People Think Stupid Things

This hit my twitter feed, and I'm just going to file it into my pile of: Dumb Things That Some People Think, because, well, people think stupid things...and tell them to surveyors.... if you clicked the link to the story, you'll see it's all a bunch of hooey anyway. Ch12 should be ashamed for giving this any attention.

In fact, this is an object lesson in how marketing spin (for a design company on one has ever heard of) gets amplified by "news" organizations thirsty for content because...well, because, they believe that they must constantly provide fresh, engaging, content, 24-7 to retain viewership and market share and....like a fool, I replied (critically) and they got what the wanted: "engagement" which is the coin of the realm on social media. Best part? The story is a year old.

To be fair, most of the comments in the thread were along the lines of "ugh" and "this means almost 75% think he shouldn't."

*I've met that Santa, at America's Got Talent's auditions we sang at two years ago, and he's great.







*Santa is a male, he's based on an actual person. James Bond is male, he's based on actual people (including the author's inflated perception of himself). Jesus was male when he was here, at least, I don't assume heavenly genders because I'm not sure that matters in the eternal.

Crimes That Have Special Motives?

I am mostly in the camp that says adding the motivation of a crime as additional crime is a little, uhm, problematic: is beating someone up because they are gay worse than beating someone up because they took your parking spot, or they didn't put the fries in your order, if you are already committing a crime and getting charged with it, like assault?

Twitter put this in my timeline (through the miracle of retweeting, it's how I see the Pres's tweets fairly often without following him whether I wanted to or not): 

So, if you want to find the tweet, and the thread, that's fine, but I think that this was the only one of the thread that used actual numbers in addition to the percents of change.

I point that out for two reasons: using percent of change always makes things more dramatic, and that the actual number is ridiculously small. I've done the math on the alphabet people's actual numbers.

With Gallup reporting that according to their research

Overall, 4.3% of U.S. adults identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, according to Gallup's latest estimate from its June 2016-June 2017 tracking data. That is up from 3.9% a year ago and 3.4% in Gallup's initial estimate in 2012. 

I find it interesting that it's still a tiny percentage of the population that was affected by this massive media story (although it's still a largish actual number: 2015 census says 247,773,709 adults, so that's like 10.6 million people), and the subset of that number that got married in light of the Supreme Court decision is pretty small. Let's do some math.

Using the 2015 number above, and that 4.3% percentage according to Gallup, there are approximately

• 10,654,269 adult LGBT people in the US.
• 841,687 married prior to HodgesObergefell (7.9%)
• 1,086,735 married after two years (10.2%)
• so 245,048 adults got married as a result, so far. (this is off by a little, as we are using 2015 numbers, I get that.)

That's .000989% of the adults in the US. 

That doesn't break out trans people, so let's do that.  Therefore, the 46% increase of 49 crimes among the 1.4+ million individuals is really not that big, is it? Yes, any increase is a bad thing, but using the change percentage so you can call it a 46% increase is alarmist.

BTW, if you did dive into the link at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) you will see that compared to the total number of crimes (and in relation to the important number of adults in the US, just under 250 million), hate crimes are actually pretty rare. This is good. Here's info from the FBI's site.

In 2018, there were 364,800 violent crime incidents, and 419,724 offenses reported by the United States by 7,610 law enforcement agencies that submitted  data.

That Escalated Quickly

A very smart person I went to HS with posted this on FB today:

This guy actually gets that gun control is a losing issue, politically, for the Dems, and he's pretty leftie (and a gun owner).

Soooooooooo, I looked up how many deaths are attributable to Hitler (who I assume is number 1), and as he started WW2, I'm putting them ALL ON HIM.

Yup, I can totally see how you'd want to kill baby Trump second, makes total sense. 

Y'all are going insane. For the record, I'm not replying to him, no way. FB is lost. That's why I write here.

Your New Happiness Guru...and It Ain't Me!

I get a bazillion emails. I have unlimited storage on Yahoo email (everyone does, right?) so I sign up for giveaways and they're like "do you want to receive emails from Fender?" and I'm like "Sure? why not?" and suddenly I have a bazillion emails.

One I get is from an outfit called Shift, they usually start with a pretty girl in an instagram link, then blurbs about articles and links...

Today's noteworthy article was:

Lots of good stuff in there. Lots of good links in there. Lots of other good stuff....and the morning is gone, including listening in on 2 different work meetings (while working from home). 

