Re: #FreeInstapundit

1

Has anybody started "TheRealInstapundit" as a twitter account yet?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:04 AM
horizontal rule
2

Aw, but it was just a tiny little incitement to violence. Totally innocuous!


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:04 AM
horizontal rule
3

Absolutely agree with Shkreli. So many articles now (especially on the Guardian, which I have almost given up on) boil down to "Rage as silly person says silly thing on Twitter" and that really isn't news.

And, no, of course journalists don't matter, at least not directly. The only thing that matters - absolutely the only thing - is power. ("We sell here, Sir, what all the world desires to have - that is, Power.") Journalists don't have power. At best they can influence the decisions of people with power.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:11 AM
horizontal rule
4

So the answer to how many divisions the Pope has is "only one company"?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:17 AM
horizontal rule
5

My high school teacher told my class that we should subscribe to monthly magazines because those articles captured broader trends and newspapers magnified brief moments way beyond their importance.

This era of trumpeting the interpreted results of a poll of 2,000 people as it had some great importance is maddening.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:18 AM
horizontal rule
6

'"Run them down" perhaps didn't capture this fully, but it's Twitter, where character limits stand in the way of nuance.' Hahahaha! Oh my God. I had forgotten the comedy gold that is InstaHack.


Posted by: Lord Castock | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:20 AM
horizontal rule
7

5 is a damn good point.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:23 AM
horizontal rule
8

Journalists have real power in exactly one situation -- when they are about to widely disseminate true but heretofore unknown information that's important. Knowledge is power as someone once said on a t-shirt. At that point they get treated like genuinely powerful people and there's considerable kowtowing to (the successful establishment ones) to make sure that one gets treated well by a journalist when one is in that situation.

None of that has anything to do with Twitter, which seems to be basically an Unfogged comments section that for some reason attracts actually successful people and journalists, creating an illusion of something being at stake and important discourse when really it's all either one-sided press releases or people wasting time at work.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:24 AM
horizontal rule
9

Yeah, that was "why bother?" weak.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:24 AM
horizontal rule
10

6: That's what I was thinking. If he said, "Run them over," he'd have a better argument. "Run them down" is not really open to a self-defense interpretation.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:25 AM
horizontal rule
11

Journalists have real power in exactly one situation -- when they are about to widely disseminate true but heretofore unknown information that's important.

Because journalism has never shifted public opinion in important ways based on false information?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:28 AM
horizontal rule
12

Well, in a Shannon sense there's no such thing as false information. The information content in a signal is measured by the decrease in unpredictability of the recipient's behaviour.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:34 AM
horizontal rule
13

And 8.1 is wrong as we can see by looking around. Information like "Hey, Donald Trump has repeatedly broken the law by stealing from a charity to pay his fines and buy himself big paintings of himself" is true and not widely known (until it was reported) and important (a presidential candidate is a criminal). But it has zero Shannon information content. It's made no difference at all.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
14

I don't even know Shannon.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:37 AM
horizontal rule
15

Twitter, which seems to be basically an Unfogged comments section

You wound us, sir.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:40 AM
horizontal rule
16

We go way, way over 140 characters. Frequently.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
17

Call us frivolous, reactive, content free? Point taken. But 'terse' is fighting words.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
18

15 seconded. Ouch, Tigre! Very ouch.

For one thing, I'll have you know we routinely exceed 114 characters. And for another thing...

... I'm sure there's another thing.


Posted by: Lord Castock | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
19

(Or yeah 140 characters, whatevs. I don't use Twitter.)


Posted by: LC | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
20

I meant power in the sense of "perceived societal power." Reporting any given true (or false) story might change the world, or not.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
21

I am disappointed that the first comment wasn't "Indeed."


Posted by: One of Many | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
22

... I'm sure there's another thing.

You can't embed images or videos in Unfogged comments.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
23

I'm disappointed it wasn't Ann Althouse saying Instapundit was exactly right.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:49 AM
horizontal rule
24

22: Yes! Exactly! Therefore we are very serious. *whew*


Posted by: Lord Castock | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
25

Kind of confirming to find out he really does think of his car as a weapon against teh blahs. But so boring to think we still have to care about Glenn "Boring McBoringpants" Reynolds.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 7:58 AM
horizontal rule
26

... I'm sure there's another thing.

