li-Ion of a supercapacitor.

Quick example: A typical smartphone battery has a capacity of about 3000mAh, which means it can deliver 3 Amps (at 3.6V) for one hour, or 300mA for 10 hours, or 100mA for 30 hours.
To charge such battery capacity in just 30 seconds it would require a whopping current of (120*3000mAh =) 360Amps. That's impossible to deliver safely into a thin smartphone. High currents are a bitch, and would take fist-sized connectors with 9-gauge (3.2mm diameter) copper wire. And it would take a power supply rated at at least 1300Watt, roughly 270 times stronger than the current adapter or ~23x as large as the charger of a MacBook laptop.

So a 30 seconds charge of a cell phone supercapacitor ain't going to happen, irrespective of the battery technology. Even a 10 minute charge will be a challenge to pull off. The amount of energy is too high for the amount of time.

For the same reason super fast EV charging is difficult. The Nissan Leaf EV has a 20kWh battery capacity which gives it a range of about 72 miles. To deliver that energy in one minute would require a whopping (20Kx60=) 1,200,000Watt, more than megawatt!. Currents would be at insane (1.2MW/370V=) ~3,250 Amps. For comparison, here are realistic charge speeds:
  • 110V/20A wall plug (2.2kW) ~4 miles/hour
  • 220V/30A L2  plug (4.6kW) ~15 miles/hour
  • Tesla DC Supercharger (90kW) ~300 miles/hour
  • Gasoline fill-up: ~3600 miles/hour, thanks to the enormous energy density in gasoline

2: Haste is waste. About 15% of the charging energy is lost with slow charging. This waste generally goes up with higher charge speeds. The waste comes out as heat, requiring special cooling hardware.   

3: Self-Discharge is the amount of energy lost over time while not using the battery. Non-rechargable batteries lose ~0.3% of charge per month, Li-Ion batteries about 5% per month, but most supercapacitors lose about 50% per month.

4: Discharge profile The output voltage of a supercapacitor goes down linearly with its state-of-charge. So at 20% capacity only 20% of the initial voltage is left. That poses a huge challenge for electronics, as it is designed for a narrow voltage range. A conventional Li-Ion battery still has over 80% of its initial voltage left at 20% capacity.

More on supercapacitors: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/whats_the_role_of_the_supercapacitor
« Last Edit: December 12, 2016, 01:02:59 PM by PatrickG »

Offline Crash

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Dogspeed John Glenn.
    • What I do for fun
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #35 on: December 12, 2016, 01:51:19 PM »
Cara was absolutely right about the humiliation of women being a porn meme.  Anyone interested in an inside look of the porn industry should read "The Money Shot".  Search "The New Yorker" for the article.  The objective of every porn film in the article was to climax with a penis ejaculating into a woman face.   Does anyone in real life ever do that? 
  I am not a porn user nor am I a prude but I know humiliation when I see it.  Klein's instant dismissal of Cara's concerns borders on being the proverbial dick.  I have been reluctantly dragged to strip clubs and women there are yelled at and insulted constantly about how they look.  Subjecting to humiliation gets the strippers more money from the creeps that go there.  Klein gives away a little cognitive dissonance for porn apologists when they say, "No humiliation here."  Is he effing blind? 
  The discussion of the word phylogeny missed few things.  The sorting of the phylogenetic order of species is being revised constantly by DNA analysis.  Every good field guide for plants or fungi is arranged in accepted phylogenetic order.  In flowering plants, the continuum is designated from "primitive" to "advanced" where gymnosperms are near the primitive end with Orchids at the advanced end. 
  I remember watching Deepak Chopra on a PBS fundraising show saying, "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny".  The whole audience gasped at the profound sounding gibberish while Chopra soaked the admiration of his gushing admirers.    I was unsettled that he would still be a proponent of something that went out of favor around the time of the eugenics movement.  Spreading stupid is what he does I guess.
  I was surprised that Cara missed the answer to science or fiction.  It's elementary biochem that Kcal/gram or energy density is a rote concept.  The answer should have been a gift for all. 