Here are several articles, https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2018/05/morning-ritual-2/ , https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2014/09/be-more-successful/, https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2018/06/harsh-truths/, https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2015/09/make-you-happy-2/, https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2014/08/10-happier/, https://www.bakadesuyo.com/2014/01/get-smarter/

and here is the one line I've been looking for literally for years. I found it once and have never been able to retrace my internet steps to find it again as I have written and talked about how to increase your happiness, even a little, every day. Let me state for the record, I agree with what this guy is saying, pretty much all of it. You aren't going to always be happy, so let that idea go and ENJOY THE LIFE YOU HAVE. Smile at yourself in the mirror a bunch in the morning = a better day, guaranteed.

Anyway, here it is. 

This staggeringly complex technique consists of determining which activities are pleasant, and doing them more often.

So, I'll not clog the page here with more jabber. Read the links, click on more of them. Learn. But most importantly, find out what energizes you and do that more often. That's all, to start. 

Gru is OK WIth Me (and not Despicable)

Did anyone ask the actor what was going on?

You may have seen the story, and I actually hope that you haven't: Gru get fired for symbol.

I have so much to say, but am too lazy to type it all out here. Let's start with 4chan, shall we? As has been documented, some 4chan trolls punked the media by suggesting that the OK symbol has white supremacist meaning. The media believed it (as did some white power guys), but most of us didn't even hear about it because we have lives.

A story or two appeared and they were debunked.

Not for this one couple, though, who after apparently NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THEIR KIDS during a photo opp with Gru and a Minion, didn't notice the Circle game was being played. Later, months later, they saw the "offensive gesture" and did what anyone would do: alerted the media, somehow.

Seriously, I know people that work for local media, and it would never have occurred to me to call them.

Universal fired the character actor, and I have to wonder if they even asked him or her what was up? "Hey, we got this complaint, uh, what was that about? Are you a stupid racist ruining photos, or?" "Wait, what's the circle game? You mean "made you look?"?" "Who would believe a playful cartoon character would play a kids game with some kids...that's ridiculous!"

I mean, Occam's Razor, right?

The best part is the edited photo that doesn't show the little toddler brother also making the circle. Because, narrative, right?

And just in time the trailer for Richard Jewell dropped. Perfect timing.

Find Me On YouTube!

I know, I know, yet another place to find me on the interwebs? It's all too much. I mean that, I have no idea why I created so many places to publish myself, but it's too much to keep track of. Sorry about that.

As long as this is free, I'll keep it alive, but you'll find me more readily on Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube for sure, plus my website.

More Bad Headlines

Hmmm, I haven't posted for a while, and here I am back with another Headline bashing post... LOL

Trolling Facebook like usual and saw two posts fairly close together that garnered the same reaction from me: crappy headline! They are crappy for two different reasons, however.

The first is crappy because it's one of these modern "it's all about me, the writer" headlines that tries to tell me how I should feel or react to the story because the writer includes their feelings:

Now, granted it's from totallythebombdotcom, which sounds like a great bastion of journalism (I really don't like those aggregator sites with the content that appears to be written by thirteen year olds), and I'm not going to link to the story, because if it interests you, well, we aren't friends and you don't read this...:)

I know this is the modern, click attracting, I'm a person just like you so read my story like we're girlfriendbesties or something style, but I'm not in favor, like, I know, right? 😒 (so, i just discovered that Blogger is aimed at non-emoji-knowledgeable-people: they have hover messages to explain what they all are and it's kind of unintentionally funny)

Anyway, the other story is a fine enough story about bees, but the headline goes to the other extreme: it sounds like it was written by a robot!

"Photographer documents?" zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz the opposite of click bait, if you ask me, almost like "don't bother reading this, this picture is cute, so just scroll on by, everybody...." So much for driving web traffic to your site! lol

Have a great Friday, peeps!

Oh, Yahoo News, You Suck So Much.

I have had a Yahoo email for years, it's my first email and it's limitless, so it's unbelievably full of crap, mostly. It is and has been my main email, though.

What that means is that I suffer through the home page on a daily basis with the unbelievably bad choices of liberal bullcrap stories and editorial choices they are so filled with.

Yes, I said "unbelievably" twice. However, it's totally believable, as they do it on a daily basis. Today's example is pretty egregious:

As soon as I saw the little blurb, I thought I was seeing things, I mean, I liked him as a presidential candidate (remember when the Republicans had 2 black male candidates and the Dems were all white?) and didn't recall that part of his career. (yes, yes, I now know that was a Trump nickname for him, so shouldn't they have capitalized it if that's what they were going for? Of course not, they wanted to minimize his credentials)

It's in a prominent part of the Yahoo homepage as well, top stories and all:

I mean, they are getting roasted in the comments, but Libs don't read the comments, they only read the headlines and think they know it all. I mean, it's not like he was the Director of the Kansas City Fed or anything (narrator: He was, in the 90s).

Hey, journalists, this is why people don't like you. You are either the ones doing this crap or you let this crap happen.