Well, Twitter has Twitterstorms. I don't think we have the energy to engage in mob activity now that we're all getting on a bit.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
27

The media pretty obviously has about as much power as ever, it's just that there's no money in it, so it leaves more room for committed maniacs. Where we once had CBS News, we now have Breitbart. Social media is highly dependent on input from outside itself, and the news media is an important source for it.

I mean, we just saw the media engineer a 5 point swing in the polls for President of the United States. That's power.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
28

26: Also true. We are sober and seasoned and, and stuff.


Posted by: Lord Castock | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
29

Back before when I learned not to seek out things that annoy me, Al/thouse gave me my first experience of looking at a blog and being so squicked out by the peculiar batshit craziness of the proprietorial voice that I felt immediately compelled never to look at it again. Something about Hillary Clinton and onion rings.


Posted by: One of Many | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:05 AM
horizontal rule
30

||

Possibly of interest: The Vox article on the Clinton Foundation is really good (particularly since, personally, my knowledge about the Foundation was fairly spotty). It gives a sense of the strengths and weaknesses of Clintonian glad-handing and an assessment of the fact that the foundation has had successes and failures, but that the successes are much larger in scale -- both in global impact and in terms of Foundation resources.

|>


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
31

Well, in a Shannon sense there's no such thing as false information.

I wonder if that's the only, or even the best, sense of "information", or if it might rather be a specialized sense useful in some situations but not others, and also why you bothered making this useless comment.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
32

why you bothered making this useless comment.

It's directly relevant to the comment immediately before it, you clot.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
33

It's precisely as relevant as if I had said "Well, technically there's no such thing as 'false information'; there's only falsehoods presented as information, which is as such always true. But of course such a presentation of falsehoods can affect the behavior of those who believe them."

It's not relevant at all.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
34

What I said was clearer and contained fewer glaring grammatical errors* but boils down to the same thing. The point is that, contra 8 (which 12 was quoting) journalists' "power" does not depend on whether what they say or not is true, but on whether what they say can alter the hearer's behaviour. This is exactly the right context in which to introduce the concept of Shannon information.

*"there's only falsehoods", really, tut tut


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
35

According to an online calculator I found, the Shannon entropy of comment 12 is 4.08 bits.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
36

I'm going to ignore this Shannon stuff because it sounds like math. Only a fool ever does math except for money.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
37

35: which is about typical for any passage of written English.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
38

Christ, what an asshole.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
39

That gets 3.7.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:37 AM
horizontal rule
40

I miss the self-correcting blogosphere.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:41 AM
horizontal rule
41

This is exactly the right context in which to introduce the concept of Shannon information.

The concept of Shannon information is not necessary to remind people of the fact that a people can believe or act on falsehoods. That Tigre and Moby both used the word "information" does not mean that information theory is relevant.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:42 AM
horizontal rule
42

I'm certainly not known for carefully selecting my words when there isn't a pun involved.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
43

Anyway, what you said and what I said can't boil down to the same thing because what I said implies that if the NY Times ran an article full of false Trump puffery, it would not contain any information (in the puffery bits, anyway), but what you said implies that it would be very informativehave a lot of information, since an article like that would presumably alter the behavior of a lot of people.

(I'm now wondering whether we can use this to test out questions like "which is more informative, a slap in the face or a punch to the gut?".)


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:46 AM
horizontal rule
44

The face has more nerve sensation, so a slap to the face could certainly carry more bits.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
45

And 8.1 is wrong as we can see by looking around. Information like "Hey, Donald Trump has repeatedly broken the law by stealing from a charity to pay his fines and buy himself big paintings of himself" is true and not widely known (until it was reported) and important (a presidential candidate is a criminal). But it has zero Shannon information content. It's made no difference at all.

If Shannon information is the relevant kind (as 12 would suggest, because otherwise it's just equivocation w/r/t Moby's question), then 8.1 is not actually tested by the publication of this fact about Trump, since such a publication does not constitute the publication of information.


Posted by: nosflow | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:50 AM
horizontal rule
46

Information wants to be free of association with all values that attribute something to information beyond saying it's the content of a message, including statements about what information wants.


Posted by: fake accent | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
47

This is such useful nostalgia: reminding me of the old Instapundit days and why I can't read this blog, all in one.


