If we had collective reflection and mourning on covid, then it would've been more difficult for RFK to rewrite what happened publicly. But because the memory is individualized and local, RFK can easily fill the national vacuum with exonerating lies
Dan Rosen
@danrosen.xyz
Scholar/researcher in digital media, STS, internet culture, and livestreaming. PhD in Cinema & Media Studies (he/him) danrosen.xyz
Cultural memory in action www.cmaj.ca/content/195/...
COVID-19 lockdown revisionism
cmaj.ca
Lockdown revisionism is wild b/c lockdown means anything from masks to stay at home orders to vaccines. It's why I don't use the term lockdown. Also any public health intervention that works even moderately will look in retrospect as an overreaction
Lockdown revisionism is wild b/c lockdown means anything from masks to stay at home orders to vaccines. It's why I don't use the term lockdown. Also any public health intervention that works even moderately will look in retrospect as an overreaction
I think this is fundamentally wrong but in an interesting way I will need to write about sometime. The key is a) consumers do not choose what is produced, or how, they choose between what is produced. This is a crucial difference
I think my most genuinely unpopular take is that a widely held and genuine consumer preference for cheaper, lower-quality goods, not private equity, is driving the decline in quality of consumer goods like clothing and housewares.
this boils down to "the pandemic didn't actually happen but they still closed the applebees" which frankly i think is a trauma response by a lot of people that buy it - lot easier to be in denial that things were that bad instead of reckoning with 1.3m dead people [in this country]
RFK Jr said these words today on national television "There were ICUs that were empty all over the country including in New York at the height (of the pandemic)" hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha You are a fucking idiot hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha <sobs silently>
Finding a copy of Julie Dash's Illusions is a challenge but I really want to show it
I’m the first to tell you that books are tools and it’s fine to dispose of them in many cases. This isn’t retiring a damaged book. It’s pillaging of intangible cultural heritage.
Hate to see democracy now portray these AI agents as “rogue.” A system is what it does
Artificial intelligence tools are quickly advancing in sophistication and capabilities, raising alarm among researchers and industry figures who say the technology needs to be more tightly regulated.
This is just to say I have OCRed the text thet was in tne arch:ve and whicb yov were prabaldy seamhing for "breahtast" Fargme ms fheg mem debo:w5 sb ?mccf mmb 5c oc1b
Easy way for cities to increase their tax base is demand all TikTokers get filming permits the way that film shoots do. “Oh it’s just your daily blog? Send the city a check for $250 a day.”
To me, a decent film review helps you decide if you want to see a movie. A good review gives you context for the work in relation to itself, its visual language, other films etc so that you might know it better and understand the film. It helps you appreciate cinema itself from that understanding.
This is great. The "just one more pull" logic of interacting with generative AI, and the token-based economy of expenditure that underlies many narratives about increased productivity via more GenAI use, feels very on point.
Wrote a short post about how GenAI makes us into gamblers who confuse judgment and probability
Golf courses in Arizona, a v popular golfing state, use more than their allotment of water year after year, while only 10% of Arizonans and 10% of tourists play golf golfweek.usatoday.com/story/sports...
Arizona golf courses use more water than they're supposed to. Nothing is stopping them.
The Scottsdale National Golf Club — an exclusive resort in the Sonoran Desert where 145 members pay $300,000 to join and $60,000 in annual fees — brags about wide open fairways, stunning vistas and “u...
golfweek.usatoday.com
I'm reading the "environmentalists are wrong about data centers" piece from the NYT and ohmygoditssofuckingbad. Apparently, so long as you're punching left, they'll just let you say any goddamn thing you please... www.nytimes.com/2026/07/25/o...
Prompts are bets (or wishes) on probability
Wrote a short post about how GenAI makes us into gamblers who confuse judgment and probability
Wrote a short post about how GenAI makes us into gamblers who confuse judgment and probability
AI and the Gambler's Logic
the design, language, and interfaces lend themselves to a gambler's logic - "just one more pull."
danrosen.leaflet.pub
Can we get like Emily Wilson, Manohla Dargis, and Laura Mulvey to do a podcast??
Can we get like Emily Wilson, Manohla Dargis, and Laura Mulvey to do a podcast??
Pretty good! Solid adaptation. Agree with some of the sad dad criticisms. Odysseus isn’t complicated - he’s pretty unsubtle
Odyssey in imax today, queen?
on the bright side, it's kind of awesome that so many people are talking about THE ODYSSEY, the translation the movie is based on, the translator's own thoughts in the LRB, and what a big, ambitious film can mean in a market oversaturated with movies about superheroes and nostalgia for old titles
Received one of those class action lawsuit emails suing the ACME corporation. Is this legit chat?
Exceptional clarity from Science magazine but we need to take this one step further. Their design to break academic science is coupled with their design to re-segregate higher education and control culture, ideas, and memory. It fits with anti-DEI policies and Trump disclaimers at the Smithsonian.
The Third Man (1949) in 35 mm at Film Forum was great. A world weary movie - tired of WW2 and the new Cold War. Such a dense movie
Received one of those class action lawsuit emails suing the ACME corporation. Is this legit chat?
I've always disliked the term "evidence-based" because it weirdly makes it seem like no one else was using evidence before that and you can just use it to label any set of questions, methods, or results you don't like as unscientific
I saw this posted elsewhere, and hoped it was just an AI spoof, but sadly, it's a real CDC Webpage, and the information it contains is deeply dangerous and untrue.
I think a persuasive argument could be "It is easy to share more than what we may originally intend. What data do you really want to share and is the convenience worth the trade offs of sharing it?" This is ofc, only possible with a dialogue about what tradeoffs mean, etc