Offline PatrickG

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 64
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #36 on: December 12, 2016, 03:03:45 PM »
Cara was absolutely right about the humiliation of women being a porn meme.  Anyone interested in an inside look of the porn industry should read "The Money Shot".  Search "The New Yorker" for the article.  The objective of every porn film in the article was to climax with a penis ejaculating into a woman face.   Does anyone in real life ever do that? 

Marty Klein was plugging his book "His Porn, Her Pain". The implicit effect of the interview was that he seems to think that her pain is not that big of a deal. That porn represents a unreal visual fantasy is clear. But Klein too easily dismissed side effects of what goes into making porn and the submissive memes. Perhaps the book is more thorough and nuanced, but I'm not inclined to buy it given this segment.

Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

Offline DevoutCatalyst

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #37 on: December 12, 2016, 06:53:12 PM »
Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

Skeptics shouldn't be doing ads ever. If they need money they should state what their needs are upfront and see if the listeners can't come up with the cash. Quickest way to the bottom of the credibility ladder is to put yourself up for sale. As you illustrated.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2016, 07:13:15 PM by DevoutCatalyst »

Offline Belgarath

  • Forum Sugar Daddy
  • Technical Administrator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 10742
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #38 on: December 12, 2016, 06:59:31 PM »
I find this discussion around porn fascinating.  It reminds me a lot of the discussion about video games back in the late 80's early 90's
#notarealskeptic

Online Sawyer

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #39 on: December 12, 2016, 08:32:46 PM »
Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

Skeptics shouldn't be doing ads ever. If they need money they should state what their needs are upfront and see if the listeners can't come up with the cash. Quickest way to the bottom of the credibility ladder is to put yourself up for sale. As you illustrated.

Hold on, we've just drifted from calling this an author interview to calling it an advertisement.  These two are clearly not the same thing, regardless of how equally distasteful certain listeners find them.

Offline DevoutCatalyst

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #40 on: December 12, 2016, 08:46:00 PM »
Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

Skeptics shouldn't be doing ads ever. If they need money they should state what their needs are upfront and see if the listeners can't come up with the cash. Quickest way to the bottom of the credibility ladder is to put yourself up for sale. As you illustrated.

Hold on, we've just drifted from calling this an author interview to calling it an advertisement.  These two are clearly not the same thing, regardless of how equally distasteful certain listeners find them.

I should have been more clear. The ads that the SGU personalities read in their own voices -- do they still do that? I get the ad-free version so I don't know. I hated those. To me they open a door to cast doubt upon the SGU enterprise. The writer I quoted suggested soft ball interviews have taken place similarly uncritical as are the fake testimonials. Whether or not that is true isn't my objection, that he can point to phoniness for hire is.

Offline Crash

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
  • Dogspeed John Glenn.
    • What I do for fun
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #41 on: December 12, 2016, 09:12:45 PM »
Phoniness for hire?  Oh man,... That's cold.  I suppose it was a choice to either ask for money from listeners or phoniness.  I can handle the phoniness. It's a tradition from ol' timey radio.   Like porn I know it when I see it and if it supports the podcast, is that less shame than asking for money?  At least Cara gave a little skeptical slant to the add by saying the only difference for female razors is pink.  The script could be embellished a bit.  I'm not going to hold it against the rogues.  Would you rather hear an add for "Chia Pets"? I'm sure they're available.  I wonder if Luminocity ever approached SGU?  It was a pretty ubiquitous add in the pod-a-sphere for a while.  At least Steve didn't cross that line. 

Offline dreamlander

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #42 on: December 13, 2016, 05:22:58 AM »
Cara was absolutely right about the humiliation of women being a porn meme.  Anyone interested in an inside look of the porn industry should read "The Money Shot".  Search "The New Yorker" for the article.  The objective of every porn film in the article was to climax with a penis ejaculating into a woman face.   Does anyone in real life ever do that? 

Marty Klein was plugging his book "His Porn, Her Pain". The implicit effect of the interview was that he seems to think that her pain is not that big of a deal. That porn represents a unreal visual fantasy is clear. But Klein too easily dismissed side effects of what goes into making porn and the submissive memes. Perhaps the book is more thorough and nuanced, but I'm not inclined to buy it given this segment.

Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

I guess I thought his book was about the effects porn has or doesn't have on society, not what goes into making porn.

I just didn't really understand Cara's point. She had trouble finding porn SHE likes, so porn is not made for women because she doesn't like most of it. There may be some truth to porn not being made for women, but why does she think it is ok to speak for all women when it comes to their sexual fantasies? There is lots of porn out there that I am not a fan of, but I would never say men don't like porn that humiliates men just because I don't. Is hair pulling and spanking humiliating? I guess I don't know, but I do think some women do enjoy rough sex, or at least like to fantasize about it.

Online daniel1948

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4327
  • Cat Lovers Against the Bomb
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #43 on: December 13, 2016, 09:16:26 AM »
Somehow book plugs don't seem to work well on the SGU. The rogues are too happy to tone down skepticism in order to appease the guest and keep the mutual banter positive. In 2014 Michio Kaku plugged his book about the future of the mind by spouting all kinds of nonsense. There was little skeptical resistance even though Steve is a neuroscientist and Kaku is not.
Good for Cara that she tried this time. Still, I prefer that these segments are just marked as ads. After all, it gets a similar uncritical treatment as the fake testimonials for that shave club.

Skeptics shouldn't be doing ads ever. If they need money they should state what their needs are upfront and see if the listeners can't come up with the cash. Quickest way to the bottom of the credibility ladder is to put yourself up for sale. As you illustrated.

While not actually stating a funding goal (AFAIK) they did exactly this when they created the "membership" program, with the enticement of an ad-free version and premium content for members. Apparently that did not bring in enough money. I find most podcasts' ads annoying, so I skip through them (for podcasts where I don't buy the ad-free version, or where there isn't one). The exception is Oh, No, Ross & Carrie, since they manage to make their ads fun. Pretty much the same ads as other podcasts have, but their tone and delivery changes the whole feel.

I've never heard an ad on SGU because I became a member as soon as that option was offered. I'm actually curious as to what they sound like. Maybe for premium members they should release a separate edition on the premium stream (clearly marked so we can delete it without listening if we want) with just the ads.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline PatrickG

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 64
Re: Episode #596
« Reply #44 on: December 13, 2016, 12:25:23 PM »

Skeptics shouldn't be doing ads ever. If they need money they should state what their needs are upfront and see if the listeners can't come up with the cash. Quickest way to the bottom of the credibility ladder is to put yourself up for sale. As you illustrated.
...
While not actually stating a funding goal (AFAIK) they did exactly this when they created the "membership" program, with the enticement of an ad-free version and premium content for members. Apparently that did not bring in enough money. I find most podcasts' ads annoying, so I skip through them (for podcasts where I don't buy the ad-free version, or where there isn't one). The exception is Oh, No, Ross & Carrie, since they manage to make their ads fun. Pretty much the same ads as other podcasts have, but their tone and delivery changes the whole feel.

Agree. There is a huge difference between an ad in a skeptical podcast versus an ad in most any other show. Skepticism is about rigorously verifying all claims, being ruthlessly honest about truth even if the conclusions are unpleasant. Advertising is about the exact opposite: hype and deception are fair game to achieve a goal.

What makes the SGU ads extra cringeworthy is that the rogues are acting out a script that is 180 degrees opposed to their normal podcast personas and is also opposed to basic skeptical principles. They are pretending to be happy uncritical consumers of shavecrap/hulu-timesinks/wealthmanagementservices/whatever. That is simply awful.The irony is through the roof, and it eats into general credibility.

If the SGU really must have ads, please please stick to a generic script just like the Car-Talk guys do did: "This program is supported by <TrumpUniversity>, <slogan of company>, go to <website> to get X% of your first order and enter code SGU" . The effectiveness of the ad will likely be better because it doesn't piss off skeptics.

Don't get me wrong, I love the SGU and I have listened to every episode every week since 2005. It would take more than the lousy adds to get me off the SGU.

 

personate-rain
personate-rain