Posted by: FL | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:16 AM
horizontal rule
48

Technically, reading this blog isn't required to comment on it.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
49

Somewhat OT but has everyone watched the Clinton Between the Ferns? SO FUNNY. must watch if you haven't.


Posted by: urple | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:45 AM
horizontal rule
50

Has Instapundit posted on it yet taking it seriously?
Or I should say has Instapundit linked to someone taking it seriously.


Posted by: SP | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:50 AM
horizontal rule
51

The post at the OP has been updated, if that's what you mean. Reason editors support him in email.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
52

Even if you take it as a given that what he actually meant was "Don't stop the car if you feel threatened" or whatever, I still don't see how Twitter did anything wrong by reading what he actually wrote and shutting him down briefly (he's already been restored) to check things out.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
53

Maybe Instapundit will link to us and then we'll hit the big time!


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
54

Is he still a law professor?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:02 AM
horizontal rule
55

12: Shannon information doesn't depend on what the recipient does with it, or even if the recipient reads it. It's a measure of the probability that the particular message was sent throught a channel vs. the possible messages that could have been sent.


Posted by: Dave W. | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
56

Fucking nerds. Next thing you'll be talking about the average Kolmogorov complexity of New York Times articles.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:06 AM
horizontal rule
57

Yesterday somebody linked to something by Andrew Sullivan. Today, we have Instapundit. I'm afraid for tomorrow.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:24 AM
horizontal rule
58

You got me to click on Instapundit at the very moment I was reading the NYer piece about Rick Astley. Damn, dude, you've still got it.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:25 AM
horizontal rule
59

Hi everyone, my ears were burning.


Posted by: Opinionated Mickey Kaus | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
60

True story: I've now twice seen a guy who looks just like Michael Kinsley while I was walking around campus.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 10:32 AM
horizontal rule
61

Fake Kinsley is a weakass celebrity sighting. I just drove by a Chewbacca im a convertible but I'm not making a big deal out of it.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 11:18 AM
horizontal rule
62

Out here our celebrity fields lie fallow and we must take comfort in what we can. Occasionally during the warmer months I see our local Gene Simmons impersonator, who drives around on a motorcycle wearing a KISS-branded leather jacket.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
63

So PGH is basically nothing but hills Unfogged commenters and fake second-tier celebrities


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 12:08 PM
horizontal rule
64

All the cool kids talk about Renyi entropy these days anyway. Shannon entropy is so old school.


Posted by: AcademicLurker | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 12:23 PM
horizontal rule
65

I ran into the dad from That '70s Show on the subway once. I didn't have time to throw him a line from Robocop.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 09-22-16 2:17 PM
horizontal rule
66

I hope to Christ ajay is wrong about the guarndia. It seems to me to have a lower number of twitter non-stories than anywhere but the FT. The ideal number is of course zero.

the trouble is that twitter is actually useful for journalists as a way of drawing attention to real stories. Providing you read it as carefully selected lists, it will supply news of niche interests (the ongoing Catholic schism, computer security, swedish politics) quickly and reliably in a low-friction way. So one spends time there.

Meanwhile, twitter unfiltered is a measure of what bored people are wasting their time with at work *right now* -- which is of course the audience that advertisers are pursuing. So the department of clickbait (and all papers now have them) will follow it as flies follow the flow of dysentery


Posted by: NW | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 2:31 AM
horizontal rule
67

66: do you have a link to a feed about the ongoing Catholic schism?


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 3:48 AM
horizontal rule
68

There's an ongoing Catholic schism?


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:34 AM
horizontal rule
69

NW is referring to the Reformation. He takes the long view of history.


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:37 AM
horizontal rule
70

There's an ongoing Catholic schism?

Indeed.


Posted by: Opinionated Clement VII | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:38 AM
horizontal rule
71

Let's not think of only recent history.


Posted by: Opinionated Leo IX | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:59 AM
horizontal rule
72

I mean the conservative revolt against pipe Francis, especially over sex. But I'm on a train. The next conclave will be s hell of a thing


Posted by: Nw | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:33 AM
horizontal rule
73

That's a great typi.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:33 AM
horizontal rule
74

Ceci n'est pas une pope.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:36 AM
horizontal rule
75

I don't really see the problem though. Or at least not any new problem. This is much smaller than the post-Vatican II drift of the ultra conservatives like Lefebvre and Mel Gibson's dad.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:38 AM
horizontal rule
76

74 made me laugh and I don't even speak French.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:38 AM
horizontal rule
77

Though if the Pope backs Jolie and Ross Douthat back Pitt, maybe it will get worse.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:41 AM
horizontal rule
78

Possibly these divisions seems less pronounced in America, where "conservative Christian" means "someone who expects the world to end before next Tuesday" or "will complain with true feeling when Starbucks prints a coffee cup that says 'Happy Holidays'"?


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:54 AM
horizontal rule
79

74 Said the bishop to the nun.


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 6:08 AM
horizontal rule
80

When I went to graduate school, I kept wishing Jewish people "Merry Christmas" because of the Leprechaun Effect.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 6:15 AM
horizontal rule
81

Wait, is this Pitt the elder or Pitt the younger?


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 6:44 AM
horizontal rule
82

74: Fantastic.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 6:45 AM
horizontal rule
83

81. Pitt Rivers. Jolie was their prime exhibit.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 7:02 AM
horizontal rule
84

||

I think I've had way too many beers before getting on this flight back to Arrakis. Amsterdam is quite lovely.

|>


Posted by: Barry Freed | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 8:17 AM
horizontal rule
85

On Topic: Having two real jobs means Instapundit gives a very sincere "I'm sorry you weren't smart enough to understand me."

Also, the USA Today still exists.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:09 AM
horizontal rule
86

85.2: So long as there are hotels in America, USA Today will exist.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:21 AM
horizontal rule
87

Did Warren Zevon ever pay his bill?


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
88

Zevon is dead and the Hollywood Hawaiian Hotel is now apartments, but still sort-of standing.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:32 AM
horizontal rule
89

I know Zevon is dead, but if he died before paying his bill the HHH would presumably have stood forever.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
90

Huh, I had never actually looked up the HHH to see the extent of its eaves.


Posted by: dalriata | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
91

I don't know about a formal schism, but there is a very great deal of sabre rattling about Amoris Laetitia which -- if the next pope (74!!) keeps up the present line -- might well lead to something. Look at the open slapdowns between Cardinal Sarah and the Pope at the moment.


Posted by: NW | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 10:38 AM
horizontal rule
92

Yeah, call me when there is an anti-Pope set up in Avignon.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 3:15 PM
horizontal rule
93

You can just declare yourself antipope if you want. And move to Avignon. That part's not too hard.


Posted by: R Tigre | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 3:19 PM
horizontal rule
94

I thought you had to have the support of the King of France to be antipope. Which is hard because there are three groups of pretenders: House of Bourbon, House of Orléans, House of Bonaparte.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:20 PM
horizontal rule
95

The current heir of Napoleon is at Harvard in business school. I'd start there.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:26 PM
horizontal rule
96

I'm assuming he's learning how market his new cologne, Whiff of Grapeshot.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:33 PM
horizontal rule
97

Well, the legal succession is clear enough - the President of the Republic. You just have to hope Le Pen wins and falls out with official Catholicism


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:36 PM
horizontal rule
98

I'm guessing this whole "democracy" thing is a fad.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:39 PM
horizontal rule
99

ONLY DAN BROWN REMEMBERS US.


Posted by: OPINIONATED MEROVINGIANS | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 4:53 PM
horizontal rule
100

And the Wachowskis, maybe.


Posted by: Moby Hick | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 5:00 PM
horizontal rule
101

99: I remember you! You had cool names.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
102

74 is awesome, and made me laugh out loud.

I pay no attention to anyone who styles himself (or herself) a Catholic, but also an American-style conservative. I expect nothing good from that quarter, and also nothing very coherent.

(And I'm pro-Frankie, if there is indeed an actual schism. Pope Francis would totally back Angelina Jolie over Brad Pitt, but would probably decline to get involved in the child care arrangements, in the event of a custody dispute).


Posted by: Just Plain Jane | Link to this comment | 09-23-16 7:36 PM
horizontal rule
103

97. The substitution of the President of the Republic for the King is already a fait accompli in the case of the joint Price of Andorra (there's still a Bishop of La Seu d'Urgell), so legally it's open and shut. The other approach would be to elect a president who was super serious about laicite and refused to get involved.


Posted by: chris y | Link to this comment | 09-24-16 4:14 AM
horizontal rule